United States Regions July 1979
Environmental Protection 1201 Elm Street
Agency Dallas, TX 75270
Water
xvEPA Environmental Final
Impact Statement
Wastewater Treatment Facilities
St. Mary Parish, Louisiana
-------
906R79001
FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FOR
ST. MARY PARISH
SEWERAGE FACILITIES
GRANT NO.'s C-220343-01-0
C-220348-01-0
C-220441-01-0
C-220413-01-0
C-220543-01-0
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 6
DALLAS, TEXAS
JULY, 1979
APPROVED BY:
ADLENE HARRISON
REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR
-------
Due to the limited number of changes and modifications required by com-
ments received on the draft EIS, this final EIS contains only those pages
that have required revisions or additions, plus the comment letters re-
ceived on the draft statement with EPA's responses to those comments.
The draft and final EIS's in combination provide full analysis of the
environmental issues regarding EPA's proposal to award additional grants
for the detailed design and construction of wastewater treatment facili-
ties -in St. Mary Parish, Louisiana.
The particular sections which have been revised from the Draft EIS on
the following pages are designated by the following symbol:
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
( )Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(X)Final Environmental Impact Statement
Environmental Protection Agency
Region VI
Dallas, Texas
1. Name of Action
Administrative (X)
Legislative ( )
2. Background
In September of 1977, EPA determined to prepare environmental
impact statements on five separate grants for the design and construc-
tion of sewerage facilities in St. Mary Parish, Louisiana under Section
201 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, as amended by
the Clean Water Act of 1977. This decision was based upon concern over
possible adverse impacts on wetland areas, ecological communities, and
archaeological resources. Since all five sewerage projects proposed in
St. Mary Parish were to be essentially similar in purpose and execution,
and would occur in the same general geographic area during a limited time
span, EPA decided that a single EIS investigating the individual and
cumulative impacts of all five projects would be prepared. Therefore,
the proposed grant actions in the following five project areas will all
be addressed in this environmental impact statement:
1) Morgan City & Amelia
2) Wards 5 & 8
3) Franklin & Vicinity
4) Baldwin & Vicinity
5) Cypremort Point
-------
3. Environmental Setting
St. Mary Parish is located on the central Gulf coast of
Louisiana and is characterized by vast areas of marsh segmented by the
Lower Atchafalaya River, natural bayous, and man-made canals. Nearly 84
percent of the parish's area is either wetland or open water, and almost
all of the development is limited to the relatively narrow alluvial
ridges along the natural bayous. The parish is traversed from east to
west by the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW) and from north to south by
the Lower Atchafalaya River, both major inland navigation routes.
The largest community in the parish is Morgan City, located at
the intersection of the GIWW and the Lower Atchafalaya River. Morgan
City is a world center for the production of off-shore oil drilling
equipment, and this industry, along with the local petroleum extraction
and related service industries, have provided the economic foundation
for the recent rapid growth in the eastern portion of the parish.
Franklin, the parish seat, is the second largest community and serves as
the commercial center of the primarily agricultural western half of the
parish. Other principal communities are Patterson, Berwick, and Baldwin.
The 1978 estimate of parish population was 61,699, and most projections
for the year 2000 predict a parish population approaching 90,000.
Because of the almost negligible topographic relief, the
influence of winds and tidal action, and the many interconnecting water-
ways, the hydrology of the area is extremely complex. The principal
flood threats to the parish are from hurricane tidal surges and Atchafalaya
River flooding, although levees now protect nearly all developed areas
from all but the most infrequent of these events. The lack of good
drainage within these leveed areas often results in minor localized
flooding during wet weather.
Nearly a quarter of the parish's land is comprised of forested
wetlands or open marsh, and these areas support a wide variety of terres-
trial and aquatic species in-great abundance. The only rare or endangered
species known to occur in St. Mary Parish are the Southern Bald Eagle
and the American Alligator. In 1978, two eagle nest sites were known to
exist in the parish, both south of the GIWW on Avoca Island, several
-------
miles from the nearest proposed facilities. The alligator is thriving
in St. Mary Parish. Increased freshwater flows from the Atchafalaya
River and Wax Lake Outlet have reduced salinity levels in Atchafalaya
Bay to the point that it is no longer a viable commercial oyster produc-
tion area, but the offshore areas do sustain very high rates of shrimp
and fish yields.
4. Sewerage Problems
At the present time, only about 20,000 of the people in the
entire parish are served by municipal sewage treatment plants, and of
these, only about half consistently receive adequate treatment. None of
the existing plants can consistently meet the limitations of their
present NPDES permits. The communities of Bayou Vista, Berwick, and
Morgan City have sewage collection systems, but all of the sewage,
approximately 2.5 million gallons per day, is discharged untreated into
the Lower Atchafalaya River. More than 12,000 other residents are not
served by any municipal collection system and are forced to rely upon
on-site facilities. Because of the generally high water table and poor
absorption qualities of the soil, septic tank systems seldom function
properly, and a large part of these wastes find their way to the surface
waters of the parish. These conditions can lead to severe public health
hazards in densely populated areas, such as the southern portion of
Baldwin. They also cause odor problems and locally degrade water quality,
particularly dissolved oxygen levels.
5. Alternatives Evaluated .. .
Because of the geographical distribution of development, the
barriers formed by the major navigable waterways, and the existence of
several independent governmental organizations dealing with sewerage
problems within the parish, no single parish-wide regional alternative
was developed. Each of the five distinct areas of the parish with major
sewage treatment problems conducted independent alternatives evaluations
within their own state and federally-approved planning areas.
111
-------
These alternatives included numerous combinations of treatment
methods, treatment plant numbers and locations, effluent discharge
points, and sludge disposal methods. Among the treatment alternatives
considered were a variety of physical-chemical and biological methods,
including trickling filters, oxidation ponds, oxidation ditches, extended
aeration package plants, and land application techniques.
6. Proposed Projects
At the present time, five distinct projects are being proposed
for design and construction. They are:
a) Morgan City & Amelia - Two distinct systems are proposed:
one to serve Morgan City and the unincorporated areas of Ward 6, north
of the GIWW, and the other to serve the Amelia area, east of Bayou
Ramos. In Morgan City the following elements are proposed:
0 a 4.85 mgd trickling filter plant with sludge stabili-
zation and effluent chlorination, on a 17-acre site;
0 four major pump stations;
0 33,600 ft of force mains; and
0 17,400 ft of gravity collection lines.
Discharge will be to Bayou Boeuf about 1,800 feet east of the Atchafalaya
River, and will meet secondary treatment standards.
The Amelia project includes:
0 expanding and upgrading the existing pond to three
cells, totalling 33.0 acres, with effluent chlorination; ^>-i
0 13 pump stations;
0 16,300 ft of force mains; and
0 37,150 ft of gravity sewers
Treatment will meet secondary standards for oxidation ponds. Discharge
will be to a ditch emptying into Lake Palourde. Design capacity is 1.25
mgd.
b) Wards 5 & 8 - The Wards 5 & 8 area is proposed to be
served by a single, centrally-located treatment plant on Cotton Road,
south of US Hwy 90. Principal features of the system include:
IV
-------
0 6 mgd activated bio-filter plant with anaerobic sludge
digestion and effluent chlorination, on a 12.5-acre site;
0 2 aerated flow equalization holding basins;
0 8 new major pump stations and 4 rehabilitated major pump
stations;
0 123,470 ft of force mains; and
0 81,655 ft of gravity sewers.
Discharge will be to the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, and will meet more
restrictive requirements than secondary treatment standards.
c) Franklin & Vicinity - Two distinct systems are proposed:
one to serve the part of Ward 4 north of the GIWW, and the other to
serve Franklin and the unincorporated areas west of Garden City. The
eastern plant, serving Ward 4, is sized for an average daily flow of
0.28 mgd; the western plant is designed for 2.40 mgd. The western plant
will be an oxidation ditch, with sludge drying beds and effluent chlorina-
tion, on a 10-acre site. The treatment process for the eastern plant
will be a 3-cell oxidation pond of about 15 acres. Other major project
components are:
0 110,000 LF of force mains;
0 168,000 LF of gravity sewers; and
0 80 pump stations.
The eastern plant will discharge to Yellow Bayou; Bayou Yokely will be
the receiving stream for the western plant. Both facilities will produce
an effluent meeting applicable secondary treatment standards.
d) Baldwin & Vicinity - The Baldwin area is proposed to be
served by dividing the area into eastern and western subareas, each with
a separate treatment plant. The eastern plant will be designed for an
average flow of 0.870 mgd; the western plant for 0.375 mgd. The treatment
processes for both plants will be 3-celled oxidation ponds. The oxidation
ponds will require 45 acres and 30 acres, respectively. Other features of
the proposed project include:
-------
.° effluent chlorination units
0 33 pump stations
0 102,100 ft of force mains
0 148,840 ft of gravity sewers
Discharge from the eastern plant will be to a drainage ditch flowing
into a low area drained by Bayou Choupique or the Charenton Canal; the
western plant will discharge to the Kelley Canal. Both facilities will
produce an effluent meeting secondary treatment standards.
e) Cypremort Point - The project proposed in the Cypremort
Point study area consits of the following elements:
0 130,000 gpd extended aeration package treatment plant,
chlorine disinfection unit, and 75,000 gal flow equali-
zation tank.
0 9 pump stations; and
0 36,250 ft of force mains;
0 15,000 ft of gravity collection lines;
The plant will be on a 2-acre site located on Bayou Cypremort south of
Hwy 83, and will discharge to a canal emptying into West Cote Blanche
Bay. Sludge will be disposed of by land application. The plant is
sized to serve a design-year resident population of 1,000 plus a maxi-
mum-day beach patronage of 4,000. Effluent from the Cypremort Point
plant will meet secondary treatment standards.
7. Environmental Impacts of EPA's Proposed Action to Award Additional
Grants
Based on the evaluations completed and documented in the draft
and final EIS's (i.e., the environmental impact analysis, the review and
comment on the draft EIS, the public hearing on the draft EIS, and com-
ments from interested individuals) EPA, Region 6, proposes to award Step
2 and 3 grants for the recommended projects described in the previous
section.
VI
-------
The principal impacts of these five proposed projects will be
the drain on the parish's financial resources; the temporary disruption of
traffic during construction of the collection systems to serve the un-
sewered areas; and the improvement in the overall quality of surface
waters in and abutting the parish, which includes a significant reduction
in coliform bacteria contamination and the public health hazard these
organisms indicate. The projects are not expected to induce population
growth, since the parish's recent history shows that strong economic
activity will spur growth even without the provision of sewer service.
A total of approximately 20 acres of wetland will be adversely impacted
by the five proposed projects, as will approximately 119 acres of prime i
agricultural land. In these agricultural and wetland areas, there are
no alternatives available to eliminate these adverse impacts other than
"no action." However, specific conditions will be incorporated into the
Step 2 and 3 grants to minimize these adverse impacts of construction
(see Appendix D, page 275). No known archaeological or historical
resources will be affected by any of the projects. On-the-ground surveys
to provide the additional data requested by the State Historic Preservation
Officer will be made a condition of the Step 2 grants, as will construc-
tion procedures to insure that no other archaeological resources will
be adversely impacted by the projects (see EPA response, page 262).
Population projections for the 5 separate projects have been modified
downward to provide more appropriate size facilities to accurately
reflect the future growth of St. Mary Parish.
8. Coordination of the Draft EIS
Copies of the draft Environmental Impact Statement were made
available to all concerned Federal, State, and local interests for
review and comments. Comments were received from the following Federal
and State agencies and local interests:
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
US Department of Agriculture
US Department of Commerce
vii
-------
US Department of Energy
US Department of Housing and Urban Development
US Department of Interior
US Department of Transportation
US Army Corps of Engineers
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
State of Louisiana -
Department of Culture, Recreation, and Tourism
Department of Natural Resources
Department of Transportation and Development
Department of Urban and Community Affairs
Office of Science, Technology, and Environmental Policy
Department of Wildlife & Fisheries
D. Ralph Caffery & Associates, Inc.
9. Public Hearing
A Public Hearing on the Draft EIS was held on June 21, 1979,
at 7:00 pm in the Parish Courthouse in Franklin, Louisiana. Approximately
40 persons attended the public hearing. No statements were made in
opposition to any of the five projects. The comment voiced most fre-
quently was that the EIS process had caused an inordinate delay in the
proposed projects. Several persons also requested that EPA assist the
Parish by discussing with the State of Louisiana the severity of their
sewerage problems so that the Parish would not be given a lower priority
for funding. The "Notice of Availability" of the Draft EIS was pub-
lished in the Federal Register dated May 4, 1979.
Vlll
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i
1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Legislative Background 1
1.2 Parish Water Quality Problems 2
1.3 Sewerage Facility Plans 4
1.4 Environmental Impact Statement Background 5
2. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 7
2.1 Natural Environment 7
2.1.1 Description of the Study Area 7
2.1.2 Climate 7
2.1.3 Air Quality 11
2.1.4 Odor 11
2.1.5 Noise 11
2.1.6 Topography 11
2.1.7 Geology 12
2.1.8 Soils 13
2.1.9 Hydrology 17
2.1.10 Rare and Endangered Species 21
2.1.11 Terrestrial Ecology 27
2.1.12 Aquatic Ecology 31
2.1.13 Water Quality 34
2.2 Man-Made Environment 41
2.2.1 Population 41
2.2.2 Land Use 44
2.2.3 Economics and Financial Resources 44
2.2.4 Community Services and Facilities 47
2.2.5 Transportation 49
2.2.6 Cultural Resources 50
2.2.7 Other Projects and Programs 51
3. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES 52
3.1 Development of Project Alternatives 52
3.1.1 Assessment of Parish-Wide Alternatives 52
3.1.2 Assessment of Individual Project Alternatives 52
-------
Page
3.2 Morgan City - Amelia Area (Wards 6 & 9) 54
3.2.1 Sewerage Problems 54
3.2.2 Alternatives 57
3.2.3 Impacts of the Proposed Morgan City Project 68
3.2.4 No-Action Alternative 82
3.3 Wards 5 & 8 86
3.3.1 Sewerage Problems 86
3.3.2 Alternatives 90
3.3.3 Impacts of the Proposed Wards 5 & 8 Project 95
3.3.4 No-Action Alternative 106
3.4 Franklin & Vicinity 112
3.4.1 Sewerage Problems 112
3.4.2 Alternatives 114
3.4.3 Impacts of the Proposed Franklin Project 119
3.4.4 No-Action Alternative 129
3.5 Baldwin & Vicinity 133
3.5.1 Sewerage Problems 133
3.5.2 Alternatives 135
3.5.3 Impacts of the Proposed Baldwin Project 140
3.5.4 No-Action Alternative 152
3.6 Cypremort Point • 155
3.6.1 Sewerage Problems 155
3.6.2 Alternatives 156
3.6.3 Impacts of the Proposed Cypremort
Point Project 158
3.6.4 No-Action Alternative 166
4. PARISH-WIDE CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 169
4.1 Cumulative Impacts of the Proposed Projects 169
4.1.1 Impacts on the Natural Environment 169
4.1.2 Impacts on the Man-Made Environment 170
4.2 Cumulative Impacts of the No-Action Alternatives 174
4.2.1 Impacts on the Natural Environment 174
4.2.2 Impacts on the Man-Made Environment 175
5. COORDINATION OF THE EIS 175A
XI
-------
Page
REFERENCES 176
APPENDICES
A. Cultural Resource Survey Reports 183
B. Cost-Effective Analyses 201
C. Water Quality Analysis, St. Mary Parish Wells 274
D. Conditions to the Step 2 and 3 Grants 275
LETTERS OF COMMENT ON THE DRAFT EIS 242
-------
Fresh water aquifers in St. Mary Parish consist of a surficial
gravel aquifer occupying the Mississippi River scour trenches and
alluvial valleys in the pre-Recent flood plain and at-depth aquifers in
Pleistocene sands and gravels. The surficial aquifer is recharged from
surface waters flowing southward through the Atchafalaya River and the
canals and bayous. Except for isolated salt domes at Belle Isle and
Cote Blanche Island, the land elevations in St. Mary Parish are less
than 17 feet above sea level. Because of differential densities, fresh
water floats on top of salt water. This principle is responsible for
the high water table throughout St. Mary Parish. During periods of low
fresh water flow the thickness of this fresh water layer is reduced.
Sea-level canals and regulated stream flows permit sea water to advance
inland. The molecular interaction between salt and fresh water produces
brackish water. Some shallow water wells become brackish during
prolonged droughts (Reference 78).
City water supplies and some private wells obtain their water
from the Chicot aquifer. This aquifer in Pleistocene sands and gravels
is confined under a silt-clay layer more than 100 feet thick. The wedge
of Pleistocene deposits is recharged from rainfall on the Pleistocene
Terraces about 75 miles north of the parish. The Chicot aquifer
consists of an upper and lower unit separated by a clay layer. At the
present time, the principal fresh water supply source from wells in St.
Mary Parish is from the Upper Chicot. The Upper Chicot aquifer,
according to USGS, is from 400 to 600 feet average thickness. Water
supply wells at Baldwin are 400 to 450 feet deep. Wells at Franklin are
from 215 to 405 feet deep with the shallow depth being at the top of the
Upper Chicot. Two private wells at Cypremort Point are 325 and 600 feet
deep. Here the Upper Chicot has been logged at 205 to 950 feet deep or
a thickness of over 700 feet.
The Chicot aquifer is confined and is under artesian head.
The piezometric level is at sea level in the southwest corner of the
parish. Septic tank effluent can enter surface waters and the surficial
17A
-------
aquifer having regional flow toward the Gulf. The confining clay layer
overlying the Upper Chicot may not be continuous over the entire parish.
However, because the Upper Chicot is under artesian pressure and is
more than 100 feet below sea level, it is not likely that septic tank
effluent will contaminate the aquifer. Therefore, wells in the Upper
Chicot can be considered to be free of pollution caused by on-site
disposal facilities. Contamination of shallow wells in the surficial
aquifer deposits is likely, especially where the water table is within a
few feet of the land surface.
For water quality analysis of wells, see Appendix C.
17B
-------
TABLE 2
ENDANGERED OR THREATENED BOTANICAL
ELEMENTS IN LOUISIANA *
Common Name Scientific Name
PLANTS:
Quillwort, Louisiana Isoetes louisianensis
Blue-star Amsonia glaberrima
Sarvis holly, Large-leaved holly Ilex amelanchier
Thieret's skull-cap, Horsemint Scutellaria thieretii
Spicebush, Jove's fruit Lindera melissifolia
Prairie orhcid, Prairie
white-fringed orchid Platanthera leucophaea
Beardgrass, Broomsedge Bothriochloa exaristata
Parrot's pitcher plant Sarracenia psittacina
Snapdragon Agalinis caddoensis
Southern yellow orchid Platanthera integra
Tickseed (unnamed) Coreopsis intermedia
Indian Paintbrush (unnamed) Castilleja ludovicina
* Unofficial listing - Extracted from Federal Register Vol. 40, No. 127 &
128, Vol. 41. No. 117 & 208 and Vol. 42. No. 6. Common names provided
by Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, Office of Forestry.
24
-------
be more cost-effective and less environmentally damaging than building a
new lagoon in the Amelia area. Subsequent analysis showed that upgrading
the existing facility was much less expensive than pumping to Morgan City.
i. Sludge treatment or conditioning processes evaluated for
the Morgan City facility included aerobic and anaerobic digestion, drying
beds, sludge lagoons, gravity thickening, dissolved air flotation, and
dewatering by centrifugation, heat treatment, chemical conditioning, vacuum
filtration, or pressure filtration. The method selected after thorough
study of the strengths and weaknesses of each method includes gravity
thickening, anaerobic digestion, and dewatering by vacuum filtration.
Sludge in the Amelia lagoon will be anaerobically digested at the bottom
of the lagoon.
j. Sludge disposal methods investigated included land spread-
ing, ocean dumping, sludge lagoons, incineration with on-site ash disposal,
and hauling either dewatered or wet sludge to the St. Mary Parish landfill
near Berwick. The method originally selected was hauling dewatered sludge
to the landfill, although the prospect of a joint sludge incineration
project with the Morgan City water treatment plant was also considered.
Regulations governing the use of that landfill, however, forbid disposal
of sewage sludge, so the sludge disposal method is currently being reviewed.
The alternatives presently being considered all involve upgrading the
degree of sludge treatment so that it will no longer require special landfill
procedures. Possibilities under consideration include incineration, a
massive chlorination process known as Purifax, and a wet air oxidation
process, known as Zimpro. Treated sludge from any of these processes
will be sufficiently disinfected to allow use as common fill material
without further special handling. Sludge from the Amelia lagoon will
not require disposal during the 20-year design life of the project. The
cost of dredging and disposing of the lagoons' sludge will, however, be
a major factor in determining the disposition of the facility at that
time.
k. Alternate treatment processes considered for the Morgan
City plant included oxidation ponds; aerated lagoons; oxidation ditches;
physical-chemical systems as a class; rock media trickling filters; the
extended aeration, step aeration, and contact stabilization variations
of the activated sludge process; the diffused air aeration variation of
the conventional complete-mix activated sludge process; the activated
60
-------
biofiltration system; the UNOX pure oxygen activated sludge system; the
conventional complete-mix activated sludge system, using surface aerators;
artificial media trickling filters (biofilters); and rotating bio-disc
filters. The first seven of these processes were eliminated in the initial
screening because of various undesirable characteristcis as applied to
this particular project. The last five processes were all considered
technically feasible, and were used with or without primary clarification
(where allowed by the process) and with the Amelia pond discharge routed
to either Bayou Boeuf or Lake Palourde, to establish 16 final alternatives.
A detailed cost estimate, including operation and maintenance
costs, was developed for each of the 16 final alternatives. A matrix
evaluation of several non-cost factors was also made, the results of which
were given equal weight with cost in making the final selection. The
non-cost factors used in the matrix were:
Water Quality Enhancement
Protection of Drinking Water
Odor
Wetland Enhancement
Oyster Water Protection
Impacts on Historical Sites
Impacts on Archaeological Sites
Enhancement of Wildlife Habitat
Traffic Interruption
Public Exposure to Construction
Possible Project Delays Due to Implementation Problems
Energy Consumption
Ease of Operation
Well-demonstrated Technology
Ease of Expansion
Uncomplicated Technology
Plant Facility Aesthetics
Ability to Withstand Shock Loads
Flexibility of Operation
Excess Capacity in Design
Mechanical Reliability
Ease of Upgrading
Parts Availability
Lower User Charge
Degree of Local Investment Required
The final 16 alternatives, and their rankings, are given in
Table 9. The complete cost-effective analysis is presented in Appendix B.
61
-------
3.2.2.2 Description of the Proposed Project.
a. Morgan City (Ward 6). The Morgan City treatment facili-
ties will be designed to handle an average daily flow of 4.85 mgd and a
peak flow of 14.55 mgd in the year 2000. Initial average daily flow, \
after rehabilitation of the existing sewer system to eliminate excessive
I/I, is anticipated to be 3.5 mgd, with a peak flow of 10.5 mgd. The
major treatment units proposed consist of the following components:
A bar screen in parallel with a comminutor
An aerated grit removal tank
Two primary clarifiers with scum and sludge removal
Two covered artificial media trickling filters (biofilters) with
forced ventilation and chemical scrubbing of removed air for
odor control
Two final clarifiers with scum and sludge removal
Sludge recirculation pumps capable of 200% return of design flow
Effluent chlorination chamber and equipment
Effluent pumps capable of handling peak flow
Gravity sludge thickener
Wet air oxidation followed by filter presses
Vacuum filtration dewatering equipment
Sludge hauling trailers and truck
Control and laboratory building
Main treatment building housing head works, primary and
final clarifiers, chlorination facilities, and pumps
Sludge Treatment building housing the digesters, thickener,
and dewatering equipment
The treatment plant is expected to reduce influent sewage having
an average municipal strength (200 mg/1 each BOD,, and suspended solids)
to an effluent containing 30 mg/1 each BOD,, and suspended solids, and
meeting the 200 colonies/100 ml fecal coliform limitation. The chlorination
facilities proposed will meet all detention time and redundency requirements
specified in EPA's publication MCD-06-Protection of Shellfish Waters,
(Reference 67).
The design of the plant's structures will blend with its location,
and landscaping will be provided to improve its appearance and to reduce
off-site operating noise levels. The plant will occupy a 17-acre wooded
site bounded on the north by the Southern Pacific RR, on the east by a
64
-------
spur line of the SPRR, on the west by the City cemetery, and on the south
by Young's Road. The plant effluent will be pumped through a 7,000 ft
long, 24-inch diameter force main to discharge into Bayou Boeuf at a point
about 1,800 ft east of the Atchafalaya River, near the existing discharge
point.
Other Ward 6 work included in the proposed project consists of
constructing four new major pump stations, rehabilitiating six existing
pump stations, building 30,000 LF of major force mains ranging from 8 to
20 inches in diameter, rehabilitating the existing sewers to eliminate
I/Ii and constructing some 17,400 LF of 8-inch diameter gravity sewers,
3,650 LF of 4" minor force main and three minor lift stations to provide
sewage collection facilities in the Siracusaville-Greenwood area. All
proposed sewer and force main construction in Ward 6 is anticipated to
occur within the limits of existing public rights-of-way.
b. Amelia (Ward 9). The Amelia oxidation pond will be de-
signed to handle an average daily flow of 1.25 mgd and a peak flow of
3.1 mgd in the year 2000. Initial average daily flow is expected to be
1.00 mgd, with a peak flow of 2.5 mgd. The existing 22-acre pond will
be supplemented by the addition of two new cells of 5.5 acres each, for
a total water surface area of 33 acres. The total site required will be
43 acres, and is located about 6,500 ft north of highway 90 and 3,500 ft
west of Bayou Boeuf.
A new chlorination building and equipment will also be constructed,
along with a new major lift station in the Englewood area which will pump
directly to the plant through a 6,700-ft long, 12-in diameter force main.
This force main will be located in an existing gas pipeline right-of-way
and will not require the taking of additional lands. The chlorination
system proposed has been modified to fully satisfy the requirements for
protection of shellfish waters (Reference 67).
65
-------
The plant is designed to receive influent sewage of normal
municipal characteristics (200 mg/1 each of BODr and suspended solids),
and is expected to discharge an effluent meeting the 30 mg/1 BOD,, and
90 mg/1 suspended solids requirements now in effect. Discharge will be
through an existing ditch, approximately 2,400 ft. long, to Lake Palourde.
Other work proposed for Ward 9 as part of the project includes
constructing about 37,150 LF of 6-to 10-inch diameter gravity sewers,
9,950 LF of 4- to 8-inch diameter force mains, 6,350 LF of 1^- and 2-inch
diameter pressure pipes to transport wastes from 7 grinder pump stations,
and six new lift stations. This work is all intended to provide sewerage
to areas currently without service, primarily south of US 90. All of
these collection system facilities are anticipated to be located within
existing public rights-of-way.
The locations of the major elements of the proposed Wards 6
and 9 sewerage project are indicated on Figure 15.
3.2.2.3 EPA's Proposed Action. Based upon the analysis presented in
the draft EIS, the review and comment on the draft EIS, the public hearing
on the draft EIS, and subsequent modifications to the originally-proposed
project, EPA, Region 6, proposes to award Step 2 and 3 grants for the
design and construction of the proposed projects in the Morgan City and
Amelia areas. As a result of awarding these additional grants, the impacts
described in the following sections are expected to occur.
3.2.2.4 Alternatives Available to Other Permitting Agencies. The placement
of effluent discharge structures or force main pipeline crossings in any
navigable waters will require a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(COE) pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. In
addition, for those instances where project facilities will be located in
wetlands, a permit pursuant to Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act of 1972, as amended, will be required.
a. Issuance of COE Permits. For construction of the Amelia oxi-__
dation ponds, a routine application for a COE Section 404 permit for con-
struction in wetlands must be filed with the District Office in New
Orleans, LA.
66
-------
For construction of all other project facilities which may
occur in wetlands, such as force main pipelines and effluent discharge
structures, issuance of the Section 404 permits will proceed under the
"Nationwide Permit" concept for the placement of dredged or fill material
as backfill or bedding for pipelines. The city of Morgan City need not
formally submit a Section 404 permit application since the following con-
ditions for the "Nationwide Permit" are satisfied (42 FR 13-8: 37146-
37147, July 19, 1977):
1. "That the discharge will not be located in the proximity
of a public water supply intake." Since there are no known public water
supply intakes in the vicinity of the proposed force mains and discharge
structures, this condition will be satisfied.
2. "That the discharge will not occur in areas of concentrated
shellfish production." Since there are no known shellfish production areas
in the areas where dredged material will be discharged, this condition will
be satisfied.
3. "That the discharge will not destroy a threatened or en-
dangered species as identified under the Endangered Species Act, or en-
danger the critical habitat of such species." There are no known endan-
gered species or critical habitats that will be adversely affected, and
therefore, this condition will be satisfied.
4. "That the discharge will not disrupt the movement of those
species of aquatic life indigenous to the waterbody." None of the pro-
posed structures will limit the movement of any aquatic species, there-
fore this condition will be satisfied.
5. "That the discharge will consist of suitable material free
from toxic pollutants in other than trace quantities." Toxic materials
should not be present in the materials excavated for pipeline placement,
therefore this condition will be satisfied.
6. "That the fill created by the discharge will be properly
maintained to prevent erosion and other non-point sources of pollution."
Any fill created by the construction of the force mains will be properly
seeded and maintained by the applicant in order to prevent erosion; there-
fore, this condition will be satisfied.
66A
-------
7. "That the discharge will not occur in a component of the
National Wild and Scenic River System or in a component of State wild and
scenic river system." Since there are no Wild and Scenic Rivers in the
study area, this condition will be met.
If any of these previously discussed exceptions could not be
satisfied, issuance of a COE Section 404 permit would require that a routine
application be submitted for review. However, the evaluation completed
on these issues has indicated that there are no provisions in the regu-
lations which are not satisfied nor prevent the 404 action from proceeding
under the "Nationwide Permit" concept.
b. Denial of COE Permits. The COE can deny either or both of
the required permits. Denial of the Section 404 permit would require the
redesign and rerouting of the force mains to avoid any impact on wetlands,
while denial of the Section 10 permit would totally preclude the construc-
tion of the effluent discharge structure. The denial of these permits
would negatively affect the project as proposed.
66B
-------
FIGURE 15
PROPOSED PROJECT
MORGAN CITY
SCALE
LEGEND
• TREATMENT PLANT
A PUMP STATION ,
__.. FORCE MAIN
ittttttt PRESENTLY SEWERED AREAS
«K
-------
3.2.3 Impacts of the Proposed Morgan City Project.
3.2.3.1 Impacts on the Natural Environment.
a. Odors. There will be no adverse odor impacts resulting
from the operation of the Morgan City sewage treatment facility. Under
normal operating conditions the proposed trickling filter process pro-
duces very little odor. In addition, the trickling filter unit will be
completely enclosed within a fiberglass dome with filtered ventilation.
All other facilities will also be housed within enclosed structures to
eliminate the possibility of odor impacts.
Odor impacts at the Amelia treatment plant site should also be
negligible. Under normal operating conditions, no odors should develop
from the proposed oxidation ponds.
b. Noise. Neither of the proposed treatment facilities will
produce adverse noise impacts. At the Morgan City treatment plant, the
odor control enclosures should almost completely eliminate the noise of
the plant beyond the site boundaries. In Amelia, there will be no
operating equipment at the oxidation ponds and therefore no noise
impacts. The nearest residence at both sites is at least one quarter
mile distant.
c. Geology & Soils. The proposed Morgan City Treatment
Plant will not affect the geology except for a slight change in
topography resulting from plant construction. The site is located in an
area free of soil subsidence potential. Most of the soils excavated for
pipelines can be used for backfill, and possibly some soils excavated
for the plant can be used for levee construction.
Sharkey-Alligator clay soils at the proposed plant site are
rated as having poor shear strength, high shrink-swell, severe wetness,
-------
flooding, and high compressibility. Thus it will be necessary to design
structure foundations for these conditions. Present plans call for the
use of piles, thereby eliminating the need for importation of more
suitable soils for foundations.
Exposure of soils during construction of plant and pipelines
will result in some loss of soils by erosion and contribute locally to
turbidity and sedimentation. These impacts will be minor because of the
flat terrain and short duration of exposure.
d. Hydrologic Conditions. No streams, natural drainage pat-
terns, or subsurface water will be permanently altered by the proposed
project. Normal construction procedures are to be used for the Morgan
City sewage treatment plant and expansion of the Amelia oxidation pond.
Any siltation or sedimentation will be for short duration and can, to a
large extent, be controlled by the contractor's efforts. No stream
crossings, dredging or channel changes are contemplated.
The high water table in the area will require dewatering for
pipeline trenching and foundation excavation. The removed water will be
discharged into the existing drainage system. Turbidity will be of short
duration.
e. Water Quality. Construction of the collection and treat-
ment facilities proposed for Wards 6 and 9 will result in minor, temporary
increases in siltation, sedimentation, and turbidity, and a slight lowering
of DO levels, in surface waters adjacent to project components, caused
by erosion of bare earth from construction sites into the waterways.
Most work will be done in built-up areas, away from surface waters, thus
causing no water quality problems. This problem will be the most severe,
but still quite minor, at the Amelia plant site. The site of the existing
Amelia pond is on the wetland - non-wetland interface. Coordination will
be made with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to determine if a Section 404
permit will be required for construction of the additional oxidation ponds.
69
-------
DO and turbidity levels will return to normal shortly after construction
is completed.
The Amelia pond will continue to operate during construction,
and the Morgan City discharges are presently untreated, so no worsening
of water quality is expected as a result of bypasses required by
construction operations. No major watercourses will be crossed by pipe-
lines, so there will be no problems caused by dredging.
Since the average discharge of the Lower Atchafalaya River is
extremely large in relation to the discharge of the Morgan City treatment
plant (approximately 96,800 mgd versus 4.85 mgd), operation of the plant
will have only a small effect on the Atchafalaya.
The principal impact on water quality caused by operating the
proposed project will be minor improvements in DO levels, solids concen-
trations, and turbidity readings, and a significant reduction of coliform
bacteria counts (and the public health hazard they indicate), in area
waterways during the design life of the project. It is also probable
that a very slight improvement in heavy metals concentrations may occur.
However, this is not a claimed benefit of the project, since the facili-
ties are not specifically designed to remove heavy metals, and since any
metals removed would represent an adverse impact at the point of sludge
disposal. Also, it is probable that most of the heavy metals found in
the area's waters are contributed by industries that are not, and will
not be, connected to the public sewerage system.
The beneficial impacts on water quality will be most apparent
in Bayou Boeuf between the lock and the Atchafalaya River, especially in
the immediate vicinity of the present Morgan City raw sewage discharges.
The northern end of Bayou Schaffer should also show improvement. Even
70
-------
though Morgan City is the major raw sewage discharge in the area, it cannot
be stated with any degree of certainty whether the reduced coliform counts
in its treated effluent will allow reopening of the Point Au Fer Shell
Reef oyster grounds. This is because of the complex hydrology of the
area, and because the oyster grounds are also affected by contamination
from other raw sewage discharges, both point and non-point, from areas
as distant as the Bayou Du Large ridge in Terrebonne Parish (Reference 45).
Also, there are still many industrial and commerical discharges that will
not be eliminated by the project.
Beneficial impacts will also be noticeable in the presently-
unsewered areas to be served by the project. Abandoning malfunctioning
septic tanks in the more-densely populated areas of Wards 6 & 9 should
result in elimination of standing pools of sewage in the wetland areas
and watercourses abutting most of the built-up, unsewered parts of the
project area. This, again, should slightly increase DO levels and
significantly lower coliform counts in the project area's waters. Very
little change is anticipated in the quality of the waters of Lake Palourde
near the Amelia discharge, since the volume discharged is quite small,
and the quality of the effluent will not be greatly different from that
believed to be produced now, although coliform counts will be reduced.
f. Rare and Endangered Species.
American Alligator. No published studies directly address
the influence of sewage effluent on alligator populations. It seems likely
that there will be very little if any direct negative or positive effects
of the operation of the sewage project on the alligator. The open trenches
that must be dug for placement of the pipe should be left open for as
little time as possible to prevent trapping alligators. Only a small
portion of the construction of the proposed projects will affect areas
that could be considered alligator habitat.
Bald Eagle. It is also highly unlikely that construction in
the Morgan City-Amelia project area will have any direct effects upon
bald eagles. Potential disturbances from existing road traffic far outweighs
71
-------
any potential disturbance created by the pipeline. The two bald eagle
nests in this area are at least 1 mile south of Highway 90 and will not
be influenced by construction activities.
g. Terrestrial Ecology.
Vegetation. The proposed sewage treatment plant for Ward
6, including Morgan City and the Siracusaville-Greenwood area will occupy
approximately 17 acres. The expansion of the oxidation pond in Ward 9,
including Amelia will take an additional 16 acres. The vegetation at
the 17 acre site considered in the Morgan City area appears to be scrubby
regrowth of a cutover originally bottomland hardwoods forest. Plant species
growing in such an area are widespread and common throughout coastal Louisiana
The vegetation at this site will be destroyed with no regrowth. In Ward
9, much of the 16 acre addition will occupy bottomland hardwoods and cypress-
tupelogum swamp, i.e., forested wetlands. Most of this site is probably
second growth. The vegetation at this site also consists of species common
to forested wetlands of coastal Louisana. The vegetation at this site
will be destroyed with no regrowth.
The laying of sewer lines associated with the project will be
almost entirely along existing roadsides and will result only in temporary
disturbance of the usually weedy plant species growing there. Little
erosion is expected due to the low topographic relief of the general area
and due to planned grass reseeding operations. Revegetation should occur
within one to several growing seasons.
Amphibians and Reptiles. There are no apparent negative effects
to any of the resident amphibians or reptiles from the proposed project,
except for the small loss of habitat at the treatment plant sites.
Birds. Because of their highly mobile nature, most bird species
will probably not be affected by pipeline construction. A small amount
of habitat will be lost at the treatment plant sites.
Mammals. Net impacts on the mammal populations in this area,
whether adverse or beneficial, will be nearly negligible.
h. Aquatic Ecology.
Vegetation. Any erosion and resulting sedimentation and
siltation that may occur during project construction should be short-term
and have little effect, if any, on submerged aquatic plant vegetation.
72
-------
Craig and Day (1977) have stated that the very high nutrient concentrations
and high loading rates of phosphorus and nitrogen point to eutrophic conditions
in the entire Atchafalaya Basin. Considering the extensive input of nutrients
into the Lower Atchafalaya Basin from agricultural north Louisiana and
the input from outside the state via the Mississippi River, the impact
of the changes in the Morgan City effluent will be insignificant.
Invertebrates. Of the three commercially important shellfish
harvested from Louisiana waters, oysters are most sensitive to human sewage
impacts. Oysters concentrate micro-organisms, including pathogenic forms.
Oysters are unable to swim away from water low in oxygen or high in turbidity,
and can be virtually eliminated by local areas of excess BOD and micro-
organisms resulting from sewage discharges. Only 576 acres of water bottom
were being leased for oyster production in St. Mary Parish in 1976, down
from 808 acres in 1960. The primary reason for the small area devoted
to oyster production is that the increased freshwater flows into the St.
Mary coastal areas from the Wax Lake Outlet and the Lower Atchafalaya
River have lowered the salinity below the point required by oysters.
Penaeid shrimp and blue crabs are economically more important
today in St. Mary Parish than are oysters. These mobile crustaceans are
physiologically quite different from oysters, and are not known to concen-
trate pathogenic organisms. The harvest of shrimp or crabs has not been
closed in local areas because of the presence of human wastes; however,
the recent cholera outbreak in coastal Louisiana was blamed on infected
crabmeat and created a drastic decline in crab sales. Thus, by eliminating
raw sewage discharges, the proposed project will help reduce the potential
for contamination of the local shrimp and crab resources.
Fish. Although specific critical limits vary considerably from
one body of water to the next, any project leading to reduced BOD loads
may be expected to have generally beneficial impacts upon the natural
populations of most fishes.
73
-------
There is little likelihood that either construction or opera-
tion of the proposed system will directly have significant adverse impacts
on fish communities except in the vicinity of the existing raw sewage
discharges, where the anticipated elimination of these point sources of
untreated sewage should generally enhance water quality. On balance,
the proposed project will be beneficial to the aquatic biota of the Morgan
City area.
Wading bird nesting colonies. Though all of the nesting colonies
in the parish are located south of the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway and
far enough from the proposed sewage system to not be affected by primary
impacts, their locations should be borne in mind by the construction
contractor, and care should be taken to avoid disturbance of those colonies.
This is especially critical in spring and summer, when nesting takes place.
3.2.3.2 Impacts on the Man-Made Enviroment
a. Land Use and Population. About half the land in Ward 6 is
developed, with the undeveloped areas occupying most of a thousand-yard-wide
strip of land along the shore of Lake Palourde. Only about a third of
Ward 9 is developed; as in the eastern part of Ward 6, the development
is restricted to a strip of land along Bayou Boeuf (References 28, 58).
Most of the developed land within the Morgan City limits is
residential, whereas in the unincorporated portion of Ward 6 and in Ward
9, industrial development predominates. An analysis of developed land
uses is given in Table 10, (Reference 16).
In 1970, there were 16,586 people in Morgan City and 2,292 in
Amelia (Reference 20). Estimated 1978 population in Morgan City was 16,712.
Population projections for Wards 6 and 9 developed in the original Facility
Plan have been revised to conform to the overall Parish projection of
91,000 in 1995. These revised projections call for a 1995 population of
24,848 in Morgan City, 3,604 in the unincorporated areas of Ward 6, and
4,398 in Ward 9.
74
-------
Construction of the proposed sewage systems in Wards 6 and 9
will have several direct land-use impacts. Expansion of the Amelia oxi-
dation pond will impact approximately 16 additional acres of
cyress-tupelogum swamp. Another 17 acres of woods will be replaced by
the proposed Morgan City treatment plant. While these land-use changes
may be regarded as adverse, they are not highly significant, since both
treatment plant sites are located in areas which could be expected to be
developed in the relatively near future as a result of the expanding economy
in the Ward 6 and 9 areas.
In Ward 6, all but 3,000 feet of the planned total of 51,000
feet of sewer line will be placed along roads. All of these 3,000 feet
will be through developed or unforested open areas; about 700 feet will
lie along a cemetery. Of the lines lying along roads, most will border
open, residential, and industrial areas. About a thousand feet are to
border a cemetery, and several hundred feet will lie along the edge of a
forested area. Land-use changes directly resulting from laying the Ward
6 lines will be negligible.
In Ward 9, a 6800-foot sewer segment will be routed overland
from US 90 to the treatment facility. This line will extend along an
existing gas pipeline which has already been placed through the forested
swamp land. Construction of this sewage force main should therefore not
require clearing of any additional land. Another 42,000 feet of sewer
line (omitting gravity lines which parallel force mains) will be laid
along roads in Ward 9. For the most part, these will be placed along
industrial and agricultural areas. Some 6,400 feet will border forested
areas, and 2,300 feet will lie along a marsh. At most, another seven
acres of forest and seventeen acres of farmland may be disturbed.
76
-------
Building the proposed sewerage project will Wards 6 and 9 more
attractive for development, in relation to other planning areas, than
they would be if the project were not built. The sewerage project will
thus responsible for drawing a portion of the projected population in-
crease into the Wards 6 and 9 planning area, assuming the projects in
the other areas are built; but this induced growth effect is likely to
be less in Wards 6 and 9 than it would be in any of the other planning
areas, because the disadvantage of a lack of sewerage facilities in this •
area would be offset to some degree by the proximity of any development
to major employment centers. Whatever induced growth does result is
likely to have adverse secondary impacts on land use, community services,
and agricultural and ecological resources; these impacts could be signifi-
cant, but are impossible to quantify. (By the above reasoning, any of
the projects planned for any of the various St. Mary Parish planning
areas may be said to induce growth. However, if all the projects are
built, difference in relative attractiveness for development will cancel
out, so that the proposed projects will not induce growth in St. Mary
Parish when considered together. See Section 4.2).
Aside from any induced increases in the amount of development,
the proposed project is not likely to alter the pattern of urbanization
in Wards 6 and 9. The Siracusaville-Greenwood area, along with the more
sparsely developed areas within Morgan City proper, are likely to fill
in anyway.
b. Economics and Financial Resources. Morgan City's economy is ..
dominated by the petroleum and natural gas industry, including exploration
and production, both on-shore and off-shore. Morgan City is one of the
main centers worldwide for the fabrication of off-shore oil rigs. Other
important industries include Intracoastal Waterway shipping, seafood produc-
tion and processing, and wholesale and retail trade. Agriculture, though
important in the rest of the parish, has almost no significance in the
77
-------
TABLE 11
MORGAN CITY - AMELIA
PROPOSED CAPITAL COSTS
BY SEWERAGE DISTRICT
District
Morgan City
Sewerage Dist. No. 1
Sewerage Dist. No. 4
Total
Federal
Share
$8,767,783
2,265,661
1,883,766
$12,917,210
Local
Share
$2,922,593
944,953
684,960
$4,552,506
Total
Cost
$11,690,376
3,210,614
2,568,726
$17,469,716
Source: Barnard & Thomas Engineering, Inc., Facility Plan for
Sanitary Sewage Collection and Treatment Facilities
for Morgan City and Wads 6 and 9, Vol. 2. April, 1978,
revised June, 1979, Exhibit 89.
79
-------
Operation and maintenance costs have been estimated for each
area. For the 1981 operating year, Morgan City is expected to need
$476,772 to maintain its system, Sewerage District No. 1 - $104,377 and
Sewerage District No. 4 - $70,000. These costs translate to average user
charges of $1.98, $2.90, and $1.72 per capita per month respectively.
EPA regulations require the use of a user charge system based on relative
use to pay operation and maintenance costs, so the 3/4C sales tax cannot
be used for that purpose even though adequate revenues might be generated
by that method.
c. Community Services and Facilities. Morgan City provides services
for a large part of eastern St. Mary Parish's rapidly growing population.
The City's problems in providing municipal services have been eased somewhat
by the fact that there is limited developable land in the city itself
and much of the residential and commercial development is locatng to the
west in Wards 5 and 8. Educational facilities provided by the City include
eight elementary schools and one high school. Amelia has one elementary
school. A vocational technical school located in Morgan City trains workers
for relevant local industries. Health facilities, provided by the parish,
include an existing 100-bed hospital and a new 150 bed hospital under
construction. Basic utilities are generally provided by the City, including
water,'gas, and electrc. Water treatment capacity is presently 14 mgd,
of which only half is used. Morgan City has both fire and police departments
with 30 adn 50 permanent employees each (Reference 87). Sewage collection
services are provided in most of the project area, although treatment is
only provided in part of Amelia.
The main impact of the proposed project will be to improve the
sewerage service by providing treatment in addition to collection. The
project is not expected, in itself, to induce much growth and should have
limited impact on the area's other community services. Morgan City appears
to have adequate financial resources to handle service expansion as it
is necessary. Several new services, such as the water treatment plant
and hospital, have existing capacity adequate to serve future growth.
80
-------
ii. Alternative II investigates the merits of numerous small
plants versus the long-distance pumping of Alternative I. Two new ABF
plants would be constructed under this plan, and the existing Patterson
plant would be rehabilitated to meet its effluent limitations.
One of the new facilities would be a 3.5 mgd ABF plant located
south of US 90, east of Bayou Vista. This plant would receive flows
pumped to it by renovated pump stations in Berwick, Bayou Vista, and
Country Club Estates. One new major lift station would be needed to
boost the flow from the renovated Berwick stations. The plant would be
equipped with a flow equalization basin to retain peak flows.
The Patterson plant would be rehabilitated to treat only its
original design flow of 0.4 mgd. A new major pump station at the plant
would transport flow above that amount to a new treatment facility
proposed for the Calumet area.
The second new plant would be a 2.1 mgd ABF plant in the
Calumet area, south of the Patterson Airport. This plant would receive
the excess flow from the new Patterson major pump station, plus flows
from three new major pump stations at the Todd Subdivision, the Wilson
Lane area, and the Calumet area near the airport. This plant would also
be equipped with a flow equalization basin.
iii. Alternative III is virtually identical to the Alternative
II. This plan would abandon the Patterson plant, and pump the entire
Patterson flow to the new ABF plant near Calumet, which would be enlarged
to a capacity of 2.5 mgd. It would also divide the flow in Bayou Vista
between the renovated existing pump station and a new major pump station
located near US 90 at the western end of the community.
3.3.2.2 Description of the Proposed Project.
Alternative I was the project selected for the Wards 5 & 8
study area as the most cost-effective and environmentally-compatible
system available. Details of the cost-effective analysis are presented
in Appendix B.
The treatment plant proposed for Wards 5 & 8 is designed for
an average daily flow of 6 mgd in the design year of 2002. Peak flow
will also be 6 mgd because of the two flow equalization basins. The
plant will be located on a 12.5-acre site on the east side of Cotton
92
-------
Road, about 1.5 miles south of US 90, and is expected to produce an
effluent containing less than 7 mg/1 BODr, 30 mg/1 suspended solids, and
200 fecal coliform colonies/100 ml. The effluent will be discharged to
the GIWW at the south end of Cotton Road. Plant components proposed
include comminutors and bar screens,- flow measurement equipment, grit
removal facilities, primary clarifiers, ABF units, short-term aeration
units, final clarifiers, effluent chlorination, anaerobic sludge diges-
tors and sludge holding lagoons.
The project design is predicated on removal of about 50% of
the present I/I by rehabilitation of the existing sewer systems. This
work is included in the proposed project.
About 81,655 LF of gravity sewer lines ranging from 8 to 12
inches in diameter (89% are 8-inch), 33,470 LF of minor force mains (4
to 8 inches in diameter), 15 minor lift stations (new or rehabilitated),
and 20 grinder pump stations will also be constructed to provide sewage
collection from presently unsewered areas. More than half of this work
will occur in the area west of Patterson.
In addition to the collection system work, the project will
include 2 aerated holding basins, and 8 new major pump stations (includ-
ing the plant effluent pumps) and 4 rehabilitated major pump stations to
convey the collected sewage to.the holding basins, the plant, and the
GIWW. The pump stations will discharge through some 90,000 LF of major
force mains, ranging from 6 to 24 inches in diameter.
Both the Patterson plant and the Country Club Estates lagoon
will be abandoned. Disposition of the unused facilities has not been de-
termined. Final disposition of dried sludge from the sludge lagoons, now
that the Parish landfill will not accept it, has not yet been determined.
Principal features of the project proposed for Wards 5 & 8 are
shown on Figure 16.
3.3.2.3 EP'A's Proposed Action.
Based upon the analysis presented in the draft EIS, the review
and comment on the draft EIS, and the public hearing on the draft EIS,
EPA, Region 6, proposes to award Step 2 and 3 grants for the design and
93
-------
ENTIRE PROJECT AREA IS PROTECTED
FROM 100-YEAR FLOOD BY LEVEES
GULF
FIGURE 16
PROPOSED PROJECT
WARDS 5 & 8
SCALE
MILES
~t "t"t~t~t"t't'l
W
LEGEND
PRESENTLY SEWERED AREAS
PROPOSED NEW COLLECTION AREAS
TREATMENT PLANT
HOLDING POND
MAJOR PUMP STATION
FORCE MAIN
WETLANDS
-------
construction of the proposed project in Wards 5 & 8 of St. Mary Parish.
As a result of awarding these additional grants, the impacts described
in the following sections are expected to occur.
3.3.2.4 Alternatives Available to Other Permitting Agencies
The placement of effluent discharge structures or force main
pipeline crossings in any navigable waters will require a permit from
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) pursuant to Section 10 of the
Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. In addition, for those instances where
project facilities will be located in wetlands, a permit pursuant to
Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, as
amended, will be required.
a. Issuance of COE Permits.
The proposed site of one of the aerated flow equalization holding
ponds is in a wetland area. Construction of this facility will require a
routine application for a COE Section 404 permit. Construction of any other
project facilities which may occur in wetlands, such as a force main, will
proceed under the "Nationwide Permit" concept for the issuance of a Section
404 permit. Details of this procedure are presented on page 66.
b. Denial of COE Permits.
The COE can deny either or both of the required permits. Denial
of the Section 404 permit would require the redesign and rerouting of the
force mains to avoid any impact on wetlands, while denial of the Section
10 permit would totally preclude the construction of the effluent dis-
charge structure. The denial of these permits would negatively affect the
project as proposed.
3.3.3 Impacts of the Proposed Wards 5 & 8 Project
3.3.3.1 Impacts on the Natural Environment.
a. Odors. Odor impacts resulting from operation of the proposed
project should be minor. Beneficial impacts will occur in the vicinity
of the existing Patterson plant and the existing Country Club Estates
lagoon which will be abandoned, and in unsewered areas where faulty
performance of septic tank systems has resulted in odor problems.
95
-------
Adverse odor impacts could possibly occur at the sites of the two major
holding ponds in Bayou Vista and Patterson. Both of these holding ponds
will be immediately adjacent to developed areas. The proposed plan
specifies that these ponds shall be mechanically aerated, which should
generally eliminate odor problems; power failures, lack of proper main-
tenance, or other operational problems, however, could lead to intermittent
adverse odor impacts.
Odor problems from the proposed treatment plant should be
nearly negligible, as the plant will be located approximately 1-1/4
miles south of US Highway 90 in a completely undeveloped area. Minor
problems could possibly develop at Kemper Williams Park, which is planned
for the area directly west of the proposed sewage treatment plant,
across Cotton Road. This park, a proposed multi-purpose recreation
facility of over 300 acres, is still in the preliminary planning stage,
with no projected completion date as yet.
b. Noise. Adverse impacts on noise quality should be nearly
negligible. Noise levels normally associated with excavation work will
occur during construction of the sewage collection system, but since
this work is primarily of a linear nature, the duration at any one place
will be quite limited. No blasting will be required. There will be no
adverse impacts on noise quality caused by construction of the treatment
plant because the nearest development is over one mile distant. Operation
of the proposed project should also cuase no adverse impact. All pumps
will be enclosed within the pump station buildings, and the noise generated
by the treatment plant equipment is expected to be barely perceptible at
the boundaries of the site.
c. Geology & Soils. The proposed treatment plant site on Cotton
Road south of US 90 will not affect the geology except for a slight
change in topography resulting from plant construction. The site is
located in an area rated as having a very high soil subsidence potential.
The bottom-land and marsh soils at the proposed plant site are
rated by the Soil Conservation Service as having many areas too unstable
to support buildings with conventional foundations. It will be necessary
96
-------
to design structure foundatious for these conditions, to import suitable
materials, or to select a more suitable site for the plant. It will
also be necessary to dispose of unsuitable soils in non-wetland areas.
The pump stations and lift stations are located, for the most
part, along the natural levees, and as such, should not have any major
construction problems.
The impacts of construction of pipelines and treatment plants
are the same in the Berwick - Patterson area as previously discussed for
Morgan City in Paragraph 3.2.3.1., and consist mainly of minor erosion
and turbidity.
d. Hydrologic Conditions. Streams, natural drainage patterns and
subsurface water will not be permanently altered by the project. Construc-
tion of the treatment plant, lift stations and pumping stations will
follow normal procedures. Any siltation or sedimentation resulting from
construction will be for short duration. Local turbidity is not con-
sidered to be a problem because of the abundance of moving water in the
area. No stream crossings, dredging or channel changes are contemplated.
The high water table in the area will require some dewatering for pipeline
trenching and foundation excavation. The removed water can be discharged
into the Atchafalaya River or existing drainage systems.
e. Water Quality. During construction of the proposed project
for Wards 5 & 8, there will be a temporary, minor lowering of the water
quality of streams and wetlands immediately adjacent to project components
from siltation and sedimentation caused by erosion from areas of bare
earth exposed by trenching, pond building, and plant construction. This
effect will be the most severe, but still minor, in areas where project
components are constructed in wetlands. The resuspension of high-oxygen-
demand sediments and the general churning caused by the heavy equipment
needed to build these components will temporarily result in zero DO
concentrations and extremely high turbidity in waters in and immediately
abutting the construction zones. The areas so affected will be quite
small in proportion to the total areas of similar wastes within the
study area, however, and the impacted waters will return to their original
97
-------
condition within a matter of weeks after construction ceases. No bypasses
or overflows of raw sewage will be necessitated by construction procedures.
Operation of the proposed facilities will eliminate the raw
sewage discharges from Berwick and Bayou Vista, improve the quality of
the effluent from Country Club Estates and Patterson, eliminate a signi-
ficant portion of the unsatisfactory individual sewage disposal facilities
in the study area, and greatly reduce the occurrences of sewage overflows
and bypasses from parts of the collection systems surcharged during wet
weather.
The net effect of these improvements will be a beneficial, if
slight increase in DO concentrations in both the major waterways surrounding
the project area and in the smaller watercourses and shallow-water
wetlands within the ring levee throughout the project's design life.
There will also be a significant beneficial lowering of coliform bacteria
counts in these same waters, particularly around the present raw sewage
discharge points, together with a lessening of the public health hazards
indicated by the presence of these organisms.
The hydrology of the area and the unquantified severity of
non-point source pollution make it impossible to determine the impacts
on the Point Au Fer Shell Reef oyster grounds. It is certainly unlikely
that the Wards 5 & 8 project alone would reduce coliform levels in the
Atchafalaya Bay sufficently to allow reopening of the grounds, considering
the raw sewage discharges of Morgan City and the probablity of contamination
from the inhabitated areas of Bayou DuLarge. Design changes will be made in^^Z—
Step 2 to insure that a 30-minute chlorine contact time is provided for thisX. ,—I
treatment facility in order to comply with the requirements of EPA's guide-
lines for protection of shellfish waters (Reference 67).
f. Rare and Endangered Species. Since there are no known rare
and/or endangered species in Wards 5 and 8 of St. Mary Parish, there
will be no adverse impacts.
g. Terrestrial Ecology. The proposed sewage treatment plants for
Wards 5 and 8 will utilize 12.5 acres of land consisting primarily of
second-growth bottomland hardwoods and some cypress-tupelogum. The Corps
98
-------
of Engineers had determined that the site of the proposed treatment plant
is a non-wetland. Trees present on the site include live oak, sweetgum,
water oak, green ash, Drummond red maple, and hackberry. Wetland areas
within the project vicinity are shown on Figure 16.
The land required for the two holding ponds is 3.4 and 4.4
acres. The smaller site is to be located near Hwy 90, just west of
Patterson. Vegetation of this site consists of bald cypress, green ash,
black willow, Johnson grass, eastern baccharis, and yellow dock. The
4.4 acre holding pond site west of Berwick has been determined by the
Corps of Engineers to be a wetland. The area is a black willow thicket
with giant cutgrass, sugarcane plumegrass, cutgrass, maidencane, spike-
rush, and pickerelweed. The vegetation on the total 20.3 acres will be
destroyed by project implementation with no regrowth, and the area will no
longer be available as habitat for the faunal species presently using it.
As redwood is an aesthetically and ecologically valuable,
increasingly scarce, and essentially non-renewable national resource,
the proposed use of redwood lath in the ABF plant should be considered a
minor adverse impact.
h. Aquatic Ecology. Any sedimentation arising from construction
should be short-term and have little effect, if any, on submerged aquatic
vegetation. While primary productivity in the immediate vicinity of the
effluent discharge may be increased, the generally eutrophic nature of
the GIWW will not be affected by an addition of 6 mgd at 7 mg/1 BOD.
Elimination of the discharge of untreated sewage from Bayou
Vista and Berwick into the Lower Atchafalaya can only have beneficial
impacts on shrimp, crab, and fish populations.
3.3.3.2 Impacts on the Man-Made Environment
a. Land Use and Population. Most of the land in the Wards 5 and
8 project area, including all of the land south of US 90, is undeveloped
(Reference 40). Developed land lies along Bayou Teche and the Atchafalaya,
and is about three-quarters agricultural. There is some strip development
along LA 182 east of the Wax Lake Outlet in the vicinity of the Patterson
airport; some industry between Patterson and Bayou Vista; and a residential
99
-------
subdivision - Country Club Estates - north of LA 182 between Bayou Vista
and Berwick. Otherwise, nonagricultural development is located primarily
within the towns of Patterson, Bayou Vista, and Berwick (Reference 80).
No land-use data are available for Patterson or Bayou Vista.
In 1970 the town of Berwick comprised about 160 acres of residential
land (including streets), about 80 acres of industrial development along
the waterfront, and about 10 acres apiece devoted to commercial and
public uses (Reference 16).
In 1970, 14,949 people lived in Wards 5 and 8, including 4,409
in Patterson, 5,121 in Bayou Vista, and 4,168 in Berwick. Estimates
made in 1978 for revenue-sharing purposes place 4,848 people in Patterson
and 4,496 people in Berwick, for an annual compounded increase of 1.08
percent in the incorporated areas. Applying this rate to all of Wards 5
and 8 would yield a total 1978 estimated population of 16,300.
The proposed sewerage system was originally sized on the basis
of a projected 1995 design population of some 41,500 in Wards 5 and 8.
As a result of analyses conducted in the Draft EIS, it was determined
that that population projection was out of line with total population
projections for the parish, and would provide excess capacity in the
treatment facility. In order to avoid providing excess capacity and the
possibility of inducing growth, EPA developed a new 1995 population
projection for the Wards 5 & 8 area of 27,802 persons. This figure
allows for reasonable growth in the area, and is coordinated with the
official state population projection for St. Mary Parish.
Because of delays in the project timetable, the design year of
the project has been adjusted to 2002, 20 years from the expected
completion date of 1982. Design population for the year 2002 is pro-
jected to be 32,527.
The proposed sewerage system will have a number of minor
direct land-use impacts. Some 209,500 feet of sewer line will be laid
(Reference 29). All but 18,600 feet will be along existing roads. Of
the remainder, 9,800 feet will lie along existing pipeline right-of-way
already cleared through forest land; 3,800 feet along an existing pipelir.-.
99A
-------
right-of-way through agricultural land; 3,000 feet through uncleared
forest land; and 1,000 feet along a canal bordering farmland. Sewer
line construction will thus temporarily disturb a minimum of about 5.5
acres of farmland and 3.4 acre of forest land (based upon a construction
impact zone 50 ft wide). Depending on the extent to which sewer line
construction easements cannot be incorporated into existing rights-of-way.
as much as another 53 acres of forest land and 21 acres of farmland may
have to be cleared temporarily (References 26, 58). At the plant site,
12.5 acres of forest land will be permanently taken for sewage treatment
facilities (Reference 26). The proposed holding ponds will permanently
displace another 7.8 acres of forest land and wetland. However, several
acres occupied by the present Country Club Estates sewage lagoon and the
existing Patterson treatment plant will be returned to other uses
(Reference 29).
Building the proposed project will make Wards 5 and 8 more
attractive for development, in relation to other planning areas, than
they would be if the proposed project were not built. The sewerage
project will thus be responsible for drawing a.portion of the projected
population into the Wards 5 and 8 planning area, assuming the projects
in the other areas are built; if they are not, the proposed project will
likely induce growth in Wards 5 and 8 beyond that projected above.
These impacts on population and their secondary impacts on land use,
community services, and agricultural and ecological resources are likely
to be significant, but are impossible to quantify. (Of course, statements
analogous to the above can be made with respect to any of the other four
planning areas. If all the projects are built, differences in relative
attractiveness for development will cancel out, so that the proposed
projects will not induce growth in St. Mary Parish as a whole. See
Section 4.2).
The proposed project will probably also affect the geographical
pattern of development within Wards 5 and 8. In the past, residential
development has occurred in the drier areas. If this trend continues,
sewer routing upstream from Patterson would appear to be in line with
100
-------
the expected pattern of development. However, development might also be
expected to occur on the expanses of dry land around Calumet near the
Wax Lake Outlet, due to the proximity of US 90. However, the geography
of the proposed sewers may lure development away from the unserved
Calumet area to the wetter forested areas around the proposed holding
ponds farther east along US 90. Such an alteration of the expected
future growth pattern would benefit the agricultural area near Calumet
at the expense of ecological resources including small areas of wetlands
near the holding ponds.
b. Economics and Financial Resources. The economy of Wards 5 and
8 is characterized by a strong industrial sector and an expanding commercial
sector. The Berwick and Patterson waterfronts include numerous support
facilities for the offshore oil and fishing industries. These facilities
include steel fabricators, drill equipment suppliers, ship building and
repair yards, and seafood and fresh fish processors. Three canneries
are expected to utilize the proposed treatment facility, but their total
contribution will not be more than 2 percent of the design flow.
Commercial activity, previously centered in Morgan City to the
east, is currently expanding into Wards 5 and 8. Greater availability
of dry land has made commercial sites along new US Hwy 90 quite attractive,
and expansion is expected to continue along with residential development.
Agriculture still contributes to the Wards 5 and 8 economy,
but to a continually decreasing degree. Residential expansion has
reduced acreage of the sugar cane crop and that trend is expected to
continue.
Employment figures are not available for Wards 5 and 8 as a
whole. However, 1970 census data for Berwick and Patterson indicates
that of the total persons employed, approximately 22 percent are in
retail and wholesale trade, 12 percent in professional services, 12
percent in manufacturing, 8 percent in transportation, and 8 percent in
finance, business, and repair services. Median family income is higher
than the parish-wide average (Reference 40).
101
-------
The proposed project is not expected to have much impact on
the Wards 5 and 8 economy. Development and commercial expansion will
continue along present trends, which are determined largely by national
energy policy and its effect on offshore oil development.
The primary economic impacts of the project will consist of
the construction activity generated and the cost of the system.' Building
a treatment system this size will benefit the local construction activity
on the short term but will have no long-term effect. The local share of
the estimated capital costs are displayed in Table 12. Part or all of
these local costs may be financed by capital generated by the parish-wide
3/4C sales tax. Any additional funds required will be provided by special
assessments. Operation and maintenance, costs for the treatment plant,
pumping stations, and pond aerators are estimated to be $327,500 per year
(Reference 29). The cost of maintaining the gravity sewer system has not
been estimated. Based on a projected 1980 population of 24,000, the per
capita user charge would average $13.00 per capita per year plus cost of
the gravity system maintenance.
c. Community Services and Facilities. St. Mary Parish operates
two elementary schools, two junior high schools and two senior high
schools in Wards 5 and 8. These facilities are divided between Patterson
and Berwick; the Berwick schools also serve the Bayou Vista population.
Health care needs are met by hospitals in Bayou Vista and Morgan City.
102
-------
The treatment plant site for the Eastern Project Area was
chosen primarily because of its proximity to both the most
densely-populated part of the project area and a suitable receiving
stream, Yellow Bayou. It was reasoned that such a location would
minimize pumping and construction costs. Similarly, since the vast
majority of flow in the Western Project Area would come from the City of
Franklin, a site at, or near, the existing treatment plant was deemed
obviously favorable because of the lower pumping and construction costs
entailed. Also, the St. Mary Parish Police Jury had previously acquired
a site directly across Bayou Yokely from the existing plant for the
express purpose of constructing wastewater treatment facilities and a
solid waste transfer station.
Wastewater flow reduction measures were considered for the
study area. Rehabilitation of the existing Franklin sewer system to
reduce I/I was recommended for the Western Project Area; and encouraging
water conservation by basing the sewer user charge on water consumption
was proposed for both project areas. After allowing for these measures,
anticipated flows for the Western Project Area were an initial average
daily flow of 2.15 mgd, increasing to 2.40 mgd by the 1996 design year,
with corresponding peak flows of 5.38 mgd initially, and 6.00 mgd by
1996. In the Eastern Project Area, the initial average daily flow was
extimated at 0.27 mgd, increasing to 0.28 mgd by 1996; with peak flows
beig 0.68 mgd initially, and 0.70 mgd in 1996 (Reference 63).
Treatment processes considered for the 0.28 mgd Eastern
Project Area plant were an oxidation ditch, oxidation ponds, and a
package plant. An oxidation ditch plant was originally proposed.
However, review and comments by the State and EPA prompted a re-analysis
that resulted in the selection of the oxidation pond alternative. The
very low energy usage of this type of treatment makes it the most
cost-effective of the three alternatives, and the ponds are expected to
meet the 30 mg/1 BOD,, limit and the recently-relaxed 90 mg/1 limit for
suspended solids.
115
-------
An engineering analysis of the existing Franklin plant
indicates that it could be rehabilitated and modified to adequately
treat 1.0 mgd. Therefore, the following alternative treatment methods
were considered for the Western Project Area:
- a 1.4 mgd oxidation ditch, plus upgrading and expanding the
existing plant;
- a new 1.4 mgd trickling filter, plus upgrading and expanding
the existing plant;
- a 1.4 mgd oxidation pond, plus upgrading and expanding the
existing plant; or
- abandon the existing plant, and construct a 2.4 mgd
oxidation ditch.
The oxidation pond alternative was eliminated because of doubts about
its ability to meet effluent limitations. The oxidation pond
alternative would have required algae removal facilities, because it
would not have qualified for the relaxed suspended solids limitations
under EPA's recent guidelines. To be eligible for the relaxed suspended
solids limitation, an oxidation pond must be both smaller than 2 mgd,
and be the sole secondary treatment process being used. If all the flow
in the Western Project Area is diverted to the pond, it will violate the
2 mgd maximum capacity criterion; if flow is divided between it and the
existing plant, it will violate the sole process criterion. A
cost-effective analysis of the remaining three alternatives resulted in
selection of a 2.4 mgd oxidation ditch, and abandonment and demolition
of the existing plant, as the treatment method for the Western Project
Area.
Three alternate methods of sludge disposal were considered:
mechanical dewaterihg and disposal by landfill; sludge drying beds with
ultimate disposal by continuing to allow citizens to use it as a soil
conditioner, as is now done; and land spreading of wet sludge. Sludge
drying beds were selected as a result of a cost-effective analysis.
116
-------
3.4.2.2 Description of the Proposed Franklin & Vicinity Sewerage Project.
The treatment process presently proposed for the Western
Project Area is an oxidation ditch, consisting of a bar screen, raw
wastewater pumps, concrete-lined oxidation ditch, final clarifiers,
sludge return pumps, sludge drying beds, and effluent disinfection,
sampling and metering. In the Eastern Project Area, a three-cell
oxidation pond is proposed on a 40-acre site. Other facilities will
include a bar screen, raw wastewater pumps, and effluent disinfection,
sampling, and metering equipment. The treatment facilities will vary in
size, with the Eastern Project Area units being sized for a 0.28 mgd
average daily flow, and the Western Project Area units being sized for
2.40 mgd. The western plant site will require about 10 acres, the
eastern plant will occupy a 40-acre site.
Because of dilution by I/I remaining after sewer system reha-
bilitation, the western plant will be designed to treat an influent
strength of 225 mg/1 BOD^ and 215 mg/1 suspended solids. The eastern
plant will be designed to treat wastewater containing 240 mg/1 BOD- and
225 mg/1 suspended solids. Both plants are expected to produce an
effluent consistently containing less than 30 mg/1 each BOD,, and fecal
coliform counts less than 200 colonies/100 ml. Suspended solids counts
should be less than 30 mg/1 in the western project area, and less than
90 mg/1 for the oxidation ponds in the eastern project area. The
eastern plant will discharge to Yellow Bayou; Bayou Yokely will be the
receiving stream for the western plant.
The proposed project includes recommended rehabilitation of
the existing Franklin collection system. An estimated total of about
168,000 LF of gravity sewers ranging from 8 to 10 inches in diameter are
proposed to collect sewage from the presently-unsewered parts of the
study area. About 110,000 LF of force mains and 80 minor pumping
stations will also be constructed. Nearly all pipeline work is expected
to be performed within existing public rights-of-way; however, a force
main is planned along the Missouri Pacific tracks and Bayou Yokely from
Caffery to the Western Project Area plant, and another will follow an
existing drainage ditch from Verdunville to the proposed Eastern Project
117
-------
FIGURE 17
PROPOSED PROJECT
FRANKLIN
SCALE MILES
LEGEND
• TREATMENT PLANT
IIU11HI PRESENTLY SEWERED AREAS
&?&, PROPOSED NEW COLLECTION AREAS
100-YEAR TIDAL FLOOD
-------
Area plant. Force main crossings of Bayou Teche are planned at Oaklawn,
Oxford, and Verdunville; the Franklin Canal is also planned to be
crossed by a force main (Reference 64).
Major elements of the proposed Franklin & Vicinity project are
shown on Figure 17.
3.4.2.3 EPA's Proposed Action.
Based upon the analysis presented in the draft and final
EIS's, the review and comment on the draft EIS, and the public hearing
on the draft EIS, EPA, Region 6, proposes to award Step 2 and 3 grants
for the design and construction of the proposed Franklin and Vicinity
project just described. As a result of awarding these additional
grants, the impacts described in the following sections are expected to
occur.
3.4.3 Impacts of the Proposed Franklin Project
3.4.3.1 Impacts on the Natural Environment.
a. Odors. With proper operation of the proposed oxidation ditch
treatment plant, odor impacts beyond the immediate plant site should be
nearly negligible. It is possible that during infrequent periods of
equipment failure, malodorous conditions could develop which would
affect the residential areas in the vicinity of the two plants. For
major portions of the time, however, prevailing wind conditions (shown
on Figure 4) will limit the impact to areas which are presently undeve-
loped. The oxidation ponds in the Eastern Project Area are sized so
that conditions in which odors could be produced should not occur.
Collection and treatment of sewage from presently-unsewered areas will
provide beneficial impacts to areas of faulty .septic tank operation.
b. Noise. Construction of the force mains and collection system
will be accompanied by the normal noises commonly associated with con-
struction equipment, although no pile-driving or blasting will be
required. Also, since this work is essentially linear, the minor noise
impacts which may occur will be of short duration in any one place.
Construction at the treatment plant sites will be of considerably longer
duration, but these sites are much further removed from the nearest
residences, thereby greatly reducing the potential impacts. The nearest
119
-------
residence is 1700 feet from the eastern treatment plant site, and in the
western area the nearest residence is 700 feet from the plant site.
Operation of the projects should cause no adverse noise
impacts. Noises which will occur will be of a continuous, low,
background type not likely to be perceptible beyond the treatment plant
sites. There will be no noise impacts from the oxidation pond in the
eastern project area.
c. Geology & Soils. Construction of the proposed facilities will
not affect the geology except for a slight change in topography
resulting from plant construction. Both the Franklin (west) and
Verdunville (east) plant sites are to be located in areas free of soil
subsidence potential.
Both sites are in areas of soil rated as poor for foundations
by the Soil Conservation Service. Baldwin silty clay is at the west
site and Iberia clay is at the east site. Both are rated severe for
septic tank operation, slight for sewage lagoons, poor to fair for
embankments and poor for building foundations. It will be necessary to
design structure foundations for these conditions, to import suitable
materials, or to select alternative sites for the plants in more
favorable soils.
Soil exposure during construction of the plants and collection
pipelines will result in some erosion and contribute locally to
turbidity and sedimentation. These impacts will be minor because of
flat terrain and short duration of exposure. Use of shell should be
considered wherever possible to reduce soil requirements.
d. Hydrologic Conditions. The proposed project will not alter
the subsurface or surface water drainage patterns. Construction of
collection pipelines and the two proposed treatment plants will produce
some temporary siltation and sedimentation in the adjacent bayous.
Yellow Bayou (Thorgeson Canal) and Bayou Yokely will receive surface
runoff from the proposed plant sites. Exposed excavation materials
removed by erosion will contribute to the siltation, sedimentation, and
turbidity of these bayous but the effect will be temporary. Five force
120
-------
mains will cross Bayou Teche, requiring dredging in the channel. A'll
i
construction activities in navigable waters such as Bayou Teche and the
Franklin Canal will require Section 10 permits from the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers. Turbidity and resuspension of bottom deposits resulting
from this dredging will be a very short-lived event and should cause no
permanent adverse impacts. The entire Project Area is within the
protective levee and according to Corps of Engineers studies is not
subject to flooding. The water table is high and pipeline construction
will require dewatering in most locations. Because most of the proposed
collection pipelines are along Bayou Teche, the removed water can be
discharged into Bayou Teche or the existing drainage system.
e. Water Quality. Erosion from areas of bare earth exposed
during pipeline trenching and plant construction will cause a temporary
lowering of the water quality of the streams and wetlands immediately
adjacent to project components. DO concentrations will decrease, and
turbidity, siltation, and sedimentation will increase. These effects
will be most noticeable where project components are built in or near
waterways or wetlands; for example, the force main from Verdunville to
the new eastern treatment plant, or the force mains proposed to be built
across Bayou Teche and the Franklin Canal. However, the areas affected
will be quite small in comparison to the total of similar waters in the
study area, and the impacted waters will return to their natural
condition within a matter of weeks after construction ceases. Erosion
control measures proposed to mitigate these effects include shaping,
seeding, fertilizing, and watering disturbed areas to speed rees.tablish-
ment of their vegetative cover. No bypasses or overflows of raw sewage
will be caused by construction procedures (Reference 63).
Operation of the proposed facilities will improve the quality
of the effluent presently discharged by the Franklin plant, eliminate
the frequent wet weather bypasses, and eliminate the vast majority of
the unsatisfactory individual sewage disposal facilities presently being
used in the study area. The new effect of these improvements will be a
beneficial, if slight, increase in DO concentrations in both the major
121
-------
waterways surrounding the study area (particularly Bayou Teche) and in
the smaller watercourses and shallow-water wetlands within the ring
levee throughout the project's design life. There will also be a slight
lowering of solids concentrations and a significant lowering of coliform
bacteria counts in these same waters, with an attendant lessening of the
public health hazards indicated by the presence of these organisms.
The chlorine contact time proposed for these facilities
(Reference 64) has been increased to 30 minutes to meet the requirements
of EPA's guidelines for protection of shellfish waters (Reference 67).
f. Rare and Endangered Species. There are no known rare and/or
endangered species in the Franklin and Vicinity sewerage project area.
g. Terrestrial Ecology. Approximately 50 acres of land will be
needed for the two sewerage treatment facilities planned for the
Franklin and Vicinity area. The proposed sites are now marginal
canefields, and as such are considered to be prime and unique farmland.
Any existing vegetation and/or crops will be cleared with no regrowth,
and most of the area will be lost to the fauna presently utilizing it.
h. Aquatic Ecology. Sediment-laden runoff from project construc-
tion will be brief in duration and localized in extent and will conse-
quently have little effect on submerged aquatic vegetation and fauna.
While primary productivity in the immediate vicinity of the proposed
effluent discharges may be increased, the relatively eutrophic nature of
the receiving bayous will not be affected. On the contrary, the substi-
tution of a more effective treatment plant for the present one in the
western area should result in higher-quality water in Bayou Yokely. In
addition, the proposed project will forestall further eutrophication of
waters in the vicinity of areas proposed to be sewered by removing the
incentive to install septic systems which may malfunction. Both
treatment plant sites are located in essentially agricultural areas well
away from wetland areas. To date, the Corps of Engineers have not
identified any wetland areas that will be affected by construction of
the proposed projects.
3.4.3.2 Impacts on the Man-Made Environment _
a. Land Use and Population. Existing and projected land use data
122
-------
for the incorporated area of Franklin are presented in Table 13.
Outside the corporate limits, approximately 25 percent of the land area
is devoted to agriculture and nearly 75 percent is undeveloped
marshland. For the most part, development is limited to the high ground
along the Bayou Teche ridge, with some light strip development along
Bayou Sale.
The official 1977 estimate of population for the City of
Franklin was 9,576 an increase of 0.33 percent per year over the 1970
census figure of 9,325 (Reference 66). Projections of population for
Franklin and the surrounding project study area, which includes portions
of Wards 3, 4, and 10, are shown in Table 14. These figures indicate a
relatively low compounded growth rate of 0.7 percent, and reflect the
lack of major growth industries in the western area of the parish.
Successful implementation of the Port of West St. Mary Parish (see
section 3.4.3.2.g) could contribute substantially to a more rapid rate
of growth over the next ten years.
Direct land use impacts from the proposed project will be
relatively minor. In the western project area, approximately 10 acres
will be required for the proposed treatment plant. The site selected
lies directly west across Bayou Yokely from the existing Franklin sewage
treatment plant. This site has been purchased by the St. Mary Parish
Police Jury and presently lies vacant. The site lies within an area
classified as prime farmland by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service. The
proposed oxidation pond for the eastern project area will lie on
approximately 40 acres of lightly wooded undeveloped land and
agricultural land three quarters of a mile south of U.S. Highway 90 in
the Centerville- Verdunville area. This area is all considered to be
prime farmland.
Direct land use impacts from sewer line construction will be
extensive, but of a temporary nature. In the eastern project area, an
estimated 100,110 ft of sewer line will be installed, and in the western
project area, an estimated 193,880 ft will be constructed, for a total
in the Franklin area of 293,990 ft. Almost without exception, these
lines will be placed in existing road rights-of-way. Thus, during
124
-------
construction there will be traffic congestion and safety impacts, but
tbese will be of a relatively short-term nature, and there should be no
lasting impact on these areas once construction is complete.
Secondary land use impacts resulting from construction and
operation of the proposed facilities should also be minor. All areas
proposed to be sewered are either already developed or lie immediately
adjacent to developed areas. No large tracts of undeveloped land will
be served nor will any of the proposed facilities be located near wetland
areas. All proposed collection areas lie along existing roads and these
facilities should allow new development to fill in between existing
developed areas, thereby increasing the density of development and
allowing other utilities and community services to be provided more
efficiently.
b. Economics and Financial Resources. With the eastern
third of the parish being industrial and the western third agricultural,
the Franklin area, in the approximate parish center, has a combined
industrial-agricultural economy. Historically, as the parish's oldest
town, parish seat, and one of the main ports, Franklin has been a center
for processing and transport of agricultural products, particularly
sugar cane. Presently two sugar cane mills, employing approximately 500
persons jointly, and a steel fabricator specializing in sugar mill
facilities are located in Franklin. Other major industries include
cement, meat packing, soft drink, and two carbon black plants (located
on Bayou Sale in the extreme southern project area), (Reference 40).
Specific employment and income breakdowns are not available
for the Franklin project area. However, data is available for Wards 3
and 4, which include the City of Franklin and the Eastern Project Area.
Of roughly 4400 persons employed in these two wards, manufacturing
establishments employed approximately 19 percent, wholesale and retail
trade - 17 percent, services - 15 percent, construction - 11 percent,
mining - 10 percent, and agriculture and fishing - 8 percent (Reference 63),
The unemployment rates for Wards 3 and 4, at 6.8 percent and 3.4 percent
respectively, are below the average for the western and central part of
the parish (Wards 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 10), (Reference 63).
126
-------
As western St. Mary Parish's commercial and governmental
center, the Franklin locale should experience considerable growth as a
spinoff of industrial development in the eastern parish and the possible
West St. Mary Parish Port near Cypremort, especially when the U.S. Hwy
90 improvements are completed. The proposed sewerage project will have
some impact on determining specific location of development, but will
have little or no influence on the economy of the Franklin area. Those
factors that made Franklin a commercial and governmental center
(location, transportation, early development) will continue to define
Franklin's economy regardless of the existence of new sewers.
The primary economic impact will be the cost to the local
citizens for local share of the capital costs, operation and maintenance
costs, and connection costs for newly sewered residences. The total
estimated project capital cost is $12,825,800. The anticipated federal
share is $8,383,100, which leaves a local share of $4,442,700. The City
of Franklin and St. Mary Parish Police Jury have made preliminary agree-
ments to jointly finance the local share of the capital costs, although
no specific methods or proportions have been developed.
The total annual operation and maintenance costs for the
proposed Franklin projects in the year 1981 is estimated to be
approximately $487,375, which will average to a $2.28 user charge per
capita per month. By geographical area, the user charges are estimated
to be $1.76 per month in the City of Franklin, $3.07 in the
unincorporated areas of the western project area, and $3.03 in the
eastern project area. In addition, there will be a one-time charge for
initial connection to the new system for all those in presently-unsewered
areas. This cost has not been estimated (Reference 63).
c. Community Services and Facilities. Franklin is the service
center for western St. Mary Parish. It has that area's only high
school, as well as one junior high and six elementary schools. The
schools are not presently overcrowded. There is a large, 200-bed
hospital in Franklin, serving the western parish. Police and fire
protection is provided by the City, with 17 full time police officers
127
-------
and 8 firemen. A second fire station is now under construction.
Recreation facilities include two large recreation buildings, two major
parks, and one public swimming pool. Water and electric services are
supplied by the City, with almost 2 million gallons of water storage
capacity. Sewage collection and treatment is provided only in the
immediate Franklin area.
127A
-------
two sites were studied; one just east of the intersection of highways 83
and 318, north of 83; the other just east of Desonier Road in the Four
Corners area, south of the proposed relocation alignment for US 90. The
Four Corners area site was found to be the most economical choice. Alter-
natives considered in the Eastern Project Area included using two plants,
one just south of Charenton and one near the existing plant site, and
using a single plant near the existing lagoon. A single plant to serve
the Eastern Project Area, located near the existing lagoon, was found
most cost-effective (Reference 23).
Rehabilitation of the existing sewer system in Baldwin to eli-
minate wet weather I/I was found to be cost-effective, and was recommended
as part of the project. Encouraging water conservation by basing the
sewer use charge on water consumption was also proposed for both project
areas. Allowing for these measures, flows for the Western Project Area
plant were projected to be 0.366 mgd average daily flow initially, in-
creasing to 0.375 mgd by 1996, the design year. Peak flows were esti-
mated at 0.915 mgd initially, and 0.938 mgd in 1996. The Eastern Project
Area facility was sized for 0.754 mgd initial average daily flow, increas-
ing to 0.870 mgd by 1996, with corresponding peak flows of 1.885 mgd and
2.175 mgd (Reference 23).
Three treatment methods were considered for each project area:
oxidation ditch, trickling filter, and oxidation ponds. Oxidation ditches
were originally proposed in the Facility Plan (Reference 27) for both
project areas. However, review of this proposal by the State and EPA
led to a re-evaluation of the oxidation pond alternative. Further analysis
indicated the oxidation ponds to be the most cost-effective alternative,
and it was determined that sufficient land was available for the ponds.
The pond alternative will be able to meet the 30 mg/1 BOD,, limitation
and the recently-relaxed 90 mg/1 limits for suspended solids.
Three alternate methods of sludge disposal were considered:
landfilling after mechanical dewatering; application as a soil condi-
tioner after dewatering in sludge drying beds; and application of wet
sludge as a soil conditioner, using tank trucks. Sludge drying beds
were chosen after a cost-effective analysis.
136
-------
3j.5.2.2 Description of the Proposed Baldwin £ Vicinity Sewerage Project.
The treatment processes proposed for both the Western and-Eastern*"
Project Areas are oxidation ponds. Each plant will include a 3-celled
lagoon system with a bar screen, raw wastewater pumps, and effluent disin-
fection, sampling and metering equipment. The western facility will require
a primary cell with 15 acres of water surface, two polishing cells with
4 acres of water surface each, and a total site of 30 acres. The eastern
plant, which will be an expansion of the existing single-cell lagoons,
will occupy a 45-acre site, with a 24-acre primary cell and two 6-acre
polishing cells.
The western plant will serve an area that has not previously
been sewered, and is designed to treat an average daily flow of 0.375
mgd with an influent strength of 240 mg/1 BOD,, and 225 mg/1 suspended
solids. Anticipating dilution by I/I remaining after sewer system
rehabilitation, the eastern plant is designed to handle an average daily
flow of 0.87 mgd with an influent strength of 225 mg/1 BOD5 and 215 mg/1
suspended solids. Both plants are expected to discharge an effluent con- .-
sistently containing less than 30 mg/1 BOD,., 90 mg/1 suspended solids, ^^
and fecal coliform counts less than 200 colonies/100 ml. The western ^^
plant will discharge to the Kelley Canal; effluent from the eastern
facility will follow the same route as that discharged from the existing
pond, which is through a drainage ditch to a low area that is drained by
Bayou Choupique or the Charenton Canal (Reference 27).
The project proposed includes recommended rehabilitation of
the existing Baldwin sewer system. In addition, an estimated total of
75,865 LF of gravity sewers, 65,600 LF of force main, and 17 pump sta-
tions are proposed to collect sewage from the Western Project Area and
transport it to the treatment plant; approximately 72,975 LF of gravity
sewers, 36,500 LF of force mains, and 16 pump stations are planned to
perform a similar function in the Eastern Project Area (Reference 27).
Nearly all pipeline work is expected to be performed within existing
public rights-of-way; however, force mains are proposed across Bayou
Teche just west of its intersection with the Charenton Canal, near
Charenton, and just west of Jeanerette; some five canal crossings are
also proposed.
137
-------
Disposition of the new extended aeration treatment facility
serving the Chitimacha Indian Reservation is still in doubt. The
Eastern Project Area plant, pumps, and force mains are sized to
incorporate the estimated 220 persons now using that facility, and it is
anticipated that the Tribe will elect to connect to the Baldwin &
Vicinity project and sell their plant to achieve the economies of scale
and to avoid the necessity of operating their own plant. However,
negotiations to accomplish this transfer are still in the preliminary
stages.
Major elements of the Baldwin & Vicinity Sewerage Project are
indicated on Figure 18.
3.5.2.3 EPA's Proposed Action. Based upon the analysis presented in
the draft EIS, the review and comment on the draft EIS, and the public
hearing on the draft EIS, EPA, Region 6, proposed to award Step 2 and 3
grants for the design and construction of the proposed project in
Baldwin and vicinity. As a result of awarding these additional grants,
the impacts described in the following sections are expected to occur.
3.5.3 Impacts of the Proposed Baldwin Project.
3.5.3.1 Impacts on the Natural Environment.
a. Odors. The proposed project will have a beneficial
impact on odors in the Baldwin area. At the present time, a large
portion of the septic tanks in the south Baldwin area do not function
properly, resulting in raw, odor-producing sewage standing in roadside
ditches. The collection and treatment of sewage from all of these
unsewered areas in the Baldwin vicinity will put an end to the localized
odor problems. There should be no odor problems from the oxidation
ponds proposed in the Baldwin area.
b. Noise. There will be very little potential for adverse
noise impacts resulting from this project. The sound levels normally
associated with the operation of earth-moving equipment and other con-
struction machinery will occur at the sites of the proposed treatment
plants, but since these sites are not immediately adjacent to residen-
138
-------
FIGURE 18
PROPOSED PROJECT
BALDWIN
SCALE
MILES
LEGEND
• TREATMENT PLANT
Mllllllllll AREA ALREADY SEWERED
SE^'-Ii PROPOSED NEW COLLECTION AREA
, , , , , 100-YEAR TIDAL FLOOD
-------
tial areas, no severe impacts should occur. Sewage line construction
will occur in residential neighborhoods, but the duration of construc-
tion activities at any one point will be brief. With the oxidation pond
treatment method, no sounds will be produced by operation of the plant.
c. Geology & Soils. The Baldwin Treatment Plant locations at Four
Corners (west) and Bayou Choupique (east) and the collection pipelines
that follow the highways and bayous will not affect the geology except
where plant construction will slightly alter the topography. The pro-
posed plant sites are located in an area in the northwest portion of the
parish where the natural levees of Bayou Teche are quite wide and for
this reason all of the construction will take place in soils having no
subsidence potential. Most of the soils excavated for pipelines can be
used for backfill.
Baldwin and Iberia silt loam soils at the proposed plant sites
are rated poor to fair for stability and compaction for embankments, slight
for sewage lagoons, and poor in shear strength for foundations. The soils
also have high shrink-swell subsoils and severe wetness. Structure founda-
tions will require design that includes consideration for these conditions.
Any disposal of unsuitable soils should be done in non-wetland areas.
Soil exposure during construction will result in some loss of
soils by erosion. These impacts will be minor because of the flat terrain
and short duration of exposure.
d. Hydrologic Conditions. Excavation and erosion will contribute
to the sedimentation, siltation and turbidity of local drainage patterns.
Normal construction procedures are to be used at both treatment plant
locations. The short duration of these impacts will make them of minor
importance. Three force main crossings of navigable waterways are pro-
posed. Turbidity caused by dredging for these crossings will be of a
very short-term nature, and should cause no permanent impacts. Removed
water from dewatering operations can be discharged into exisiting drainage
patterns.
Construction of this facility will not affect the Chicot Aquifer
which is the source of Baldwin's water supply. Baldwin wells are about
400 ft. deep.
1-41
-------
e. Water Quality. Erosion of bare earth exposed during pipeline
trenching and plant construction, together with the dredging necessary
to install the bayou and canal crossings, will temporarily lower the
quality of waters in streams and wetlands abutting project components.
DO concentrations will decrease, and turbidity, siltation, and sedimen-
tation will increase. However, the areas affected will be an insignifi-
cant fraction of the total of such waters in the study area, and the
impacted waters will reestablish their natural conditions shortly after
completion of construction. Erosion control measures proposed to miti-
gate these impacts include shaping, seeding, fertilizing, and watering
disturbed areas to speed reestablishment of their vegetative cover. No
bypasses or overflows of raw sewage will be caused by construction pro-
cedures (Reference 23). All dredging within navigable waterways, such
as the Bayou Teche, will also require a Section 10 permit from the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers.
Operation of the proposed facilities will have the net effect
of slightly improving the quality of waters in and abutting the study
area during the design life of the facilities. Effluent quality of the
Baldwin lagoon will be improved by the elimination of the hydraulic over-
loads imposed by I/I during wet weather, and by the greater reliability
of the three-celled facilities. The greatest water quality benefit of
the Baldwin & Vicinity Project will be derived from eliminating the
numerous unsatisfactory individual sewage disposal systems currently in
use in the unsewered parts of the study area. This benefit, though minor
in terms of overall effect, will be most noticeable in the Water Quality
Limited segment of Bayou Teche. Bayou Teche, and other study area waters,
will show slight improvements in DO and suspended solids concentrations,
and a significant reduction in bacterial counts and the health hazards
they indicate, as a result of the project.
Both of the proposed treatment plants will include chlorination
facilities to provide a full-30 minute contact time prior to discharge of
the effluent, thus satisfying the requirements of EPA's guidelines for the
protection of shellfish waters (Reference 67).
142
-------
Abandoning the extended aeration plant that now serves the
Chitimacha Reservation, as envisioned in the project documents, will
also yield a very small benefit to the quality of Bayou Teche. Even
though the effluent limitations of the proposed Eastern Project Area
plant are not as strict as those of the Chitimacha facility, thus
resulting in a slightly greater overall BOD loading of area waters,
eliminating the latter's discharge is seen as a net benefit because of
Bayou Teche's Water Quality Limited classification.
f. Rare and Endangered Species. There are no known rare and/or
endangered species in the Baldwin and Vicinity sewerage project area.
g. Terrestrial Ecology. Approximately 75 acres of land will be
utilized in the Baldwin and Vicinity project area for the construction
of the two oxidation pond sewerage treatment facilities. Both sites
will occupy marginal sugarcane land. Any existing vegetation and/or
crops will be cleared with no significant regrowth anticipated.
h. Aquatic Ecology. Sediment-laden runoff from sewer
construction will occur over only a brief period of time at any one
location and will thus have little effect on aquatic fauna and submerged
vegetation. Treatment plant construction will occur, over a somewhat
longer period of time, but runoff will not significantly affect nearby
watercourses.
Effluent to be discharged from the proposed plants should not
adversely affect the receiving canals, particularly in the eastern
project area, where an already existing effluent will be upgraded.
Neither of the receiving canals is likely to contain a biotic community
of ecological or commercial significance. Both treatment plant sites
are located in agricultural areas well away from any wetlands! The
Corps of Engineers have not identified any wetland areas that would be
affected by construction of the proposed projects.
3.5.3.2 Impacts on the Man-Made Environment.
a. Land Use and Population. Development in the Baldwin area
is generally limited to the higher ground along the Bayou Teche ridge.
There is also light strip development along Bayou Cypremort to the
southwest, and along the major highways, such as US 90, LA 83, and LA
318.
143
-------
There is very little commercial or industrial development in the project
area - the land that is developed is devoted to either residential use
or the growing of sugar cane. Nearly three-fourths of the study area
consists of low-lying, undevelopable marsh land. Within the incorporated
limits of the town of Baldwin, residential, agricultural, and transporta-
tion uses predominate, as shown in Table 15.
The 1978 population of the incorporated area of Baldwin was
estimated to be 2,486. This figure represents an annual compounded growth
rate of 2.03 percent over the 1970 census population of 2,117. For the
entire project study area, the estimated growth rate since 1970 has been
approximately 0.7 percent per year. Projections of study area population
through the project design year of 1996 are shown in Table 16. This, pro-
jection calls for the population to continue to grow at a 0.7 percent
per year compounded growth rate. With the opening of four-lane divided
highway access to the major growth areas of Morgan City to the east and
New Iberia to the west, along with development of the Port of West St.
Mary Parish on the GIWW, it seems quite possible that the Baldwin area
may exceed this projected growth rate.
At the present time two sites are being proposed for location
of the treatment plants in the Baldwin vicinity. The western area site
is located about 1/2 mile south of new US Highway 90 to the east of the
Four Corners residential area. The eastern site includes the existing
Baldwin oxidation pond and the immediately adjacent land. Both sites
are presently being used for the raising of sugar cane. The oxidation
pond treatment process will require approximately 30 acres at the western
plant site and 45 acres at the eastern location. Approximately 8 acres
at the eastern site is presently used as a sewage lagoon, so additional
land required for both sites totals about 67 acres, nearly all of which
is now being used for sugarcane, and is therefore considered prime and
unique farmland.
Construction of the sewage transport lines will be almost
entirely within existing road rights of way, and will therefore have no
direct long-term land use impacts beyond the easements required for the
lines. An estimated 269,105 feet of sewer line are proposed for the
-------
Baldwin area, making the short-term impacts of construction quite exten-
sive, although not severe in any single location. All disturbed areas
should revegetate within one to two growing seasons.
The proposed project should have no major secondary land use
impacts. The pressure for residential development in the Baldwin vicin-
ity is not great enough for the provision of sewerage service to induce
the conversion of large amounts of land to residential uses. Areas which
will be serviced by the proposed project have already been developed and
lie along existing roadways. The provision of sewerage facilities will
enable new development to fill in undeveloped portions along these roads,
thus increasing density and making the distribution of other public utili-
ties and services more efficient. None of the areas to be served by the
proposed facilities are near wetland areas.
b. Economics and Financial Resources. The Baldwin and vicinity
project area is primarily agricultural and residential, with minimal indus-
trial and commercial activity. The only major industries are Ashland's
carbon black plant and Morton's salt plant in the southwestern project
area, but neither plant's locale will be served by sewers. Several light
industries, including a cement plant and a steel fabricator, are located
in the immediate Baldwin area. A natural gas field is located nearby.
The project area's economic base is agriculture. Though no
specific data are available for this area alone, relative acreage and
gross sales are assumed similar to parish-wide trends. Sugar cane is by
far the most important crop, comprising more than 90 percent of both acre-
age harvested and gross sales. However, the closing of sugar cane mills
in the parish has so reduced milling capacity that cane production is ....
decreasing and the acreage is being steadily converted to soybean pro-
duction. Soybean yields are not high but can offer greater profit stabil-
ity than the overproduced cane market.
A limited number of commercial establishments in Baldwin serve
the residents of the project area. These businesses include eight grocery
stores, five service stations, four restaurants, and several commercial
stores (Reference 15).
-------
Information on employment and income characteristics for Baldwin
alone is not available. Parish-wide in 1973, approximately 20 percent
of the labor force worked in commercial trade, 17 percent in mining, 16
percent in manufacturing, and 13 percent in transportation/ utilities.
Farm employment has decreased from 11.1 percent in 1960 to 5.9 percent
in 1970. It is assumed to have further decreased during the 1970's due
to mechanization and reduction of sugar cane acreage. Per capita income
for the parish was higher than the state average in 1970 and is assumed
to have remained higher through the 1970's because of industrial expansion
in the eastern part of the parish. However, approximately 21 percent of
the parish population had income below the poverty level in 1970 (Reference 15)
The proposed sewerage project is expected to have minimal impact
upon the area's economy. Present trends for local development will continue
with Baldwin remaining a bedroom community in support of the industrial
growth in the eastern part of St. Mary Parish and in Iberia Parish. The
proposed project will not, in itself, induce growth, although it could
tend to localize expected growth. With its agricultural, rural economy,
Baldwin's limited commercial and service establishments may experience
some immediate growing pains, but there appears to be adequate capability
for expansion. As sugar cane production is reduced, the use of land for
commercial purposes becomes more attractive. Also, the improvement of
US Hwy 90 provides Baldwin residents with easy access to commercial cen-
ters in the eastern part of the parish. These factors will tend to
ameliorate the impact of greater demand for Baldwin services.
The major impact on the local economy will result from financ-
ing the local share of the capital costs, operation and maintenance costs,
and the initial connection costs for those homes presently unsewered.
Cost estimates were developed for the capital and operation
and maintenance costs for the two oxidation ponds. These estimates are
shown in Table 17. No estimates have been made for cost of operation
and maintenance of the collection and force main systems, although their
construction costs are included.
Methods of local financing have not been finalized. Capital
costs will be financed by the parish utilizing a front-foot special
assessment or a bond issue (either parish-wide or local). Capital costs
L43
-------
for the collection system will average about $300-$350 per person in the
presently-unsewered areas. Operation and maintenance will be financed ^>
by user charges based on proportional use. Annual 0 & M charges are
-------
TABLE 17
BALDWIN AND VICINITY
ESTIMATED COST OF PROPOSED TREATMENT ALTERNATIVE
Total Project Capital Costs $ 12,495,630
Federal Share* 7,643,800
Local Share ' 4,851,830
Operation & Maintenance Costs, 1981 $117,500
Monthly Per Capita User Charge
Town of Baldwin $0.85
Unincorporated Eastern Project Area 1.34
Western Project Area 1.16
* Federal Share equals 75% of eligible project costs. The cost of
land, rights-of-way, and service lines are not eligible project
costs.
Source: D. Ralph Caffery & Associates, Facility Plan for Baldwin and
Vicinity Sewerage Project, St. Mary Parish Louisana, August_,_
1978, revised June, 1979, p. 25.
150
-------
3.6.2 Alternatives
3.6.2.1 Effluent Limitations. Because of the nearby oyster beds in
Vermilion Bay and the use of the bay for contact recreation, the
Louisiana State Department of Health and Human Resources originally
determined that any treatment plant effluent discharged into the bay
should meet advanced treatment standards of 10 mg/1 BOD,., 15 mg/1
suspended solids, and 70 total coliform colonies/100 ml. This
determination has been reviewed, however, and it has been determined
that only secondary treatment standards of 30 mg/1 each for BODj. and
suspended solids will be required. The standard for total coliform
colonies will be maintained at 70 per 100 ml. This decision was based
on the facts that the area waters are classified as Effluent Limited,
the amount of effluent to be discharged is relatively small, and the
costs of advanced treatment are quite high.
3.6.2.2 Screening of Alternatives. Because of the remoteness of the
Cypremort Point Study area, pumping sewage to a regional treatment plant
more centrally located within the parish was found to be not
cost-effective. Consideration was therefore limited to waste treatment
alternatives within the study area.
Three basic alternatives for waste treatment were considered
initially. These were:
1) Biological or physical-chemical treatment and dis-
charge;
2) Biological or physical-chemical treatment and reuse;
3) Treatment by land application.
Treatment by land application was found to be infeasible. The
relatively high annual rainfall, poorly drained soils, and high water
table make irrigation or infiltration-percolation disposal infeasible.
Overland flow methods of land application were rejected because most of
the area consists of coastal marsh which is frequently flooded by normal
tidal action.
Reuse of treated wastewater was not proposed because no use
could be found in the study area for non-potable water. There are no
industries requiring cooling water in the vicinity, and the high annual
rainfall eliminates the need for irrigation water. Physical-chemical
156
-------
treatment was deemed too expensive and complicated. Therefore,
biological treatment and discharge was selected as the basic treatment
approach. Details of the cost-effective analysis are presented in
Appendix B.
Three methods of treatment were considered for the Cypremort
Point sewage plant:
1) Extended aeration
2) Oxidation ditch
3) Oxidation ponds
*
Both the ditch and pond alternatives would require a considerable amount
of excavation. Since the water table is almost at ground level, any
excavation would be quite expensive. Also, flood protection for either
of these type of plants would be very expensive. The 100-year flood
height in the Cypremort Point area is approximately 12 feet msl, and
both the pond and the ditch would have to be protected by an earth-fill
levee above that height. The lack of suitable fill material near the
study area makes these alternatives prohibitively expensive. Because of
these cost considerations, the extended aeration method of treatment was
selected.
3.6.2.3 Description of the Proposed Project. The sewage treatment.
alternative presently proposed for the Cypremort Point study area
consists of the following elements:
15,000 ft. of 8" gravity collection line
36,250 ft. of 4" or 6" force mains
9 pump stations
2 extended aeration package treatment
units (65,000 gpd each)
75,000 gal. flow equalization tank
chlorine disinfection unit
157
-------
The proposed plant would be located on a 2-acre site on the
south side of LA Highway 319 approximately 4.3 miles from the Point.
Effluent discharge would be to an unnamed canal which empties into West
Cote Blanche Bay, thus increasing the dilution and dispersal of the
effluent. Principal collection areas would be located in the approximately two
mile developed strip along the highway extending up from the Point.
There would also be a collection line to serve the sanitary facilities
at the State Beach and a line to serve development just south of the
GIWW. Principal project features are shown on Figure 19.
The proposed package treatment plant would be mounted on
elevated foundations to place the treatment units and all control equip-
ment above the 12 ft msl 100-year flood level. A 75,000 gal. aerated
flow equalization tank would also be provided to hold peak flows from
the beach facility, so as to allow the use of the smaller treatment
units proposed.
3.6.2.4 EPA's Proposed Action. Based upon the analysis presented in
the draft EIS, the review and comment on the draft EIS, and the public
hearing on the draft EIS, EPA, Region 6, proposes to award Step 2 and 3
grants for the design and construction of the proposed Cypremort Point
project. As a result of awarding these additional grants, the impacts
described in the following sections are expected to occur.
3.6.3 Impacts of the Proposed Cypremort Point Project
3.6.3.1 Impacts on the Natural Environment.
a. Odors. The proposed treatment system should have a beneficial
effect on odors in the project area. The proposed treatment plant site
is well removed from the areas of dense development, with only two
residences in the immediate vicinity of the plant. Furthermore, the
flow equalization tank and treatment facilities will be enclosed, re-
ducing the possibilities of odor impacts on the surrounding area.
Finally, the collection and treatment system will eliminate the odor
problems which now exist in the residential areas from faulty operation
of septic tanks and from raw discharges.
b. Noise. Construction of the collection and treatment system
will be accompanied by the normal sound levels associated with the
operation of construction equipment. However, since the work in resi-
158
-------
VCHMILION a*r
CYPflEMORT
POINT
H
VJl
wcsr con BLANCHE aw
ENTIRE PROJECT AREA IS WITHIN 100-YEAR TIDAL FLOODPLAIN
FIGURE 19
PROPOSED PROJECT
CYPREMORT POINT
SCALE MILES
LEGEND
• TREATMENT PLANT
A LIFT STATION
- FORCE MAIN
PROPOSED NEW COLLECTION AREA
-------
dential areas is generally linear in nature, noise impacts at any one
point will be limited in duration, and will not be severe in any case.
Construction at the treatment plant site will also be of limited
duration since the plant is a package unit. There are only two or three
residences within hearing range of the treatment plant site. Noise
levels from operation of the plant will be very low and will probably
not be discernible beyond the limits of the site.
c. Geology & Soils. The proposed package treatment plant on
Bayou Cypremort will not affect the geology except for a slight change
in topography resulting from plant construction. The site of the plant
is an area free of soil subsidence potential. The pipeline and plant
excavation soils can be used for backfill, and some soils excavated for
the plant can possibly be used for levee construction. Cypremort and
Baldwin soils on the bayous' natural levees are probably some of the
best available in the area for construction purposes, although they are
still rated as fair-to-poor by Soil Conservation Service rating
standards. As with all sites in the parish, a soils investigation will
be required to determine local conditions at each construction site
before grading and foundation design can be made.
The plant is presently proposed on a site having Cypremort
soils, a fine sandy loam. Sewage lagoon rating for this soil is
"slight", but the rating is "severe" for septic tank and filter field
operation. No construction difficulties are anticipated for contractors
familiar with the area.
The impacts for construction of pipelines are the same for
Cypremort Point as for Morgan City as previously discussed in Section
3.2.3.I.e.
d. Hydrologic Conditions. The bayou and natural drainage pat-
terns as well as subsurface water will not be permanently altered by the
project. The proposed pipeline into the plant will cross Highway 319
and Bayou Cypremort. Construction of a canal leading from the bayou at
the proposed plant site apparently contributed to filling downstream of
the site, so, although the proposed pipeline will cross the former bayou
alignment, it will be at a location which has been filled in. The high
water table will require dewatering for pipeline trenching. The removed
160
-------
water can be discharged into Bayou Cypremort. Coordination with the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will be conducted to determine the need for
Section 404 or Section 10 permits regulating construction activities in
wetlands and navigable waterways. Recent wetland area maps provided by
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New Orleans District, indicate that
none of the proposed Cypremort Point project facilities will be located
in wetland areas.
e. Water Quality. Siltation and sedimentation during constuction
will temporarily cause minor increases in turbidity and solids content
of waters immediately adjacent to construction sites. Operation of the
facilities will cause a practically unnoticeable lowering of DO content,
and a similar increase in solids content, in waters immediately adjacent
to the discharge point. The abundance of moving water in the plant's
vicinity, however, make all these impacts exceedingly minor. The major
impact of the project on water quality will be a minor improvement in DO
levels and a significant decrease in coliform bacteria counts in the
waters adjacent to the public beach and the built-up residential areas
of the point. The design detention time of the proposed chlorination
facility will meet the requirements of MCD-06 (Reference 67) for
protection of shellfish waters.
f. Rare and Endangered Species. There are no known rare and/or ..
endangered species in the Cypremort Point project area.
g. Terrestrial Ecology. The amount of land needed for the
proposed sewage treatment plant in the Cypremort Point area is 2 acres.
The site is a primarily brushy area on the higher natural levee.
Vegetation will be removed at the facility site with no regrowth. There
should be virtually no impact on fauna.
h. Aquatic Ecology. Sediment-laden runoff from sewer
construction will occur only over a brief period of time and only over a
localized area. Any eutrophic effects of the treatment plant effluent
will also
161
-------
recreation area, is located on Vermilion Bay, about 1 mile west of
Highway 319. There is almost no development from this point north to
the GIWW.
It is not expected that the provision of sewerage facilities
in the Cypremort Point area will affect the amount of residential develop-
ment. The small amount of developable land, along with the relative
isolation of the area and the increasd exposure to tidal flooding, have
been the major factors limiting development. The majority of the residences
in the area solved their individual sewage problems by discharging directly
to the waters of Bayou Cypremort, which while not an environmentally
sound practice, has not greatly discouraged new development. Some
additional growth is expected in the project area, principally along
Highway 319 north of the State Beach road. Development of the Port of
West St. Mary Parish may increase the pressure for residential development
along Highway 319 south of the GIWW.
The direct land use impacts of the proposed project will also
be minimal. All sewer lines will be constructed along or abutting
existing road rights-of-way. Only about two acres of land will be
required for the package treatment plant. The proposed site is a lightly
wooded undeveloped area along Highway 319 at the junction of Bayou
Cypremort and an unnamed canal which connects to West Cote Blanche Bay.
The treatment plant site is classified as prime agricultural land by the
U.S. Soil Conservation Service. However, because of the location and
narrowness of the site, it is not used for agricultural purposes.
b. Economics and Finance. Economic impacts other than financing
the system will be slight. It is unlikely that any significant amount of
construction employment will be generated in the Cypremort Point area.
The greatest economic impact will be to the landowners in the project
area, who will be required to provide for the operation and maintenance
expenses and the construction of the service lines to the individual
residences. The monthly per capita operation and maintenance costs in
1981 are estimated to be approximately $3.61. At the State beach facility,
user charges for the sewerage system are estimated to be approximately
$0.26 per user per day.
Estimated capital costs for the proposed Cypremort Point
project are shown in Table 18.
163
-------
The local share -will be financed by revenues generated by a parish-wide
sales tax and special assessments.
TABLE 18
CYPREMORT POINT
PROPOSED CAPITAL COSTS
Federal
Share
$1,377,100
Source: Preliminary Draft Facility Plan, Cypremort Point & Vicinity
Sewerage Project, D. Ralph Caffery & Associate, Inc.,
February, 1978, as amended, June, 1979.
c. Community Services and Facilities. The proposed project's ______
impacts on community services and facilities are expected to be minimal.
Adequate capacity already exists for most infrastructure requirements
for the expected population increases . Water supply on Cypremort Point
is by private wells and present electric service will be adequate.
Since Cypremort Point is primarily a recreation-oriented community, very
few other community services are provided or required. The expected
improvements in local watr quality should benefit the quality of the
recreation experience in the residential areas and at the State beach.
d. Transportation. No major impacts on transportation in the ______
project area are expected to result from the proposed project. While
there is only one road serving Cypremort Point, the absolute increases
in population expected are small enough so that there should be no
164
-------
4. PARISH-WIDE CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Since the five grant actions being considered in St. Mary
Parish will all occur at about the same time and within a limited
geographical area, it is appropriate that the cumulative impacts of
these projects be considered. Therefore, this chapter addresses the
impacts which will result on a parish-wide scale from the five projects
taken together. Impacts that would occur if the no-action alternative
were selected in all five project areas are also discussed.
4.1 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECTS
4.1.1 Impacts on the Natural Environment.
The five proposed projects will have no impacts on odor or
noise quality on the regional scale. Localized impacts that will occur
are discussed for each individual project. Likewise, no parish-wide
effects are expected on the geology or hydrology of the region.
The net collective impacts on the quality of waters in and
adjacent to St. Mary Parish resulting from construction and operation of
all five proposed projects will be small, but beneficial. More-or-less
simultaneous construction of all five projects will temporarily lower
the quality of the waters immediately adjacent to construction areas.
DO levels will decrease, and solids concentrations, turbidity, and
siltation will increase. These effects will be the most significant in
shallow wetland waters disturbed by construction machinery; but they will
all still be minor, will affect only small areas, and will be reversed
by natural processes within a few weeks after construction ceases.
Operation of the five projects should cause a slight, but noticeable,
long-term improvement in the quality of the parish's waters, particu-
larly in the Berwick-Morgan City area, where several discharges of raw
sewage will be eliminated, and in Bayou Teche, which will be relieved of
considerable non-point source BOD and coliform loadings presently re-
ceived from the numerous unsewered developments along its ridge. DO
levels will rise slightly; solids turbidity, and sedimentation will de-
169
-------
crease very slightly; and colifonn bacteria counts should be drastically
lowered, as will be the threat of waterborne disease epidemics they repre-
sent. A slight increase in chlorinated hydrocarbon compounds may occur
as a result of the use of chlorine for disinfection, but none of the re-
ceiving streams are used for drinking water supplies-below the discharge
points, and the concentrations involved would be exceedingly minute, in
any event.
There will be no impacts on rare and endangered species as a
result of these projects. On a parish-wide basis, only minimal impacts
are expected on vegetation. Only about 172 acres will be permanently
taken by all project facilities. Most of this land is presently devoted
to agriculture, approximately 119 acres are classified as prime farmland,
and only about 20 acres are wetlands. The five projects will entail
laying nearly 167 miles of pipe throughout the parish, but the vast ma-
jority of this work will be within or abutting the rights-of-way of ex-
isting roads, and disturbed areas should revegetate to pre-project con-
ditions in one or two growing seasons, except where mature trees must be
removed. Also, it should be noted that in many areas force mains and
gravity sewers run side by side, thus making the length of excavation
required considerably less than 167 miles.
Water quality improvements in the study region brought about
by the proposed projects should have minor beneficial impacts on aquatic
elements. The large reduction in coliform pollution may allow re-opening
of the legally-closed oyster grounds in the parish. No adverse impacts
on aquatic species are foreseen, and increased species diversity may be
allowed, especially in the Morgan City-Berwick area.
4.1.2 Impacts on the Man-Made Environment
Each of the five proposed projects exerts a direct impact on
land use through replacement of current uses in some areas with uses
.related to sewage collection and treatment. A total of 172 acres will
be taken permanently, and perhaps three times that amount affected
temporarily by sewer construction. Taken together, the loss of these
areas to current uses is not of great significance.
170
-------
Secondary land-use impacts on a regional scale will be negli-
gible. Rapidly increasing employment opportunities in the Morgan City
area make the parish likely to grow whether the proposed projects are
built or not. Other potential residential locations are too remote to
absorb much of the growth brought on by the employment increase. "Of
course, each of the five individual projects may be said to induce
growth, because its planning area becomes more developmentally attrac-
tive, in relation to the others, than it would have been without the
project. But taken together, if all planning areas construct sewerage
improvements, there will be only a small amount of growth attracted from
outside the parish due solely to the sewerage projects.
The sum of the original population projections in the five
sewerage facility planning areas for the design year of 1995 was just
over 109,000. However, most projections for the parish indicate that
a total 1995 population less than this figure is expected, as shown in
Table 6. The arithemetic average of the 1995 projections presented in
this table (excluding the lowest projection, Segal-2, because of the con-
troversy surrounding it) is approximately 91,000. It should also be noted
that the July 1, 1978, official estimate of population for St. Mary Parish
is only 61,699, considerably below the figures projected for 1980 in most
of these projections. If 91,000 is taken as a consensus projection, the
treatment facilities, as originally proposed, were considered to have an
aggregate excess capacity for approximately 18,000 persons.
The combined projected increases in population for the three
western projects total only 4,053, an annual growth rate of 0.7 percent.
Considering the increased accessibility to be provided by the improvements
to US Hwy 90, the relatively greater availability of developable land,
and the growth potential provided by the Port of West St. Mary Parish,
it seems quite likely that the western areas will be able to sustain at
least that relatively low projected growth irate, and that those three
treatment plants will therefore have little or no excess capacity. The
projected compounded annual growth rates for the Morgan City and Wards 5
& 8 areas, used to size the originally proposed treatment facilities, were
171
-------
2.1 percent and 4.0 percent respectively, projecting a total population
increase of over 35,300. While these areas are expected to grow at a
faster rate than the western portion of the parish, the rates utilized
were considerably too high to agree with the expected 1995 parish popu-
lation of 91,000. Therefore, it was felt that there was combined excess
capacity in those two projects sufficient to handle approximately 18,000
persons.
As a result of these analyses presented in the Draft EIS, EPA
determined that the 1995 design populations should be adjusted to agree
with the overall 1995 projecton for the Parish as a whole. This decision
resulted in the revised 1995 design populations presented below.
ORIGINAL 1995 EPA REVISED 1995
AREA DESIGN POPULATION DESIGN POPULATION
Morgan City and 29,482 28,452
Unincorporated Ward 6
Amelia 7,598 4,398
Wards 5 & 8 41,542 27,802
The strength and direction of St. Mary Parish's economic growth
will be influenced mainly by the future of the offshore oil industry,
which will be determined primarily by national energy policy and secon-
darily by widening and deepening of the Bayous Black, Boeuf, Chene and
the Lower Atchafalaya River. The provision of sewage collection and
treatment services for the parish is not expected to have an impact on
that industrial growth.
172
-------
There will continue to be considerable growth in commercial
'and residential activity generated by the industrial growth in the
Morgan City area. Although this growth will proceed regardless of the
sewerage projects, the availability of sewer service will certainly affect
the location of new residential and commercial development. New commercial
development will locate near interchanges of US Hwy 90 and will be more
concentrated in the eastern half of the parish. Areas near US 90 inter-
changes and also near proposed sewage collection areas, including Berwick,
Patterson, Centerville-Bayou Sale, and Franklin, can be expected to be
of prime commercial value. It is assumed that residential development
will occur closer to Morgan City first. This could be altered by changing
land values as development occurs, which might make the western parish
areas more attractive.
One major impact on the parish economy will be the primary
beneficial impact of making $57 million worth of capital improvements
over a period of several years. This will represent a substantial
benefit to the local construction industry. The other major primary
economic impact will be-the cost to local residents for those capital
improvements, as well as the continuing cost of operating the facilities.
The total local share of the projects' capital costs is more than $18
million, to be financed by both the parish and local communities through
the existing 3/4C sales tax and other supplemental forms of bond sales
or assessments. In addition, unsewered residents will have to pay con-
nection costs that could be several hundred dollars per residence; and
all users will pay annual O&M costs ranging from $1 to $44 per capita.
Although St. Mary Parish has experienced extensive growth in
recent years, the local communities appear to have adequately expanded
most of their services to meet the demand. Numerous new schools have
been built recently and a new hospital is under construction. Police
and fire protection continues to expand, as do utility services. The
only exception has been sewerage service. The parish communities have
173
-------
funded planning efforts to guide parish growth. The proposed sewerage
projects are part of those efforts to provide services to the expanding
population. The main impacts of the five projects will be to provide
the communities with adequate sewage collection and treatment services
for the next 20 years.
Construction of the five proposed projects will temporarily
disrupt auto travel throughout the parish. Although the duration of
construction in any one location will be limited, all developed un-
sewered areas of the parish will be affected. There should be no
impacts on other transportation modes.
All proposed projects will include measures to insure that no
adverse impacts occur to the cultural resources of the parish.
The Acadiana Regional Clearinghouse has stated that the pro-
posed projects are in conformance with the plans and policies of that
agency.
174
-------
5. COORDINATION OF THE EIS
A public hearing on the Draft EIS was held on June 21, 1979 in
Franklin, Louisiana. The hearing was attended by approximately 40 persons.
No adverse comments were received on any of the five projects in St. Mary
Parish. The sentiment most frequently expressed at the hearing was dis-
satisfaction with the delay in project implementation brought about by
the EIS process. There were also several requests that EPA assist the
parish in discussions with the State of Louisiana in order to prevent
the parish from being moved lower on the state's funding priority list.
Copies of the Draft EIS were distributed to Federal, State,
and local agencies and interested individuals for review and comment.
Comments received from these parties have been reviewed and incorporated
into ths Final EIS where appropriate. All comments received along with
EPA's responses to those comments are presented as follows:
Comments From Page
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 242
U.S. Department of Agriculture 243
U.S. Department of Commerce 247
National Marine Fisheries Service 248
National Ocean Survey 251
U.S. Department of Defense 252
U.S. Department of Energy 253
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 254
U.S. Department of the Interior 255
Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service 257
U.S. Department of Transportation 260
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 261
Louisiana Department of Culture, Recreation and Tourism
Division of Archaeology and Historic Preservation 262
Division of Outdoor Recreation 264
175A
-------
Louisiana Department of Natural Resources 266
Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development 268
Louisiana Department of Urban and Community Affairs 269
Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries 270
Louisiana Office of Science, Technology & Environmental
Policy 271
D. Ralph Caffery & Associates, Inc. 272
-------
Advisory
Council On
Historic
I'rt'survalion
ir.iZ k Slrtel NW.
Waihinglun DC.
2UU05
Reply to:
P. 0. Box 25085
Denver.
May 24, 1979
Mr. Clinton B. Spotts
Regional E1S Coordinator
Environmental Protection Agency
Region 6
1201 Elm Street
Dallas, Texas 75270
Dear Mr. Spotts:
This is in response to your request of April 23, 1979,
for comments on the draft environmental statement (DES)
for St. Mary Parish Sewerage Facilities.
Pursuant to its responsibilities under Section 102(2)(C)
of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the
Council has reviewed EPA's DES and has determined that
there appears to be no reason for the Council to comment
at this time.
Sincerely,
Wall
Ch^ef", Western Office
of Review and Compliance
EPA RESPONSE
An on-the-ground cultural resources survey will be conducted
in all areas to be affected by construction in the Wards 5 and I project
area. This survey will be a condition of the Step 2 grant, as will all
coordination and data collection required to insure that the Franklin,
Baldwin, and Cypremort Point projects have no adverse impacts on the
cultural resources of the parish. After a complete State review and
concurrence by the State Historic Preservation Officer that the projects
will have no adverse impacts, the Advisory Council will be inforned
and their comments will he requested.
-------
May
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE
Fo.it Office Uox 1610. Alexandria. La. 71301
Mr. Clinton B. Spotts
Regional EIS Coordinator
Environmental Protection Agency, Region VI
1201 Elo Street
Dallas, Texas 73270
Dear Mr. SpottsI
We have reviewed the March 1979 Draft Environmental Impact StaTemenl
for the Wastevater Treatment Facilities, St. Marjr Parish. Loulalana,
and offer the following comment*.
The Soil Conservation Service recognizes that the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) establishes a Federal policy to preserve Important
historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national hertige and
maintains, wherever possible, an environment which supports diversity
and variety of Individual choice. This policy Is understood to Include
highly productive farmland*.
Prime farmlands are thoae whose value derives from their general advantage
as cropland due to soil and water conditions. The land does not have to
be presently In row crop* to be classified as prime farmland. Prime •
farmland can be cropland, paaturaland, foreatland, or other land, but
not urban bulltup land.
Enclosed for your use la a copy of the Important Farmlands, St. Mary
Parish, Louisiana. This map depict* thoaa soils classified as prime
farmland. An evaluation of present use would be necessary to Identify
prime and unique farmland. Unique farmland la land other than prime farm-
land that Is devoted to one of the following uses: augarcane, citrus,
catfish ponds or crawfish ponds.
The EIS describes the lands to be connltted to each of the five project
areas and then describes the parish-wide cumulative Impacts. Theae
descriptions of Impacts could be Improved by Identifying the lands to
be permanently committed to treatment facilities as prlne or unique farm-
lands. As stated on page 170 of the EIS, depending on the alternatives
selected, about 120 to 210 acres will be devoted to project use*.
Approximately 1! acres of this Is wetlanda and the remainder would likely
be prime and unique farmlands. Also enclosed for your use is • list of
the soil napping units that neet the criteria for prime farmland as
found In the 1919 Soil Survey of St. Mary Parish.
'• »*
-• *
EPA RESPONSE
The effects of the five proposed projects on the farmland re-
sources of St. Mary Parish have been described in the Impact evaluation
section for each project as requested. (See pages 124, 143, and 163.)
Based upon soil classification!! provided by the Soil Conservation Service,
a total of approximately 119 acres of prime farmland are expected to be
taken for the construction of sevage treatment facilities throughout the
parish. Of this total, approximately 107 acres are devoted to raiting
sugarcane, and are therefore classified as unique farnland.
-------
Clinu
Spol I:.
M.-IV ::. 1«7
[•revisions for control of erosion and management of water during construct ii>n
should be addressed by the E1S. The construction of the treatment facilities
and the installation of seuer lines will cause a lowering of water quality
of adjacent streams and wetlands because of siltatlon and sedimentation.
The suitability and limitations of soils for construction activities has been
recognized in the E1S.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments.
Sincerely,
AlforTHaTTgu
State Conse
Director, Office of Federal Activities (5 copies)
Environmental Protection Agency
Room 537, W. Tower
401 M. Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Director, Environmental Services
SCS, Washington, D.C.
Office of the Coordinator of Environmental Quality Activities
Office of the Secretary, USDA
Washington, D.C. 20250
Daniel Holmes, Director
STSC, SCS
Fort Worth, TX
In much of St. Mary Parish, relief is extremely slight, thus
limiting flow velocities and thereby reducing the likelihood of severe
erosion and widespread siltation. Where appropriate, as, for example,
in dredging pipeline crossings of waterways, silt barriers or sedioent
traps will be used to prevent the spread of turbidity plumes containing
large amounts of suspended sediment. In addition, any lowering of water
quality as a result of construction activities will be of an extremely
short-term nature, particularly when compared with the continuing ad-
verse water quality impacts of the present inadequately treated sewage.
While EPA strongly supports Federal policy to preserve pro-
ductive farmlands wherever possible, the particular characteristics of
St. Mary Parish make the taking of these lands the least disruptive of
the alternatives considered. With very few exceptions, all of the
higher ground in the parish consists of either previously developed
urban land or prime agricultural land. Nearly all of the remaining
lands of the parish are classified as wetlands. Because of the phy-
sical and environmental problems of locating sewerage facilities in
wetlands and the social and economic problems that would occur with
location in urban areas, agricultural lands are frequently the best
locational alternative in St. Mary Parish. The recent economic! of
the sugarcane industry, with mills being closed and thousands of acres
of cane being converted to other crops or allowed to sit idle, also
contributes to this situation. Furthermore, should there be drastic
changes in the factors cited above, much of the acreage devoted to oxi-
dation ponds could be converted back to agricultural production, thus
making the projects a non-irretrievable commitment of the prime faraland
resources.
-------
SOIL MAPPING UIIITS THAT MEET THE
CRITERIA FOR PRIME FARMLAND
ST. HARY PARISH
Happing Symbol Name
Aa Alligator clay
Ba Baldwin silt loan
Bb Baldwin silt loam, compacted phase
Be Baldwin silt-loam, dark-colored surface phase
Be Baldwin silt loam, salty variant
Bf Baldwin sllty clay
Bg Baldwin sllty clay, compacted phase
Bh Baldwin stlty clay loan
Bk Baldwin stlty clay loan, compacted phase _
Bra Baldwin very fine sandy loam
Bp Buxln-Portland-Perry soils, gently sloping phases
Bs Buxln-Portland-Perry soils, nearly level phases
C* Cypremort silt loam
Cb Cypremort sllty d*y loam, eroded phase
Cc Cypremort very fine sandy loam
la N -Iberia clay
Ib Iberia clay, compacted phase
Ic Iberia clay, compacted, thin solura phase
Id Iberia clay, thin solum phase
le Iberia silt loan
If Iberia sllty clay loam
SI-
-------
..i. I'.ar;1 i jrish - ',
Mapping Syn&ol Hane
lg Iberia silty clay loam, thin solurn phase '
Ja Jeanerette silt loam
Jb Jeanerette silt loam, thin sol urn phase
Jc Jeanerette silty clay loam, thin solum phase
Jd Jeanerette-Iberia very fine sandy loams
Pa Patoutville silt loam
Pb Patoutville very fine sandy loam, eroded, gently sloping
phase
PC . Patoutville very fine sandy loam, level phase
-------
OklMtlMtdi 5 S'cxob i^T7S
NO EPA RESPONSE NECESSARY
fw^S^ ;fe i^V
-------
: >••/ ...V
: UNIYED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE V .
N»llon»| OoMnlo and AtmoBphwto Administration <•
..NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES BEAU1CC .: '&*:• ••,...•;•>.
... i'.Duwal Buildtog'•:•••%. '-j>:.:i~ •-!'•'•'.i'c- "''-'•'.-'":' '•?.•• . .-•;., '
i^?.:.'•'"••. 9450 Roger Boulevard '*• V^^ivVV ;-; ^ "'T '• •
. .;•/"• St. Pet«r«burg,iFL: 33702 :-.••}>•,,•.>„ -';- .-..
;• PSB61RJH
893-3503
!-Jun«--.7»,'197|>-.;vN.«i?>v',''-
ir?ife^;e ' ' '""
. _, envixoru&Bntal ?dJnq>act
Treatxiftnt' Facilities, St. Mary Pariah, Louiaiana (DEIS: Ho»< 7904.39
that aooocmpanied your^ioeBiorandun^of May i, l»7^.baa boon raoeived'
byvthe ^.national 'KariAe;-F^.eberiea;6eryipe -ys&r .io^eir.jj^d^coiaBftnt.VJr;:
•-,,.-.•..
:> ••„•
t>M.
3.2,
HORGftH CIOT - AMHtTA ARHft (wardg 6 Midi
""
3.2.3 ...r.v j,r-' a^Iiapactii of tha Propoaed Morgan Ctty^Project^fc'-.r. ^^:. ..;•
3. 2. 3.1 ?,
- •'• •'
i lBj>aot« 'on', tlva Maitural Environment
• ' " ' ~ " " '
Vaqettttlon
. ' •••..
Page 72
. . . .. .. .:
\ '-'•••!'' : -'..i- ; :.t i. i~^\ ^r ' ' •' • >>rt%.v*'"T '"' 'f^'-r.*" ' "i.-p'"» ". ' '•• ' '•-•'•" •':' ;--.'
lon t^ JM;'--:'-: v ^: ' .'^-K-^ ft;i^H's*J''v:V;-;il»:';;-\--.0\{f 'vj^f''^<'^'-&^^^.*-!
-.- — . . .1 ;. ' •".• '%"'"'' ';•'" ""•"'•.''•"•''•.', •.•""".;"'/*.', ••..'-. '.-.•'='• .':""*".•*•• • ' •
, Paragraph 2.- •••% :i.--.:^jJ4v^';:'.f- ;;:'^-j; '.''-: ;.•.;;/•:•;'-: «:.'•>.;.'•. £.='-' :K;; . v : .; ••
• ' It i« ctated that "In vard 9, tb* 32 acr* Bite will occupy
bottomland hardwood* and cyprwaa-tupelogua *wanp« i.e.V*;. Thin Is .
vary general and th»' final Bnviroccpntal Jjrgpaot'-etnt^wsnt,
should di«cu»8
Invertebrafcea •' • ••
Paqa 73, Paragraph* 2 and 3.>;1 V;; "
EPA RESPONSE
Because of reductions in the design population in the Amelia
area from that originally proposed in the Facility Plan, the water sur-
face area required has been reduced from 49.5 acres to 33 acres. Since
the existing lagoon has an area of 22 acres, only 11 additional acres of
lagoon will be required. Total additional land needed comes to 16
acres, and will be located immediately adjacent to the existing lagoon.
As originally stated, the site adjacent to the existing Ugoon
consists of bottomland hardwoods and cypress-tupeloguo swamp typical of
much of southern Louisiana. This particular area extends fron Bayou
Boeuf westward across the southern shore of Lake Palourde and it
characterized by cyclic inundation and frequent standing water. Typical
species in these bottomland hardwoods include live oak, black willow,
tallowtree, elms, persimmon, hackberry, swaop-prlvet, and honeylocust.
As the land grades toward a more swampy nature, common species in the
Amelia area include tupelogum, bald cypress, black willow, pumpkin ash,
bitter pecan, buttonbush, elderberry, palmetto, smartweeds, and
alligatorwood. The eastern and southern edges of this wetland have
recently seen an increasing amount of clearing and draining for the
construction of roads and residential areas.
It is recognized that wetlands play an extremely iuportant
role in the production of shrimp, crab, and most other aquatic life
. forms in southern Louisiana. The plant material and micro-organismi
originating in the wetlands are gradually transported by tides and other
runoff into the coastal estuaries, where this detritus forms the base of
the food web on which most estuarine organisms depend. Many other
nutrients, such as phosphorus and nitrogen, are also exchanged between
the marshlands and the estuary. These marsh areas also play another
critical role in the development of fishes and crustaceans by serving as
nursery habitat during the early stages of rapid growth. Numerous
studies have shown that a distinct relationship exists between fisheries
production and wetland acreages, particularly intertidal wetlands.
-------
She role wetlands play in Bhrlvp'snd crab production^ in
tarns of nutrient and detrital input ehould be discussed. Also,1
the potential adverse impact* which toay result I rot destruction
of'wetlands by project icfplenentation-should be provided.
tieh •': ••;!' '• ::;
'••'':" :.;'vi," • •'.• ' •••'•:
Page 13; Paragraph "'
. ... .
'Tf ' The adverse inpacta on fish population* a* a result of
' wetland- destruction should be discussed. . .*:
•3.3
',%.' .;.' ' Tarrestri*l; Ecology .'••• .'• ;£.{"•.
; Page 98, Paragraph 4. '/'-"/.V^.1 ."•'',. .' ...•.'.?•.'•!. . •• .
'•i,.r.'' •'' • •' ' -'-.-' ' •'• ' ..-.'-, ••• .-.'.:• - •• • :
.', It i* stated that* "The proposed sewage'treatment plant*
'for Hards 5 and 8 will utilise 13.3 acre* of wetlands consisting
v.of Becond-growth bottottland hardwood* and some cypreis-tupelo-
'" " this description i* too general and abould be expandtd in
v.igun.- IMS description i* too general, ana snonia r*e expanata in ^-^
^.''ytbe final BIS. to nore ajocujtatilyjiportray the project eit*.' "^'\ jt
.
Page 91, Paragraph 6.
•'•:" . * description of. adveiiie' impact* on inverteti^t** and f tabes
resnlting from doatrnctioa of w*tl*nd* at tb* prbjih^; jilt* in. (4
• . _,••__« .t_-.» .. . • •_..«& A -• ". • *•,"' — ^''-* ^' '
dispusaed.
tenu of lost nutrient end detrltali production *bould
: 4. pARisn-«Titg ccmtutttyg' IMPACTS ,; - "'•
4kl COMDMItVB Uig*CTS OF THE PHDPO8KD HJOJKCTS
• • ,'. ' • ." i • ••'*'•'• • *•-
4k..l.l>'- . ' Impact* on the;natural Environment •'., .
' ' . '• •;-.•.....-...•••,'
Page-170, Paragraph 2. ' >• ." \tt • '. • . 1 ' .'
: If ie: etatedotbat, "Depending on. which altaraative* are
selected, in the Franklin and Baldwin area*r;oaly about 120-to 210
acrestvill be permanently taken by all project facilities. Most
of this; land ia presently, derated -to agriculture, and only about
Within thli setting, the loss of 16 acres of wetlands will
certainly adversely iapact the shrimp, crab, and fish populations which
feed on the wetland-based food chain. However, the particular
geographic letting of the Amelia treatnent plant site will lessen this
impact to some degree. The wetland unit to be affected is completely
bounded on the east, south, and vest by Bayou Boeuf, the Gulf
Intracoaatal Waterway, and the Lower Atchafalaya River, and is thus cut
off from the intertidal siarshlands to the south, which are the principal
sbrlitp and fish habitats. Much of the nutrients produced in the Amelia
area will therefore be transported directly past the major marshlands
and into Atchafalaya Bay. This lack of direct interaction between the
Amelia wetlands and the southern estuarine areas thus tends to reduce
the adverse impact! on aquatic ecology brought about by loss of these
wetlands.
The site of the proposed Wards 5 S 8 sewage treatment plant
was originally assessed during the preparation of the Draft EIS as an
area of bottomland hardwoods with some cypress-tupelogua. Since that
time, the U.S. Army of Corps of Engineers has conducted • field
investigation of that portion of St. Mary Parish and baa determined that
the proposed site is • non-wetland. Woody species on the plant site
which were observed by the Corps of Engineers field investigation ^
"included sweetgum, water oak, live oak, hackberry, green ash, and
Drunraond red staple. The force Bain to the treatment plant will be
placed immediately adjacent to the road, in a non-wetland area.
Since the Wards S & S treatment plant site has been determined
to be a non-wetland, the loss of this land ahould have a negligible
effect on Invertebrates and flshei. Furthermore, the entire Wards 568
study area has been surrounded by a ring levee, thus isolating the site
from the coastal marsh ecosystem.
The eastern holding basin just south of Highway 90 vill be
located in • wetland. This 4.4 acre site has been described by the
Corps of Engineers as a black willow thicket with giant cut grist,
-------
o
Jl
15 «cre> are wetlands." . Thie statenent apparently conflicts -with
earlier statements about the .acres of wetlands to be 'lost with
project implementation. As noted above, the. project site for
Kard 9 (page 72, paragraph. 2) is described 'as a. 32-acre "bottom-
land hardwoods and cypress-tupelograi swamp, i^e. forested wet-,
'lands*i the project area for .Herds 5 and 8. -(page 98, paragraph
4) is described as "12.5 acres of wetlands consisting of second-
growth bottcoland hardwoods and some cypress-tapelogunr." -and
the project site for the 'Cypremont Point (Section 3.6 CXPKBMDNT.
POniT, 3.6.3.1 Impacts Cn_ the Hatural Environment 3.6.3.1.g
Terrestrial Ecology page. 1SI; paragraph,^) tis described as a 2*y,
acre site "in intermediate marshland." The . .final BIS should / •
address this apparent conflict regarding thtfr total vacres of wet*
lands involved. . • .'.: ' ,.:. t/v-' . yx ,, .<• .-.'•• ':
'%.•:",'."• •; '.•;• .' .".'s*f '••V-v: •' ';"•• '•••'"•.•'-' . .
' 'B»e final EIS should also address the parish-wide cuwulative
impacts, in terms of project inpacts qn wetlands as the proposed
project relates to otjiar on-gplig and planned projects in ^he
parish.' Examples are ! the relocatidta of p.Si.!Higbwjiy "90, davelop-
nent of the Port of West' St. Itary Parieh, and the proposed 'channel
widening .in. Bayous Boeuf^ Black , and. Chene. ..... ' ..:.....-.•'.. ..... ...
'*'
CLEAPAHCKl .
*7 - Kenneth R. Roberta
Signature^ and Date
sugarcane plumegrass, cutgrass, maidencane, spikerush, and pickerelweed
being the dominant ground cover. Because of the small area involved and
the location of the site within the ring levee, adverse impacts on
invertebrates and fishes should be minimal.
The figures cited from the Draft EIS were in conflict. Based
upon the recently obtained wetlands determinations from the Corps of
Engineers and the downsizing of the Amelia oxidation ponds, it is now
estimated that a total of 20 acres of wetlands will be permanently taken
for construction of the proposed sewage facilities in St. Mary Parish.
This figure also includes the recent determination by the Corps of
Engineers that the site of the proposed Cypremort Point treatment plant
is a non-wetland.
The greater portion of development in St. Mary Parish lies
within leveed areas that are for the most part hydrologically isolated
from the major marsh and estuarine ecosytem south of the Gulf
Intracoastal Waterway. The levee and canal construction has taken •
toll on net parish fisheries production, as will future development in
wetland areas. Any development within these leveed areas, however, will
have a much smaller impact on the marsh ecosystem than a corresponding
development in the open marsh. The parish-wide cumulative impacts of
all the separate actions undoubtedly constitute a potential for
significant adverse impacts; however, because of the complexity of the
interrelationships, this potential is not fully understood. It does
appear, though, that the net beneficial water quality impacts of the
proposed sewerage projects should mitigate to some extent the cumulative
impacts of other projects in the parish.
-------
UNHID STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Nstlonil Oceanic and Atmovphcrio Administration
NATIONAL OCEAN SURVEY
«.*,«,««,. »oM OVC52X65JLR
JUN1 J979
TO: PP - Richard L. Uhnui
FROM: OVCxl ^GonJontilt' ^^
SUBJECT: DEIS 17904.38 - Hastewater Treatnent Facilities; St. Mary
Parish, Louttlara
The subject statement has been reviewed within the areas-of HOS
responsibility and expertise, and In tents of the Inpact of tht proposed
action on HOS activities and projects.
The following convent Is offered for your consideration.
Geodetic control survey nonuments my be located In the proposed
project area. If there Is any planned activity which will disturb or
destroy these winner)ts, HOS requires not less than 90 d»ys' notification
In advance of such activity In order to plan for their relocation. KOS
reconnmds that funding for this project Includes the cost of any relocation
required for HOS eonucents.
EPA RESPONSE
If It is determined during detailed design that geodetic control
•urvey Bonunents would be Impacted by construction of any of the projects,
the National Ocean Survey (NOS) will be notified at least 90 days In ad-
vance to plan for their relocation. The cost of any relocation of NOS
•onunents necessitated by these projects is a grant eligible itea, and
will be reimbursed by EPA. .
-------
DEPARTMENT >F THE ARMY ,
NCV. OHLtANS OISTNIC1 COH ••(. O« INGINtERB /,-•
• O KOI • OJ»T
IN REPLY REFER TO
LMNPD-RE
MAY
Mr. Clinton B. Spoct*
Regional EIS Coordinator
Environmental Protection Agency
Region 6
1201 Elm Street .
Dalits, Texas 75270
Dear Mr. Spotts:
Reference Is mate to your letter dated 23 April 1979 requesting comments
on the draft EIS for the proposed Wastewater Treatment Facilities,
St. Mary Parish, Louisiana.
The subject draft EIS has been reviewed in accordance with US Army Corps
of Engineers' administrative procedures for permit activities in navigable
waters or ocean water*. Title 33, CFR, Parts 320-329, published in the
"Federal Register," 19 Jul 77. The following comments are offered:
t\}
)o a. Wetlands will be Impacted by the proposed>project. The draft
EIS does not acknowledge US Army Corps of Engineers* jurisdiction
regarding Sections 10 and 404 permit requirements for dredge and fill
activities which occur In wetlands and/or navigable waters. The wet-
lands and navigable streams should be adequately described In the
document.
b. Haps delineating the wetlands associated with the proposed
project were forwarded to your office in January 1979. We recommend
these maps be included in the final EIS.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this draft EIS.
Sincerely,
Copy Furnished:
Environ. Protection Agency
Ra. 537, West Tower
401 M St., SW. Mall Code A-104
Washington, DC 70460
THOMAS A. SANDS
Colonel, CE
District Engineer
EPA RESPONSE
The "Alternatives" and "Impacts" sections for each separate
project have been modified to discuss the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers'
jursidiction over construction activities in the wetlands and navigable
waters of the parish. See pages 66, 69, 95, 121, 141, and 161 for de-
tailed discussions.
Areas designated by the Corps of Engineers as wetlands and
which are in the vicinity of proposed project facilities have been
shown on Figures 15 and 16. Existing wetland determinations indicate
that none of the proposed facilities in the three remaining project
areas will impact wetlands.
-------
Department of Energy
P.O. Box 35228
2626 W. Mockingbird Lane
Dallas. Tx. 75235
MAY 2 2 1379
ro
VJl
Ms. Adlene Harrison
Regional Administrator
Environmental Protection Agency, Region VI
1201 Elm Street
Dallas. Texas 75270
Attn: Clinton B. Spotts
Dear Ms. Harrison:
Thi draft Environment Impact Statement for Wastewater Treatment Facilities,
St. Hary Parish, Louisiana, has been reviewed and there are no comments.
HO EPA RESPONSE NECESSARY
6. Dan Rambo
Regional Representative
-------
> - IT- «
. fan- '•
• * '.ii ii.- • •
OEI'ARIMENI O^ HOUS'NG AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Fl. WGH1" HtCIONAL OfriCC
1100 COMMENCE S1HECT
DALLAS. TEXAS 7MOJ
June 12, 197S
Ms. Adlene Harrison .-.
Regional Administrator Z'i.. ~
Region VI T' -
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency :.
1201 ElB Street ''.-•
Dallas, Texas 75270 '.',. •
r .
Dear Ms. Ilarrisoni
r"
This is to inform you that your agency's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for Wastewater Treatment Facilities in St.
Mary Parish, Louisiana, has been reviewed in the Department
of Housing and Urban Development's Mew Orleans Area Office
and Dallas Regional Office and that it has been determined
that the Department will not have comments on the subject
Statement.
We would appreciate receiving a copy of the Final Statement
for reference in connection with housing and community develop*
ment project applications received from the affected area.
Sincerely,
HO EPA RESPONSE NECESSARY
S$x
RECEIVED-
\6i EPA
BICJJN VI
L . S « A 01*
V«V 110. ASST,
ABKA OFrtCES
-------
United Stales Department of the Interior
OFFICE OF THE SECKETAKV
SOUTHWEST ICKGIIJN
K>ST OFUCE HOX ami.
ALBUQUEIiqUE. NEW MEXICO R7IU3
JUN J 5 B7|
IR-lt/M
Mr. Clinton B. Spotts
Regional E1S Coordinator
Environmental Protection Agency
IZOl Elm Strett
Dallas, Texas 11110
Dear Mr. Spotte:
As requested ue have reviewed the environmental iiapaat statement for
ixatcaater treatment facilities, St. Hazy Parish, Louisiana and offer the
follcuing carmente.
General Conments
There are several Land and Water Conservation find (LtVCFi projects in St.
Mary Pariah, Louisiana, the. naps and descriptions contained in the state-
ment are not adequate to determine uhich, if any, LtVCF projects may bt
affected by the proposed project. A determination should be made if any
LiVCF projects uill It affected, the possibility for impacts on any of
those projects should bs discussed in detail. The project sponsors should
maintain close coordination uith Dr. B. Bernard Carrier, Assistant Secretary,
Office of Program Development. Dr. Carrier is the Stats official responsible
for coordinating and assisting in identifying and minimiting any impacts on
recreational, cultural, historical, and archeological resource*; he is also
responsible for coordinating the Land and Voter Conservation Fund in Louisiana,
ana should bs able to assist you in alleviating any potential problems. Doc-
umentation of these efforts should bs included in any final statement.
He note that archeological surveys have been conducted on several of tha sites
and that on one site, Vards & and t, "...the State aill require an on-the-gromd
survey by a professional archeologist prior to oonmencement of construction."
The close coordination betueon the project sponsors and the State Historic
Preservation Officer (SHPO) should be maintained and the SUPO's conments con-
sidered prior to any further action. If the SHPO has been given an opportunity
to conment on all the proposed sites and actions, these camant* should be
documented in the statement.
It ohould bo clarified as to uhethcr the proposed project hats bean acaacacd in
accordance uith the requirements of Executive Orders 11988 (Floodplain Hanage-
mantl and 11990 (Protection of Vetlanda). Vt not* that nearly 81 percent of
the parish is either uetland or open water.
EPA RESPONSE
The only Land and Water Conservation Fund recreation project
in St. Nary Parish to be affected by any of the proposed facilities is
the State Beach at Cyprenort Point. A pump itatlon and force main will
serve the enisling sanitary facilities at the beach, and will prevent
the discharge of raw sewage near the beach area which occurs during
periods of high use. Design of these facilities will be coordinated
with the Division of Outdoor Recreation of the Louisiana Department of
Culture, Recreation and Tourism during Step 2. Ho other LUCF projects
will be impacted.
The comments of the State Historic Preservation Officer are
presented in this section.
All of the proposed projects have been assessed in light of
the requirements of Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management. Of
the eight treatment facilities proposed In the parish, three lie within
the 100-year floodplaln. These facilities are the Amelia oxidation
pond, the eastern Baldwin oxidation pond, and the Cypremort Point treatment
plant. In both the Amelia and Cypremort Point areas, the entire project
areas lie within the 100-year floodplaln, and thus there are no practicable
alternatives that would allow locating these facilities outside the
floodplaln. In order to minimize the risk of economic loss and threats
to public health, the Cypremort Point package treatment plant will be
elevated above the 100-year flood level, and the Amelia oxidation pond
levees will be constructed to a height sufficient to prevent overtopping.
Much of the eastern Baldwin project area also lies within the
100-year floodplaln, as does the existing Baldwin sewage lagoon. Since
the most cost-effective solution is an upgrading of the existing lagoon,
the economic cost of locating the facility out of the floodplain would
far exceed that of the proposed project. The height of all levees wilt
be such that no damage will occur from the 100-year flood.
-------
. . ..
•ir ciuc-Hifc" vdr.quatiiii. Kouevcr, in vici> of the many oil w.d nas pipelincc
whioli tk crisucivsr tht fai"ish, ue suggest thai contractors l>e cautious uiicr.
t'ncy inuiall the: approximate 1C? miles of force mains and gravity aeuers j'oi-
the projects, so that existing pipelines are not disrupted.
projects
Specific Coiments
pages Hi, 3, 17, SO, 114, 121 - The statement includes repeated oorments on
the existing and widespread high water-table conditions; however, no infor-
mation is given concerning the shallau aquifer, its possible relation to the
Chicot aquifer, its use, of possible effects on onsite disposal facilities on
the quality of the water. This should be clarified in the statement.
Page 13, Figure ? - The statement would be strengthened by shoving the flood { 5
hazard areas on proposed project maps (figs. 15-19).
Pages 52 - 168 - This section should consistently discuss the effects of the
alternatives upon recreational land and facilities in each area. The Morgan
City-Amelia area (Sec. 3.2), Wards i and 8 (Sec. 3.3), and the Baldwin and
Vicinity area (Sec. 3. S), have no mention of recreational features which may
be affected; uhile the sections dealing with Franklin (Sec. 3.4) and Cypremort
Point (Sec. 3.6) each address the effects on recreational features. This dis-
crepancy should be clarified and the potential impacts on all recreational
areas and uses discussed.
Page 141, Item d - Although dredging of force-main crossings of navigable
waterways would result in very short-lived turbidity, measures such as silt
barriers or sediment traps should be considered for use in minimizing the mi-
gration of turbidity plumes that may contain significant concentrations of
resuspendad sediments.
Page 149 - In connection with the statement that Baldwin is served by deep
veils, it should be indicated whether the aquifer is confined or unconfirmed
in that area. If it is confined, the nature and thickness of the confining
materials and the probable degree of confinement should be discussed, thus,
making possible assessment of the potential for contamination under the .no-
action alternative.
Page 164 - It is stated that the Water-supply on Cypremort Point is provided . ,
by private uella. Pertinent information on ground-water resources and typical \ 9,
well construction and use should be given to aid in the assessment.
V* appreciate the opportunity to comment an this statement..
Sincerely yours,
Charon
negional Environmental Officer
Since the principal flood threat in St. Mary Parish is of a
tidal nature, with no major flood channel as such, construction of these
facilities in the floodplain will in no way increase flood damage potentials
in other areas.
All other treatment plants proposed in the parish are to be
located on higher ground or within leveed areas, outside the 100-year
floodplain.
The proposed projects have also been assessed in accordance
with the requirements of Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands.
This assessment is presented in the response to the letter of comment
from the National Marine Fisheries Service, on page 248.
A discussion of the various aquifers and their potential for
pollution by cm-site disposal facilities has been added to Chapter 2.
®See revised pages 17 and 17A.
The individual project maps, Figures 15-19, have been revised
®to show those areas affected by the 100-year tidal flood.
With the exception of the State Beach facility at Cypremort
Point, no recreation facilities are expected to be impacted by any of
the proposed projects. In all sections where recreation facilities are
not discussed, there are no impacts expected on recreation facilities.
[ 7 J The use of silt barriers and sediment traps to prevent-the
spread of turbidity during dredging operations will be considered during
_. the preparation of Plans and Specifications in Step II.
. 8 ) The Baldwin wells are 400 to 450 feet deep and are in the
Upper Chicot aquifer. This aquifer is confined under a more than 100
foot thick silt-clay layer and is under artesian bead as confirmed by
USGS. Although there is no guarantee that the confining clay layer i»
continuous, the fact that the aquifer is under artesian pressure would
seem to minimize the possibility of contamination fron surface disposal
.facilities.
According to USGS, there are two private wells at Cypremort
Point obtaining fresh water from the Upper Chicot aquifer. The wells
are two inch diameter reaching to depths of 325 and 600 feet. The Upper
Chicot extends from 205 to 950 feet below sea level as reported by USGS.
•I
-------
II. ktrir mr« 10
linited Stales Deparlmenl of the Interior
IIEHriAtifc COSStHVAIKIN ANl> RLCKLAIION SLKVICt
INTtllAtiKM'V AIU IIM.MHIll Al. XUBVH KSATI.ASTA
IKH^ riMietllk lUnllrvinl
74(1 AU.nU. i:r,r,Ui M3tf
1201-05-1AS-A
JUN201979
Mr. Clinton R. Spotts
Regional EIS Coordinator
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6
1201 Eln Street
Dallas. Texas 7J270
Dear Mr. Spotts:
Thank you (or allowing ui to review the draft "Environmental lapact
Statenent for Wastewater Treatment, St. Mary Parish, Louisiana."
Enclosed ar« the reviewer's cements; hopefully, you will Incorporate
these comenta Into your scope of work fox Wards 3 sod 8. ' If ve can
be of any further assistance, please contact us.
Sincerely yours.
Benole C. Keel
Chief
Enclosure
-------
Uf.'ITE.D STA7LS
memorandum
CO
Arciieolu-is,:, li-.terigency Archeological Servicti-Aliarita
Review of Draft "Environmental Iripact Statement for Vastewater Treatment
St. Mary Parish, Louisiana" by hobert Keuman
Archeologist, Interagency Archeological Services-Atlanta
This report consisted of five sections, one for each project area.
The review will discuss each section in the order It appears in
Appendix A.
Since we do not have the information that the State Historic Preservation
Officer (SHPO) of Louisiana has ve can neither agree or disagree with
his decision not to have Wards 6 and 9 surveyed. It would be helpful
to have a prehistoric and historic overview for the reviewer's informa-
tion. Part of the project crosses areas that have a high probability
for archeologlcal sites and without background information the review-
er does not have enough information to make a decision.
We agree with the SHPO that the project area within Wards 5 and 8 should/
be surveyed. The survey should determine if sites eligible for nomlna-
tion to the National Register of Historic Places will be impacted by
the Project.
The three survey reports by Robert W. Neuman were read. Unfortunately.
the reports did not contain enough information for a competent review.
Listed below is some of the Information that is needed before the report
can be reviewed.
1) Although the environmental impact statement contains geologic,
faunal, and floral sections, the relationship of these sections to
archeology should be discussed in the archeological report. Many
landforms have a high probability for prehistoric and historic site
occurrence, the presence or absence of these landforms within che
project area should be noted. Mr. Neuman mentions that some of the
project area has subsided, what effect 'does this have on archeologic
and historic sites?
2) The methodology discussion is meager. Mr. Neuman states that
• pedestrian and vehicular survey was performed, however, he does not
say what areas were surveyed on foot and what areas were surveyed from
a vehicle. Since some of the land has subsided, subsurface testing
should have been performed, especially in areas with a high probability
for site occurrence.
EPA RESPONSE
Based upon the results of several recent extensive
on-the-ground surveys throughout the Morgan City area, the State
Historic Preservation Officer has determined that the proposed project
should have no impact on the cultural resources of the area, and that no
further cultural resources investigations should be necessary. (See the
letter of comment from the State Historic Preservation Officer, in this
section.) The Step 2 and 3 grants will of course carry the condition that,
should any cultural resources be discovered during construction, work
will be stopped and the properties will be evaluated in consultation
with the office of the State Historic Preservation Officer. This grant
condition will apply to all five of the sewerage projects in St. Mary
Parish.
As recommended by the State Historic Preservation Officer, an
on-the-ground survey of the areas within Wards 5 and 8 to be affected by
construction will be performed during the Step 2 design. This cultural
resources survey will be a condition of the Step 2 grant.
For the Franklin, Baldwin, and Cyprenort Point projects,
coordination will be carried out with the SHPO to determine what
additional cultural resources information will be required. This
coordination and all steps to obtain the necessary data will be
accomplished during Step 2.
Buy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan
FOAM MO. I*
IRCV. 1.1 ti
CSA rpMRUi CPU) tout1.1
wit-tu
-------
3j In the cultural sequence bcctiun ol the.* rcpor: tiitirfc uat. nt-
B'-r.riun of historic Indian or European occupation ol tiie erct.
H:. lieuman Implies that many historic structures still renain near,
if not in, the project area, however, he states nothing specific about
any of those structures. Without background Information and detailed
information of the structures, the importance of these structures
cannot be determined. /
/•
A) A map showing the,'location of archeological and historical
Bites as well as properties listed In or eligible to the national Reglstei
of Historic Places should be Included.1 The background Information on
'the sites and National Register properties should be expanded. As
stated In Dr. E. Bernard Carrier's letter, two surveys have been
performed near the project area, Mr. Heumao. does not mention either of
these two surveys or any other previous Investigation of the area.
Sites that have been previously recorded vithin the study area should
be discussed.
The following comments refer only to the "Archaeological Survey of the
Proposed Project Area. Baldwin and Vaclnlty, St. Mary Parish, Louisiana.
In this report Mr. Neuman states that there are numerous historic sites
In the study area. Since Hr. Neuman never states what his study area
is or how It relates to the project area, the reviewers cannot determine
If the historic sites are vithin the project area. If tht sites are
within tht project area, site Corns should be completed and attached
to this report under a separate cover. If these historic buildings
are within the project area and are eligible for nomination to*the
National Register, the proper fonts nust be completed sod sent to the
SUTO.
VJl
JiB Thomson
-------
u.s. DTPARIMCNT or THANSPORTATION
I tOCN At HICMKWA* A1JMINIS1MA1 IOK
730 Florida boulevard
Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70801
May 7. 1979
M HH> MM* to
Uastcwater Treatment Facilities
St. Mary Parish, Louisiana
KJ
O
o
Mr. Clinton B. Spotte
Regional EIS Coordinator
Environmental Protection Agency
1201 Elm Street
Dallas, Texas 75270
Dear Mr. Spotts:
Please refer to Ms.' Adlene Harrison's letter of April 23, 1979. which
transmitted for review and comments the Draft Environmental Impact
Statement for the proposed captioned project.
Since • large percentage of the sever lines to be installed will be
located along or on highway right-of-way, permits will need to be
acquired. Therefore, it is recommended that this document and project
be Coordinated with the Louisiana Department of Transportation and
Development, Office of Highways. Also, provisions should be made in
the construction contract to keep the interference with highway traffic
to a ainimua.
Sincerely yours,
EPA RESPONSE
The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development
(LA DOTD) has been contacted and provided with a copy of the Draft EIS.
All required permits will be obtained from the LA DOTD for any work
affecting Louisiana State highway facilities or rigbts-of way.
Consideration will be given during the preparation of the
plans and specifications to measures to reduce the interference with
highway traffic. Safety measures recommended by the American
Association of State Highway Officials, such as warning signs, flashers,
flagmen, and temporary fencing will be implemented as necessary to
protect the safety of highway users.
/'James N/ficDonald
Division Administrator
-------
. CNENGV f •!«.• .AIOHY COMMISSION
MASHIMGIUH. D.C. 2042C.
June 6, 1979
Cor. Clinton B. Spotts
Regional EIS Coordinator (6A)
Environmental Protection Agency
1201 Elm Street
Dallas, Texas 75270
Dear Mr. Spottst
I am replying-to your request of April 23, 1979 to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Cotnmisison for comments on the
Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Construction .„. .«.,»,.„.= - „,..„
and Operation of Hastcwater Treatment Facilities in St. Mary m m ""H"182 KECESSAHY
County, Louisiana. This Draft EIS has been reviewed by
appropriate FERC staff components upon whose evaluation this
response is based.
The staff concentrates its review of other agencies'
environmental Impact statements basically on those areas of
the electric power, natural gas, and oil pipeline industries
for which the Commission has jurisdiction by law, or where
staff has special expertise in evaluating environmental impacts
Involved with the proposed action. It does not appear that
there would be any significant impacts-in these areas of concern
nor serious conflicts with this agency's responsibilities should
this action be undertaken.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this statement.
Sincerely,
JacVJl. Heinemann
ctviaor on Environmental Qu
RECEIVED \l
JUN121979»-
-------
STAYt-OF LOUISIANA
DEPARTMENT OF CULTURE. RECREATION AND TOURISM
OFFICE OF PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
E. BERNARD CARRIER. HnD
Auituni &«ctci»rr
Kay 8, 1979
Mr. Clinton B. Spotts
Regional E1S Coordinator
Environmental Protection Agency
1201 Elm Street
DalU>. IX 75270
Re: Draft Environmental Impact Statement
. Uastewater treatment facilities
St. Mary Parish
Dear Mr. Spotts,
My staff has reviewed the document referenced above and we offer the
following comments.
The project area in Wards 6 and 9 was not recommended for a cultural
resources survey and no additional work should be necessary in these areas.
No cultural resources survey was conducted in Wards 5 and 6 and no survey
was recomnended for areas slated for rehabilitation only. The project
areas where new construction will take place should be surveyed, and we note
this intention on page 105.
In reference to the cultural resources surveys in Appendix A, we -require
some additional information about the projects. The reports do not state
whether subsurface inspection of any kind was made at any points in the right-
of-way. Information on this should be included especially concerning the
location of sites 16SMY7 and 16SMY4.
The historic period of European settlement and later history in relation
to the project areas was not discussed. The history of the Franklin and
Baldwin area, in particular, may have implications for the location of cultural
resources. Events such as the Battle of Irish Bend, in the Franklin and
vicinity project area, may have associated cultural remains. Any subsurface
investigation in historically sensitive areas, such as the battlefield or
historic plantations, should be mentioned.
Previous investigations which have a relation to the project area should
be discussed as well as the geological history of the Bayou Teche area. This
Information could help explain why so few sites occur in this region.
In the Baldwin report, there was a discussion of site 16SMY4, which on
our maps Is In the Franklin and vicinity project area. One site in the
Baldwin and vicinity project area, 16SMY41, was not mentioned. Our files
show that it could be within the project area. Also site 16SMY3S, in the
EPA RESPONSE
An on-the-ground cultural resources survey of all areas la
Wards 5 & 8 to be affected by construction will be required as a
condition of the Step 2 grant.
Also, all investigations necessary to supply the additional
cultural resources information required for the Franklin, Baldwin, and
Cypreaort Point projects will be carried out during Step 2. This work
will be a condition of the Step 2 grant.
In all five project areas, the Step 2 and 3 grants will
contain the condition that, should any cultural artifacts be discovered
during construction, work will cease until the State Historic
Preservation Officer has had the opportunity to examine the artifacts
and determine what disposition should be made of them.
DIVISION OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION
!• o. r... i.tru i!..i..-, n:nrj... 1.1. «:-M Msir-wr.'.;
-------
STA71 of
DEPARTMENT OF CULTURE. RECREATION AND TOURISM
Sj|&X OFFICE OF PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
tUWIN ft. tUWAHUC
E. BERNARD CARRIER. PhD
Auiiurt tocitury
J. «.»HRV CfKUh.h.!.
Mr. Clinton B. Spotte
Draft CIS. St. Mary Parlih
Hay 8, 1979
Fagt 2
Franklin and vicinity project area, according to the nap on page 118, was
I- not mentioned. Both of these sites and their relation to the project should
I be dlacussed.
II ' Upon receipt of the additional Information, va will able to complete
|| our review. If you have any questions, please contact ay staff In the Division
i i of Archaeology and Historic Preservation.
Inaerely youtl
EBC:DU:jkp
I. Bernard Carrier
State Rlatorlc Preservation Officer
DIVISION OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORIC 'RESERVATION
n O. Po» 44747 n.-; .:. r.«^-, I , .-myn ^f.f. v.J tftt
-------
STATE OF LOUISIANA
DEPARTMENT OF CULTURE. RECREATION AND TOURISM
OFFICE OF PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
EDWIN W. EDWARDS
Govtrnor
E. BERNARD CARRIER. PhD
AnifUnt SKTVU/V
J. LARRY GRAIN. PUD
April 27. 1979
Clinton b. Spotts
Environmental Protection Agency
Region 6
1201 Eln Street
Dallas. TX 75270
Dear Mr. Spotts:
He have recently reviewed the Draft EIS for Wastewater Treatment
Facilities in St. Mary Parish, Louisiana. As you may be aware. this
office handles the grant program under the Land and Water Conservation
Fund. It 1s our understanding that the proposed Wastewater Treatment
Facilities may impact LWCF projects within St. Mary Parish. The EIS
does not cover the impacts of nearby recreation facilities within the
Analysis of Alternatives section. We suggest that you look into this
matter further in finalizing this draft.
Accompanying this letter you will find a listing of LUCF projects
within St. Mary Parish. We hope this will assist you. Further in-
formation may be obtained either from this office or the project
sponsor.
If you have any questions on this matter do not hesitate to
contact us.
Sincerely,
Marie Owens
Director
Hfl/cad
Enclosure
EPA RESPONSE
The only Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) project in St
Mary Parish which will be affected by the proposed project* is the
Cypreraort Point State Beach. At this facility, a small enclosed pumping
station and force main will be constructed to transport sewage from the
park's sanitary facilities to the Cypremort Point sewage treatment
plant. This will eliminate the present occasional discharges of raw
sewage into the waters adjoining the state beach.
Construction of these facilities will be either on or immediately
adjacent to park property and will result in temporary adverse impacts
to the park and its users. These impacts will consist primarily of
construction noise and the unsightliness and disruption of traffic
caused by excavation work. These impacts will occur only over a period
of a few weeks, after which the area will be returned to pre-project
conditions.
None of the other LWCF projects will be affected by construction
of the sewerage facilities, nor are any of them near any of the treatment
plants to be constructed.
DIVISION Of OUTDOOR RFCREATION
-------
£92
UNO AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND ASSISTANCE TO ST. HART'S PARISH
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT SPONSOR
DATE APPROVED
0105 0 Berwick Boat Ramp
0135 0 Burns Point Boat Rarap
0185 A Morgan City AC
0191 0 Morgan City Rec. Conplex
0278 A Franklin Park
0321 0 Lake End Park
0370 0 Chitioacha Indian Park
0459 0 Bayou Vista
0467 0 Lake End Park Extension
0518 0 Cypreaart Point Development
Wildlife and Fisheries Cosroisslori 4/12/63
St. Mary's Parish 4/17/70
City of Morgan City 11/12/71
City of Morgan 3/24/72
City of Franklin . 11/12/74
City of Morgan City 11/20/74
La. Oept. of Public Works 3/10/75
St. Mary Parish Police Jury 12/09/76
City of Morgan City 2/08/78
U. Office of State Parks 12/28/77
-------
WILLIAU C. HUUS
SCCRCTAHT
May 28, 1979
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
OFFICE OF FORESTRY
(LOUISIANA FORESTRY COMMISSION)
Mr. Clinton B. Spotts
Regional EIS Coordinator
Region 6
Environmental Protection Agency
1201 Elm Street
DaUas, Texas 75270
Re: Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Wastewater Treatment Facilities
St. Mary Parish, Louisiana
Dear Mr. Spotts:
We are in receipt of Mrs. Harrison's letter and attachments of April 23
in connection with the above captioned project, and her request for
comaents on same.
A careful review of the draft statement reveals that approximately 167
oiles of pipe will be laid, but it appears that 1$ acres is the only
figure mentioned, on page 170, where there may be some involvement of
forest or related lands. I would want to insist that wherever mature
trees, or treea of merchantable size, are removed, they be disposed of
by sale to the highest bidder, if, in fact, the quantity and quality of
the woody material renders it merchantable. Piling,and burning of
'potentially useful forest products is a wasteful practice in these days
of increasing shortages and escalating prices.
In addition, on page 2b there appears a listing of endangered or threaten-
ed plant species in Louisiana from which a number of the common names
have been omitted. I am attaching a copy of that page with the appropri-
ate names typed in, should you wish to include them.
i
I have'no further objections to or comments on this project as outlined.
Thank you for the opportunity of reviewing this draft statement.
VERHON E. ROBINSON - CHIEF, ENVIRONMENTAL RELATIONS
JB
cc: District Forester Miller
EPA RESPONSE
All merchantable timber which must be cleared for this project
will be made available for public sale whenever economically feasible.
The list of endangered or threatened plant species in Louisiana
has been revised to include the common names provided.
P.O. BOX 1(11 . BATON ROUGE, LA. 70111
-------
TAUU J
EKDANCEIU^O 01: TIIKU1TNLU liUTiMUCAL
ELEMENTS IN LOUISIANA "
Common Kane
to
PLAKTS:
Quillvort, Louisiana
?ar.vi?.)
leaved holly
ThAe.re.t.1 A .sKHUrP»P»
Horsemlnt
Spicebush..JAve:p. fruit
Prairie, .orchid.. Prairie
white fringed orchid
Beardgrafi«,. Aroon\pedge
Parrot's pitcher plant
Snapdragon
Southern yellow orchid
Tickseed (unnaaed)
Indian Paintbrush (unnamed)
Scientific Hame
lioetes lonisianensis
Aasonia tlaberrtau
Ilex amelanchier I
Scutellarla thieretii
tlndera mellss'tfolia V.
flatanthera leucophaea
Bothrtochloa exarlstata
i
Sarracenia psittacina
Agalints caddoeniii
Platanthera Integra
Coreopsis intermedia
Castllleja ludovicina
* Unofficial 11.ting - Extracted fro. Federal Ree.ister.Vol. 40, Ho. 127 &
12B, Vol. 41. Ko. 117 & 201 and Vol. 42. Ho. 6.
-------
fetntc of louisimm
^Department o( transportation anb Dcbtlopmcnt
O
CCORCC A.FlSCMCR
{X O. Vox 4-1245 Cipiiol ftlation JBaion Roujt. Imiiuni 70804
May 25, 1979
Mr. Clinton B. Spotts
Regional EIS Coordinator
EPA, Region 6
1201 Elm Street
Dallas, Texas 75270
Re: Wastewater Treatment Facilities
Draft EIS
St. Mary Parish, Louisiana
Dear Mr. Spotts:
j In response to your letter of April 23, 1979, the only comment
3\ the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development has to
O offer relates to permits. A permit will be required from the
Department for any work involving sewer line placements within the
right-of-way limits of a state highway. Should you have any questions
regarding this matter, please contact Mr. Gorman S. Pounders, Chief
Maintenance and Operations Engineer.
Sincerely,
HENRY G. PYLANT
PUBLIC HEARINGS &
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER
HGP/RPR/kmg
cc: Mr. H. T. Taylor, Jr.
Mr. D. D. White
Mr. J. R. Reid
Mr. F. M. Heroy, Jr.
Mr. G. S. Pounders
EPA RESPONSE
Specifications for the construction of these projecti will
require that all necessary permits for the placement of sewerage fa-
cilities within state highway right-of-way limits be obtained fro»
the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development.
-------
Si ill'.1 (* LuutiJiirin
Department of Urban and Community Affairs
OHtce of Planning and Tecnmca! Assrsiani.fr
June 4, 1979
C*ML W it* i >*i
I. to** R. T***vcw. J».
s
Mr. Clinton B. Spottf
Regional E1S Coordinator
EPA. Region 6
1201 Elm Street
Dallas. Texas 75270
Dear Mr. Spotts:
Re: EIS for the towns of Baldwin,
Berwick. Cypremort Point, Franklin,
and Morgan City, Louisiana
TO SPA H2SPOHSE HECeSSAJiy
We are in receipt of the above referenced document and have reviewed it
for possible impact on the state's environment. The document will be
kept in our library for public Inspection and • notice of its availability
will be sent out with our next newsletter.
We appreciate being kept informed of your activities. If we can be of
further assistance, please let me know.
Si
f O unit <4<99-B*TON RCMICr. IOUISIANA)U04-)»«eM
-------
OST-BP-
OFFICE Or SCIENCE. TECHNOLOGY I ENVIRONMENT AL POLICY
Edwin V. Uwkrilft. Covernut
Lcr U. Jrnnmcb. DirecUir
May 7, 1979
Mr. Clinton B. Spotts
Regional EIS Coordinator
EPA, Region VI
1201 Elm Street
Dallas, Texas 75270
Wastewater Treatment Facilities
for the towns of: Baldwin,
Berwick, Cypremort Point,
Franklin, and Morgan City
St. Mary Parish
Louisiana
Dear Mr. Spotts:
I\J
The above-referenced matter concerning environmental quality has
been received and reviewed by the staff of the Office of Science,
Technology and Environmental Policy. From the information contained
in the package sent to our office, the staff of OSTEP issues a no
objection on this particular project. The rules and regulations
governing this project should continue to be in full compliance
with all State and Federal regulatory agencies.
The staff of OSTEP appreciates this opportunity to participate in
the review process.
Sincerely,
WilliamJ. Mollere
Manager, Administration and
Operations
HJM/cdh
cci Mr. George Gullett, Environmental Coordinator
Office of Planning and Technical Assistance
Department of -Urban and Community Affairs
NO EPA RESPONSE NECESSARY
STATE CAPI1OU BUILIXNC POST OFFICE rOX 44O11. f!ATOH ROUC-C. LA. 10901 (901) h»t-21«*
-------
D. RALPH CAFFEHY & ASSOCIATES, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
o. aAUPH cArrmr. r.t.
•r. A, HOPP«. J«., P.«.
p. LCK joLtcr. r.t.
LAFAYETTE. LOUISIANA 7O9O«
June 21, 1979
Mr. Clinton B. Spott*
Regional EIS Coordinator
EPA Region 6
1201 Eln Street
Dallas, Texas 75270
to
<]
ro
Dear Mr. Spottsi
We have reviewed the draft envlronnentsl Impact statement for
the Wastewster Treatment Facilities In St. Mary Parish, Louisiana, and
offer the following coonenta.
1) Pg. SO, Section 2.2.3.4. Airline*. The airport near
Jeanerett* 1* In Iberia Parish.
2) Pg. 93, 3rd to last link. We are not aware of any parish-
wide sludge disposal facility presently under study. Each
wastewater treatnent plant must dispose of It* own sludge.
3) Pg. 115, 4th to last Una. The oxidation pond process 1*
the noat cost effective treatnent process for the cistern
project area a* shown In th* Facility Plan for the project.
4) Pg. 122, 3rd line. A 30 alnut* chlorine contact tine will
be utilised.
S) Pg. 124, 18th line. The site directly across Bayou Tokely
fron the existing sewage treatnent plant has been purchased
by the St. Mary Pariah Police Jury and 1* not used for
agricultural purposes.
6) Pg. 124, 4th to Isst line. The proposed line* will ba layed
along or abutting existing rlghts-of-way.
7) Pg. 133, 8th line. Only • portion of th* Town of Baldwin
Is sewered.
8) Pg. 142, 3rd to last line. A 30 ailnut* chlorine contact
time will be utilised.
EPA RESPONSE
Changes have been Bade In the EIS text where required to reflect
these contents.
-------
9) Pg. 149, 4th line. The local share will be financed by
revenues generated by a' parish-wide sales tax and special
assessments.
10) Pg. 155, 13th line. There are approximately 250
residential units.
11) Figure 19. A shaded collection area should be added
around the lift station symbols In the east and east
central portions of the project area.
12) Pg. 163. line 17. Same comment •« 6 above.
13) Pg. 163, last line. Same comment as 9 above.
14) Pg. 170, 13th line. Same comment as 6 above.
Very truly yours,
D. RALPH CAFFERY & ASSOCIATES, INC.
PAH: cub
cc: Town of Baldwin
ro
Vjj ' City of Franklin
St. Mary Parish Police Jury
File
-2-
-------
'. APPENDIX C
WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS ST. MARY PARISH WELLS
Well Location
Date
Conductance ,-"micromohj
PH ,...--.
Hardness
Dissolved Solids
Silica, ppm .
Iron ppm
Calcium ppm
Magnesium ppm
Sodium ppm
Potassium ppm
Carbonate ppm
Bicarbonate ppm
Sulfate ppm
Chloride ppm
Fluoride ppm
Nitrate ppm
Boron ppm
Aluminum ppm
Manganese ppm
Franklin
1949
750
7.5
199
392
36
4.8
64
9.5
37
5.2
0
380
0.7
14
0
0
0.06
7.8
0.15
Baldwin
1951
1080
8.5
331
633
46
0.4
80
32
101
0
464
2
116
7.1
Cypremont Point
No analysis
Colliform is not considered to be a problem in the Chicot aquifer-and
therefore, is not included in the analysis.
Source: U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division, Baton Rouge,
Louisiana.
274
-------
APPENDIX D
Grant Conditions to the Step 2 and.:3 Grants Include:
1. The Grantee agrees to develop and include in the construction
contracts appropriate, measures to minimize erosion, siltation, and.
sedimentation due to construction activities.
2. The Grantee agrees to obtain 404 permits for the.necessa.ry,
wetland crossings and construction activities during Step 2 planning
when exact locations of these actions are determined.
3. The Grantee agrees to include an odor control plan in th'fe'
operation and maintenance manual and to insure the treatment plant c;.
operators are instructed in the proper use of these odor control measures..
4. The Grantee agrees to include a requirement in the construction
contracts that every attempt will be made to retain natural vegetation
in areas of construction, particularly in areas that need not be left
open for operation and maintenance purposes.
5. The Grantee agrees to conduct additional archeological survey
work required by the Louisiana State Historical Preservation Officer
during Step 2 planning to insure that no archeological resources are
adversely affected by the projects.
275
------- |