Port Of Beaumont Case Summary
The email received from the USACE included comments regarding the alternatives analysis, a request for details of the Port’s SWPPP, and information regarding the fill that might be used on this project. Our responses to these comments are included below.
1. The USACE stated that the revised alternatives analysis that was submitted as part of Lanier’s response to the Public Notice comments did not appear to sufficiently address the EPA’s comments. Specifically, the USACE provided the following list of comments and questions for consideration:
a. Start by looking at what property can be reasonably obtained for the same type of project and all options are open if a tract contains less wetland that a proposed track, even if it is not owned by the applicant. …show more content…
b. What are the existing boundaries that ‘define’ the ‘Port of Beaumont’ territory, service area, etc.?
The existing Port of Beaumont facilities includes property on both the North and South banks of the Neches River in Beaumont, TX. A map depicting these facilities has been attached for your reference. One additional property owned by the Port of Beaumont that is not shown on this map is further downstream to the East beyond Gerdau Ameristeel, and this property was considered in the revised Alternatives Analysis as Offsite Alternative #1.
c. What is the minimum size required for the proposed project?
The minimum size area required for the proposed project is approximately 24 acres. This area is approximate and may vary depending on the routing of piperack and roadway that may be required to access the facility.
d. You will want to address where these wetlands are predominantly located relative to those being proposed for
1. The USACE stated that the revised alternatives analysis that was submitted as part of Lanier’s response to the Public Notice comments did not appear to sufficiently address the EPA’s comments. Specifically, the USACE provided the following list of comments and questions for consideration:
a. Start by looking at what property can be reasonably obtained for the same type of project and all options are open if a tract contains less wetland that a proposed track, even if it is not owned by the applicant. …show more content…
b. What are the existing boundaries that ‘define’ the ‘Port of Beaumont’ territory, service area, etc.?
The existing Port of Beaumont facilities includes property on both the North and South banks of the Neches River in Beaumont, TX. A map depicting these facilities has been attached for your reference. One additional property owned by the Port of Beaumont that is not shown on this map is further downstream to the East beyond Gerdau Ameristeel, and this property was considered in the revised Alternatives Analysis as Offsite Alternative #1.
c. What is the minimum size required for the proposed project?
The minimum size area required for the proposed project is approximately 24 acres. This area is approximate and may vary depending on the routing of piperack and roadway that may be required to access the facility.
d. You will want to address where these wetlands are predominantly located relative to those being proposed for