SPN-2019-00151 City of Monterey’s Municipal Wharves I and II Structural Maintenance Program

WATERWAY AND LOCATION: The RGP 32 program affects the area within Monterey Harbor, within the Monterey Bay, including the two municipal wharves, Wharf 1 (aka Fisherman’s Wharf) and Wharf 2. As shown in Figure 1, the two wharves are located in the Monterey Harbor, in the City and County of Monterey, California (Latitude: 36.605564°N, Longitude: 121.892442ºW, for the northwest corner of Wharf I and Latitude: 36.601922ºN, Longitude: -121.889656°W, for the southeast corner of Wharf II.

EXISTING CONDITIONS: Fisherman’s Wharf (Figure 2) is the western of the two wharves, and extends approximately 700 feet into the Harbor, and consists of  2.3 acres of pile-supported structures. Wharf 2 is the larger of the two wharves and demarcates the eastern boundary of the Monterey Harbor, extending 1,500 feet into the harbor, comprising approximately 2.5 acres of pile-supported structures. According to a 2024 Wharf 1 Inspection and Assessment Report, the overall condition of Fisherman’s Wharf is poor, requiring maintenance repairs to the main boardwalk, multiple concessions, the East-West Finger Pier Structure, the mooring structures and the Western Flyer Floats. According to a 2024 Wharf 2 Condition Survey Report, Wharf 2 is also in poor condition and requires maintenance repairs to the boat docks, concession gangways (specifically, LouLou’s Griddle gangway-support piles), and the asphalt deck.  

PROJECT PURPOSE:

Basic: The basic project purpose is to provide an efficient permitting process for maintenance and repair activities on existing municipal wharf facilities.

Overall: The overall project purpose is to provide a more efficient, streamlined approach to permitting maintenance and repair activities for the pile-supported Monterey Municipal Wharf structures that would restore the original capacity of the wharves while providing safe and reliable access to the existing wharf structures, provide greater predictability and time- and cost-efficiencies associated with permitting, and ensure minimal environmental impacts.

PROPOSED WORK: The RGP 32 currently authorizes the following maintenance activities on the two wharf structures, which have been described in greater detail when the RGP 32 was originally noticed on May 3, 2019:

• In-water activities including foundation (pile) repairs and replacement, pile sleeves, wrap repairs, friction collars, encasement repairs, concrete block foundations, fender and/or guide pile replacements; and
• Above-water activities, including framing repairs and or replacements such as timber cap beams, timber stringers, miscellaneous framing and concrete repairs. In addition, utility relocations as needed on the structures.

The maintenance activities are performed on skiffs, floats, temporary scaffolding or from the wharf deck. Pile sleeve repairs and wrap repairs may require the use of divers.

AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION: The applicant has provided the following information in support of efforts to avoid and/or minimize impacts to the aquatic environment: The RGP 32 has developed and implemented best management practices (BMPs) and avoidance and minimization measures to protect the aquatic environment. These measures include water quality BMPs to prevent releases of construction materials or hazardous materials and wildlife protection measures, and are summarized in the attached Monterey Wharves Structural Maintenance Program Compiled List of Measures (attached).

COMPENSATORY MITIGATION: The applicant has provided the following explanation why compensatory mitigation should not be required: The repairs have been designed to repair and/or replace existing structures without requiring additional fill or over-water structure extent.

CULTURAL RESOURCES: The Corps evaluated the undertaking pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) utilizing its existing program-specific regulations and procedures along with 36 CFR Part 800. The Corps’ program-specific procedures include 33 CFR 325, Appendix C, and revised interim guidance issued in 2005 and 2007, respectively. The District Engineer consulted district files and records and the latest published version of the National Register of Historic Places and initially determined that:

Historic properties (i.e., properties listed in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places), are present within the Corps’ permit area; however, the undertaking will have no adverse effect on these historic properties. The Corps requested, and received, concurrence by letter dated April 9, 2020, from the SHPO on the original issuance of the RGP 32.

The District Engineer’s final eligibility and effect determinations were based upon coordination with the SHPO, as appropriate and required, and with full consideration given to the proposed undertaking’s potential direct and indirect effects on historic properties within the Corps-identified permit area.

ENDANGERED SPECIES: The Corps has performed an initial review of the application, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) West Coast Region Section 7 Mapper, and the NMFS Critical Habitat Mapper to determine if any threatened, endangered, proposed, or candidate species, as well as the proposed and final designated critical habitat may occur in the vicinity of the proposed project. Based on this initial review, the Corps has made a preliminary determination that the proposed project may affect the following species:

• Southern sea otter (Enhydra lutris nereis)
• Western snowy plover (Charadrius nivosus nivosus)
• Black Abalone (Haliotis cracherodii)
• Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)
• Coho Salmon (O. kisutch)
• CCC DPS steelhead (O. mykiss)
• SCC DPS steelhead (O. mykiss)
• Green Sturgeon (Acipenser medirostris)
• Leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea)
• Southern resident DPS killer whale (Orcinus orca)
• Fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus)
• Blue whale (B. musculus)
• Sei whale (B. borealis)
• Humpback whale (Megaptera novaengliae)
• Sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus)
• North Pacific right whale (Eubalaena glacialis)
• Gray whale (Eschrictius robustus)
• Guadalupe fur seal (Arctocephalus townsendi)
• Loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta)
• Green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas)
• Olive Ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys olivacea)

By letters dated October 25, 2019, and January 30, 2020, the USFWS and the NMFS, respectively, concurred that the activities covered under RGP 32 may affect, but are not likely to adversely affect, these species.

Pursuant to Section 7 ESA, any required consultation with the Service(s) will be conducted in accordance with 50 CFR part 402.

This notice serves as request to the National Marine Fisheries Services and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for any additional information on whether any listed or proposed to be listed endangered or threatened species or critical habitat may be present in the area which would be affected by the proposed activity.

ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT: Pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 1996, the Corps reviewed the project area, examined information provided by the applicant, and consulted available species information.

The Corps initiated Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) consultation for the initial issuance of the RGP 32. Our initial determination was that the proposed action may adversely affect EFH and/or fisheries managed by Fishery Management Councils and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Reissuance of the RGP 32 would have minor adverse effects resulting from underwater pile driving, water impacts due to increased turbidity, accidental or incidental releases of cement grout or other materials, and temporary disturbance of the benthic substrate. The effects of the project are determined to be minor. These habitats are utilized by the following species and their various life stages:

Our final determination relative to project impacts and the need for mitigation measures is subject to review by and coordination with the National Marine Fisheries Service.

NAVIGATION: The proposed structure or activity is not located in the vicinity of a federal navigation channel.

SECTION 408: The applicant does not require permission under Section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 USC 408) because the activity, in whole or in part, would not alter, occupy, or use a Corps Civil Works project.

WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION: Water Quality Certification may be required from the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. A WQC was issued for the original issuance of the RGP 32 on November 20, 2019, and amended on October 11, 2024.

NOTE: This public notice is being issued based on information furnished by the applicant. This information has not been verified or evaluated to ensure compliance with laws and regulation governing the regulatory program. The geographic extent of aquatic resources within the proposed project area that either are, or are presumed to be, within the Corps jurisdiction has been verified by Corps personnel.

EVALUATION: The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable impact including cumulative impacts of the proposed activity on the public interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of important resources. The benefits, which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the proposal, must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered including cumulative impacts thereof; among these are conservation, economics, esthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, historical properties, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, floodplain values, land use, navigation, shoreline erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food, and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of property ownership, and in general, the needs and welfare of the people. Evaluation of the impact of the activity on the public interest will also include application of the guidelines promulgated by the Administrator, EPA, under authority of Section 404(b) of the Clean Water Act or the criteria established under authority of Section 102(a) of the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. A permit will be granted unless its issuance is found to be contrary to the public interest.

COMMENTS: The Corps is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, State, and local agencies and officials; Indian Tribes; and other Interested parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps to determine whether to issue, modify, condition, or deny a permit for this proposal. To make this determination, comments are used to assess impacts to endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects, and the other public interest factors listed above. Comments are used in the preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) and/or an Environmental Impact Statement pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Comments are also used to determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public interest of the proposed activity.

The San Francisco District will receive written comments on the proposed work, as outlined above, until January 19, 2026. Comments should be submitted electronically via the Regulatory Request System (RRS) at https://rrs.usace.army.mil/rrs or to Frances Malamud-Roam at Frances.P.Malamud-Roam@usace.army.mil. Alternatively, you may submit comments in writing to:

Commander, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District
Attention: Frances Malamud-Roam, Regulatory Division, CESPN-RGS

450 Golden Gate Avenue, 4th Floor

San Francisco, California 94102

Please refer to the permit application number in your comments.

Any person may request, in writing, within the comment period specified in this notice, that a public hearing be held to consider the application. Requests for public hearings shall state, with particularity, the reasons for holding a public hearing. Requests for a public hearing will be granted, unless the District Engineer determines that the issues raised are insubstantial or there is otherwise no valid interest to be served by a hearing.