With the widening of the Panama Canal scheduled to be completed in 2014, Port Everglades and other East Coast harbors have drawn up expansion plans to accommodate the huge freighters expected to arrive from China and other Asian countries.
But the Port Everglades project, which would destroy mangroves and part of a coral reef, faces serious obstacles. An initial draft of an environmental impact statement by the Army Corps of Engineers, obtained by the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, has been savaged by state and federal environmental agencies, which say it dramatically understates the likely harm to corals, seagrass and endangered species.
The Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission and National Marine Fisheries Service have both threatened to withdraw as cooperating agencies in the environmental review unless they receive a more complete mapping of the reef and detailed plans to mitigate the damage.
The wildlife conservation commission sharply disputed the Corps' assertion that the expansion won't harm manatees. The port, which includes the warm-water discharge of the Florida Power & Light plant, is a "very important habitat for the Atlantic manatee population," the commission said. The sea mammals would lose habitat through the destruction of seagrass and mangroves, and construction work and arrival of larger ships would "increase the risk of injury and death."
Although the Port Everglades project would destroy at least 15 acres of coral reef through blasting and dredging, the Corps statement avoids referring to the habitat as coral reef, preferring the words "hardbottom," "terrace," and "relic reef," several agencies noted.
This choice of terminology is "incorrect, inappropriate and gives the impression that the USACE [Corps] is trying to diminish the value of the coral reef," wrote Chantal Collier, a biologist with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection.
She called it a "gross oversight" that the Corps failed to survey the area for elkhorn and staghorn coral, which were recently declared threatened species by the federal government. And she described as "conjecture" the Corps' assertion that sponges and sea fans would recolonize dredged areas.
Vladimir Kosmynin, environmental consultant for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, wrote that the Corps' document lacks sufficient data on the distribution of corals so that "evaluation of environmental impacts is impossible." Even with the information supplied, he wrote, "the projected impacts appear to be enormous."The National Marine Fisheries Service said the Corps asserts without evidence that its plan for blasting on the ocean floor won't harm sea turtles. The fisheries service disagreed with the Corps' assertion that the project won't harm the endangered smalltooth sawfish.
The Environmental Protection Agency said the Corps failed to give adequate weight to alternatives to expanding the port for larger ships, such as building off-shore cargo and petroleum terminals.
Steve Ross, project manager for the Corps, said the draft was a preliminary, admittedly incomplete document not meant for publication. He said what the Corps called the reef wasn't important, so long as everyone agreed on the affected area. Asked about other criticisms, he said, "Those comments are being evaluated by the team, and they'll respond to those comments."
The Corps oversees the maintenance and improvement of the nation's seaports, among many other tasks. The agency has been heavily criticized by other government agencies that say it offers overly rosy analyses of proposed projects in order to get them approved.
A 2006 report by the General Accountability Office found that Corps studies for four other projects were "fraught with errors, mistakes and miscalculations." It said the Corps "understated costs and overstated benefits, and therefore did not provide a reasonable basis for decision-making."
Phil Allen, director of Port Everglades, said the port needs the expansion to remain competitive.
"We're under the gun because we're facing an imminent expansion of the Panama Canal by 2014," Allen said. "Every other port on the East Coast is gearing up for this because of the additional cargo that will move through the Panama Canal."
The Broward County Commission, which would ultimately have to approve the project, will meet 5 p.m. Tuesday to discuss an element of the plan that would destroy about 12 acres of mangroves to expand cargo berths.
The cost of the Port Everglades project has been estimated at $320 million, although that figure is a few years old. Funding would be split between the federal government, the state and county, although any county funds would come from port businesses, not ordinary taxpayers, Allen said.
If the project wins approval from the Corps, county commission and Congress, construction could begin in 2012, according to the Corps.
David Fleshler can be reached at email@example.com or 954-356-4535.