Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Bank Stabilization Final Environmental Impact Statement & Feasibility Report 1982
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ALASKA DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O. BOX 7002 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99510 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF: BANK STABILIZATION BETHEL, ALASKA FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND FEASIBILITY REPORT MARCH 1982 SYNOPSIS Bethel is located on the north bank of the Kuskokwim River, 86 miles inland, 540 air miles southwest of Fairbanks and 400 miles west of Anchorage. Bethel is the major educational, economic, social, and cultural community in southwest Alaska serving an area larger than the State of Oregon. The economy of Bethel is based on commercial fishing, transportation and government. For the last 40 years the riverbank at Bethel has been seriously eroded by the Kuskokwim River. This erosion has caused the loss of valuable waterfront land, roads, and utilities and has forced a number of businesses to move back from the river, their economic lifeline. With continued erosion, full development of the fishery and transportation industry cannot occur. Congress, having knowledge of the problem, directed the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to study the problem and develop engineering solutions that are economically and environmentally acceptable. This report identifies a potentially feasible plan for stabilizing approximately 5,000 feet of bank at Bethel using rock riprap. The total estimated project cost is $14,700,000. The annual cost including Operation and maintenance 1s-$ “O73, 000; the annual benef i ts are pT, 494, 400 resulting in al. 17 benefit-cost ratio. Ail Je 7 Meet 7-7) = me +? Wee i | i J ey ay J / a, A ale aneeen lac Wel / LE / Af “Log ft /) L 7 pa 3 é 4 Co By _ Yl. fm oa d 4 ae mt “o« [ et Mil f 0 7 years er qo o 7 j R: 11/82 PERTINENT DATA SHEET Bethel Bank Stabalization, Bethel, Alaska SELECTED PLAN Bank Protection Using Rock Riprap Quantities Rock 179,000 cubic yards Filter Fabric 595,000 square feet Silty Sand Fill 29,000 cubic yards Excavation 120,000 cubic yards Grass Seeding and Jute Mat 555,000 square feet Maintenance Rock 11,000 cubic yards Project Cost First Cost $14, 700,000 O& (every 5th year) 250,000 Average Annual Cost 1,273,000 Average Annual Benefit 1,494,400 Cost-Benefit Ratio 1.17 ii R: 11/82 tee ~~200" (APPROXIMATE) aa TYPICAL LOW BANK STABILIZATION ne TYPICAL HIGH BANK STABILIZATION Item FINAL FEASIBILITY REPORT BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION TABLE OF CONTENTS THE STUDY AND REPORT Purpose and Authority Scope of the Study Study Participants and Coordination The Report Prior Studies and Reports RESOURCES AND ECONOMY OF THE STUDY AREA Environmental Setting Environmental Resources Government Transportation Commercial Fishing Economy of the Study Area Emp loyment Population PROBLEMS AND NEEDS PLAN Physical Bank Erosion Process Permafrost Configuration Along A River Future River Migration Status of Previous Bank Stabilization Efforts Public Concerns FORMULATION Objective of the Investigation Background Information Alternative Solutions Executive Order 11988 ECONOMIC EVALUATION PLAN Summary EVALUATION National Economic Development (NED) Plan Least Environmentally Damaging (LED) Plan Social Well Being (SWB) Regional Development (RD) Selected Plan iv Pm NN R: 11/82 U.S. TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont) FISH & WILDLIFE RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE TO USF & WS RECOMMENDATIONS DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITY CONCLUSIONS RECOMMENDATION LIST OF FIGURES Number Title NOOB WMH— 10 1 12 13 14 15 16 7 18 Location and Vicinity Map Bethel, Alaska Bank Sloughing Ice Wedge Cavity Removal of Vegetation Talik Configuration Estimated Channel Configuration at 6 points in time over a 130 year period Timber Bulkhead Failure near Brown's Slough Timber Bulkhead Failure along Town Front Local Revetment Program Local Erosion Control Submarine Net Installation Submarine Net Failure Typical Sheet Pile Wall Section Circular Sheet Pile Cell with Rock Toe Protection Circular Sheet Pile Cell with Concrete Mattress Toe Protection River Diversion Centerline Diversion Channel R: 56 57 64 64 65 11/82 Item TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Abstract Table of Contents Number A B C mo an Number ' 1 90ONwWY WOONNWNNADNHSWM— tet et wn oO APPENDIXES Title Information, Correspondence and Comments to the Report Bathymetry Survey on the Kuskokwim River at Bethel Alaska Foundation and Exploration Drilling Results and Materials Investigation Engineering Analysis U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Final Coordination Act Report Section 404(b)(1) Evaluation under the Clean Water Act Statement Recipients LIST OF TABLES Title Page EIS-1 EIS-2 EIS-5 Highest Known Stages and Discharges in Order of Magnitude 7 Population Erosion Rates Concrete Mattress Bank Protection Cost Estimate Bank Protection with Rock Cost Estimate River Diversion with Bank Protection Cost Estimate Benefits at City Dock Benefits at Standard 011 Dock Real Estate Impacted by Erosion Losses Under the Without Project Condition Annual Benefit Calculation (Real Estate) NED Employment Benefits Project Benefits and Costs Benefits with the DER Erosion Rate Summary Comparison of Final Alternative Plans System of Accounts vi R: 11/82 FINAL FEASIBILITY REPORT BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION BETHEL, ALASKA THE STUDY AND REPORT PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY In response to requests by the city of Bethel, Congress authorized the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to study and report on the bank erosion problem. A Senate Resolution by the Committee on Environment and Public Works, adopted 9 September 1977, requests the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors to review the reports of the Chief of Engineers on Interim Report No. 7, Yukon and Kuskokwim River Basins, Alaska, published as House Document No. 218, 88th Congress and on the Bethel Bank Stabilization and Flood Control Report transmitted to Congress on 4 December 1973 and other pertinent reports with a view to determining whether any modification of the recommendations contained therein are advisable at the present time, with particular reference to the provision of bank stabilization improvements at and in the vicinity of Bethel, Alaska. This report is a partial response to the Senate Resolution, addressing the erosion problem STUDY SCOPE The area of study is concentrated in the immediate vicinity of Bethel. The effects of bank erosion on Bethel and how this erosion at Bethel could affect the greater area of the Kuskokwim Valley is examined. The scope is aimed at formulating and assessing all available means of bank stabilization, screening out the alternatives that can be eliminated based on the lack of economic feasibility or environmental impacts and further assessing those alternatives that appear feasible. The study presents an examination of the economic, social, and environmental conditions of the Bethel study area in accordance with the multiobjective planning process. A review of Bethel's flooding problems will be the subject of a future report. STUDY PARTICIPANTS AND COORDINATION The Corps of Engineers has primary responsibility for conducting the study, consolidating information from other agencies, formulating the plans, and preparing the report. Throughout the preparation of the report close coordination was maintained with Federal, State and local agencies. Those agencies providing information, assistance, and advice include but are not limited to: R: 11/82 City of Bethel, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Guard at Bethel, Bureau of Land Management, Environmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Alaska State Clearinghouse, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and Department of Community and Regional Affairs. The Planning and Citizens Committee on Erosion Control, a group of concerned Bethel citizens and city planners, also provided valuable aid and information relating to value of property in the area affected by river erosion. A public meeting was held in Bethel on 5 March 1980. The main purpose of the meeting was to explain the Corps' progress. Problems associated with the bank erosion, the physical cause of the erosion process, and the alternatives formulated to solve the erosion problem were discussed. The public meeting participants did not agree to adopt any one alternative, however, they did agree that something must be done quickly or the Kuskokwim River will literally erode away the city of Bethel. THE REPORT The findings of this study are presented in a main report with seven accompanying appendixes. The main report includes background information for the study area, problem identification, plan formulation, plan eval- uation and economic analysis. Also incorporated into the main report is the final Environmental Impact Statement. PRIOR STUDIES AND REPORT Corps of Engineers Reports 1. Yukon and Kuskokwim River Basins, Alaska Feasibility Report For Navigation Improvements, 23 February 1977. The purpose of this study was to investigate the lower Yukon River and Kuskokwim River, Alaska, to determine whether navigational improvements by the Federal Government are justified. 2. Review on Reports on Kuskokwim River Basin Alaska, Bethel Stabilization and Flood Control Bethel, Alaska, September 1970. This report reviews and updates Bethel's flood and erosion problems. 3. Interim Report No. 7, Yukon and Kuskokwim River Basins. This report contains the history of Bethel's erosion problem, along with summaries of economic and engineering analyses. 4, Plan Formulation Document and Environmental Working Paper, Bethel Harbor Study Bethel, Alaska, March 1980. The report was prepared to evaluate the possibility of constructing a smal] boat harbor at Bethel. 5. Flood Plain Information, Kuskokwim River at Bethel, Alaska, December 1958. This report relates to the flood situation along the Kuskokwim River in the vicinity of Bethel, Alaska. It was prepared at the request of the city of Bethel to aid in the solution of local flooding problems and to suggest the best utilization of land subject to overflow. Other Reports 1. Bethel, Alaska, Comprehensive Plan, prepared by the Alaska State Housing Authority, Spring 1969. The basic recommendation of this com- prehensive plan is that Bethel's residential area be gradually relocated to lands above the flood level. 2. Comprehensive Study Report for a Medium Draft Port Facility at Bethel ATaska, prepared for the city of Bethel, Alaska, by Harold e Galliett, Jr. and George C. Silides, November 1971. The purpose of the report was to show the need for a medium draft port to determine the permanent docking facility best suited to answer Bethel's needs and to lower the cost of living of the region's populace. 3. Crisis Report on the Bethel Waterfront to the House Committee on Public Works U.S. Congress, prepared for the city of Bethel, Alaska, by Harold H. Galliett, Jr. and George C. Silides, August 1971. The people of Bethel and the region are almost wholly dependent on waterborne commerce for their goods. The wooden bulkhead which has served as a rudimentary docking facility since 1966 has been damaged by near flood stage waters and is on the verge of destruction. Not only is the docking capability destroyed but, rapid erosion previously arrested by the bulk- head is threatening the safety of the entire waterfront portion of the village. 4. Report to United States Army Corp of Engineers, Alaska District Engineer, December 1977 with Calendar Year 1978 Supplement on the Cost/Benefit of a Permanent Erosion Project at Bethel, Alaska, prepared by: city of Bethel, Office of Planning and Citizens Committee on Erosion Control, December 1977, with supplement in 1978. The purpose of the report was to provide economic data on real estate property at Bethel that is threatened by the eroding banks of the Kuskokwim River. RESOURCES AND ECONOMY OF THE STUDY AREA Bethel serves as the supply center for regional distribution to the rest of the Kuskokwim and Yukon basins. Within the lower Yukon and Kuskokwim River basins, the population is sparsely settled, with the major population centers located along the rivers. The main transpor- tation corridors are the rivers, which are a direct link to and a neces- sity for the economic development and survival of a community. This is especially true of Bethel where the majority of goods are brought in by ocean going barges and then distributed by river to the various communi- ties in the region. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING General The city of Bethel is located on the north bank of the Kuskokwim River, 86 miles inland from Kuskokwim Bay, 540 air miles southwest of Fairbanks and 400 miles west of Anchorage (Figure 1). The community of Bethel is the central location in a 100,000 square mile area of south- western Alaska which contains 48 villages and 16,000 people. It serves as the principal trading center in the Kuskokwim and lower Yukon River basins and has grown from a small trading post into a hub of commerce for the area. It is also the transportation center for a large portion of western and interior Alaska for both air and waterborne traffic. South- west Alaska's remoteness from Anchorage and Fairbanks, Alaska's two major cities, has been a major factor in the growing importance of Bethel to the regional economy. Physical Characteristics of the Area Over the centuries the Yukon and Kuskokwim Rivers have shaped the land and waters of southwest Alaska. These rivers deposited alluvial materials to form the lower Yukon and Kuskokwim River valleys and the huge coastal deltas. The river's constant meandering across the valleys’ vast plains has caused ponds, sloughs and oxbow lakes to form. The region has little topographic relief except for occasionally low ridges caused by wind erosion or flooding. In the past, glaciers occupied most of the region, and it is still underlain by permafrost extending to 450 feet in thickness in some places. Bethel is located on the banks of the Kuskokwim River in the Kuskokwim Delta, a vast area of tundra and tree- less plain covered with moss and low brush (Figure 2). The constantly changing course of the river poses a severe erosion problem for Bethel and other communities located along the river. Tidal Effect Bethel has an observed diurnal tide range of 4 feet. At low-flow stage in the river the highest and lowest estimated tides are +7 feet MLLW (Mean Lower Low Water) and -3 feet MLLW respectively. As the river flow increases, tidal range decreases. Appreciable tidal effect dis- appears with the occurrence of the 20-year return frequency flood. BETHEL, a BETHEL MUNICIPAI AIRPORT yay eT C FIGURE: | § LOCATION & VICINITY MAP a SE IA BS AIT AR tT MO EE ao Low tide has been observed to be approximately elevation -1.5 feet MLLW during the lowest flows of the midsummer months. River Discharge Normal discharge in the Kuskokwim River varies from 50,000 to 200,000 cfs (cubic feet per second) during most of the summer season, with the average discharge estimated to be about 60,000 cfs. Flow during winter months decreases to approximately 15,000 cfs. The water of the Kuskokwim has high glacier flour concentration that results in water that is murky and silty. The average date for river freezeup at Bethel is 29 October; the average date of the breakup is 15 May. Table 1 lists known crest elevations and year of occurence for floods on the Kuskokwim River at Bethel, between 1941 and 1982. TABLE 1 -HIGHEST KNOWN STAGES AND DISCHARGES IN ORDER OF MAGNITUDE Date Elevation Estimated Order of of Water Peak No. Crest Surface (MLLW) Discharge (cfs) ] Spring 41 (1) 16.5 - 2 Spring 63 (1) 15.6 - a 5 June 64 (1) 15.5 - 4 Spring 74 (1) 15.0 - 5 9 June 64 14.3 579,200 6 13 May 67 (1) 13.7 - 4, 1 Sep 63 12.5 446,200 8 11 May 57 11.5 384, 200 9 5 June 52 11.5 384,200 10 4 Sep 51 11.2 373,800 im 4 Sep 53 10.3 330,400 12 27 May 62 9.9 310, 300 13 3 Oct 65 9.1 279,200 14 23 Aug 67 8.8 269,900 15 5 Oct 65 8.4 254,100 16 31 Aug 59 8.3 251,200 17 19 Sep 61 8.1 246,700 18 25 Sep 54 8.1 246,700 19 3 Sep 55 7.5 227,500 20 31 May 60 7.4 223,100 21 22 Aug 56 5.5 174,300 22 16 Jun 66 5.4 171,400 ct a oOo (1) Affected by ice jam, floating ice and/or Climatology Bethel's climate is more maritime than continental in character; however, there are usually two periods of the year when the area is 7 R: 11/82 affected by continental climatic influences. In June and July tempera- tures in the area increase noticeably under the influence of warmer con- tinental air that forms over the broad valley during the long hours of arctic daylight. Around the latter part of December and early January, during prolonged hours of winter darkness, cold, clear, continental air becomes dominant. Extremes of temperature registered during these periods of dominant continental climate range a total of 142° with a low of -52° F in January to a high 90° F in June. The last date of freezing temperature in spring averages 30 May, and the average date of the first freezing temperature in autumn occurs on 9 September, which results in a growing season of slightly more than 100 days. Mean annual temperature for the Bethel area is 29.1° F. During the movement of low pressure storm fronts northeastward into the Bering Sea, it is not uncommon for wind velocities in the Bethel area to exceed 70 mph. With the winter season, strong southerly winds at times produce a pronounced foehn (chinook) effect. At such times, the temperature has increased almost 50° F in less than 24 hours under warm-wind conditions. Annual precipitation averages nearly 19 inches. August is usually the wettest month, with an average of slightly over 4 inches of precipitation. The greatest monthly rainfall on record is 12.37 inches. Snowfall averages about 60 inches per year. ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES Bethel is located on the eastern margin of one of the most important waterfowl habitats in Alaska, the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. The most pro- ductive habitat is located 50 miles west from Bethel and includes that portion of the delta extending from the coast to approximately 10 miles inland. Approximately 138 species of birds occur in the aquatic and up- land habitats near Bethel. The extent that waterfowl and shore birds utilize sloughs, bogs, and intertidal habitats of the Kuskokwim River in the vicinity of Bethel is undocumented. Occasionally waterfowl have been found nesting on Brown's Slough. Habitat in the immediate vicinity of Bethel is not considered heavily used by waterfowl] due to chronic distur- bances associated with riverboat and aircraft operations during open water season, Although few big game mammals occur in abundance near Bethel, small mammals characteristic of moist tundra inhabit the region. The Kuskokwim River serves as a migratory corridor for all five species of Pacific salmon. These salmon do not spawn in the lakes or sloughs near Bethel. GOVERNMENT Bethel is a “second class" city under the statutes of the State of Alaska. The city has a Council-City Manager form of government and is eligible for State marine fuel tax revenue sharing and for State harbor and marine construction revenue bonds. Bethel has utilized its taxation authority to set a 3 percent local sales tax. The city has the authority and ability to acquire and own land; however, Bethel's efforts to adopt the right of eminent domain has failed thus far. In lieu of condemning the land, the property owners could provide easements. But the city of Bethel would be responsible under a cooperation agreement for providing the necessary land and rights-of-way. Many governmental agencies have located their regional services at Bethel. The Public Health Service recently completed a $37 million hospital which replaced the existing facility. There are four schools in Bethel with an average daily attendance of approximately 1,760 students. The high school is regional, and a community college was established in 1970. Legal and protective services include a District Court, Alaska State Troopers area office, city police, and city fire department. The regional status of Bethel is reinforced by the presence of area offices and field offices for many other Federal and State agencies. TRANSPORTATION Bethel is unique in that it is the only Alaska river port capable of receiving oceangoing barges. But transportation is complicated because Bethel is connected to major supply and market centers by water and air traffic only. Although a highway system access to the Kuskokwim area has been proposed, such connection is considered many years in the future. Water The waterfront area of Bethel is the key to a successful distribution center for the surrounding villages. Bethel serves as a regional trans- portation center for approximately 48 villages since it is located at the head of deep draft navigation on the Kuskokwim River. A medium-draft port facility was built along the city's riverfront near Brown's Slough in 1975. Goods, including gas, oi], food, clothing, and construction materials are all brought into Bethel for redistribution to outlying villages. Generally, river shipments of bulk goods are transported by medium-draft barges. General freight and bulk oi] moves to Bethel by barge from Anchorage and Kodiak. Both Crowley and Foss have three yearly trips scheduled. The BIA ship North Star makes two trips annually carrying general cargo and packaged freight. During 1979, 72,400 tons of freight moved to Bethel. Approximately 5,000 tons were transported to other villages by commercial freight operators. It is estimated that another 8,000 tons were distributed by aircraft or private river boat. A total of 11,000,000 gallons of oil arrived in Bethel in 1977 and over 6,000,000 gallons were reloaded and taken from Bethel to villages beyond via the Kuskokwim River. The unstable riverbank at Bethel presents a complex picture for receiving and distributing freight. Air Wien Air Alaska is the main scheduled airline servicing the Bethel area. Seven charter carriers with a fleet of 135 planes also service smaller communities within a 200 mile radius of Bethel. During winter months the outer villages become dependent on ski-mounted small planes. During summer constant bank erosion presents a serious problem to both boats and float planes trying to use the waterfront as a base of operation. R: 11/82 COMMERCIAL FISHING Commercial fishing in the Bethel area has developed in the last two decades. Prior to 1960, the Kuskokwim River salmon fisheries were uti- lized primarily for subsistence fishing. Increased availability of tide water transportation after 1960 made commercial fishing much more econo- mical. Presently, most of the salmon catch is partially processed by the six floating processors and a newly constructed land based processing plant that operate in the Bethel area. The rough dressed fish are transported to processors in Anchorage and Kodiak where the processing is completed. Bethel's 1977 total salmon harvest amounted to $4,173,000 paid into the local economy. Local fishermen and processors maintain that this value could have been as high as $6,000,000 if a local freezing facility had been available. Developers are hesitant to construct shore based facilities due to the unstable condition of the riverfront. ECONOMY OF THE STUDY AREA Bethel's centralized location among the Eskimo villages of the Kuskokwim-Yukon has led to its development as a transportation center. The transportation industry is a main source of employment for the area, along with Federal, State and local government and commercial fishing. Both transportation and commercial fishing can be expected to con- tinue to contribute significantly to the Bethel area economy. However, both industries will require adequate shore based facilities to fully reach their potential. Development of such facilities depends largely on the availability of suitable construction sites, which are presently limited by the ongoing erosion problem. EMPLOYMENT Government, for many years, was the major employer providing 85 per- cent of the jobs. Currently only about 40 percent of the employment at Bethel is attributable to government jobs and the remainder are employed in transportation, retail trade, and communications. Construction and fish processing activities provide important seasonal job sources. Many residents of the surrounding villages migrate to Bethel for summer work and for the general advantages found in a more diversified economy. The U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration has designated Bethel as an area with “substantial and persistent unemploy- ment." The most recent unemployment rate in 1978, was measured to be approximately 12 percent. The average monthly wage in Bethel was only 55 percent of the statewide average in 1978, which was the lowest in Alaska. Subsistence fishing and hunting is an important supplement to low incomes. Data collected for the city's 5 year Comprehensive Study indicated that 47 percent of the city's residents engaged in subsistence fishing, and nearly a quarter of the respondents indicated that 50 percent or more of their food was supplied through subsistence activities. 10 R: 11/82 POPULATION Tne population of Bethel has grown from 1,258 in 1960, to 3,950 in 1978 and is projected to be 14,000 by the year 2000 a 6 percent annual rate of growth. The market area served by Bethel is not expected to grow at the same rate. This indicates that some of Bethel's population growth would result from migration of people from the area's villages. People may be attracted to Bethel in search of employment and social interchange. Table 2 illustrates the rapid, steady growth which Bethel has been experiencing. All indications are that Bethel will continue to grow at a rapid rate in the future. TABLE 2 POPULATION Year Total Population Estimated Annual Growth Percent 1960 1,258 nen nn nn 1970 2,416 9.2 1973 2,929 7.1 1975 3,200 4.6 1977 3,500 4.7 1978 3,950 12.9 Overall Increase 11.9 im} PROBLEMS & NEEDS Activity at Bethel is tiea directly to the use of the Kuskokwim River. The primary navigation uses are commodity shipments, subsistence and commercial fishing, and transportation. Goods are shipped to Bethel for redistribution to a region larger than the State of Oregon. The river serves aS the primary transportation link between outlying populations and Bethel. Shipment of goods is expected to increase with the regional population growth and as the city continues to develop as the regional distribution center. With the economic activity of Bethel so dependent on the Kuskokwim River and its river bank, flooding and streambank erosion are constant problems for the local people. As shown on Plate D-4, a portion of the city of Bethel is in the floodplain anda experiences periodic flooding as indicated in Table 1. The flooding occurs mainly during spring breakup on the Kuskokwim and has a minimal current. The 100-year event is estimated to cause flooding of up to seven feet on First and Second Avenues. The latest flood in 1974 resulted in 5 feet of water on First and Second Avenues and 3 feet over the city dock. This was approximately a 15-year event. However, since the existing development in the floodplain is built on piling, very little damage occured. The city of Bethel participates in the National Flood Insurance Program and enforces its buiiding codes in the floodplain. Therefore, new structures are expected to be located on pads or piling above 100-year flood levels, and would be protected from serious damage. Aaditionally, the Corps of Engineers has an ice jam alleviation program for this area that will reduce the flood hazard. Development will continue to occur in the floodplain because the river bank is the commercial bridge between Bethel and the surrounding 48 villages and outside points. Streambank erosion in arctic or subarctic regions is a severe threat to communities ana facilities located near rivers with erosion problems. lf permafrost is present ana the soils are a sandy silt, which is often the case, the streambanks become unstable as thawing occurs. Following the collapse of the streambank, the mechanical forces of stream current and wind carry the material away exposing new areas of frozen soil to thawing. The community of Bethel has had a major erosion problem for many years. wnen Bethel was first settled it occupied ground along what was a side stream of one of Alaska's major meandering rivers, the Kuskokwim River. Initially Bethel's waterfront was provided protection by a series of small islands. This changed in about 1939 when the riverbank started to erode. Today, Bethel is located along the principal channel of the river as a result of the erosion. PHYSICAL BANK EROSION PROCESS An important aspect of this bank erosion study is to define the erosion process. After this process is understood, alternatives can be formulated to halt the bank erosion. A typical meandering river (subjected only to erosion by river currents) exhibits a downstream migration of meanders with maximum erosion focused downstream of the midpoint of the bend. Most of the high rates of erosion at Bethel have occurred upstream and at the midpoint of the bend. Thus, processes other than normal fluvial processes are active in developing the erosion pattern at Betnel. Ne R 11/82 To understand why the normal erosion pattern is not followed, the physical and environmental conditions of the Kuskokwim River at Bethel were documented and analyzed. This analysis is covered in the following paragraphs. The southeastern exposure of the Kuskokwim riverbank at Bethel combined with a high steep bank results in direct sun exposure that rapidly melts the permafrost. Strong winds from the south-southwest combined with fetches of a mile or more cause significant wave action against the banks. Large amounts of boat and barge traffic produce even more wave action. Another agent of erosion is surface runoff as the rain drains off the bank eroding the exposed soils. The remainder soaks into the soil increasing its unit weight, which combined with melting of the permafrost, decreases its stability and leads to sloughing of the bank (Figure 3). Soil borings taken along the bank and upper reaches of the river bed inaicate that the materials are generally silty sand or sandy silt, and are frozen except for the top 10 to 20 feet. Occasional ice wedges or lenses are found. The exposure of an ice wedge or lense to the sun and elements can result in rapid melting that leaves a cavity in the bank (Figure 4). This leads to instability of the overlying materials and eventual sloughing. In those areas without ice wedges or lenses, the material does not appear to have a significant amount of ice. As the permafrost thaws, the fine-grained soil of the bank stabilizes at or near the angle of repose. This exposed surface material is dry, unconsolidated, and susceptable to erosion by winds and surface water runoff. A review of the Bethel channel cross sections indicates near-normal channel morphology for a meander bend. River velocity measurements taken at Bethel at three cross sections indicate a range of average velocities of 0.8 tps (feet per second) and 2.2 fps corresponding to high and low tides respectively. The velocity measurements were taken during a discharge of about 95,000 cfs. The average discharge is estimated to be 60,000 cfs. Average velocities are in the neighborhood of the critical velocities for erosion of the soils found at Bethel. The soils are uniform particles with a mean size of 0.1 mm, Flood discharges will have greater velocities and thus greater erosion capabilities. The occurrence of flood discharges for the Kuskokwim River were investigated by reviewing discharge records at the U.S. Geological Survey gaging station at Crooked Creek, which is located well upstream of the Bethel townsite. The discharge records indicate that the annual maximum flood could occur as either a snowmelt flow at breakup or as a summer storm flood. The significance of the timing of the flood lies in the thermal condition of the bank. During breakup, the banks thaw very little, receive very little if any wave action prior to the flood, and may be protected by ice frozen to the riverbed in the shallow waters along the bank (bottom fast ice). Most erosion occurs during summer when the banks have been thawed and acted upon by waves and rain. It is then that the bank sloughs into the channel making materials available for transport downstream. 13 R 11/82 Bank Sloughing Ice Wedge Cavity Figure 4: 14 Bank degradation is increased by removal of the natural vegetative cover which insulates the permafrost from direct exposure of the sun. Near the old Public Health Service Hospital is a portion of the riverbank that has experienced tremendous bank erosion because of stripping of the protective vegetative cover. Figure 5 illustrates the effects of the stripping activity. Ice as an agent of erosion is not likely to be significant since ice gouges more than a few feet in depth rarely occur. Bottom fast ice may carry only small amounts of sediments frozen to the bottom of the ice as it floats aownstream. The reasons for the physical erosion process were documented to develop alternatives for solving the problem. The main reasons for bank erosion at Bethel were found to be due to: wind-generated waves, degradation of the permafrost along the exposed banks, wind-driven rain, river velocity, and boat-generated waves. Bank erosion commences when wind drives waves onto the bank, eroding the toe. Rain, driven into the bank face by wind, coupled with the melting of the permafrost saturates the soil. Soil saturation ana toe erosion cause the bank to become unstable leading to the bank sloughing into the river. This is compounded when an ice wedge or lense is exposed and melts, which results in a cavity in the bank. The overlying materials become unstable, eventually slough down the bank and are transported downstream by the river. This leaves a new bank exposed to the waves and rain causing the cycle to be repeated. PERMAFROST CONFIGURATION ALONG A RIVER Normally, no permafrost exists beneath stable lakes and rivers because the water bodies promote thawing. This thawed area beneath a river or lake, called a talik, is curtain-shapea with the permafrost boundaries plunging steeply downward on either side of the water body. As a river migrates across the land surface, the talik beneath it also migrates. However, migration of the talik lags behind the leading bank because the rate of thawing decreases with depth. The permafrost graduaily reforms under the riverbed creating a talik with an S-shaped configuration. Migration of the river and accompanying talik across the valley is shown in Figure 6. Normally the thalweg, the deepest channel in a river, would be found adjacent to the outside bank. However, at Bethel, which is located on the outside bank of the Kuskokwim, the thalweg is nearer the center of the river. Permafrost found under the river seems to be retarding the thalwag migration and apparently limits the depth of scour Future River Migration Aerial photographs taken nine different times between 1952 and 197/ were compiled and reviewed to identify the historic bank jines. The historic bank lines drawn on an aerial mosaic, shown in Plate D-1, illustrate how the bank has eroded and changed over the years. Additionally, a review of the history of erosion was undertaken. 15 R 11/82 Figure 5: Removal of Vegetation 16 GROUND SURFACE 7 MS PERMARROTT E SLOW 7 RIVER a MIGRATION RIVER = RIVER a. MIGRATION a O°C_ ISOTHERM FAST RIVER MIGRATION FO PERMAFROST A FIGURE 6: TALIK CONFIGURATION Estimated channel configurations at Bethel for six periods of time over 130 years are shown in Figure 7. Tne block labeled 1870 reflects comments from local inhabitants that the channel fronting Bethel in 1890 could be waded across one generation earlier. A Moravian Missionary reported active bank erosion that threatened the mission in about 1884. In 1889 a surveyor who was working around the mission indicated that an island had built up in front of the bank. Perhaps the main channel in 1898 haa grown during the period reported and the island described refers to the long island between the channels. In 1915 the Coast and Geodetic Survey collected data on the Kuskokwim River near Bethel. The results of their survey are shown on the block labeled 1915. The next available documentation of a channel configuration is 1941. The process between 1915 and 1941 may have been a gradual erosion of the point bar in the main channel and the development of a small cutoff channel. By 1939 the island protecting Bethel had been completly eroded away. Between 1941 and 1979, the cutoff channel had enlarged and sediment deposition was occuring in the former main channel. This process will continue, producing a configuration similar to that labeled 2000. In an effort to establish the most probable erosion rate to occur during the next 50 years, three erosion rates were reviewed. These rates are shown in Table 3 below. Table 3 Erosion Rates Stationing i/ Maximum Average 2/ Decreasing 3/ ~ Historic Historic. Historic Erosion rate rate (HER) rate (DER) 0+00 to 6+00 2.5 1.4 0.7 6+00 to 20+00 15 6.9 1.5 20+00 to 36+00 10 9.9 3.3 36+00 to 40+00 25 16.0 3.3 40+00 to 45+00 15 5.6 3.3 1/ Stationing defined on Plate B-1 2/ See Plate D-3 3/ See Plate D-2 The average historic erosion rate was selected as the most probable future condition. Even though the main river flow appears to be moving toward the cut-off channel, the main forces of erosion will continue to be present. Wind generated waves will remain problematic. River currents along Bethel's streambank will continue to be sufficient to provide sediment transport capability to carry away material that sloughs to the toe of the bank line. Recent erosion gives evidence to support this condition. In fact, a storm in September 1982 caused erosion which exceeded the selected HER condition. 18 R 11/82 BETHEL J » — YS FIGURE 7: ESTIMATED CHANNEL CONFIGURATION AT | 6 PTS. IN TIME OVER A 130 YR. PERIOD. | STATUS OF PREVIOUS BANK STABILIZATION EFFORTS Although the city of Bethel has triea a number of measures to check the constant erosion, none has proved successful. Bethel needs a permanent solution to the erosion problem. The measures that the city has tried are discussed to provide further insight into the erosion problem. Timber Bulkhead As a means of controlling erosion, a timber bulkhead was constructed along 3,000 feet of the town front by local interests and the State of Alaska during 1965 and 1966. The bulkhead consisted of timber piling backed with 2-inch planks, plywood, and plastic sheet. Once constructed this revetment protected much of the waterfront and had the added benefit of allowing barge tie-up and unloading. The Corps of Engineers as a technical service inspected the facility after construction, and gave a life expectancy of only 5 years to the structure. This estimate proved correct. Some deterioration and partial failure occurred in 1968. Repair work was completed on the bulkhead shortly thereafter by local interests and the State of Alaska. Complete aeterioration of the timber bulkhead had taken place by August 1971 during flooding conditions on the Kuskokwim River. Most of the bulkhead collapsed resulting in serious erosion of the exposed bank. The photographs in Figures 8 and 9 illustrate this failure. The collapse resulted from erosion at the toe of the bulkhead and the washing out of the silt material behind the bulkhead. Local Revetment Program After failure of the timber bulkhead, erosion along the town front was accelerated. Local interests were forced to try other measures or move away from the river which was their source of livelihood. This time local residents placed car bodies, motors, 55-gallon arums, and other heavy objects against the bank to attempt to retard the erosion process. Figures 10 and 11 illustrate the measures that have been adopted. The resulting visual effects are not esthetically pleasing. A more important aspect is the potential for adverse impact on water quality. The motors and car bodies are potential sources of heavy metals, oil, grease, and other pollutants that could prove harmful to the aquatic environment. Tnis program has not been completely successful in stopping bank erosion. The erosion has slowed in isolated spots but the program is doomed to eventual failure because the car bodies and other heavy items used for armor were not placed in the area extending from the bank to the thalweg. Thalweg migration and flanking of the revetment will eventually cause failure of this temporary measure. 20 R 11/82 Figure 8: LRA payee Timber Bulkhead Failure near Brown's Stougt Ss Timber Bulkhead Failure along Townfront 22 Figure 9: Submarine Net Severe erosion was experienced along the town front during the sumer of 1978. The city requested assistance from the State of Alaska to soive the problem. The State Division of Emergency Services supplied submarine nets and plastic filter cloth which were placed in the areas experiencing the most severe erosion. The Corps of Engineers provided technical assistance during the installation of the nets. The submarine net consisted of interlocking rings of approximately 5/8-inch cable. The filter cloth was installed between the high water mark and just below the low water line. The cable was draped over the tilter cloth to hold it in position (Figure 12). The corners of the net were to be anchored at the top of the bank with a deadman. The nets were to be wirea together to prevent cable overlapping and movement. Yo insure that the net would not be pusned up the bank by wave action, it was recommended that a cable be run along the bottom of the net and attached to a deadman at each end. City officials were doubtful that this solution would work, but were willing to try it on an experimental basis. They were right. Erosion continued at the downstream ana upstream ends of the protected area. The procedures that were recommended for securing the nets to the bank were not followed and most of the nets slid down tne bank to rest at the toe of the bank. The failure of the submarine nets is shown in Figure 13. Even if the submarine nets had been installed correctly the erosion process would have been stopped only for a short time. Eventually the thalweg would have migratea and undermined the bank causing failure, or flanked the protectea area. Steel and Timber Sheet Piling Steel sheet pile cells were placed in 1975 to provide some stability to the city dock. However, without toe protection and tie-backs at the ends, this structure would eventually fail. So in 1982, the city of Bethel obtained funds from the State of Alaska to apply toward protection against erosion. City officials determined that the funds should be appliea to the two most critical areas: the city dock and the Standard Oil tank farm. Accordingly, 425 feet of steel sheet piling and 375 feet of steel and timber piling were installed from the east end of the city dock piling north along Brown Slough. This $2.4 million project will protect the east side of the city dock area. Another contract has been awarded for $2.25 million to construct two steel sheetpile cells at the tank farm location. This will provide a semi-permanent hard point for the crucial fuel distribution. However, without additional protection and Tie-backs, these cells would soon be outflanked. These two projects point Out the need For a complete solution. Avery high cost single point protection will not withstand the erosion process by itself. R 11/82 Figure 10: Local Revetment Program 24 Figure 11: Local Erosion Control 25 te ee Dt tian tat tent > FA i eR IY Figure 12: Submarine Net Installation 26 Figure 13: Submarine Net Failure 27 PUBLIC CONCERNS As a result of working with city officials and the interested public, a number of concerns related to the bank erosion problem have surfaced. The concerns were gathered informally through interviews and telephone conversations and through a formal public meeting held in Bethel. All persons expressed a concern that valuable waterfront land is being eroded away, decreasing the supply of usable land. Many also voiced concern over the potential loss of the dock, the U.S. Public Health Service Hospital, the Standard Oi] tank farm, and the buildings and structures located along the riverbank. They felt that navigation on the river and subsistence and commercial fishing should remain unhindered. They stated that developers are hesitant to construct or improve transportation and fishing facilities due to the unstable condition along the riverfront. Another concern expressed was that protection of the bank must not cause significant adverse environmental impacts. 28 R 11/82 PLAN FORMULATION OBJECTIVE OF THE INVESTIGATION Bethel is threatened by continued erosion of the Kuskokwim River bank fronting the town. The objective of this study is to find a means to stop or retard riverbank erosion at Bethel while maintaining the life- style and cultural values cherished by the area residents. Bethel is currently the trade, economic, health and educational center for the Kuskokwim valley and these should not be interfered with by the bank sta- bilization project. Development and expansion of the fishing industry also should be unhindered by the project. In the plan formulation stage of this study these planning objectives will be used to carefully screen the alternatives. The bank erosion solution, in addition to solving the problem, will have to be justified based on an economic evaluation. The solution will also be tested against environmental considerations of the area. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Wind and Waves Wind direction must be considered when evaluating the erosion of the bank at Bethel. The prevailing southeast wind at bearing 158 degrees hits the eroding bank directly, accelerating the drying out of soil and melting of permafrost which leads to sloughing of soil. The wind also Causes waves that run up and break on the shore loosening and washing away bank material. The design wind speed used for wave run-up calcu- lations was 54 mph of 1 hour duration and a 50-year recurrence inter- val. With a fetch of 3.2 miles the estimated significant wave height is 5.2 feet. That wave would hit the northwest bank in the Mission Lake area, where the slope is 2 vertical on 5 horizontal. Such a wave would have severe effects on an unprotected slope and on riprap sized only to withstand current scour. The wind also drives rain onto the bank, loosening more material to slough down the slope and into the river. Permafrost Most of the Bethel region is underlain by permafrost. Soils ex- ploration logs, contained in Appendix C show permafrost under the river at Bethel. The bank revetment structures considered allow the soil to drain freely upon permafrost melting, avoiding excessive hydrostatic pressure, Ice at Bethel The greatest ice thickness recorded at Bethel between 1966 and 1979 was 60 inches. Forces created by a moving ice layer of this thickness were taken into consideration when developing shore protection alter- natives for Bethel. Impact ice forces were considered in the design of 29 protective structures. Shear strength between the ice and the structure was also calculated to account for the uplift forces and down river forces generated as the ice moves. Erosion Near Public Health Service Hospital The riverbank near the old Public Health Service Hospital on First Avenue is undergoing the most extensive damage by erosion in Bethel. The erosion process may be aggravated at this site by the removal of the vegetative cover and the installation of a sewer line from the hospital to the river. The vegetation was removed during the materials extraction needed for airport and hospital construction. Removal of the vegetation exposed the underlying permafrost to thermal deterioration. The sewer line may also add enough additional heat to speed permafrost melting. If the bank is left unprotected, heavy bank erosion will undoubtedly con- tinue near the Public Health Service Hospital. Scour Depths and Forces The scour depth was calculated assuming a nonerodible bank with the river channel consisting of unfrozen silty sand of median grain size 0.1 mm. A bank-full flood flow of 179,000 cfs resulted in a theoretical scour depth of 115 feet, using the above assumptions. However, scour is not expected to penetrate as deep as calculated due to the underlying permafrost in the river channel and thalweg. The flood flows that cause 115 feet scour will not be of a duration to melt the permafrost and scour the material to the calculated depth. When flows return to normal, the equilibrium scour depth, which is less than the flood scour depth, will pe reestablished. Because the equilibrium depth is less than the flood scour depth a layer of bed material will be deposited over the perma- frost. This layer of bed material will insulate the permafrost decreasing the permafrost rate of heat transfer and subsequent deterioration. When the bed material is scoured away a new zone of permafrost is exposed. Under these conditions, the rate of scour is substantially decreased. The subsequent depth of scour is estimated to be 70 feet. This corresponds with the measurements obtained during the bathymetric survey. River Velocity To size the filter fabric and protective stones, the river velocity along the bank and bed were assumed highest at bank-full flows. Armor units were designed to resist displacement by velocities of 7 feet per second. The maximum velocity to be encountered during construction was estimated to be 4 feet per second. Construction Materials Based on a reconnaissance geological survey conducted in the Kuskokwim Bay region, tnree areas were identified as potential quarry sites. One site is located at Goodnews Bay, the other two are located at Cape Newenham. The drawings that show where these areas are located in relation to Bethel are contained in Appendix C. Rock samples were 30 gathered for laboratory analysis and both sites were found to have suitable rock. ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS CCB AS OF ENG/NGE FE Alternative solutions were developed and investigated that would provide varying degrees of protection to the bank of the outer curve of the Kuskokwim River at Bethel. In addition, a nonstructural alter- native was evaluated. Brief synopses of these alternatives are given in the following paragraphs. Of the alternatives studied, two were carried forward for further study and are presented in detail including an itemized listing of esti- mated cost. These alternatives are (1) bank protection, and (2) river diversion with bank protection. The remaining alternatives were discarded because of development cost, public acceptability, and engineering considerations. These alternatives are (1) steel wall with rock t rotection, (2) steel wall with articulated concrete mattress oe pr jon 3) steel wall and sloped bank, (4) river diversion, (5) diversion channel, an nonstructural solution. The alternatives that were not carried forward are presented first. EXECUTIVE ORDER 11988 Executive Order 11988 requires all Federal projects to avoid direct or indirect support of floodplain development, whenever there is a practical alternative. Any solution to the streambank erosion problem will encourage expansion of waterfront development. However, because the economy and culture of Bethel is directly dependent on being located on the Kuskokwim River shoreline, development will continue to occur in the floodplain with or without a Federal project. Additionally, the stabilization project must be located in the floodplain to fulfill its Purpose, that of reducing streambank erosion. Bethel is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program, and therefore, all new structures will comply to strictly enforced building codes to reduce future flood damages. Neither adverse nor beneficial impacts on the flood plain are expected to occur with the implementation of a streambank stabilization project and there are no practical alternatives to continued flood plain development. Alternatives Not Carried Forward AZ |} Steel Wall With Rock Toe Protection ~ / A combination of a cantilever sheet pile wall and a series of cir- cular cells were designed to halt the bank erosion at Bethel. Sheet pile cells would have to be used the entire project length if dock facil- ities, including office buildings, warehouses, and off-loading and on- loading equipment or any other structures or roadways, are planned at the 31 R: 11/82 water's edge. This would increase the cost. Where no development would occur near the water's edge and the bank is less than 15 feet high, a straight sheet pile wall would be used. A straight sheet pile wall would be used downstream of the existing development area, extending from Station 33+00 to Station 48+00. The stationing is shown on Plate B-1. The circular cell wall would extend from Station 0+00 to 33+00. Approximate dimensions of the sheet pile wall are depicted in Figure 14 and approximate dimensions of the circular cell wall are shown in Figure 15. The face of the steel sheet pile wall and circular cell wall is in the wave and ice zone to provide maximum bank protection. A 2-foot rockfill blanket would add weight to secure the filter fabric. The filter fabric would prevent the fine grained bank material from washing away from the toe of the wall. The depth of the rock layer is designed to protect the toe of the piles against wind and wave action. The estimated life of this project alternative would be 25 years with no annual maintenance required. This alternative uses an estimated 20,680 tons of steel sheet piling for the wall and cells and 45,000 cubic yards of gravel over 70,000 square yards of filter fabric. The total es- timated cost of this alternative is $71,900,000. It, was dropped from further consideration because of the high cost estimate. S/% FF0O/Z,, Le Steel Wall With Articulated Concrete Mattress Toe Protection fe 2 This alternative differs from the first alternative described only in that articulated concrete mattresses are used to hold the filter fabric in place rather than rock (Figure 16). One module of the articulated concrete mattress would consist of nine 3-foot square, 3-inch thick reinforced concrete units. The units would be tied together allowing for flexibility so that, as scour takes place at the toe of the mattress, the mattress would fall down the slope and protect the resulting channel bottom. The concrete mattress units would be reinforced to withstand bending loads that may result from spanning pockets in the bed under the mattress. The estimated life of this alternative would be 25 years with no annual maintenance required. This alternative would use an estimated 20,680 tons of steel piling and 3,000 concrete modules over 70,000 square yards of filter fabric. This alternative was dropped from further con- sideration because of its estimated cost of $72,300,000 and engineering feasibility. Lor, fe. This alternative incorporates two different techniques to protect the Bethel shoreline. The heavily populated and industrialized area of the bank would be protected with a steel sheet pile wall or circular cells with gravel toe protection. The bank in the undeveloped area would be graded to a gradual slope and protected with filter fabric and gravel. Steel Wall and Sloped Bank fF 2 __ 32 R: 11/82 NON - FROST SUSCEPTIBLE BACKFILL IGINAL $I Soon SILTY SANDS ’ IVS PX A N A TOE PROTECTION fe 44 PCF = SUB UNIT WT. GRAVEL OR CON- CRETE MATTRESS | = AS G3¥Vd3ud 3.1v0 VeSVIV *13HL38 FIGURE 14 TYPICAL SHEET PILE WALL SECTION Cc no > DD = ~< m za 2 g z m m » 9 ”n oa > ~ NOILVZITNIGVLS YNVE 13H1L38 HIGH WATER LEVEL V ORIGINAL GROUND st MGT BACKFILL INSITU SILTY SAND LOW_WATER LEVEL Ag G3uvd3ud A? "yV “LSIG YSSNISNS AWYY 'S'N VaSVIV “T3HL3E FIGURE 15 CIRCULAR SHEET PILE CELL w/ ROCK TOE PROTECTION NOILVZITIGVLS YNVE T3HL38 SILTY SAND ‘73HL3¢8 ‘LSIO YSSNISNS AWYYV 'S'N VUSV IV 31V0 M3 AS Q3keVd3ud FIGURE [6 CIRCULAR SHEET PILE CELL WITH CONCRETE MATTRESS TOE PROTECTION NOILVZINISVLS YNVE T3HL3g8 “Vv MT /6boZ fhe sheet pile wall would extend approximately 3,500 feet from the existing cellular city dock to the road just past the KYUK Radio Tower, From there to the Standard 0i1 dock, which is approximately 2,800 feet, the bank would be sloped and protected with filter fabric and gravel overlay. The estimated project life of this alternative would be 25 years with no annual maintenance required. This alternative includes 8,600 tons of steel sheet piling, 45,000 cubic yards of gravel, 70,000 square yards of filter fabric and would require the excavation and on-land disposal of 400,000 cubic yards of silty sand. No structures would have to be moved. The total estimated cost for this alternative is $43,800,000, and was dropped from further consideration because of the high cost. River Diversion 4D Another alternative studied involves diverting water that now flows in the channel adjacent to Bethel into the cutoff channel on the south- east side of the two islands across the river from the city. The center- line of the proposed diversion dike is shown on Figure 17. This alter- native requires gravel from an upstream source for construction of the diversion dike which would block river navigation. Riprap would be required to protect the upstream face of the dike. To prevent water from backing up and flooding Bethel, the new channel would be enlarged to carry the increased flow. Hydraulic model analysis indicates that the increased flow can be carried through the cutoff channel after some excavation. Water surface elevations at the Bethel dock would be unaffected by this diversion. Eventual siltation along the Bethel town front and dock is possible but is not expected during the life of the project. Diverting the river would leave water in the channel adjacent to Bethel allowing navigation to continue. Since bank erosion is due to wind, rain, and waves, bank protection will be required to provide for a stable riverbank with diversion of the river. This alternative uses an estimated 260,000 cubic yards of material for the diversion structure with 26,000 cubic yards of riprap on the up- stream face. An estimated 1.4 million cubic yards of material would be excavated and placed on the bank of the southeast channel. The total estimated cost of this alternative is $22,200,000 with an estimated life of 50 years. Maintenance dredging at the mouth of the access channel to Bethel may be required after 10 years. A rough estimate of dredging required for continued navigation into Bethel is 23,000 cubic yards every 5 years. This alternative was dropped from further consideration because of its lack of p public Ta estimated cost, and engineering feasibility. TA eee Tei) BY LLOs cf cau ves R: 11/82 FIGURE MILES \7 ee mee as ° 2 DIVERSION STRUCTUR i i BETHEL, ALASKA BETHEL BANK STABILIZION RIVER DIVERSION j CENTERLINE ALASKA DIST., CORPS OF ENGINEERS PREPARED EW DATE Diversion Channel f& 5 Tne purpose of this alternative is to allow the river to completely vypass wetnel by constructing a diversion channel upstream. The most economical diversion channel would cut through the south bank of the Kus- kokwim River about 1 mile upstream from the abandoned airfield (Figure 18). The channel would have a normal depth of 48 feet, be 200 feet wide, have a channel alinement of 2 miles and be designed to carry the normal flow of 70,000 cfs. The higher flood flows would initially require both the existing and the new channel to carry ali the flood water. The river would gradually enlarge the diversion channel and would eventually have the aoility to carry all riverflows. During the transition period, bank erosion would remain a probiem at Bethel. ST Tnis alternative, if implemented, would create a number of problems for Bethel. The major one would be the gradual siltation of the river channel to Bethel which would effectively block river transportation through the city. Because the river is the principal source of Tiveli- hood for Betnel residents, this alternative was dropped from further consideration. Nonstructural Solution Ag Tnis alternative is one step above the no action alternative. The concept of the nonstructural alternative ts to allow the bank to con- tinue to erode but to relocate structures when they become threatened by the eroding bank of the Kuskokwim River. An intergal part of this alternative is the development of an inten- sive management program. This program, if managed and implemented properly, could provide a mechanism for organized city growth that might not be endangered by the eroding river. To be successful, the intensive management program requires acceptance by the residents of Bethel. An important aspect of this alternative is to understand how imuch jand would be lost to the Kuskokwim River and when it might occur. The zone of erosion was determined by using aerial photographs and from a July 1979 bathymetric survey. Past erosion rates are recorded on Plate D-1. A number of facilities and services are in danger of being lost to the Kuskokwim River. These structures would not all be lost to the river immediately but would be threatened by erosion over the 50-year life of the project. To follow the nonstructural alternative and move the threatened structures away from the riverbank would require new land. Available land is in_short supply in Bethel. The Native corporation under the Native Land Claims Act will eventually gain control of most of the vacant property around Betnel. The Bureau of Land Management has the 38 PROPOSED CUTOFF ws.7 == 2 ' ~—__!00 BW. NORMAL DERTH 4 TYPICAL CHANNEL SECTION N.T.S, BETHEL, ALASKA FIGURE 18 BETHEL BANK STABILIZION | DIVERSION CHANNEL MILES ° ‘ ; ALASKA DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS PREPARED Ew DATE responsibility of managing the land until it is conveyed to the Native Corporation, This involves considerable complications but a leasing program could probably be arranged. However, most of the land around Bethel is wetland and use of it would eliminate it from use by waterfowl. If this alternative were followed the city would need to implement an intensive management program to provide organization to the relocation effort. This could be accomplished by providing assistance to the affected property owners, developing zoning regulation, and adopting a tax incentive program. Property owners who would be forced to relocate due to bank erosion would have large costs that could cause economic hardship. The city could provide assistance to the affected parties by arranging to offset the relocation costs through the State's low interest loans. The area which would be eventually lost to the river should be zoned not to allow new construction. The city should also consider abandoning all city services in the areas. It is anticipated that people will refuse to move away from the river any distance because of importance to their culture and lifestyle. If their home or business becomes threatened by erosion, they would simply chose to move a few feet back from the bank thus remaining in proximity to the river. Within a few years they again would be in a precarious position in relation to the eroding banks and would have to move their Property again. The continued use of environmentally unacceptable means to slow erosion would also continue. The transportation and commercial fishing industries need to expand their facilities which, because of their nature, need to be located on the river bank. Industry may not choose to spend the capital necessary to expand their facilities until the bank is stabilized. Residents probably would never accept the intensive management program which is necessary to the successful operation of the nonstruc- tural alternative. This alternative was dropped from further consideration because it is the worst plan for the environment and because it will never be acceptable to the residents of Bethel. Alternatives Carried Forward For Further Study Bank Protection 4 °/ Bank protection would extend from Lousetown Slough to just down- stream of the Standard Oil tank farm (Plate 0-4). Two different approaches were developed and evaluated that would provide protection and stabilize the bank in this location. One involved the use of articulated concrete mattress and the other rock riprap THe G AL 40 Available cross section data indicate that the riverbank and bottom has a uniform one vertical on four horizonal slope from MLLW (mean lower low water) to the river thalweg. A dragline would be used to smooth the bank and bottom before placement of the protective units. Concrete mattress or rock riprap would extend from the upper portion of the bank in the wave and active ice zone to the river thalweg. Fill material would be placed above MLLW at a one vertical on four horizontal slope. This is the maximum slope that the natural material can be placed. The bank above the wave zone would be cut to a 1 vertical on 2.5 horizontal. The required fill material would be gathered from these banks. Filter fabric would be necessary in the wave and active ice zone. Placement of the fabric would prevent erosion of fine material through the gaps between the concrete mattresses or rocks. It would not be needed below the wave and active ice zone. Limited scour would be experienced, but the flexibility of the mattress units and rock move- ment would adjust to any pockets formed by the scour and to the irreg- ular bottom contour. To protect the bank above the wave zone from wind erosion, surface runoff, and periodic flood, vegetation could be planted. A fescue grass was selected because it grows well for the soil and climatic conditions at Bethel. Grass seed would be applied at the rate of 5 to 10 pounds per acre. A jute mat would initially provide temporary protection until the grass became established. Periodic access trails to the river would be provided but the city would prevent boats from tying near the rocks. The new boat harbor will accommodate all boats. = = =— a The concrete mattress or rock riprap would be tied into the existing sheet pile structures which will help stabilize the entire front. However, additional toe protection will be required for the existing Sheet pile structures. This toe protection will not infringe on necessary channel depths at the city dock and standard oil dock. Car bodies, 55-gallon drums, motors, and other heavy debris placed on the bank along the town front to slow the erosion rate would have to be removed before bank restoration could be accomplished. Two borrow pits used by the city and local contractors were identified as possible disposal areas for this material. These areas are shown on Plate D-4. By stabilizing the bank, the river thalweg may become deeper against the toe of the concrete mattress or rock riprap and the river channel may become more constricted. Stabilizing the bank may help the main riverflow to remain adjacent to Bethel and not switch to the cutoff channel across the river. Bank stabilization would decrease the supply of bank material to the bed load of the river. As a result, the area immediately downstream of the project may experience an increased erosion rate, but there is no development in this area. 4) R: 11/82 hee Articulated Concrete Mattress. This type of revetment has been used extensively along the Mississippi River with a high degree of success but is untried in northern rivers. The concrete units would provide protec- tion from current scour, surface runoff erosion, and wave action. The basic mattress unit consists of a concrete siab 3 feet 10 inches in length, 14 inches wide and 3 inches thick. The slabs are tied together using corrosion resistant cable to form a 100-square-foot unit with dimensions 4 feet wide by 25 feet in length. A 1-inch space is maintained between each mattress to provide flexibility (Plate D-5). Normally a mattress up to 140 feet wide is assembled aboard a specialized barge using the concrete slab units pre-measured to the required length and then launched. Because the necessary launching equipment to follow this procedure is not available in Alaska, a different procedure would be followed. Mattresses have been installed on an experimental basis, using land based equipment. This approach would be used at Bethel. A concrete mattress 28 feet wide would be placed beginning at the downstream end of the project and proceeding upstream overlapping the adjacent mattresses by 4 feet. The mattresses would be placed in two separate operations. The units extending from -6.5 feet MLLW to the thalweg would be installed first. They would be assembled using a tugboat. After these units are instal- led, the filter fabric from -6.5 feet MLLW to +1] feet MLLW would be installed. The mattresses would then be carefully lowered over the filter fabric using a crane. Seeding the upper slopes would complete the installation procedure. The concrete slabs would be precast elsewhere and shipped to Bethel because the aggregate and production facilities are not available locally. The concrete siabs to be placed in the wave and active ice zone would be hardened to resist ice abrasion and treated or given a smooth finish to reduce shear strength between the slabs and ice. Placement of the filter fabric in the wave zone would prevent loss of the bank materials through the space between the slabs. The flat bank slope combined with drainage through the filter would protect against bank sloughing and failure. To date no concrete mattress construction has occurred in Alaska. The effect of ice on it is largely unknown. Due to this factor and the limited amount of equipment available at Bethel, maintenance costs are estimated to be $600,000 every 5 years over the 50-year life of the project. The estimated cost for this alternative is $25,200,000 and is itemized below: S25 26 fbr fC a PLO hn gl TABLE 4 —~ CONCRETE MATTRESS BANK PROTECTION COST ESTIMATE (72° | Unit Item Quantity Unit Price Amount Mobilization & Demobilization 1 JOB L.S. $ 1,100,000 Property Acquisition ] JOB L.S. 456,000 Remove Debris 1 JOB L.S. 195,000 Concrete Mattress 1,614,000 S.F. $9.55 15,413,700 Filter Fabric 650,000 ‘S.F. 0.95 617,500 Silty Sand Fill 52,000 C.Y. 1.25 65,000 Excavation 132,000 C.Y. 4.25 561,000 Seeding & Jute Mat 534,000 S.F. 0.36 192,240 Contingencies 20% 3,720,090 Engineering & Design 6.5% 1,450,830 Supervision & Administration 6.5% 1,450, 830 TOTAL COST $25,222,190 Xe ZA, Rounded to $25,200,000 Rock Riprap: This alternative is similiar to the concrete mattress alternative but instead of concrete mattress the bank and river bottom are protected using quarry rock. The rock size required for protection in the wave zone is different from that used along the river bottom. Details are shown in Plate D-6. Riprap in the wave and active ice zone, from -6.5 feet MLLW to +8.5 feet MLLW, was sized to resist the forces generated by wave and ice move- ment. The riprap placed on a one vertical to four horizontal slope in the wave zone would be uniformly graded and placed within the gradation limits listed. Weight (pounds) Percent Lighter 800 100 600 0-25 450 0 43 R: 11/82 In this zone the riprap would be two armor units thick equal to 3 feet. To prevent leaching of the fine bank soils through the large rip- rap rock, a filter fabric would be placed over the soil. Care would be required when placing the armor rock to prevent tearing or puncturing the filter fabric. Riprap placed below the wave and active ice zone was sized to resist the tractive forces of the river current. A river velocity of 7 feet per second was used in calculating rock size. The rock size that would be placed in this zone is summarized as follows. detent (pounds ) Percent Lighter 25 25 This riprap would be placed directly on the existing river bottom. The layer thickness would normally be 1 foot to contain the largest size rock within the gradation. This may lead to problems because placement of rock accurately below water is difficult. Therefore, the layer thick- ness was increased to 2 feet to allow for placement of two layers. The toe of the rock riprap would be overbuilt to account for scour. The filter would not be needed in the area below the wave zone. The riprap should slow velocities enough at the rock riprap interface to prevent joss of sand through the larger riprap. Grass would be planted above the wave and ice zone to prevent erosion by wind and rain. The rock riprap below -6.5 feet MLLW to the thalweg would be dumped from barges after minor grading of the bottom using a dragline. The rip- rap could be graded to the required thickness using a dragline. Grading the area above -6.5 feet MLLW to +8.5 feet MLLW would be done using conventional earth moving equipment. The excavated material from the upper slopes would be used when possible as fill material. The sur- plus excavated material would be disposed with the junk cars taken from the riverbank. The filter fabric would be placed directly over the graded bank and pinned to prevent movement, and would be overlapped to prevent soil loss at the seams. The rock must be carefully placed on the bank to avoid damage to the filter fabric. The best method of placing the rock would involve using a crane with an orange peel bucket. Displacement and some loss of the rock by ice flows is expected. Therefore, periodic maintenance by the local sponsor will be required to insure a 50 year project life. Because of the difficulty in obtaining materials for project maintenance, 11,000 cubic yards (20 percent of initial class A rock quantity) will be stockpiled during project construction and paid for by the local sponsor. For estimating project annual costs, maintenance costs have been established at $250,000 every fifth year through the 50 year project life. 44 R: 11/82 TABLE 5 > pr BANK PROTECTION WITH ROCK COST ESTIMATE (7 Unit Item Quantity Unit Price Amount Mobilization & Demobilization ] JOB L.S. $ 1,100,000 *Property Acquisition 1 JOB L.S. 456,000 Remove Debris 1 JOB L.S. 195,000 Class A Stone 50,000 C.Y. $42.00 2,100,000 Class B Stone 129,000 C.Y. 42.00 5,418,000 Filter Fabric 595,000 S.F 0.95 565,250 Silty Sand Fill 29,000 C.Y. 1.25 36,250 Excavation 120,000 c.Y. 4.25 510,000 Seeding & Jute Mat 555,000 S.F. 0.36 199,800 *Stockpile Maintenance Rock 11,000 C.Y. 21.00 231,000 Contingencies 20% 2,165,300 Engineering & Design 6.5% 844,450 Supervision & Administration 6.5% 844,450 TOTAL COST $14,665,500 Rounded to $14, 700,000 *Local Responsibility SAI¢ [ler Ml. J7S, t River Diversion with Bank Protection - Z566 Ze fe AY a 23 2, bin t bhely This alternative would provide a possible solution té the bank ero- ‘ sion problem by diverting the river away from the Bethel townfront (Plate D-7). By diverting the river to another channel, its main forces would not act on the banks. The river channel adjacent to Bethel would still contain water allowing waterborne access to Bethel. Protection on the bank against wind, rain, and waves would still be required. This protection would involve placing rock riprap in the wave zone and seeding on the cut banks above this zone. Details of this alternative are shown in Plate D-8. The diversion dam would be located at the mouth of Lousetown Slough crossing the river to the island opposite Bethel. With the diversion structure located as shown, a pool would form upstream creating a buffer from moving ice and flow in the main channel. A small boat harbor currently under construction includes plans for harbor access by way of Lousetown Slough. The river diversion structure would not allow for direct access to the main channel of the river from the proposed harbor location. The diversion structure would have a top elevation of +7 feet MLLW which is high enough to divert the normal summer flow. To provide flood protection for Bethel, the diversion structure must be raised in eleva- tion and the north end extended to high ground. At the elevation +7 feet MLLW the normal high summer flow and floods would pass over the structure and tend to clean the Bethel channel of deposited sediment. 45 R: 11/82 The diversion structure core would consist of rockfill. To allow for placement and repair by land based equipment the crest width would be 20 feet. Riprap would be placed on the top and both sides to -6.5 feet MLLW to provide protection against overtopping, ice movement, and waves. The riprap would have the following gradation. Weight (pounds) Percent Smaller > 10 00 1,650 0-25 1,250 0 The existing cutoff channel opposite Bethel does not have the capa- city to carry the additional flow when the river is diverted. The chan- nel would require dredging to provide the necessary capacity. The chan- nel area could be increased by dredging a pilot channel down the middle of the existing cutoff channel, thus increasing its hydraulic capacity. The pilot channel would have a trapezoidal cross section with a bottom width of 200 feet, side slopes of one vertical on three horizontal and an average depth of 20 feet with a length cf 6,800 feet. A total of 1,400,000 cubic yards would be dredged and the material disposed of at the upstream toe of the diversion structure. Diverting the river eliminates the effect of the river currents on the riverbanks at normal summer flows. Protection against waves, wind, and surface runoff is still required. To provide this protection, a layer of rock riprap over filter fabric would be placed on the bank from -6.5 feet MLLW to +9 feet MLLW. The bank above +9 feet MLLW would be flattened to a stable slope of one vertical on 2.5 horizontal. Grass seed would be planted and a jute mat placed on the slope to provide protection until the grass became established. Plate D-8 shows the cross section of the rock riprap protection. The Tilter fabric would prevent the fine soil from washing by the rock riprap. To protect the toe of the revetment from the effects of scour when the higher flows overtop the diversion structure the riprap would be placed in a trench excavated into the existing bank. This trench would be excavated to a slope of 1 vertical on 2.5 horizontal which is consi- dered to be the maximum slope that the native material can be excavated. The following rock gradation for this riprap is listed below: Weight (pounds) Percent Smaller : TOO 1,000 0-25 750 0 The layer thickness required would be 4.5 feet. Careful coordination of the dredging and diversion structure construction would be required. Before completion of the diversion structure the channel must be enlarged to provide for the increased fiow. However, the diversion structure must also be constructed prior to completion of dredging because an area for placement of the dredged material is required. The dredged material can 45 not be placed in the river until the diversion structure provides calm water. The channel must be enlarged to keep pace with the rise in the structure height. Stage construction of the diversion structure would provide an area for the dredged materials. Excavation of the cutoff channel could be accomplished with a cutter head dredge. The diversion structure would be constructed by dumping the rockfill core from barges and dressing the slope to final grade using a dragline. Armor rock would be placed using a crane with an orange peel type bucket. Bank protection could be placed anytime during the con- struction and would be accomplished using standard earth moving equip- ment. The construction season is limited to the ice free months of May through October. The design life is estimated to be 50 years with 10 percent replace- ment after 25 years. The setback of the embankment should lessen the possible effects of river ice on the rock riprap. Approximately 23,000 cubic yards of deposited sediments would have to be dredged every 5 years to maintain navigability in the channel to the Bethel dock. Blocking the main channel would result in siltation at the downstream end of the abandoned channel requiring periodic dredging to maintain navigation to Bethel. The diversion structure would prevent direct access to points upstream of Bethel. Upstream traffic would be forced to travel downstream below the islands opposite Bethel adding 3 miles to the trip. Diverting the river into the cutoff channel could result in accel- erating the erosion at other points on the river immediately downstream of the diversion structure. The estimated cost of this alternative is $22,000,000 and is itemized below: TABLE 6 RIVER DIVERSION WITH BANK PROTECTION COST ESTIMATE Unit Item : Quantity Unit ~- Price Amount Mobilization & Demobilization 1 JOB L.S. $ 1,450,000 Property Acquisition 1 JOB L.S. 456,000 Pilot Channel Excavation 1,400,000 C.Y. $ 3.90 5,460,000 Class Aj Stone 30,000 C.Y. 42.50 1,275,000 Rockfil| 74,000 C.Y. 30.20 2,234,800 Class A» Stone 84,000 C.Y. 42.50 3,570,000 Filter Fabric 621,000 S.F. 0.95 589,950 Silty Sand Fill 55,000 C.Y. 1.25 68,750 Excavation 206,000 C.Y. 4.25 875,500 Seeding & Jute Mat 526,000 S.F. 0.36 189, 360 Contingencies 20% 3,233,870 Supervision & Administration 6.5% 1,261,210 Engineering & Design 6.5% 1,261,210 TOTAL COST $21,925,650 Rounded to $22,000,000 47 R: 11/82 ECONOMIC EVALUATION Economic justification for a proposed Federal project requires that the ratio of benefits to cost be greater than one. For Bethel, the benefits and costs are based on October 1982 prices and were amortized based on an interest rate uf / 7/8 percent and a 50-year project life. Benefits Benefits were evaluated by comparing the expected economic losses associated with progressive erosion under with-project and without-project conditions. A Federal bank protection project would limit future erosion to the 1985 erosion line shown on plates D-3.1 to D-3.8. Benefits were not claimed for erosion up to 1985, which is the assumed first year of the project operation. Two different without-project erosion rate scenarios were established to evaluate future loss of land and improvements. One erosion rate scenario assumes that the historical erosion rate (HER) will continue. The HER erosion rate was determined to be the most likely without-project future condition and was used in evaluating project benefits. An alternative erosion rate scenario, the decreasing erosion rate (DER), was developed for comparitive purposes and is discussed in the sensitivity analysis on page 53. Benefits associated with a Federal project are both tangible and intangible. The following analysis concentrates on the tangible, or monetary benefits. However, substantial intangible benefits will accrue to residents of Bethel with a Federal project. The social disruptions associated with losing one's home or business, or moving to a new neighborhood will be eliminated. Also, the Kuskokwim River is the focal point of the community as it provides a transportation route to outlying villages and the rest of the world, provides a significant food source, and has been a major component of the native culture. Consequently, the social well-being of residents of Bethel and the outlying villages will be greatly enhanced once erosion is stopped and a stable waterfront is provided. The tangible benefit categories evaluated are: prevention of costly, piecemeal protection of two major facilities (tne city dock and the Standard Oil facility), prevention of the loss or moving of structures, prevention of loss of land, and employment benefits associated with Federal project construction. Where possible, benefits were developed from details furnished by a citizens committee, from comments received at the public meeting, and from input received from city officials. City Dock Protection The city dock shown in plate D-3.2 is the key to Bethel's role as a successful service ana distribution center. Essentially, all waterborne commerce, except oil, is moved over this dock. In the early stages of the study, a major benefit was claimed for the reduction of freight handling costs that would be realized with bank stabilization. As the study progressed it became apparent that local agencies preferred to protect the dock facility rather than allow erosion to destroy the critical dock area. Without a Federal bank stabilization project, the $2.4 million dock protection constructed in 1982 would need to be repeated every 10 to 20 years on the west side of the dock to prevent erosion from flanking and thereby destroying the 48 R 11/82 city dock. It is assumed construction would be staged as follows: 160 feet at year 1990; 160 feet at year 2000; and, 170 feet at year 2020. Since a Federal project would eliminate the need for this staged construction, the construction cost of local protection was discounted to the assumed Federal project construction date (1985) and claimed as a benefit to bank stabilization. Plate D-3.2 shows the without-project placement of future local dock protection. Each stage of local protection would involve installing sheet pile protection at an estimated $15,000 per linear foot. This cost was developed in the analysis for the steel wall alternative agescribed on page 31. It is substantiated by the steel wall project currently under construction at the Standard Oil facility at a cost of approximately $17,000 per linear foot. The following analysis was used to evaluate the benefits assigned to bank protection at the city dock. Table 7-A Benefits at City Dock Cost of Future Local Protection Year Needed Present Worth Present Worth (Without Project Condition) Factor Value $2,400,000 (160ft X $15,000/ft) 1990 -68 $1,632,000 2,400,000 (160ft X $15,000/ft) 2000 32 768,000 2,550,000 (170ft X $15,000/ft) 2020 -07 178,500 Total present worth $2,578,500 Annual Benefits = $2,578,500 X .0806 (I & A factor, 50 years) = $207,800 Standard Oil Facility This bulk storage tank farm is the primary fuel distribution point for 48 communities on the Kuskokwim River and adjacent Bering Sea coast. It receives its bulk fuel products from the tank farm located at Dutch Harbor on the Aleutian Chain via ocean going barge. The tank farm, which is located on the down river extreme of Bethel, is currently in a critical situation due to accelerated bank erosion. Standard Oil Company officials stated that moving the total facility beyond the area threatened by erosion would not be reasonable. This would require a combi- nation of river bank pumping and upland storage with a double handling of the product to and from the storage facility. They are, therefore, committed to a continual program of local protection for these facilities. In fact, in 1982 a $2.25 million contract was awarded for the construction of a sheet pile wall designed to protect the river bank pumping facility. Since the above work will provide only short term protection, repeated protection will be necessary and is estimated to cost $3.3 mi} lion each time. Stage construction would occur in years 1990, 2000, and 2020!/. The following table demonstrates the benefit evaluation claimed at the Standard Oil Dock for each of the federal bank protection alternatives. l/ It is assumed 110 feet of sheet pile wall will be constructed on both the upstream and downstream banks for each period (see Plate D-3.7). Using a construction cost of $15,000/ft, cost of protection = $15,000 Xx (110' + 110') = $3,300,000. 49 R 11/82 Table 7-6 Benefits at Standard Oi] Dock Future Local Protection Year Present Worth Present Worth (Without Project Condition) Cost(mil) Needed Factor a Value Future cells $3.3 1990 -68 $2,244,000 Future cells 3.3 2000 32 1,056,000 Future cells 3.3 2020 -07 231,000 Total Present Worth $3,531,000 Annual Benefit $3,531,000 X .0806 = $284,600 Real Estate Impacted by Erosion Real estate affected by river bank erosion in Bethel was analyzed at the nistoric erosion rate (HER), for the periods 1985-1995, 1995-2005, and 2005-2035. Specific real estate affectea in.the study area includes land, residential homes, commercial buildings, public buildings, roads (both paved and improvea dirt roads), and utility poles and lines. Each structure in the affected area was investigated to see if it was technically and financially feasible to physically relocate the structure. If the building could be relocated, oniy the moving costs were claimea as a Federal project benefit (see page 52). For those structures which could not be relocated, benefits were claimed based on tne current value of the buildings. This detailed study of the affectea area was conducted by the city of Bethel's Planning and Citizens Committee on Erosion Control. The community planning group, made up of real estate agents, land appraisers, and planners, determined the losses that would occur. This analysis was made by periods and is represented in the following table. Table 7-C Real Estate Impacted by Erosion (Without project condition) Category 1990 2000 2020 Total Residential homes|/ 42 10 35 87 Commercial Buildings 13 9 7 29 Roads (feet) 2,681 3,225 6,449 12,355 Utility Poles 21 33 21 75 Land (acres) 18 22 42 82 1/ These are homes that will be lost to erosion. 142 homes to be moveg are described on page 52. Based upon the above inforination, the District's Real Estate Branch, assisted by local appraisers, established current market and replacement values of improvements being affected by continued erosion. Houses that could not be moved were given an average vaiue of $50,000 and discounted according to the time when they would be lost to erosion. Commercial property, roads, utilities, medical support buildings, and the new fish processing plant were 50 R 11/82 given a replacement value and discounted as they would be threatened by erosion. The medical support buildings consist of eight major structures utilized for laboratories, dormatories and supply Bot rdines in support of the new hospital and have an estimated replacement cost of $5.58 million. The new fish processing plant consists of one large 80x60-foot, two story building with several smaller support buildings (replacement estimated at $4.0 million). Land values ranged from §2/sq. ft. to $4/sq. ft. and represent the price of unimproved land within the established erosion pattern. A value of $3/sq. ft. was used as the average value of land. It should be noted that property values are not depressed by their location, and land close to the river continues to demand the highest prices based on the river oriented economy of the region. Table 7-D Losses Under the Without Project Condition Improvements Period (Mid point year) Residential 2,100,000 500,000 1,750,000 Commercial 2,494,000 5,632,000 1,435,000 Roads 1,000,000 1,200,000 2,400,000 Utilities 200 ,000 300,000 200 ,000 Medical Buildings 5,580,000 Land 18 Acres 2,352,000 22 Acres 2,875,000 42 Acres 5,489,000 Totals $8,146,000 $76,087,000 $11,274,000 All of the analyzed Federal alternative plans would eliminate the losses shown above; therefore, these losses were claimed as benefits. The following table shows the discounted value of real estate that would be protected by bank stabilization. Property and land values affected by the erosion periods of 1985-1995, 1995-2005, and 2005-2035, were discounted from the mid period year or by 5-, 15-, and 35-year present worth factors. Annual benefit values were based on a 50-year project life and an interest rate of 7 7/8 percent. Table 8 Annual Benefit Calculation (Real Estate) 1985-1995 _1995-2005 2005-2035 Real Estate 8,146,000 16,087 ,000 11,274,000 Years Discounted 5 15 35 Discount Factor -68 -32 .07 Present Worth 5,539,300 5,147,800 789,200 Combined present worth $11,476,300 CRF 50 year @ 7 7/8 = -0806 Annual Benefit = $ 925,000 51 R 11/82 Moving Expenses Erosion control at Bethel would prevent owners from having to physically transport their buildings away from the river bank. Under current conditions of uncontrolled erosion, people transport property that can be moved as soon as it becomes endangered only to be confronted with moving it again as erosion progresses. Repeated moving of houses and the uncertainty of the rate of erosion makes it almost impossible to substantiate a meaningful moving cost. Benefits for a Federal project were evaluated assuming that the 142 buildings that can be moved and are in the erosion area will be moved at least once over the project life at the average cost of $8,000 per residence. This figure is derived from a typical moving operation involving a truck, two men and a system of timbers and hydraulic jacks. The total moving costs were then discounted from year 2000 to 1985. Year 2000 was used because it approximates the mid point of the erosion period. The annual benefits for eliminating moving costs are $29,000 and were computed as follows, $29,000 = $8,000 moving cost/home x 142 homes x 0.32 (present worth factor) x 0.0806 (I & A factor). National Economic Development (NED) Employment Employment benefits are calculated to explain the impact that Federal project construction would have on a local economy with seasonally high unemployment. Project labor costs are assigned as skilled or unskilled and an attempt is made to estimate the extent to which the local unemployed jabor force could be expected to contribute. This one time local income source is then given an annual benefit value. best estimates by local planners suggest that 20 percent of the skilled jobs and 75 percent of the unskilled labor could come from the local area unemployment roles. The Public Works Impact Program (PWIP) referenced in ER 1105-2-40, allows 43 percent of the amount earned by locai unskilled labor to be used in the NED employment benefit calculation. These percentages are allowable in the case of Bethel due to the existence of a State local hire law #3610 and the hiring practices of the Regional Native Corporation as directed by Federal Executive Order 1124, U.S. Department of Labor. Table 9 NED Employment Benefits Rock Riprap Project Costs minus E&D, S&A and Contingencies = $10,380,000 Labor Portion of 30% = 3,114,000 Labor Classes = Skilled (70%) Unskilled (30% Amounts = $2,180,000 934,000 Local Contribution = -20 «75 Total Amount 436,000 700,500 NED Benefit from Engineering Regulation 43 +58 Combined Amount = $ 187,000 $ 406,000 52 R 11/82 The annual benefit value for the labor earned by 11 skilled and 32 unskilled local workers amounts to $593,000 x .0806 = $47,795 or $48,000. Using the same calculation results in $80,000 for the concrete mattress and $70,000 for the river diversion alternatives. SUMMARY The annual benefits claimed for each Federal bank protection project alter- native are displayed in the following table. Table 10 Project Benefits and Costs Category Average Annual Benefit Standard Oi] $ 284,600 Dock Protection 207 ,800 Real Estate 925,000 Employment 48,000 Moving Costs 29,000 Total “$1, 494,400 Annual Costs (50 years at 7 7/8 percent) (3 plans) Concrete Mattress Riprap Diversion First Cost $25,200,000 $14,700,000 $22,000,000 IDC 973,000 568,000 850,000 Inv cost $26,173, 00 0 $15,268,000 $22,850,000 1&A 2; “110, 000 1 °231, 000 1,842,000 O&M V/ 102,000 42,000 300 ,000 Annual Costs 2,2 7000 3 15273, 000 } 2,142,000 Benefit Cost Analysis Concrete Mattress Riprap Diversion Annual Benefit2/ $1,526,400 $1,494,400 $1,516,400 Annual Costs 2,212,000 1,273,000 2,142,000 Ratio -69 to 1 1.17 to 1 .71 tol Net Benefits -685 ,600 221,400 -625,600 1/ 0&M Costs were estimated as: Annual Concrete Mattress Riprap Diversion $ 600,000 every fifth year = 102,000 250,000 every fifth year 1,770,000 every fifth year 300,000 2/ Benefits differ only as employment benefits differ. Sensitivity Analysis A sensitivity analysis was performed to show the effects of a slower erosion rate on project justification. Plates D-2.1 to D-2.8 show erosion for a decreasing erosion rate (DER), which assumes that the rate of erosion nas reached a peak and will decrease in future years. 53 R 11/82 The following table summarizes the benefits, costs and benefit-to-cost ratios with the DER erosion rate. Table 11 Benefits with the DER Erosion Rate Category Average Annual Benefit Standard Oil $ 266,000 Dock Protection 193,400 Real Estate 513,000 Employment 48,000 Moving Costs 29,000 Total BT, 049,400 Benefit/Cost Analysis Concrete Mattress Riprap Average Annual Benefits]/ $1,081,400 $1,049,400 Average Annual Costs 2,212,000 1,273,000 Benefit-to-Cost Ratio 0.49 0.82 |/ piffers only as employment benefits differ. 54 Diversion $1,071,400 2,142,000 0.50 R 11/82 PLAN EVALUATION NATIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (NED) PLAN The NED Plan is that plan that maximizes net benefits. The Bank Pro- tection plan using rock riprap considered for Bethel bank stabilization resulted in the most annual benefits. Therefore this plan is considered to be the NED plan. LEAST ENVIRONMENTALLY DAMAGING (LED) PLAN To meet the qualifications for an Environmental Quality (EQ) plan, an alternative must make a beneficial environmental quality contribution by preserving, maintaining, restoring, or enhancing the significant cultural and natural environmental conditions of the study area. Neither of the alternatives would make this type of contribution, therefore, a Least Environmentally Damaging (LED) plan was designated. Bank protection using concrete mattresses was designated as the LED plan because it would stabilize the shore without having a major impact on fish and wildlife resources. Using concrete mattresses instead of rock would result in less environmental damage because the impact from quarry activities could be avoided. The river diversion alternative would have more social and environmental impact. Diverting the river would result in poor access to Bethel for travelers from up river by adding 6 miles to their roundtrip to Bethel. SOCIAL WELL BEING (SWB) Social Well Being maximizes life, health and safety benefits. The current condition of the bank at Bethel provides an unsafe area which is disruptive to any way of life. People near the bank are in constant fear of losing their own home or business, or suffer the disruption of moving their belongings. A bank stabilization project will eliminate their fears. REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT (RD) Primary concerns of Regional Development are the levels of emp loyment and the business and industrial activity. With a stable waterfront the transportation and fishing industries would grow resulting in more employment and economic growth for the depressed area. SELECTED PLAN The selected plan should be the plan which best meets community needs, national economic development, and environmental quality. The Bank Protection plan using rock riprap is designated the selected pian. This plan maximizes net benefits, meets the requirements of the community, allows for future development of the waterfront, and has minimal environmental impact. 55 R: 11/82 U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are provided to minimize the potential impact on fisn and wildlife resources of stabilizing the Bethel waterfront: 1. That Alternative B using fill with concrete mattress protection be chosen as the selected plan should the CE decide to proceed with a project. 2. That, as a second choice, Alternative B using quarry rock from an upland site at tne USAF installation at Cape Newenham be chosen if concrete mattresses are not used. 3. That, as a third choice, Alternative B using quarry rock from a beach site at the USAF installation at Cape Newenham be chosen if concrete mattresses are not used. 4. Tnat the following stipulations be applied should either quarry site be chosen at Cape Newenham: a. That the contractor be made aware of the large seabird colony on Bird Rock and asked to avoid it from June 1 to August 15 during landings and takeoffs of any private aircraft associated with the project. b. That blasting be prohibited from May 1 to August 15. c. That the project life last no longer than 1 year. d. That no barge traffic go within 2 miles of the Bird Rock colony from June 1 to August 15. e. That any staging area for barges be confined to the small bay adjacent to the site. f. That the loading of barges be restricted to one area along the beach. g. That all fuel and lubricants be stored in leakproof con- tainers at least 500 feet from MHHW and the storage area bermed and lined to prevent any accidental spills from reaching the marine environment. h. That the FWS be given the opportunity to monitor all phases of the quarry operation. 5. That no quarry rock be removed from Beluga Hill in Goodnews Bay. 6. That the remaining exposed bank of the parent project along the Bethel waterfront (Alternative B) be revegetated with grasses and shrubs the first growing season after construction ends. 7. That all junked cars and other debris presently piled along the eroding bank at Bethel be removed and placed in a suitable upland disposal site. 56 RESPONSE TO USF&WS RECOMMENDATIONS The use of concrete mattresses will not be recommended as the selected plan because the cost of this alternative is significantly higher than using rock. In addition, it is uncertain how stable concrete mattresses would be against the ice force as compared with rock. Using concrete mattresses involves more risk because of a lack of information on how ice forces in northern rivers react against concrete mattresses. Bank protection using quarry rock is the selected plan. If possibie, the upland site at the USAF installation will be used, however, the Air Force is concerned that blasting may have an impact on their radar equipment. If this is the case, the beach site would be the second Choice for quarry rock. The Corps of Engineers will not use quarry rock from Goodnews Bay. The Corps will comply with all items outlined in Item 4 of the USF&WS recommendations with the following exception: Item C. It is possible that more than 1 year would be required for quarry activities in order to meet your timing stipulations for blasting. The time will be kept to the minimum required. Revegetation of the shore is part of the project design for stabilizing the shore and minimizing erosion. Before the bank could be stabilized it would be necessary to remove all junk cars and other debris. The city has suggested that the material be used to fill two existing upland quarry pits. The Corps would require fill material to be placed over the debris and then reseeded. 57 8s SUMMARY COMPARISON OF FINAL ALTERNATIVE PLANS A. PLAN DESCRIPTION Bank Protection Rock Bank Protection Concrete Mattresses Diversion Structure Dredging B. IMPACT ASSESSMENT Economic Impacts Annual Benefits/yr Annual Cost/yr Benefit Cost Ratio Property Value Tax Revenue Public Facilities TABLE 12 Without Project (No Action Plan) None None None None None N/A N/A No change No change No change Bank Protection, Concrete Mattresses (Plan A) None 1,614,000 square feet None None 1,526,400 2,212,000 9.69 No change Increased revenues from expanded tax base Provide protection for city dock, and medical support buildings Bank Protection, Rock Riprap (Plan B) 190,000 cubic yards None None None 1,494,400 1,273,000 1.17 No change Same as Plan A Same as Plan A River Diversion (Plan C) 114,000 cubic yards None 158,000 cubic yards 1,400,000 cubic yard 1,516,400 2,142,000 0.71 No change Same as Plan A Same as Plan A 6S Public Service Regional Growth Employment Business Activity Displaced homes, business etc. C. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Archaeological Water Quality Air Pollution Natural Resources Without Project (No Action Plan) No change No change No change No change Homes and business will be moved back from the advancing river None _ Degradation will continue caused by motors, car bodies, etc. placed along riverbank No change Valuable waterfront property lost TABLE 12 (cont) Bank Protection, Concrete Mattresses (Plan A) No change Increased growth of fishing and transportation industries Increased in the fishing and transportation industries Increased support of the fish- ing and transportation industries None None Improve Water Quality No change None Bank Protection, Rock Riprap (Plan B) No change Same as Plan A Same as Plan A Same as Plan A None None Same as Plan A Same as Plan A None River Diversion (Plan C) No change Same as Plan A Same as Plan A Same as Plan A None None Same as Plan A Same as Plan A Increased river trip upstream requires mo gasoline & oi) 09 Lands Habitat D. SOCIAL _IMPACTS Noise Displacement of People Esthetics Community Growth Without Project (No Action Plan) Valuable waterfront land lost No effect No change No change No change No change TABLE 12 (cont) Bank Protection, Concrete Mattresses (Plan A) Valuable waterfront property saved No effect Noise generated during construc- tion with operation of the dredge and barges No change Removal of car bodies and other debris from bank Allows for port development Bank Protection, Rock Riprap (Plan B) Same as Plan A No effect Same as Plan A No change Same as Plan A Same as Plan A River Diversion Same as Plan A Possible fish entrap Same as Plan A No change Same as Plan A Same as Plan A 19 Description ACCOUNTS le National Economic Development (NED) a. Beneficial Impacts (1) Real Estate (2) Moving Expense (3) City Dock & Tank Farm (4) NED Employment Total Renefits b. Adverse Impacts (1) Project First Cost (2) Average Annual Project Costs Without Project (No Action Plan) The eroding river at Bethel is not stopped N/A TABLE 13 SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTS Bank Protection, Concrete Mattresses (Plan A) Bank erosion is stopped using fabricated concrete mattresses Placed on the bank extending from the thalweg to just above the top of the wave zone. 925,000 29,000 492,400 80,000 1,526,400 25,200,000 2,212,000 Bank Protection, Rock Riprap (Plan B) Bank erosion is stopped using rock riprap placed on the bank extending from the thalweg to just above the top of the wave zone. 925,000 29,000 492,400 48,000 1,494,400 14,700,000 1,273,000 River diversion (Plan C) Bank erosion is stopped by diverting the river away from Betnel and by Placing rock on the banx in the wave zone. 925,000 29,000 492,400 —/0,000 1,516,400 22,000,000 2,142,000 79 Description (3) Average Annual O&M Costs (4) Average Annual NED Costs c. Net Benefits N/A d. B/C Ratio N/A Environmental Quality (LEO) a. Water Quality Without Project TABLE 13 (cont) Bank Protection, Concrete Bank Protection, Rock Riprap River Diversion (No Action Plan) Mattresses (Plan A) (Plan 8) (Plan C) 102,000 - 42,000 300,000 2,212,000 1,273,000 2,142,000 -0-" 221,400 -0- 0.69 ° 1.17 0.71 Degration will continue caused by motors, car bodies, Improve Water Quality etc. placed along the riverbank b. Esthetics No change c. Natural Habitat No effect d. Fish No effect e. Wildlife No effect f. Wetlands No changé g. Threatened or endangered species No change Removal of car bodies and other debris from riverbank No effect No effect No effect No known impacts No known Impacts Same as Plan A Same as Plan A Loss of natural habitat at quarry site No significant effect No effect Same as Plan A Same as Plan A Same as Plan A Same as Plan A Loss of downstream riv habitat Possible fish entrapi No effect Possible impact on downstream wetlands Same as Plan A €9 Description h. Archeological 3. Regional Development a. Direct Construction Expenditure b. Induced Economic Activity c. Taxes, Government 4. Social Well-Being a. Quality of Life Without Project (No Action Plan) No change none none No change No change TABLE 13 (cont) Bank Protection, Concrete Mattresses (Plan A) No known Impacts 25,200,000 Allows for increased growth of fishing and transportation industries Increased revenues from expanded tax base Increased income and economic growth will increase standard of living Bank Protection, Rock Riprap (Plan B) Same as Plan A 14,700,000 Same as Plan A Same as Plan A Same as Plan A River Diversior Same as Plan A 22,000,000 Same as Plan A Same as Plan A Same as Plan A DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITY An examination of bank protection projects authorized by Congress, including Willamette River Basin, Bank Protection, Oregon, authorized by the 1936 Flood Control Act and amended by the 1938 and 1950 Flood Control Acts; and the Lower Columbia River Basin, Bank Protection, Oregon and Washington, authorized by the 1950 Flood Control Act; reveals that the sharing of costs is the same as required for local protection flood control projects. Accordingly, in keeping with congressional precedent, the sharing of costs between Federal and nonfederal interests for the Proposed bank protection at Bethel would require nonfederal interests to furnish all lands and rights-of-way including relocations, and assume responsibility for all damages. Nonfederal interests also would bear the costs of operating and maintaining the project features in accordance with Federal requirements. The Federal Government would be responsible for construction costs of all project features. However, the Administration is reviewing project cost sharing and financing across the entire spectrum of water resource development functions and has submitted proposed legislation to Congress for navigation projects. The basic principle governing the development of specific cost sharing policies is that whenever possible the cost of services produced by water projects should be paid for by their direct beneficiaries. It also is recognized that the Federal Government can no longer bear the major portion of the financing of water projects. New sources of project financing, both public and private, will have to be found. While specific policies applicable for the Bethel Bank Stabilization project have not yet been estabiished, nonfederal interests can expect that under the Administration's financing and cost sharing principles, the level of their financial participation will need to be significantly greater than in the past. CONCLUSIONS Based on the analysis performed during this study, the Bank Protection plan using rock riprap appears to be the best solution to meet both national and local objectives. Congress authorized this study with particular reference to the provision of bank stabilization improvements at and in the vicinity of Bethel. Although much of the property at the current waters-edge in Bethel is privately owned, the intent of the proposed project is to protect the entire community including all of the public infrastructure. In addition, the river front development is not only essential for servicing the needs of Bethel, it is necessary for the survival of 48 outlying villages. The inability of Bethel to undertake a solution as proposed in this report has lead to unsuccessful piecemeal attempts to abate erosion. The resultant failures have only served to heighten the anxieties of local interests. Since the magnitude of a complete solution 64 R: 12/82 to the bank erosion problem is beyond the means of Bethel, the continued existence of the community is at stake, and the project beneficiaries are widespread, Federal remedial action is believed to be in the public interest. RECOMMENDATION I have carefully considered environmental, social, and economic ramifications of providing streambank stabilization at Bethel, Alaska and find that such development is feasible and in the overall public interest. I recommend that the plan for streambank stabilization selected herein for Bethel, Alaska be authorized for implementation as a Federal project, with such modifications as in the discretion of the Chief of Engineers may be advisable; at a first cost to the United States presently estimated at $13,780,000 (total project cost minus lands, easements, rights-of-way and stockpiled maintenance rock). This recommendation is made with the provision that prior to the commencement of construction, nonfederal interest will agree to: a) Cost-sharing and financing arrangements satisfactory to the President and the Congress; b) Provide without cost to the United States all lands, easements and rights-of-way, including suitable areas for borrow and disposal of excavated material as determined by the Chief of Engineers, necessary for the construction of the project; c) Accomplish without cost to the United States all alterations and relocations of buildings, roads, bridges, and other existing structures or utilities made necessary by the construction; d) Hold and save the United States free from all damages due to construction of the project, not including damages due to the fault or negligence of the United States or its contractors; e) Provide a cash contribution equal to the cost of the stockpiling of rock during construction of the project, necessary for the maintenance of the rock riprap bank stabilization. f) Maintain and operate all the works after completion in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Army; and, g) Prescribe and enforce regulations to protect the embankment and seeded areas, and prevent incompatible encroachment on the embankment. NEIX E. SALING Colonel, Corps of Engineers District Engineer 65 R: 11/82 NPDPL-PF (Mar 82) Ist Ind SUBJECT: Final Environmental Impact Statement and Feasibility Report, Bank Stabilization - Bethel, Alaska DA, North Pacific Division, Corps of Engineers, P.0. Box 2870, Portland, OR 97208 22 November 1982 TO: CDR USACE (DAEN-ZA) WASH DC 20314 1 concur in the conclusions and recommendations of the District Commander. . VAN a SELS ones rigadier Genetel, USA Commanding 66 R 11/82 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED PLAN FOR BANK STABILIZATION BETHEL, ALASKA The responsible agency is the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska District. ABSTRACT Bethel, Alaska, is a major economic, educational, health and social service center for southwest Alaska, an area as large as the State of Oregon. Located on the north bank of the Kuskokwim River, Bethel is threatened by a rapidly eroding riverbank which has resulted in a loss of the property, structures, roads, and utilities nearest the river. Because suitable sites for relocation of the community do not exist, the Corps of Engineers has studied several solutions for stabilizing the bank. The Corps selected two alternatives for detailed study, Bank Protection and River Diversion with Bank Protection. The Bank Protection alternative would stabilize the bank by using either rock riprap or concrete mattresses over a filter fabric in the wave and ice zone extending to tne deepest part of the river and jute mat and grass on the banks above the wave and ice zone. River Diversion with Bank Protection consists of rock riprap over filter fabric in the wave and active ice zone, jute mat and grass seed on the bank above the wave and ice zone, and a rock diversion dam across the channel closest to Bethel to divert the river away from the Bethel shoreline. Two quarry sites were identified for rock source, the U.S. Air Force installation at Cape Newenham and Buluga Hill at Goodnews Bay. Both alternatives would stabilize the bank, protect businesses, nomes, and important regional services and improve the environmental quality of the shoreline by removing car bodies, and other debris. Bank Protection would not have a significant environmental impact on fish and wildlife resources or cultural practices at Bethel. River Diversion with Bank Protection may have an impact on migrating fish, and on navigation into Bethel and would increase the travel time to Bethel from upriver. Bank Protection using rock riprap and River Diversion with Bank ~ Protection would require use of quarry rock. Both would impact bird populations and natural resources at the quarry site location. Bank Protection using rock riprap has been selected because it provides the best overall response to the study objective and is the National Economic Development Plan. If you would like further information of this statement, please contact: Mr. William D. Lloyd Commercial Telephone: U.S. Army Engineer District, Alaska (907) 752-2572 ATTN: NPAEN-PL-EN AUTOVON: 317-752-2572 P.O. Box 7002 Anchorage, Alaska 99510 EIS-1 SUMMARY A. MAJOR CONCLUSIONS AND FINDINGS The Bank Protection alternative using rock was chosen as the National Economic Development (NED) Plan because it has the best benefit-to-cost relationship. Bank Protection using concrete mattresses was chosen as the Least Environmentally Damaging (LED) Plan because it would have a minimum impact on the ecology of the area and on fish and wildlife resources. Bank Protection using rock was not chosen as the LED because it involves quarry activities which impact bird populations and natural resources at the quarry site location. Both would improve the environ- mental and esthetic quality of the town front area by removing motors, junk car bodies, and other debris from the riverbank fronting Bethel. The River Diversion alternative also involves removal of debris from the river but was not chosen because it would have an impact on fish, down- stream river habitat, and would block direct access to Bethel from up- stream causing a change in the present transportation and trade practices of individuals from villages upstream of Bethel. It also involves quarry site impacts. Bank Protection using rock was chosen as the selected plan because it best meets community needs, national economic development, and environmental quality. The quarry sites at Cape Newenham are recommended because the impacts can be minimized by mitigation measures as compared to Goodnews Bay which would result in loss of the seabird colony and habitat with no possibility of mitigation or reducing impacts. No endangered species or archeological sites would be affected by the project. No major impacts to water quality, fish and wildlife, cultural or social resources would occur as a result of the project. The project would not result in any irretrievable or irreversible commitment of resources other than energy. Sufficient data is not available to evaluate the energy requirements and conservation potential of the alter- natives. For this particular project this type of comparison is not considered an important issue. A Section 404(b)(1) evaluation was completed for placing fill in a navigable stream (Appendix F). The project was found to be in compliance with Section 404(b)(1) of the Clean Water Act. The project would not have an affect on wetlands. The recommended alternative complies with the objectives of Executive Order 11988 (Floodplain Management). Bethel is located in the base floodplain as shown on map on page D-4. Development has occured in the floodplain and particularly on the Kuskokwin shore line because there are no practical alternatives for developing outside the floodplain and the economy and culture of Bethel is directly dependent on being located on the Kuskokwin shore. The project must be located in the floodplain to fulfill its purpose, that of stabilizing the bank. Stabilizing the bank would encourage expansion of water front development, however, Bethel is under the Federal Flood Insurance Program therefore all new structures will comply to strict building specifications to reduce flood damage. Neither adverse nor beneficial impacts on the floodplain are expected to occur as a result of the projects. Coordination with the U.S. Fish and EIS-2 Wildlife Service to provide information on fish and wildlife impacts occurred throughout the planning stages. As a result of field investigations the Fish and Wildlife Service determined that the parent project at Bethel would not have a significant impact on fish and wildlife resources but that quarry activity could result in an impact to natural resources and bird population at the quarry site location. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has recommended guidelines that would minimize the impacts. The results of the coordination is given in the 17 April 1980 Coordination Act Report, included in Appendix E. B. AREA OF CONTROVERSY There were no major disagreements among public interest groups during the course of the study. C. UNRESOLVED ISSUES There are no unresolved conflicts or major disagreements among study area interests. D. RELATIONSHIP TO ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS Bank Protection with rock riprap River Diversion with Federal Policies or concrete mattresses Bank Protection Archeological and Full compliance Historical Preservation Act Clean Air Act, As Amended Full compliance Coastal Zone Management Act Partial compliance; requirement will be met when final EIS is reviewed Endangered Species Act Full compliance of 1973 Estuary Protection Act NA Clean Water Act Full compliance Federal Water Project NA Recreation Act Fish and Wildlife Full compliance Coordination Act Land and Water Conservation Fund Act NA Marine Protection, Research NA and Sanctuary Act EIS-3 Bank Protection with rock riprap River Diversion with Federal Policies or concrete mattresses Bank Protection National Environmental Partial compliance; requirement will Policy Act be met with the filing of the final EIS with EPA National Historic Full compliance Rivers and Harbors Act 1899 NA Watershed Protection NA and Flood Prevention Act Water Resource Planning Full compliance Act of 1966 Wild and Scenic Rivers Act NA Flood Plain Management Full compliance £.0. 11988 Protection of Wetlands Full compliance £.0. 11990 State and Local Policies Alaska Coastal Management Partial compliance; requirement will be met when final EIS is reviewed Bethel Comprehensive Full compliance Land Use Plan Required Federal Entitlements None Required NOTES: The compliance categories used in this table were assigned based on the definitions: a. Full compliance - all requirements of the policy and related regulations have been met. b. Partial compliance - some requirements of the policy and related regulations remain to be met. c. Noncompliance - none of the requirements of the policy and related regulations have been met. . d. NA - Not applicable to this project. EIS-4 Item TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT SUMMARY A. Major Conclusions and Findings B. Area of Controversy C. Unresolved Issues D. Relationship to Environmental Requirements I. NEED FOR AND OBJECTIVE OF ACTION QAwmDp Study Authority Public Concerns Planning Objectives II. ALTERNATIVES ontyYp I. 2. 3. Plans Eliminated from Further Study Without Condition (No Action) - Plans Considered in Detail Bank Protection River Diversion With Bank Protection Alternative Quarry Site Locations D. Comparative Impacts of Alternatives Ill. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT A. Existing Conditions B. Significant Resources l. 2. 3. 4. 5 6 7 8 Quarry Sites The Kuskokwim River Bethel; A Regional Center Subsistence Life Style Water Quality Fish and Wildlife and Endangered Species Social Economic Groups Historical Archeological Resources IV. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS Effects on Significant Resources ANAMHRWNH — Quarry Site Kuskokwim River , Bethel; A Regional Center Subsistence Life Style Water Quality Fish and Wildlife and Endangered Species Social Economic Groups Historical Archeological Resources EIS-5 Page EIS-1 EIS-2 EIS-2 EIS-3 EIS-3 EIS-3 EIS-7 EIS-7 EIS-7 EIS-7 EIS-8 EIS-8 EIS-9 EIS-9 EIS-9 EIS-10 EIS-10 EIS-11 EIS-14 EIS-14 EIS-15 EIS-15 EIS-18 EIS-19 EIS-20 EIS-20 EIS-20 EIS-22 EIS-23 EIS-25 EIS-25 EIS-25 EIS-27 EIS-28 EIS-29 EIS-29 EIS-30 EIS-30 EIS-30 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont) Item Page V. LIST OF PREPARERS EIS-32 VI. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT EIS-33 A. Public Involvement Program EIS-33 B. Required Coordination EIS-33 C. Statement Recipients EIS-33 D. Public Views .and Responses EIS-33 INDEX, REFERENCES AND APPENDIXES EIS-35 BIBLIOGRAPHY EIS-38 EIS-6 I. NEED FOR AND OBJECTIVES OF ACTION A. STUDY AUTHORITY In response to a request by the city of Bethel, Congress authorized the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to study and report on the bank erosion problem. On 9 September 1977 the committee on Environmental and Public Works requested a review of pertinent reports to determine whether any modifications to recommendations (contained within the reports) are ao for bank stabilization improvements at and in the vicinity of ethel. B. PUBLIC CONCERN The following public concerns were identified by public interest groups at informal meetings and at a formal public meeting held 5 March 1980: 1. The need for a long term solution that would include future plans for expansion. 2. How soon the project could be constructed. 3. Erosion of valuable waterfront land and consequent decrease in the supply of usable land. 4. Threat of erosion to the city dock, the hospital support buildings, the Standard O0i1 tank farm, and other buildings and structures. 5. Shore based facilities for transportation and fishing cannot be constructed or improved due to the unstable condition of the riverfront. 6. Protection of the banks must not cause significant adverse environmental impacts, impede navigation or hinder fishing. C. PLANNING OBJECTIVES The following is a summary of planning objectives given on page 29 of the Feasibility Report: 1. To develop alternatives to resolve riverbank erosion at Bethel. 2. To assure that these alternatives will retain the lifestyle and cultural values of residents of Bethel and surrounding areas. 3. To assure that alternatives will not interfere with Bethel's position as a center for trade, education, and health. 4. To develop alternatives that will not hinder river navigation to and from Bethel or development and expansion of the fishing industry 5. To prevent unnecessary damage to the environment. EIS-7 R: 11/82 II. ALTERNATIVES A. PLANS ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER STUDY Eight alternative solutions were studied for bank stabilization at Bethel. Six alternatives were eliminated from further study for engi- neering and economic reasons and for lack of public acceptability because of interference with cultural and economic patterns. A summary of each eliminated alternative is given below and a detailed description of each alternative is given in the Plan Formulation Section of the report, page 29 through 40: 1. Steel Wall with Rock Toe Protection (Figure 15) -- Except for quarry activity, there would be minimal environmental impact. Eliminated because of high cost estimate. 2. Steel Wall with Articulated Concrete Mattress Toe Protection (Figure 16) -- Minimal environmental impact. Eliminated because of high cost estimate and engineering feasibility of laying the concrete mattresses. 3. Steel Wall and Sloped Bank -- Moderate environmental impact. Eliminated because of high cost estimate. Also, this alternative would require onland disposal of 400,000 cubic yards of silty sand which could involve disposal in a wetland area since available nonwetland sites are scarce and valuable land. 4. River Diversion (Figure 17), diverting the river from the main channel to an existing side channel -- Possible impacts would be, increased siltation, change in down stream habitat, entrapment of migratory salmon. (Note the impacts for this alternative are very similar to Alternative C, one of the detailed plans described in this report.) This alternative was eliminated because river diversion alone would not provide erosion protection from wind, rain, and wave action. 5. Diversion Channel (Figure 18), constructing a diversion channel to allow the river to by pass Bethel -- This alternative was dropped because of social and economic impacts to Bethel and adverse enviromental impacts from increase siltation, changes in downstream habitat, potential impacts on migratory salmon, and disposal of dredged material. 6. Nonstructural Solution, relocate structures when they become threatened by the eroding bank of the Kuskokwim -- This alternative was dropped because it would not stabilize the bank, which is necessary to maintain fishing, transportation, and other water related industries that are extremely important to the local and regional economy. Suitable land for relocation is not available and developing marginal lands is expen- sive. There could be potential impacts from loss of wildlife habitat and filling in wetlands to provide land for relocation. The idea of moving from the river is not culturally acceptable to the people of Bethel whose culture and economy depends on their location on the Kuskokwim. EIS-8 B. WITHOUT CONDITION (NO FEDERAL ACTION) The without condition is a description of what would be expected to occur if no Federal action is taken. At this time there are no State or local plans to address the planning objectives. Several short term alternatives have been tried. These alternatives are described on page 20. The impacts that no Federal action would have on significant resources is given in Section IV for each resource. The following discussion summarizes the impacts: No action would result in loss of property in an area where real estate suitable for development is scarce. Loss of businesses and’ resi- dences would occur except where it is economically feasible to move them, placing a significant economic burden on individuals forced to relocate. Land suitable for relocating buildings would need to be found and then developed. Extensive protective structures would need to be installed periodically to protect the Standard Oil tank farm. This first stage of protection has begun. The city decided that costly protection was the only alternative to relocating the tank farm. By not stabilizing the riverbank, businesses would not only be lost but surviving businesses could not expand on the remainder of the Bethel waterfront. This would have a detrimental effect on the economy of Bethel. Despite these impacts Bethel would continue to be a regional supplier of goods and services. It is expected that some services would be more costly, less convenient or eliminated as a result of no action. No action would not affect the subsistence life style, fish and wildlife resources, cultural groups or the natural environment of the Kuskokwim River downstream of Bethel (the waterfront at Bethel is not considered natural). Junk cars and other debris are now being used as a means of stabilizing the riverbanks at the Bethel waterfront. If no action is taken junk cars and debris would continue to be placed or would fall into the river. C. PLANS CONSIDERED IN DETAIL ]. Bank Protection Bank protection would extend from Lousetown Slough to just downstream of the Standard Oi] Company tank farm using either articulated concrete mattresses or rock riprap. If rock riprap is used, approximately 190,000 cubic yards will be required. A dragline would be used to smooth the river bottom before placement of the protective units. The protection would extend from the upper portion of the bank in the wave and active ice zones to the river thalweg. Rock or concrete mattress would be placed over a filter fabric to prevent erosion of fine material through the gaps. The bank above the wave zone would be protected by laying a jute mat and planting grass seed. Car bodies, 55-gallon drums, motors, and other heavy debris placed on the bank along the waterfront to slow the erosion rate would have to be removed before bank restoration could be accomplished. The debris would be disposed of in an upland borrow pit EIS-9 R: 11/82 impacts of this alternative would be minimal. A teniporary increase in sedimentation would occur during construction. This short term increase in sediment should have little impact on fish and wildlife resources. Using rock riprap to stabilze the bank would result in an impact to natural resources and bird populations at the quarry site location. For a detailed description of the alternative refer to the Plan Formulation Section of the report, page 40. 2. River Diversion with Bank Protection This alternative involves the use of bank protection in the wave zone ] and above, plus a diversion dam to divert the river away from the Bethel town front. Unlike the alternative Bank Protection with rock, rock protection would not be required in the river below the wave and ice zone. Approximately 190,000 cubic yards of rock would be required. The diversion dam would be located at the mouth of Lousetown Slough 2 and would cross the river to the island opposite Bethel. It would divert the main flow of the river to the channel on the southeast side of the island off Bethel. This would prevent the main forces of the river from acting on the bank and would still allow waterborne access to Bethel from the river channel adjacent to Bethel. Direct access to that channel from upstream would be blocked by the diversion. The core of the diversion dam would consist of rockfill with riprap 3 placed on the top and sides. The crest width would be 20 feet and elevation, +7 feet MLLW. The existing cutoff channel opposite Bethel does not have the 4 capacity to carry the additional flow when the river is diverted, there- fore the channel would require dredging to provide the necessary capacity. The material would be disposed of at the upstream toe of the diversion structure. Frequent maintenance dredging may be required to keep the channel open. The dredged material will also be disposed of at the upstream toe of the diversion structure. This alternative would have the following environmental impacts: temporary increase in the silt load of the river, possible entrapment of migrating salmon, possible change in downstream habitat, impact the natural resource and bird habitat at the quarry site location, and would result in removal of car bodies and debris from the river. The debris would be disposed of in an upland borrow pit provided by the city. For a detailed description of the alternative refer to the Plan Formulation Section of the report, page 45. 3. Alternative Quarry Site Locations Economics and the scarcity of suitable rock close to Bethel have 1 caused the Corps of Engineers to search the western coast of Alaska for material sites. Two potential rock sources, one at Goodnews Bay and the other at Cape Newenham, both a considerable distance southwest of Bethel along the coast (see Plate c-4), are being considered for the project. Goodnews Bay is the location of an isolated seabird colony which would be EIS-10 totally distroyed by quarry activities. Impacts could not be minimized or mitigated because no other suitable marine cliff habitat exist for a considerable distance in this portion of the western coast of Alaska. Cape Newenham is a National Wildlife Refuge for sea birds. location is on the U.S. Air Force installation. an existing quarry and the beach site is not used by sea birds. can be minimized by timing constraints. The quarry The upper quarry site is Impacts Cape Newenham is the quarry site location preferred by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, provided certain stipulations are followed to protect the resource during quarry activities. and loading the rock onto barges. 56 of the Feasibility Report. Quarry activities include drilling, blasting (above water), The stipulations are discussed on page If rock riprap is used for bank protection, quarry activities would conceivably have more impact than the parent project at Bethel. For this reason great attention has been given to describing the quarry sites and the impacts of quarry activities in the FEIS under Affected Environment and Environmental Effects. Bank Protection with rock, has been designated as the National Economic Development (NED) and selected plan. Bank Protection with concrete mattresses has been selected as the Least Environmentally Damaging (LED) plan because it does not require the use of quarry rock. D. COMPARATIVE IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVES Bank Protection using concrete No Action Mattresses Using Rock River Diversion Cape No Effect No Effect Impact *N.W.R. Impact *N.W.R. Newenham seabirds colony seabirds colony, quarry and herring and herring site spawing. Impacts spawning. Impacts can be minimized. can be minimized. Goodnews No Effect No Effect Seabird colony Seabird colony Bay quarry eliminated. eliminated. site No mitigation No mitigation possible. possible. Benef it/ Not Applicable 0.69 1.17 0.71 Cost *National Wildlife Refuge EIS-11 R: 11/82 Bethel; A Regional Center Kuskokwim River No Action Continue to be a regional center but quality of regional center reduced. Junk-cars etc. will continue to be used for bank stabili- zation causing potential im- pediment to navi- gation, degrada- tion of water quality and esthetics. Bank Protection using rock or Concrete Mattress Protect waterfront and allow for expan- sion of regional services. Benefit by removing junk- cars, etc. EIS-12 River Diversion Protect waterfront allow for expan- sion of regional services. Hard- ship on upriver residents who must go around the diversion to get to a dock- ing area or city dock. Benefit by removing junk cars etc. Possible change in downstream habitat, possible increase erosion of islands, point bars etc. would eliminate direct access from up- stream into Bethel. Subsis- tence life style Fish and Wildlife Water Quality Social Economic Groups Historical and Archeo- logical No Action No effect No significant impact . Degradation will remain the same, car bodies, junk, oil grease. Economic opportunities could be reduced by continued ero- sion of the shore- line. Economic loss would continue. No impact Bank Protection using rock or Concrete Mattresses No effect No significant impact Improve water quality Increase emp loyment opportunities No impact EIS-13 River Diversion Increase cost and time for fishing up- stream. Possibility of fish entrapment (slight) Improve water quality Increase emp loyment opportunities No impact III. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT A. EXISTING CONDITIONS Betnel is located on the banks of the Kuskokwim River in southwest Alaska, approximately 400 miles west of Anchorage. It was originally the Eskimo village of Mumtrekhlogamute and later the site of an Alaska Commer- cial Company trading post. The name was changed to Bethel in 1886 when a Moravian mission and mission school were located in the village attrac- ting people to the area. Bethel continued to grow, becoming the largest trade center of the region. Today it is an important cultural, economic, transportation, health, and government services center for. the region's 16,000 Yupik speaking Eskimos. Bethel's population of approximately 4,000 is 65 percent Native. . The climate in Bethel is influenced by a maritime air mass from the Bering Sea 100 miles to the west and southwest and by the Kilbuck Mountains 40 miles to the east and southeast. Summer temperatures average 54 to 55 degress Fahrenheit (F) and winter 13 to 14 degrees F, although there can be extremes of +90 degrees F and -52 degrees F when the climate is influenced by the continental air mass. The constant wind from 11 to 15 miles per hour affects the air temperature causing wind chill much lower than the actual air temperature. The predominate wind is from the north-northeast except during July, August, and September when it blows from the south-southwest and May when it blows from the south. Winds can occur in excess of 50 miles per hour. Bethel is located in the Kuskokwim River flood plain in a low lying flat area of wet tundra and moist tundra. Numerous small lakes, pot- holes, and wetlands dot the landscape’. The Kuskokwim River, Bethel's most important resource, is a slow moving, meandering river that is actively eroding its banks. The river is a migratory corridor for all five species of salmon. Sheefish, white fish, rainbow, and smelt are taken for subsistence use and sport. Muskrat and snowshoe hare are found around Bethel but large game animals such as moose, grizzly bear, black bear, and wolves are seen only occasionally. The Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta is one of the most important bird nesting areas in North America with the single most productive part of the delta located some 50 miles west of Bethel (Selkregg 1972). The areas that would be affected by the proposed alternatives are the quarry site locations described below, and the shoreline of the Kuskokwim River described on page EIS-18 under Kuskokwim River, and shown on Plate D-4 and on photos in Figures 3 through 5 and 8 through 13. Wetlands are not found in the areas affected by the project even though there are numerous wetlands in and around Bethel. EIS-14 B. SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES 1. Quarry Sites Because the major impacts of the bank stabilization project would be from quarry activities, a detailed description of both alternative quarry sites is given below. These descriptions were taken from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services Coordination Act (CA) Report. For a full list of references and literature cited please refer to the CA report in Appendix E. Goodnews Bay: The Goodnews Bay site (Figure 9 and 10 Appendix €) is located at the base of Beluga Hill across the bay, northeast of Platinum and due west of Goodnews. Lowland habitats adjacent to Goodnews Bay support widely scattered populations of nesting arctic terns, Aleutian terns, mews, Sabine's, and glaucous gulls. Lowland areas are also used by waterfowl for nesting and molting. Colonies of arctic and Aleutian terns are located on the sandspits forming the entrance to Goodnews Bay. One seabird colony at the tip of the south spit contains 600 Aleutian terns and numerous arctic terns. A field investigation of 16 July 1980 also vertified that the cliffs along the majority of the face of Beluga Hill are nesting habitat primarily for glaucous-winged gulls and pelagic cormorants (Figure 11). Due to the lack of access, a population assessment of only the eastern third of the hill was conducted. The bayward side of the hill consists of sheer cliffs, rising about 300 feet above mean sea level. Glaucous-winged gulls utilize the cliff top for nesting. The contours of the hill made actual counts impossible although some nests and young were observed. A very gross population estimate is approximately 300 adult Glaucous-winged gulls which is considered a low estimate. Direct counts for adult and young were made on two species of cormo- rant pelagic and red-faced. A total of 270 adults and 48 young were observed on the eastern one-third of Beluga Hill. Many of the ledges at the cliffs were deep and numerous sightings of adults with no nest observed could have been on nest. In many instances, the number of young in the nest was probably higher as the young could have been behind the adults which were present. In addition to the sitting cormorants, between 30 to 50 adults were airborne at the hill at all times. Of the cormorants observed, approximately 95 percent were pelagic with the remaining 5 percent red-faced. It should be noted that the eastern portion of the hill supported more than half of the birds. Due to the rough terrain and contours of the hill, the counts taken are considered low. The actual number of birds could be twice that actually counted. Other seabirds observed in the Beluga Hill/Goodnews Bay area included pigeon guillemots, horned puffins, glaucous gulls, mew gulls, arctic terns, Aleutian terns, black-legged kittiwakes, and approximately 20 scaup. Shorebirds were scarce and only two species were identified - several Aierican golden plover and four whimbrel. Perching birds observed in the area included: common redpoll, savannah sparrow, golden- crowned sparrow, Wilson's warbler, yellow warbler, yellow wagtail, gray- cheeked thrush, and several nesting Say's phoebe. EIS-15 ] The Goodnews River enters the bay from the east and contains spawning runs of chinook, sockeye, coho, pink, and chum salmon. The entire bay is utilized by commerical fishermen using drift and set gill nets. The bay is also used as a spawning area for Pacific herring and supports a commer- cial and subsistence fishery on that species. Representative terrestrial mammals of the area include moose, wolf, wolverine, red fox, river otter, mink, lynx, beaver, and muskrat. Marine mammal hauling out areas or rookeries have not been found in Goodnews Bay. Harbor seals are most likely found in the bay due to their widespread distribution along the western coast of Alaska (Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G).) No threatened or endangered species as listed by the U.S. Department of the Interior (1979) are known to occur in the vicinity of Goodnews Bay. Records of the U.S. FWS contain an undocumented report of an endangered American peregrine falcon nesting on Beluga Hill sometime in the late 1940's. No evidence of any peregrine nest was found on Beluga Hill nor were any adult birds seen during field investigations on 16 July 1980. One raptor, a dark phase gyrfalcon, displayed protective nesting behavior for several hours while biologists searched for any signs of peregrines on the top of Beluga Hill. Cape Newenham: The Cape Newennam rock sources are located on the north stde of the Cape at the U.S. Air Force (USAF) radar and communi- cations installation (Figure 12 page E-17). Two potential quarries lie below the end of the runway adjacent to the coast (Figure 13 page E-18) and the third lies upland near communication towers east of the runway. The entire area surrounding the USAF installation is included in the Cape Newenham National Wildlife Refuge administered by the U.S. FWS. The Cape Newenham National Wildlife Refuge was created on 20 January 1969 when Interior Secretary Stuart Udall approved the transfer of 265,000 acres of public land to the National Wildlife Refuge System. The refuge was created primarily for the protection of seabirds and their habitat. Estimates of a million or more murres, kittiwakes, puffins, cormorants, guillemots, and gulls nesting around the cliffs and rocky islands have been made. The area around Cape Newenham and nearby Cape Pierce is the most important concentration of nesting seabirds in all of Bristol Bay. For example, within 5 air miles of the USAF installation there are 7 nesting colonies of over 367,000 birds. Appendix — contains a list of birds that have been identified on the refuge. A short field investigation was conducted at the potential Cape Newenham quarry sites on 16 July 1980. No seabird colonies were observed within the confines of the small unnamed bay adjacent to the USAF Property. However, seabirds were seen actively feeding and resting in the bay predominantly along the northern and southern shores. The majority of the birds were murres (1,000), glaucous-winged gulls (200), white-winged scoters (200), ‘and surf scoters (200). A substantial amount of bird movement occurred on the open ocean just outside of the bay generally from east to west. Several dozen cormorants and a few arctic loons were active in the bay also. EIS-16 Shorebirds included tens of rock sandpipers, several semipalmated 10 plovers, and a sanderling with two young. Perching birds included: Savannah sparrow, yellow wagtail, common raven, snow buting, and white-crowned sparrow. Bays near Cape Newenham are also important to migrating geese and 1 seaducks. A major migration route exists along the coast in the Cape Newenham area. During a relatively brief period in early spring and late fall, the bays are used as staging areas for ducks and geese migrating to and from their nesting grounds. Waterfowl use of the small bay near the USAF installation is unknown. However, due to the lack of extensive eelgrass beds, it is not believed to be a major staging area. There are no salmon spawning streams near the vicinity of the USAF 12 installation, but all five species of Pacific salmon occur offshore in marine waters. A substantial number of Pacific herring spawn on the beaches throughout the small bay adjacent to the USAF installation. Other marine species occurring in ocean waters near Cape Newenham are king crab and Pandalid shrimp (ADF&G). Marine mammals found on the refuge include walrus, northern sea lion, 13 and harbor seal. No major rookeries or hauling out areas are found on the refuge. No marine mammals were observed in the small bay near the Air Force site or along the outer coast during field investigations. In 1970, endangered gray whales were observed migrating past Cape Pierce from May through July. Terrestrial mammals include a few brown bear, moose, and wolves. 14 Smaller mammals such as the red fox, arctic fox, hoary marmot, and arctic ground squirrel are common. Information on threatened or endangered species as listed by the U.S. 15 Department of the Interior (1979) in the vicinity if Cape Newenham is not well documented. According to the Alaska Peregrine Falcon Recovery Team (1979), Cape Newenham is considered to be within the range of the endan- gered American peregrine falcon. This endangered species was observed southeast of Cape Newenham in the vicinity of Cape Pierce in 1970 and 1973. The sightings made were thought to be migrant birds; no nests were observed. Due to the lack of adequate surveys, the presence of peregrines has not been confirmed on Cape Newenham. Suitable cliff 16 habitat and an abundant food supply make some areas on Cape Newenham likely spots for nesting peregrines to be found. On 16 July 1980, biologists were able to determine that no peregrines were nesting in the low cliffs bordering the small bay adjacent to the USAF installation. Due to the presence of human activity and airplane traffic associated with USAF operations, it is likely that available cliff nesting habitat in the small bay is not suitable for peregrines. Eight species of endangered whales have been reported in the Bering Sea and may occur seasonally near Cape Newenham. The eight whale species are: blue, fin, sei, nump-backed, right, gray, sperm, and bowhead. The gray whale tend to maintain close contact with the coastline during their directed EIS-17 seasonal migration and typically, would be in the proposed project area when northbound during April through June and southbound during September through November. See Appendix A for coordination letters. 2. Kuskokwim River The Kuskokwim River is a slow-moving meandering river actively eroding its shoreline. It changes course continuously, eroding channels and islands, and at the same time, depositing silt to create mudflats, point bars, and deltas that are starting points for primary succession. Annual floods provide and recharge nutrients to the numerous wetlands surrounding the Kuskokwim. The tide influences both the velocity and level of the river at Bethel. Bethel is located on the outside curve of a meander where the rate of erosion is the greatest. The Kuskokwim shoreline is crowded with houses, businesses, fish buying plants, and dock facilities. Banks are steep with heights ranging from 5 to 10 feet along the town front and 30 to 50 feet further downstream near the hospital and tank farm. The soils forming the banks are composed of fine silt and sand. Vegetation has been removed along most of the town front shore and near the hospital causing accelerated erosion. gethel is affected by the natural processes of the Kuskokwim River, flooding and erosion, which have caused damage in Bethel and will con- tinue to cause damage. Of particular concern is the erosion of the waterfront area. Several manmade changes have occurred along the banks in Bethel that have had an effect on the erosion process and have degraded the appearance of the river at Bethel. The vegetation has been removed near the hospital resulting in rapid accelerating of erosion and increase in silt load in this location. A more significant change in the shoreline has been the dumping of numerous car bodies for bank stabili- zation starting at the city dock and extending along the town front. Submarine nets are being used on an experimental basis to stabilize the shoreline downstream of the car bodies. Both methods have slowed down the rate of erosion but are still not an effective long term alternative (see photos page 24). A timber bulkhead that would protect the town front was constructed in 1966 but failed in 1971. The Kuskokwim, a navigable river, is the most important cultural and economic resource in the Bethel area and surrounding region. It is the transportation corridor for 48 villages; a highway in a region where roads are almost nonexistent. During the summer there is constant activity on the river. Flat bottom river boats originating from areas around Bethel and remote villages up to 100 miles away, river and ocean- going barges and freighters all make use of the Kuskokwim River at Bethel during the summer. Snowmobiles and dog sleds replace river boats during the winter when the river is frozen. Activity is the greatest during the summer when villagers come to Bethel to buy groceries, dey goods, clothing, and sell native art work. The Kuskokwim also connects the villages to health and social services and is a commercial shipping corridor for fuel, building supplies, and food. The majority of all goods that come into Bethel are shipped from Anchorage and Kodiak by barge. From Bethel these goods are transported EIS-18 to villages in the region. In addition to transportation, the Kuskokwim is an important food source with subistence fishing and commercial fish- ing supplying a majority of food and income to the people of this region. 3. Bethel: A Regional Center The importance of Bethel as a regional center is a direct result of its location on the Kuskokwim. Bethel is a regional center for the Kuskokwim Delta Region which includes 48 villages and approximately 16,000 people of which 90 percent are Yupik speaking Eskimos. Health services, food, household goods, transportation, and government services are all provided. A new hospital and health service center was recently completed in Bethel. It provides health care for the region's residents, replacing the outdated hospital and health facilities. Kuskokwim Community College in Bethel provides opportunities for higher education for the people of the region. The stores in Bethel have food, staples, household supplies, clothing, and many other commodities at a lower price and much greater variety than small stores in outlying villages. Villagers who come to Bethel several times a year for supplies do not depend solely on Bethel for food since a large portion of their food is from a subsistence source, but for many other supplies and staples Bethel is the only source in the region. A local merchant: estimated that up to 75 percent of the store's business is generated by nonresidents. The goods and services provided to the region are an important economic base for Bethel. Bethel is the upper limit of navigation for oceangoing vessels making it the regional distribution center for cargo. Supplies are transferred from larger vessels to barges pulled by tug boats. Commercial barge companies in Bethel then transport the cargo and bulk fuel products to other communities on the Kuskokwim River and Bering Sea Coast. The Standard Oi] Company at Bethel estimates that they dispense 3 thousand 55-gallon drums of fuel and oi] during the summer, most of it to customers from outlying villages who transport the drums themselves by river boat to their villages. Commercial fish buyers in Bethel provide a market for villagers to sell their commercial catches. The commercial catch includes approxi- mately one half of the fish catch on the Kuskokwim River. Roads do not connect Bethel to outlying villages or to other parts of Alaska. Bethel is the transportation center for locations outside of the region, and commercial air flights are scheduled daily from Bethel to Anchorage and other parts of Alaska. Small charter planes connect Bethel to outlying villages. EIS-19 Bethel is the cultural ana social center for Yupik Eskimos living in 8 the Kuskokwim region. The Bethel Village Native Corporation is located in Bethel as well as representatives from the Calista Regional Native Corporation which has its headquarters in Anchorage. State Social Service Offices located in Bethel provide a variety of social services to the region's residents. Bethel is a trade center for native art work, the most well-known being the basket work of the Kuskokwim region. Basket weavers from small villages bring their work to Bethel to sell directly or to be sold by the museum which maintains a display of native art work and artifacts. 4. Subsistence Life Style One of the most significant cultural aspects of Bethel is the subsis- ] tence use of resources. Although a traditional native subsistence life style is no longer practiced, many residents supplement their incomes either by choice or necessity by subsistence food gathering. A recent survey indicated that 47 percent of Bethel's residents are engaged in subsistence fishing, 34 percent in subsistence hunting, and 12 percent in subsistence berry picking. Twenty four percent of those responding indicated that at least half of their food was supplied through subsis- tence (Darbyshire 1979). More families in Bethel have full-time, part-time, or seasonal jobs than in surrounding villages where subsis- tence is practiced. Fish are the most utilized subistence resource. The Alaska Depart- 2 ment of Fish and Game reports that approximately 450 families in the Bethel District rely on subsistence fishing for most of their food. In 1978 the subsistence catch for 698 families (averaging 6 persons) from the mouth of the Kuskokwim to the headwaters was about 35,881 king salmon and 118,809 small salmon (excluding coho). Those families who are subsistence food gatherers are less dependent 3 on a cash economy. This is an important factor to consider when viewing the economy of Bethel and particularly the high unemployment. People in Bethel are not as dependent on full-time employment as compared to other communities of its size where subsistency is not practiced. 5. Water Quality Because the Kuskokwim River has a high silt load the water quality is ] not suitable for salmon spawning but they do use it as a corridor to other suitable streams. The water quality of the Kuskokwim near Bethel is thought to be 2 degraded by oil, gas, and rusting metal from car bodies used for bank stabilization. The significance and extent of this pollution is unknown. River boats may also add to the water quality problem by leak- ing gas or oi] into Brown's Slough and Lousetown Slough, Water quality data are not available for the Kuskokwim at Bethel. 6. Fish and Wildlife and Endangered Species E[S-20 The Kuskokwim River serves as a migratory corridor for five species ] of salmon from mid-June until late August, with chum salmon being the most abundant, followed in descending order of abundance by coho, chinook, sockeye, and pink salmon. No salmon are known to spawn in the Mainstream of the Kuskokwim River from its mouth upstream past McGrath, a distance of several hundred miles. (Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) 1978). Sheefish migrate past Bethel during April and May to spawn in the Kuskokwim. The only known spawning areas are a considerable distance upstream from Bethel. In addition, rainbow and pond smelt migrate up the river during the spring and are harvested by residents of Bethel for subsistence purposes by a dip net fishery. Broad and humpbacked whitefish utilize sloughs and lakes near Bethel in the summer, and move into the Kuskokwim River prior to freezeup in winter. Sloughs and lakes in the project area, including Brown's Slough also Support a population of northern pike and Alaska blackfish (Jonrowe 1980). The Kuskokwim River in the vicinity of Bethel supports an important 2 commercial salmon fishery. Most channels of the river in the project area are used by fishermen for a drift gill net fishery. The commercial harvest of salmon from the Kuskokwim River in 1978 was 45,612 chinook, 249,732 chum, and 214,144 coho. Most of the fish taken commercially in the region are transported to Bethel for processing prior to shipment elsewhere. An additional 35,881 chinook (King) and 118,809 small salmon (excluding coho) were taken from the river in the subsistence fishery. Bethel is located on the eastern margin of one of the most important 3 waterfowl habitats in Alaska, the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. A large portion of the waterfowl that migrate along the Pacific flyway are produced on the Delta. The most productive habitat is located 50 miles west of Bethel and includes that portion of the delta extending from the coast to approximately 10 miles inland. The delta is particularly important to populations of black brant, emperor, whitefronted, and cackling geese (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service p. 8 1980). For a list of other species that utilize the delta see pages E-32 and £-33 Appendix E. Habitats in the immediate vicinity of Bethel are not heavily used by 4 waterfow!] due to chronic disturbances associated with river boat and aircraft operations during the open water seasons. The highest number of waterfowl] and shorebirds apparently occur in the Bethel area during spring and fall migrations. A list of waterfowl and shore birds that have been observed near Bethel is included in the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (CA) report (p. E-11). The nabitat around Bethel is a mixture of wet tundra and moist tundra 5 interspersed with patches of shrub thickets. Moist tundra is the pre- dominant habitat type. The habitat consists of wet marshy areas with a variety of mosses, lichen, forbs, grasses, herbs, sedges, and low-lying shrubs intermixed with small lakes and pot holes. Wet tundra with grass, sedges, mosses, and lichen is found in wet depressions and in between hummocks. Shrubby habitat is found where there is a very slight change in elevation, 1 to 2 feet or less. The shrubby habitat which is inter- mixed with the wet and moist tundra consists of dense growths of American EIS-21 green alder, thin leaf alder, and willow. There is no distinct dividing line between wet and moist tundra and shrubby habitat. The moist tundra with low-lying shrubs is a transition between wet and shrubby habitat. The moist and wet tundra habitat surrounding Bethel is not a signifi- cant habitat for upland game species. Few big game mammals occur in abundance near Bethel; grizzly bear, black bear, and wolf occur in the area only occasionally. Snowshoe hare occur in shrubby habitats near Bethel and on the islands in the Kuskokwim River opposite the settle- ment. Ptarmigan, ruffed grouse, and sharp-tailed grouse also occur near Bethel. For a complete list of species that occur in the region see the Fish and Wildlife Service CA report p. E-31 located in Appendix E of this report. No listed threatened or endangered plant or animal species are present in the project area. See Appendix A for coordination letters. 7. Social Economic Groups The two major cultural groups in Bethel are Eskimos and nonnatives. Economic groups include government, private industry, and two native corporations. Another important group is the unemployed of Bethel. Bethel's racial composition has changed significantly in the last 20 years. In 1950, its population was about 90 percent native; in 1970 approximately 80 percent and by 1979 the native population had dropped to about 64 percent. This change in racial composition has resulted from a large influx of nonnative people responding to government and service related employment opportunities (Darbyshire 1979b). The largest social group in Bethel, the Yupik speaking Eskimos, is comprised of Eskimos native to Bethel, those who have emigrated from villages in the Kuskokwim region, and individuals from mixed racial families. The Yupik Eskimo group has its own cultural practices, art and a life style that depends more on subsistence. The Eskimos that are native to Bethel or have lived in Bethel most of their lives are less dependent on subsistence and more accustomed to the white culture and way of life. Many members of the native population hold important positions in government and business and are community leaders. The larger group of natives is made up of a subgroup who emigrated from the small villages around Bethel. Natives who emigrate face adjustment problems in an urban environment which include: a society dependent on a cash economy, inadequate or unavailable housing, alcoholism, unemployment, language barrier, and a loss of group (village) identity. The nonnative population in Bethel (approximately 36 percent), includes business and government employees, and people who have moved to Bethel for the subsistence lifestyle. EIS-22 With an unemployment rate of approximately 11 percent, Bethel has been identified by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Deve lopment Administration as an area with “substantial and persistent unemployment." The groups of unemployed people in Bethel include unskilled and inex- perienced individuals, the seasonally unemployed, and people on subsistence. Several factors influence unemployment in Bethel. People, who have little skill or experience migrate to Bethel from outlying villages, and cannot find jobs. Although year-round employment has increased in recent years, much of the employment in Bethel occurs during the short summer season in the fishing transportation and construction industries. Many people chose to live a subsistence lifestyle and do not depend solely on full-time employment or part-time employment. Even if jobs become avail- able it is likely that a number of people would choose to continue a subsistence lifestyle rather than choose full-time employment. Important economic groups in Bethel include, public administration and service industries which provide about 60 percent of the income in Bethel; the transportation, communications, and utility industries which account for 15 percent of the total income, and the trade industries which provide another 10 percent. About 7 percent of the total income of Bethel residents comes from construction while fishing related activities account for the remaining 9 percent of Bethel's total income. Under the Alaska Native Claim Settlement Act (ANCSA) village and regional native corporations were formed to manage land, mineral rights, and money allocated to natives of the designated regions. The Bethel area is represented by the Calista Regional Native Corporation which manages the region's land, mineral rights, and investment of funds. The Bethel Village Corporation has selected land around Bethel as a part of their allotment. To date very little of this land has been conveyed. The Bureau of Land Management will manage the land until it is determined which of the selected land is to be conveyed. After the land is conveyed the Bethel Village Corporation will have surface rights and management responsibilities over the land but must wait 20 years before the land can be sold. The village corporation is now responsible for managing and investing the funds that were allocated under the ANCSA. 8. Historical and Archeological Resources The State Historical Preservation Officer was consulted and has determined that the project would not conflict with any known archeo- logical and/or historical properties. Coordination letters are included in Appendix A. The current Federal Register of Historical and Archeological Sites (March 18, 1980) was consulted to determine if archeological or historical sites are located in the proposed project area. NO properties presently included in, or eligible for, inclusion in the National Register are located within areas of direct or indirect impact of this project. EIS-23 IV. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS A. EFFECTS ON SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES |. Quarry Sites The impacts of quarry activities on the resources at the two proposed quarry sites are described below. The two alternatives, River Diversion with Bank Protection, and Bank Protection using rock, both require about the same amount of quarry material. River Diversion with Bank Protection requires less quantity of quality rock or Class A stone which would require less blasting to obtain Class A stone. Impacts due to blasting would be slightly less for this alternative. Bank Protection with concrete mattresses would not require quarry material and therefore would not have an impact on the proposed quarry sites. Detrimental impacts of exploiting rock sources for the Bethel waterfront from either Goodnews Bay or Cape Newenham include the physical removal of habitat; disturbances to birds and fish in the area from drilling, blasting, and the use of mechanized equipment; and disturbances from barge traffic. Our assessment of these impacts indicates they would primarily affect avian species at both quarry sites and Pacific herring at Cape Newenham. Impacts to terrestrial mammals, marine mammals, including endangered whales that may occur in the area, and other fish species are not expected to be significant. Goodnews Bay: Removal of rock from Beluga Hill in Goodnews Bay would eliminate a breeding colony of approximately 300 glaucous-winged gulls and over 300 pelagic and red-faced cormorants by destroying their nesting habitat. Those nest sites not completely destroyed would be rendered unusable by disturbances from drilling, blasting, and the noise from large front-end loaders used to load the rock on barges. This destruction of habitat would cause a permanent loss in the production of these seabirds in the Goodnews Bay area. No other suitable cliff habitat adjacent to marine waters exists for a considerable distance along this portion of the western coast of Alaska. Any work done in or near the bay increases the risk of accidental fuel spills entering the aquatic environment. Barge traffic in and out of Goodnews Bay would disrupt the feeding and resting activities of terns and gulls nesting on the sandspits at the entrance and waterfowl nesting in the lowlands surrounding the bay. This impact would be difficult to quantify as a considerable amount of boat traffic already exists in Goodnews Bay from commerical and subsistence fishermen. Commerical and subsistence fishing for salmon and herring within Goodnews Bay would also be disrupted by tug and barge traffic moving in and out of the area. Confrontations with fishermen would probably result. EIS-24 This quarry site should not have any impact on threatened or § endangered species. Cape Newenham: Potential adverse impacts from quarrying rock at 6 either an upland site or a beach site at Cape Newenham primarily involve colonial nesting seabirds and Pacific herring. Since the U.S. Air Force installation is surrounded by one of the largest concentrations of nesting seabirds on the west coast of Alaska, any large scale quarry operation could disrupt these birds during the breeding season causing a signficant loss in production if no mitigation measures are taken. Drilling, blasting, and the noise from heavy equipment would disturb 7 seabirds utilizing the small bay adjacent to the USAF property for feeding and resting and may cause a portion of them to abandon the area temporarily. The extent of this impact is difficult to quantify. The importance of the bay for feeding and resting to those birds nesting along the outer coast is unknown. However, in terms of density, the number of seabirds per unit area appeared to be considerably higher on the open ocean and waters within 1 mile of Bird Rock, the most important nesting colony on the nortn side of Cape Newenham. No nesting colonies were found within the confines of the small bay 8 and the nearest large concentration of birds (Bird Rock) is approximately 2 miles due west. This colony is an offshore island and is shielded from the USAF installation by a mountain ridge that averages 500 feet above mean sea level. The extent of any project impacts to either birds nesting on Bird Rock and the outer coast or birds feeding and resting in the small bay would depend on several project features. These are the frequency of blasting, the size of the charges, and the resultant explosions and tremors. These impacts can be minimized by setting time constraints on blasting during the prime breeding season - June 1 through August 15. Barge traffic in and out of the small bay would also disrupt the 9 feeding and resting activities of seaducks, murres, gulls, cormorants, and other seabirds presently using the area regardless of whether an upland site or beach site is chosen. As previously mentioned, the importance of this bay as feeding and resting habitat to seabirds nesting nearby is unknown. However, no long term abandonment of the area due to barge traffic is anticipated. For example, cormorants, gulls, and scoters coexist with barge and small boat traffic throughout coastal Alaska and should not be adversely affected. Detrimental impacts of barge traffic on the tremendous concentration of nesting seabirds a few miles west of the USAF property are also difficult to quantify. As long as the barges do not come within 2 miles of Bird Rock, adverse impacts should not be Significant. The presence of vessel traffic is not new to this portion of the Bering Sea. Commerical fishermen harvest salmon in this area during the time birds are actively nesting. At this time, no detrimental effects of that activity have been documented on the Cape Newenham seabird colonies. EIS-25 Removal of rock from either an upland site or a beach site would have little detrimental impact on vegetative resources. Disturbances of surface vegetation would be minor as suitable rock is exposed on the surface or covered with a shallow layer of tundra vegetation. Some upland nesting shorebirds and passerines would be disrupted by drilling, blasting, and traffic from heavy equipment. However, the area is already impacted by the presence of the USAF buildings, runway, roads, and a large sanitary landfill. In spite of man's presence, numerous shorebirds and passerines were observed in the area. Although no nests were located, two sanderling chicks were observed in the tundra close to the end of the runway. Information from the Alaska Department Fish and Game (ADF&G) indicates that any quarry site level with the waterline, and any operation to load barges from the beach, could have detrimental impacts on herring spawning on the beach and the resultant survival of newly hatched larvae in nearshore waters. The time period necessary to complete the spawning and hatching cycle is from early May through late June. Herring females deposit eggs in the intertidal zone preferably on living plants. However, if plant life is not abundant, eggs may be deposited on anything solid. The eggs are very small, adhesive, and hatch after incubating for 12 to 20 days (ADF&G, 1978a). During the incubation period, eggs laid within the intertidal area are alternately exposed and covered by tides. Mortality rates can be very high even under ideal conditions. Once the eggs hatch, the larvae are about 0.25 inches long and very feeble swimmers. Additional mortality on eggs and newly hatched larvae caused by both quarrying rock and loading barges on the beach could be expected. Eggs and newly hatched larvae could be crushed from heavy equipment traversing the beaches at low tides, barges beached at low tides in the process of being loaded, and shock waves from the detonation of charges reverberating across the spawning beaches. Metamorphosis (the change from a naked larva to a scaled juvenile) takes place 6 to 8 weeks after the egg is hatched (ADF&G, 1978b). At this stage, the young herring is 2.5 inches long and resembles a miniature adult. Once the fish have reached this size, adverse impacts from any quarry operation or loading of barges would not be significant. The juveniles collect in small schools, gradually move seaward toward the mouth of the bay in which they were hatched, and head for deeper ocean waters. Potential adverse impacts on herring from a beach level quarry site and the loading of barges can be minimized provided time constraints are imposed. The ADF&G states that if no blasting or quarrying on the beach occurs from early May through late June impacts on herring would not be significant. Discussion: Mitigation measures are not possible for the Goodnews Bay quarry site, removal of rock would destroy the only suitable cliff habitat in the area. Impacts at Cape Newenham could be minimized by the following mitigation measures: EIS-26 1 12 13 The impacts of seabirds from barge traffic can be minimized if 15 barges stay at least 2 miles from bird rock from 1 June to 15 August which is the critical time for nesting seabirds. Barges going to Bethel would not have to go out of their way to avoid bird rock. Impacts from blasting can be greatly minimized or eliminated if the majority of drilling, blasting, and stockpiling of rock could be accomplished from September through April. The upland quarry site at Cape Newenham is recommended because it 16 would have the least environmental damage. The noise level from blasting would be considerably less audible to the seabirds and impacts to herring would be significantly less without blasting and barges working in the intertidal area. Barges would still be loaded in the intertidal area but if they were loaded during high tides, mortality of herring egg and larva would probably not be significant. Less natural habitat would be disturbed because the site has been used before for quarry material. 2. Kuskokwim River Bank erosion of the Kuskokwim River is an ongoing natural physical ] process that promotes succession. Erosion occurring at Bethel is not considered to be detrimental to the natural environment of the Kuskokwim River. Rather detrimental impacts that occur are related to the debris such as automobile bodies, 55-gallon barrels, engines, and other objects placed in the river and along the riverbank to retard erosion. If no Federal action is taken, junk cars and other debris would 2 continue to be placed on the riverbank. Navigation could be affected if the debris is moved into the river by hydraulic action. Oil and grease could seep into the river from the car bodies. Both alternatives require the removal of the debris from the banks 3 and the river. This would improve the esthetics of the shoreline, eliminate potential water quality problems and potential hazards to navigation. Bank protection would not result in any other significant Changes in the Kuskokwim River. Diverting the river at Bethel could cause some changes in the river 4 downstream such as accelerated bank erosion of the island off Bethel, of intertidal habitat, point bars and mudflats and, deposition of silt elsewhere. Changes in erosion or deposition rates upstream generally cause changes downstream. These types of changes are natural on a river such as the Kuskokwim and are not necessarily considered detrimental to the natural environment. No significant detrimental changes to the natural environment are expected as a result of the river diversion. Diverting the river has the potential of decreasing future navigation 5 into Bethel. Increased siltation in the west downriver channel between — Bethel and the island might impede navigation of larger vessels into Bethel. Frequent maintenance dredging may be required at the mouth of the access channel to town. EIS-27 The maintenance dredged material will be placed at the upstream toe of the diversion structure. A temporary increase in siltation would occur during maintenance dredgeing operations. 3. Bethel: A Regional Center The alternatives for bank stabilization and for no Federal action would have an effect on services of regional importance but would not significantly affect Bethel's position as a regional center. The bene- fits from bank stabilization are local benefits to Bethel and, more specifically, a benefit to those businesses and residents threatened by the eroding bank. No action could cause inconvenience and hardship to travelers and would not permit further expansion of onshore facilities that could provide services to the region, but Bethel would not be elimi- nated as a regional center. Bethel will continue to be a regional center because there are no other practical alternatives. The quality of the regional center would be reduced and some services could be lost but essential services would be replaced or relocated. The Standard 0il Company tank farm is threatened by erosion. This regional fuel supply would be protected by the city at great expense but protection is less expensive than relocation. The hospital support buildings are threatened by the eroding bank. The 3 new USPHS hospital will not be affected by erosion or by the alternatives. No Federal action could cause the loss of several businesses located along the eroding bank. One of regional importance is the fish buying business. Loss of the buildings used by the buyers would not necessarily mean abandoning the fishing industry. The fish buyers affected could relocate if the profits are great enough to offset the cost of relocating or other fish buyers could replace the ones whose businesses are lost. In either case it is likely that this regional service would continue to be provided. Loss of the present facilities or relocation could cause inconveniences to or hardship on commercial fishermen in the region. Relocating regional services would require suitable land for develop- ment. Much of the land around Bethel is in a flood plain or wetland area which is either unsuitable or too expensive and difficult to develop. Providing services to newly developed areas, sewer, water, electricity and roads, is extremely expensive. In addition, Federal land that has been selected by the Bethel Village Corporation, under the provisions of the Alaska Natives Claim Settlement Act, is not available for development until the BLM conveys title to the land. At that time, the land cannot EIS-28 R: 11/82 4 be sold for 20 years but can be developed or leased by the Bethel Village Corporation. Indiviaual native land allotments could be sold but many of these are presently being used as home sites. The "selected" land that is not conveyed will remain under the management of the BLM. These factors make relocation expensive and difficult. Some of these services and business may have to be located in areas that are not as convenient to the people they serve. Bank protection would stabilize the bank and allow for expansion or relocation of the fish buying business and other businesses on the stabilized bank. Dock support facilities could be expanded making commercial shipment of goods into Bethel more economical, convenient and less time consuming. Diverting the river would interfere with travel into Bethel from upriver. The diversion dam, to be located at Lousetown Slough, would block the access to tne shore along Bethel, the city dock, Brown Slough and Lousetown Slough (see Plate D-7). Travelers from upstream would be requirea to go further downstream around the island then back upstream to Bethel adding 3 miles to their trip. This would be considered a signi- ficant inconvenience in both time and increased fuel cost to commercial fishermen, commercial shippers, and people trading for goods and services in Bethel. It is likely that people would tie up their boats to the river diversion rather than going around the island. Road access and transportation into Bethel from the upriver side of the diversion would also become a necessity. Other trade for commodities, food, clothes, supplies, and services not located on the eroding shore would not be significantly affected by the alternatives or by no Federal action. 4. Subsistence Lifestyle No Federal action would have little to no impact on subsistence food gathering in Bethel. Stabilizing the bank would provide a more conven- jent launching and tie up area. Diverting the river would increase the cost of fuel and decrease the time available for subsistence fishing upstream of Bethel. Increased fuel costs could be a burden on families with low incomes. 5. Water Quality The alternatives have the potential of improving water quality. A slight increase in turbidity (the river is near maximum silt load) during construction would be expected, but more importantly the alternatives would require removal of car bodies, 55-gallon drums, and other debris that is now used for bank stabilization. Removing the debris would eliminate a source of potential water pollution and visual pollution that now exist on the Kuskokwim shore. Unless there is some type of Federal EIS-29 action, car bodies and debris would remain in the river and continue to be a source of pollution. Additional debris could continue to be placed in the river. The 404(b)(1) evaluation in Appendix F provides more infor- mation on water quality. 6. Fish and Wildlife Impacts No major impact to fish and wildlife resources would occur as a result of the Bank Protection alternative or no Federal action. Indirect impacts from construction activities would be avoided by scheduling con- struction to avoid times when the bulk of adult salmon are migrating through the area. : River Diversion with Bank Protection, is not expected to affect fish migration because the river naturally changes course through time. How- ever, the present river channel would be blocked and could possibly entrap migrating salmon or other species. Migratory fish follow the strongest current upstream. As a result of the diversion, the current would flow on the east side of the island. Very little if any current would flow in the dead end channel created by the river diversion. Because of the lack of current it is very unlikely that large schools of fish would migrate into this channel although occasional fish may take this channel. Placement of material on the bank of the new channel would eliminate some shrubby habitat. The loss of this habitat is insignifi- cant. Placing material into the river to construct a diversion dike would cause short term siltation. These impacts are expected to be low and not significant to the productivity of fish or wildlife in the project vicinity, provided time constraints on construction are consid- ered when the bulk of migrating adult salmon are moving upstream (USFWS 1980). 7. Social Economic Groups The alternatives and no Federal action would not have a significant impact on the cultural groups in Bethel. However, the structural alter- natives would increase employment opportunities thus benefiting the unemployed and economic groups, particularly construction, trade, and commercial fishing. The stabilized banks would provide opportunities for expansion of business along the waterfront. Construction firms would benefit from the temporary construction jobs created by the project and commercial fish buyers and shippers could locate along the stabilized shore thus making their operations more economical and convenient. 8. Historical and Archeological Resources No known historical or archeological resources will be impacted by the bank stabilization project. Should archeological resources be found during construction, construction will be stopped and the State Historical Presevation Officer will be consulted. EIS-30 T€-S13 Effects of the Recommended Plan on Resources of Principal National Recognition. Types of resources Principal sources of national recognition Air quality......... ee seeseeeeeeeeesClean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1857h-7 et seq). Areas of particular concern within Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as the coastal zone. amended (16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq). Endangered and threatened species critical habitat.. ++-Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amend-. ed (16 U.S.C.1531 et seq.). : Fish and wildlife habitat...........sssesee2. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C Sec. 661 et seq.). Floodplains...........08 tee eeeeee teeeeeeeeessExecutive Order 11988, Floodplain Management Historic and cultural properties.... s++ees National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. Sec. 470 et seq.). Prime and unique farmland..............+++++ CEQ Memorandum of August 1, 1980: Analysis of Impacts on Prime or Unique Agricultural Lands in Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act. water quality........... seu twee Ses eect! Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). WEtTANdS.. 6. se cee cece eeseeeeeeeeeeseeeseee Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wet- lands Clean Water Act of 1977. (42 U.S.C. 1857h-7, et seq.). Wild and scenic rivers........ woeseeeces sees Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1271 et seq.). Measurement of effects no effect not present in planning area not present in planning area disruption of large concentrations of seabird colonies in quarry area, impacts minimized by setting time constraints during prime breeding season, no effect not present in planning area not present in planning area water quality gain along affected bank of Kuskowin River, 5,000 feet, by removal of contaminated debris no effect not present in planning area V. LIST OF PREPARES The following people were primarily responsible for preparing this Environmental Impact Statement. LIST OF PREPARERS Name Sandra L. Vannice Tom Murdock Charles Welling Kenneth Hitch Discipline/ Expertise Ecosystems Analysis Engineering Civil MSCE, PE Economist Civil Engineering Experience 4 yrs Environmental EIS Studies Alaska District Role in Preparing EIS EIS Coordinator 7 yrs Engineering Formulation of Studies 18 years Economics Studies Alaska District 7 years of Hydraulic Design and Study EIS-32 Alternatives, Economic analysis Project Manager VI. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT A. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM A public workshop was held in Bethel on 5 March 1980 to describe the alternatives that were studied, the process and reason for eliminating alternatives, and the alternatives that were being considered in detail. The public was asked for their comments on the alternatives, their con- cerns, and information which may aid the Corps in the planning process. Prior to the workshop, informal meetings were held with the city manager, city planner, and members of the city council to obtain informa- tion on Bethel and to find out what their objectives were for bank stabi- lization. Contact has continued throughout the study with city officials. A brochure briefly explaining the alternatives and announcing the public workshop was mailed to each individual in Bethel. Radio and newspaper announcements were also made prior to the public workshop. B. REQUIRED COORDINATION Section 404(b)(1) of the Clean Water Act, which discusses discharge of dredged or fill material, will be satisfied when the EIS is circulated for review and comment and submitted to Congress in lieu of issuing a public notice and obtaining a State Water Quality Certificate. Coordina- tion for coastal zone management will be completed with the circulation of the final EIS. The Corps of Engineers will continue to coordinate with the Department of Community and Regional Affairs to assure project consistency with the Bethel comprehensive land use plan. C. STATEMENT RECIPIENTS A list of statement recipients is included in Appendix G. D. PUBLIC VIEWS AND RESPONSES Tne public view repeatedly expressed during informal meetings and workshops was that Bethel needs a stabilized shoreline to maintain the local economy and to provide essential transportation, goods, and services to the region. The city dock area was described as being Bethel's most important resource and the bank stabilization as the city's highest priority and most serious concern. The local public feels that the project is essential for the community's economic stability and ability to provide goods and services to the entire region. The regional importance of the project was strongly expressed by city officials and workshop participants. The general opinion was that a long term permanent stabilization of the riverbank should be accomplished for continued business and future commercial development along the shoreline at Bethel. The above public views were influential in eliminating alternatives that did not involve stabilizing the existing shoreline. Alternatives EIS-33 ] such as removing existing buildings and sloping the shore back, relocat- ing Bethel away from the Kuskokwim or relocating endangered structures were not acceptable to the public in Bethel. Bank Protection using rock was chosen as a result of the public views because it would stabilize the existing shoreline and allow for continued use and economic development. The majority of review letters received on the draft EIS did not result in changes to the EIS. Other comments resulted in minor changes and improved information. The review letters on the draft EIS are included in Appendix A. EIS-34 SUBJECTS Affected Environment Alternatives Areas of Controversy Comparative Impacts of Alternatives Endangered Species Environmental Conditions Environmental Effects Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Report Historical Archeological List of Preparers Major Conclusions and Finding Need for and Objectives of Action Planning Objectives Plans Considered in Detail Index, References, and Appendixes Bank Protection with rock Source Documentation Environmental Main Report Impact (References Statements Incorporated) PP. EIS-14-24 PP, 4-8 PP. EIS-8-11 PP. 31-47 PP. EIS-3 ne nnn ne PP. EIS-11-13 ss wn nee PP. EIS-21 & 30 w+ eee PP. EIS-14 PP.4-11 PP, EIS-24-30 PP. EIS-2, 3, 15-18 EIS-21-22 PP. EIS -23, 30 PP. EIS-31 ww nnn nnn PP, EIS-2 PP. 64-65 PP, EIS-7 PP. 12, 29 PP. EIS-7 PP. 29 PP, EIS-9, 10 PP. 40-47 EIS-35 Report Appendixes (References Incorporated) App. E, App.F, App. A F, App. C D, App. E App. App. - A, App. E App F App. E App. A App. G Source Documentation Enviromental Main Report Report Appendixes Impact (References (References SUBJECT Statements Incorporated) Incorporated) Plans Eliminated PP. EIS-8 PP. 31-40 2 ween from Further Study Public Concerns PP. EIS-7 PP. 1, 28 = =nee=- Public Involvement PP. EIS-33 PP. 1 App. A Public Involvement PP. EIS-33 er Program Public Views PP. EIS-33 PP. 1, 28 App. A and Responses Relationship to PP. EIS-3 wenn en nn= App. A, App. E Environmental App. F Requirements Required PP. EIS-33) wre en anne App. A, App. F Coordination Section 404(b) (1) PP. EIS-2, 3300 wen ennee-- App. F Evaluation Significant PP. EIS-15-30 0 weeeene- ween Resources Quarry Sites PP. EIS-15-18, = -$------- App. E EIS-24-27 Kuskokwim PP. EIS-18, 27 PP. 7, 15, 18 App. D River Bethel; A PP. EIS-19 PP. 8-11 ween Regional Center EIS-20, 28 Subsistence PP. EIS-20, 29) wweeene tee Life Style Water Quality PP. EIS -20, 29 = ==------ App. F Fish and Wildlife PP. EIS-21, 30 ------- App. E and Endangered Species Social Economic PP. 22, 23, 30 PP. 10 = weee-- Groups EIS-36 SUBJECT Historical Archeological Resources Statement Recipients Study Authority Summary Table of Contents Unresolved Issues Water Quality Data Without Conditions (No Action) Source Documentation Enviromental Impact Statements PP. PP. PP. PP. PP. PP. PP. PP. EIS-23, 30 EIS-33 EIS-7 EIS-2-7 EIS-5 EIS-2 EIS-20, 29 EIS-9 Main Report (References Incorporated) EIS-37 Report Appendixes (References Incorporated) App. A BIBLIOGRAPHY Alaska Department of Fish and Game 1978a Alaska's Fisheries Atlas, Volume I., compiled by R. Mclean and K. Delaney in FWS CA Report 1980 p. 9. Alaska Department of Fish and Game 1978b. Arctic-Yukon-Kuskokwim Region Salmon Fishery Report--A report to the Alaska Board of Fisheries, December 1978. Unpublished report. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Commercial Fisheries. In Fish and Wildlife CA Report 1980 p. E-15. Alaska Department of Fish and Game 1978c. Annual Salmon Management Report 1978 for Kuskokwim District, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, ivision of Commercial Fisheries. Darbyshire and Associates. 1979a City of Bethel Comprehensive Plan, Volume I: Community Goals and Objectives. Darbyshire and Associates. 1979b Responses to Resident Survey of Bethel Jonrowe 1980, Personal Communication, Alaska Department of Fish and Game. In Fish and Wildlife Services CA Report 1980, p. 9. Selkregg, 1972. Alaska Regional Profiles, Southwest Region, University of Alaska, Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center, Anchorage. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1980 Coordination Act Report. U.S. Department of Labor. No date. Eligible Labor Surplus Areas for Bidding on Federal Contracts under Defense Manpower Policy No. 4B(DMP-4B) and Executive Order 10582 and 12073. EIS-38 APPENDIX A Information, Correspondence and Comments to the Report DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES 25A-TILH iat JAY S. HAMMOND, GOVERNOR (807) 485-3900 POUCH 2 ? JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811 OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER =; (TELEX 45-328) October 13, 1981 Colonel Lee R. Nunn, District Engineer Alaska District, Corps of Engineers U.S. Department of the Army P. O. Box 7002 a Anchoragey AK 99510 Dear Colonel Nunn: This is in response to your letter of August 31 concerning the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Feasibility Report for a Bank Stabilization at Bethel. The State of Alaska is willing to pursue funding for a 5% participation in the first cost of this project. A definite commitment of funds by this Department would have to await the completion of your design and action by the State Legis- lature. Please proceed with the finalization of the feasi- bility report and keep us informed as this project develops. Sincerely, Cay Robert W. Ward Commissioner COLONEL LEE Ke NUNN ALASKA OISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS Pee BOX 7002 ANCHORAGEs ALASKA 99510 DEAR COLUNEL NUNN» THe STABILIZATION OF THE RIVERBANK OF THE KUSKOKWIM RIVER AT SsFTHEL HAS BEEN ON THE MINOS OF THE RESIDENTS OF SETHEL SINCE 1934.6 DURING THAT PERIOO OF TIME MANY RESIDENTS OF BETHEL HAVE SPENT UNTOLO dOURS OF WORK IN TRYING TO REALIZE A FUNCTIONAL SEAWALLe A PRACTICAL ANDO TIMELY MEANS OF EROSION CONTROL IS STILL THE TOP PRIORITY OF THE THE vETHEL CITY COUNCIL AND ALL BETHEL RESIDENTS. TO THE END OF HAVING A SEAWALL BUILT IN BETHEL THE CITY OF SETHeL TS ATLLING TO AGREE TO: Ae PRUVIDE WITHOUT COST TO THE UNITED STATES ALL LANOSs EASEMENTSs ANDO RIGHTS-OF-wAYs INCLUDING SUITABLE AREAS OF BORROW ANDO OISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL AS DETERMINED BY THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS» NECESSARY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT; &e ACCOMPLISH WITHOUT COST TO THE UNITED STATES ALL ALTERATIONS AND RELOCATIONS OF SUTLOINGS» ROADS¢e SRIOGES+ AND UTHER EXISTING STRUCTURES AR UTILITIES MADE NECESSARY BY THE CONSTRUCTION; Ce HOLD AND SAVE THE UNITED STATES FREE FROM ALL DAMAGES OUE TO CONSTRUCTION GF THE PROJECTs NOT IWCLUDIING DAMAGES DUE Tu THE FAULT GR NEGLIGENCE OF THE UNITED STATES OR ITS CONTRACTORS; Ue MAINTAIN AND OPERATE ALL THE WORKS AFTER COMPLETION IN ACCORDANCE AITH REGULATIONS PRESCRIBED BY THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY; Ee PRESCRIBE AND ENFORCE REGULATIONS TO PROTECT THE EMBANKMENTAND SEEDED AREAS»y AND PREVENT ENCROACHMENT ON THE EMBANKMENT © SIMPLY PUT COLONEL» THE CITY OF BETHEL WILL COOPERATE T9 THE FULLEST EXTENT WITH ANYONE SERIOUSLY INTERESTED IN ASSISTING US IN SOLVING JQUR RIVERBANK EROSION PROBLEMe FURTHERe WE WILL ADHERE TO ANY FUNDING FORMULA AS MAY BE SET 3Y OR NEGOTIATED WITH A GRANTING AGENCY TO THE LIMITS THAT OUR FINANCTAL POSITION WILL ALLOW. YOHN GUINN AYOR UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service P.O. Box 1668 Juneau, Alaska 99802 April 20, 1980 Colonel Lee R. Nunn Alaska District Engineers Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 7002 Anchorage, AK 99510 Dear Colonel Nunn: This responds to your letter of April 17, 1980, in which you requested information on threatened or endangered marine species that might be present in the areas of the proposed Bethel Bank Stabilization project and the Bethel Small Boat Harbor project. None of the threatened or endangered species for which the National Marine Fisheries Service bears responsibility occur in the vicinity of the proposed projects. Sincerely, _ y , 2 Y4 “i KR Ptlex Harry L. Rietze Director, Alaska Region STs. TE o~ THEO RAN. Wf ~ of ALASKA 4 to. - Jerry Madden a DATE: April 23, 1979 FROM: State-Federal Coordinator Division of Policy Development FILE NO: and Planning Office of the Governor TELEPHONE NO. oO SUBJECT: : Alan H. Townsend SID 79022315 Habitat Biologist II Bethel Bank Erosion Habitat Protection Section Feasibility Study Fairbanks THRU: J. Scott Grundy, Regional suerviso Ss The Department of Fish and Game has reviewed the subject request and has no objection to the proposal. We request you notify the applicant that we would appreciate a copy of the feasibility report. Thank you for this opportunity to comment. cc: D. Lowery - ADEC Fairbanks W. Copeland - ADL Fairbanks United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE IN REPLY REFERTO: SE 1011 E. TUDOR RD. ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 (907) 276-3800 2 FEB 1981 Colonel Lee R. Nunn District Engineer Alaska District, Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 6002 Anchorage, Alaska 99510 Dear Colonel Nunn: This responds to your January 16, 1981 request for information concerning proposed or listed threatened or endangered species which may be affected by quarry mining activities in the vicinity of Goodnews Bay or Cape Newenham, Alaska. Based on information currently available to us, the only proposed or listed species which could potentially be affected by the proposed project is the American peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum). In 1962, residents of the Goodnews Bay area reported nesting of peregrine falcons at Beluga Hill (north side of Goodnews Bay) in the late 1940's. Other evidence indicates that gyrfalcons have nested at this location since as early as the 1930's. Roseneau visited the site in 1962 and found evidence (molted feathers) of past occupancy by gyrfalcons. A joint Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)/Corps of Engineers 2) survey of the site in 1980 found a gyrfalcon present but no peregrines. The similarity in appearance of the two species and strong evidence indicat- ing that the site has historically been used by gyrfalcons weakens the credibility of the report of peregrine nesting. Therefore, based on available information, we conclude that peregrines are not present in the proposed quarry area at Goodnews Bay. Peregrines have also been reported at Cape Newenham. Here, as at Goodnews, some observers may have confused peregrines with gyrfalcons. Other, sightings may have been of migrating peregrines rather than local nesters. We are aware of no reliable reports of peregrines nesting at Cape Newenham. The small bay, within which the proposed quarry site is located, was surveyed by FWS and COE personnel in the summer of 1980. Neithey peregrine falcons nor evidence of prior nesting by this species was found. If peregrines do nest at Cape Newenham they most likely would nest along the sea cliffs outside the small bay, sufficiently removed from the proposed quarry so as not to be affected by rock removal activities. levee, Richard W., Stanley A. Temple and Tom J. Cade. 1976. The 1975 North American Peregrine Falcon Survey. Canadian Field-Naturalist 90(3): 228-273. 2uanna, Paul. 1980. USFWS Final Coordination Act Report to the Corps of Engineers for the Bethel Bank Stabilization Project. To summarize, based on the best information currently available to us, no Proposed or listed, threatened or endangered species are present in the vicinity of the Goodnews Bay or Cape Newenham quarry sites. New information indicating the presence of other currently listed species or the proposed listing of new species which may occur in or near either of the Proposed quarry sites will require reassessment of this finding. Thank you for your demonstrated concern for endangered species. Questions pertaining to this response may be directed to me or to Dennis Money at 276-3800, ext. 431. Sincerely, : or Assistant Regional Director cc: WAES UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Nattonal Marine Fishertes Service P.O. Box 1668 Juneau, Alaska 99802 April 6, 1981] Colonel Lee R. Nunn Department of the Army Alaska District, Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 7002 Anchorage, Alaska 99510 Dear Colonel Nunn: This is in response to your letters of January 16th and 28th requesting information on endangered species that may be present in the areas of the proposed Bethel Bank Stabilization and Dry Pass Dredging Projects. Humpback whales frequent the inside waterways of southeast Alaska during the March to December period and may be present in the vicinity of Dry Pass. Gray whales occur in the waters of southeastern Bering Sea during their seasonal migrations through the Goodnews Bay and Cape Newenham area described in the Bethel Bank Stabilization project. Gray whales tend to maintain close contact with the coastline during their directed seasonal migrations. Typically, they would be in the proposed project area when northbound during April through June and southbound during September through November. We do not have any special conditions or timing restrictions for consideration regarding the potential impacts of the proposed activity upon the humpback whale in the Dry Pass area. A decision on the need for timing restrictions regarding the gray whale and the Bethel Bank Stabilization Project will depeid on project information apparently not available at this time. Sincerely, Ve LI ghee Robert’ W. McVey Director, Alaska Region ‘as? 7 | UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE } g | Maritime Administration SDF | western Region Paras 450 Golden Gate Ave. Box 36073 San Francisco, California 94102 June 4, 1981 Colonel Lee R. Nunn District Engineer Alaska District Corps of Engineers P. 0. Box 7002 Anchorage, AK 99510 Dear Colonel Nunn: Subject: Draft of an Environmental Impact Statement and Feasibility Report "Bank Stabilization - Bethel, Alaska" Thank you for sending us the subject report for our information and comments. The Maritime Administration has a sincere interest in port development and the maritime industry in Alaska. The report indicates that something has to be done very soon to solve the erosion problem at Bethel or Bethel will no longer be a transportation center for the region. Prior attempts to stabilize the bank of the Kuskokwim River at Bethel have not been successful. This has been partly due to the lack of professional engineering know how. The use of submarine nets and old junk vehicles to stabilize the bank has not helped to solve the erosion problem. It appears to us that if the soil tests and the other hydraulic design investigation work supports the Rock Riprap Alternative Plan, then this should be the recommended plan. We note that this plan maximizes net benefits, meets the requirements of the citizens of Bethel, allows for future development of the waterfront, and has minimal environmental impact. We hope that conditions will permit that construction work will commence soon. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review the report. Sincerely, Region Port and Intermodal Development Officer Thank you for your comments. nN. U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY . p05, REGION X > & * 1200 SIXTH AVENUE 5 ay, 3 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101 2 2 wes Me pean REPLY TO. ATIN OF M/S 443 JUN 25 1981 Colonel Lee R. Nunn District Engineer Alaska District Corps of Engineers P. 0. Box 7002 Anchorage, Alaska 99510 Subject: Draft Feasibility Report (DFR) and Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Bank Stabilization at Bethel, Alaska Dear Colonel Nunn: Thank you for sending us the above draft reports. From the standpoint of the Environmental Protection Agency's areas of concern and expertise, we are rating this statement LO-1 (LO - Lack of Objections; 1 - Adequate Information). Our lack of objections is based in part upon the Corps commitment to the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service recommendation dis- cussed on pages 56 and 57 of the DFR. We have also reviewed the Section 404(b)(1) evaluation found in Appendix F. We have no comments on the evaluation. We appreciate the opportunity to review these documents. Please contact me or Judi Schwarz of my staff if you have any questions. We can be reached at (206) 442-1285 or FTS 399-1285. Sincerely yours, er Ke Voc Prusas. Vizabeth ce Chief A Environmental Evaluation Branch Thank you for your comments. a US Deoormert Alackar Sagior 701 C Street, Sow ta Of Transoortcon Anchorage, Alaska Federal Aviation 99512 Administration JUN 15 1981 Colonel Lee R. Nunn U. S. Army Corps of Engineers P. O. Box 7002 Anchorage, Alaska 99510 Dear Colonel Nunn: We have completed a review of the proposed bank stabilization project at Bethel, Alaska, and have no objections. It does not appear that there will be any adverse impacts upon the plans and programs of the Federal Aviation Administration. Thank you for the opportunity to review the draft environmental impact statement. Sincerely, i Ch Thank you for your review. United States Department of the Interior OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY P. O. Box 120 Anchorage, Alaska 99510 ERS1-950 June 24, 1981 Cofonek Lee R. Nunn District Engineer Alaska District, Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 7002 Anchorage, Aaska 99510 Dear CoLonet Nunn: We have reviewed the dragt Environmental Impact Statement and Feasibility Report for Bank Stabilization, Bethel, Afaska, and we have no comments to offer: We appreciate the opportunity to review the draft document. Sincerely, lee el raul Gat Regional Envinonmentat Officer Noted. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERC National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administratit JUN 3 1931 OA/C52x6:0V TO: PP/EC ~ Joyce M. Wood . Ale FROM: OA/C5 Robert B. Rollins 4." / SUBJECT: DEIS #8105.07 - Bank Stabilization, Bethel, Alaska - The subject statement has been reviewed within the areas of the National Ocean Survey's (NOS) responsibility and expertise, and in terms of the impact of the Proposed action on NOS activities and projects. In the description on pages four and seven, under the paragraph entitled “Tidal Effect," the diurnal range of 4 feet has been verified. The mean range is 2.3 feet (although not stated). In the text, +7 feet and -3 feet would be a 10-foot range at low-flow stages. Since the range decreases with increased flow, the 2.3-foot mean range would seem reasonable, or a little low. The NOS suggests that the tide and hydrologic data could be diagramed for a more logical and effective presentation, 10TH ANNIVERSARY 1970-1980 . v4 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration A young agency with 3 hstone | trao'von of service to the Nauon A plot of tidal and hydrologic data is an excellent recommendation. However, since the bank protection must be designed for the full range, variations are not so important and would not affect the design. recommendation in future studies. We will remember your UNITED ST.TES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Pisheries Service P.O. Box 1668 Juneau, Alaska 99802 May 18, 1981 Colonel Lee R. Nunn District Engineer Alaska District Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 7002 Anchorage, Alaska 99510 Dear Colonel Nunn: We have received the Draft of an Eviromiental Impact Statement (EIS) and Feasibility Report for the Bank Stabilization, Bethel, Alaska. However, due to a lack of funds and personnel we will not be able to review this EIS. Therefore, we have no comment to offer at this time. Sincerely, Dirgctor, Alaska Noted. BAB en SUAVE OF ALASIA [ramen OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR POUCH AW ~ JUNEAU 99811 DIVISION OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING PHONE 465-3562 Govarnmenta! Coordination Unit M/S 0165 June 15, 1981 Mr. Harlan E. Moore, Chief, Eng. Div. U.S. Department Of The Amy Alaska Corps Of Engineers P.O. Box 7002 Anchorage, Alaska 99510 Subject: BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION FACILITIES DEIS State I D Number FD201-81051301ES Dear Mr. Moore: The Alaska State Clearinghouse has completed review on the referenced project. The State Clearinghouse hasno coinnent_of on this project. vi oi This letter will satisfy~ thé rev iew requirements , of the office of Management and ia Circular A-95. at _Dave Haas 3 State Federal Assistance Coordinator Thank you for your review. atat TE yn ne JAY S. HAMMOND, Governor OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR POUCH AD DIVISION OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING , JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811 , PHONE: 465-3573 April 4, 1979 Mr. Jay K. Soper Engineer Division Alaska Corps of Engineers Department of the Army P.O. Box 7002 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Subject: Bethel Bank Erosion Feasibility Study State I.D. No. 79022315 Dear Mr. Soper: The State Clearinghouse has completed review of the subject proposal. The following comments were received. The State Historic Preservation Officer indicated that the project will not conflict with any archaeological and historic properties. The Department of Environmental Conservation advises that DEC regulations should be used when determining effects construction activities may have on the area when determining the feasibility of this project. The Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities would like to received a copy of the completed report. The City of Bethel stated: "The stabilization of the Bethel river front has, for many years been a serious concern to the residents of Bethel. In the past few years the seriousness of the problem has grown. Currently, it is the most serious problem facing the City of Bethel. The potential loss of homes, power, roads, commercial enterprises and badly needed residential land is staggering to this community. To date, homes, land and commercial enterprises have been lost to the eroding bank. "In addition to the above, the Standard Oil Distribution Center is severely threatened. This facility is the distribution and storage point for many villages and people in the area. The loss or crippling of this facility would be a disaster for this portion of Southwestern Alaska. "The feasability study presented here is a step toward averting this disaster. The City of Bethel enthusiastically supports it. The Department of Community and Regional Affairs responded: "The Division of Community and Regional Affairs of the Department of Community and Regional Affairs is currently engaged in a comprehensive planning project with the City of Bethel. The City is initiating development of a comprehensive plan, and our Division of Community Planning is providing grant and technical assistance. The project will be funded by a combination of federal grant funds administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, pass- through Comprenensive Planning Assistance grant funds administered by the Department of Community and Regional Affairs, and a local matching share. The results of this project should be a substantial influence relative to Betnel's future growth and development. "Erosion and flooding problems represent one to the critical issues to be considered by Bethel in its planning program. We therefore would like to coordinate our efforts with those of the Corps of Engineers to ensure consistent data and planning assumptions are used. Our contact in the Division of Community Planning for the Bethel comprehensive planning project is Mr. Ed Busch at 225 Cordova Street, Building B, Anchorage, Alaska 99501, telephone: 279-8636. "We would appreciate receiving the Corps of Engineers' feasibility report when it is available, and would be pleased to chare information relative to the comprehensive planning project." Provided that proper coordination occur with the Department of Community and Regional Affairs, the Clearinghouse has no objection to the proposal. This letter satisfies the review requirements of the OMB Circular A-95. cc: Sjncerely, HOEAASS. Gop J — erry L. Madden State-Federal Coordinator William Hanable, DNR Rikkie Fowler, DNR Dennis Dooley, DOT/PF Commissioner Mueller, DEC Commissioner McAnerney, CRA Jay Livey, City of Bethel APPENDIX 8 Bathymetry Survey on the Kuskokwim River at Bethel Alaska e-1 ELEV 8.11 } | ©——e secron ror mn sorrow ean LEGEND NOTES Mosaic MOT TO SCALE BETHEL, ALASKA BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION CROSS - SECTION LOCATIONS & STATIONS ALASKA DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS ANCHORAGE, ALASKA sureevseo, mecommencer seantrec arewovts PLATE B-I BETHEL, ALASKA BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION KUSKOKWIM RIVER SECTION BI - BIA LOOKING DOWNSTREAM U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ALASKA PLANNING AND REPORT BRANCH PREPARED BY__- sé PLATE B-2 NS EERE SE ° °°<§ oO 0 0 ee EEE se Ber seer SS] Pee pe ee ee in pre over eae in t | ft HQ | we - #0 -30 7 Tso -40 ae. 80 Le + 4 80 1650 1800 1750 1700 1850 1600 = 1850 1500 1450 400 1300 1250 1200 ° er T. re He e 210 ee = SEES — SE | Sei = erie ee Ree -—] -20 ee ote ] faa ol ae : -40 | -50 120 150 00 1050 4000 950 900 | 850 800 TsO TOO 2 650 600 sso 825 | “BETHEL ° 10 zs zr . BETHEL , ALASKA 3 BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION a -30 —— i Sais en : % x - Ta : KUSKOKWIM_ RIVER é 5, s SECTION B2-B2C LOOKING DOWNSTREAM =40 — a6 U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ALASKA 823 450 PLANNING AND REPORT BRANCH PREPARED BY DATE PLATE B-3 BETHEL ,ALASKA BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION KUSKOKWIM RIVER SECTION B-4TOB-4B LOOKING DOWNSTREAM U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT,ALASKA PLANNING AND REPORT BRANCH PREPARED BY______—iDbATE. PLATE B-4 BETHEL , ALASKA BETAEL BANK STABILIZATION KUSKOKWIM RIVER SECTION B-6 TO B-6Z LOOKING DOWNSTREAM U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT,ALASKA PLANNING AND REPORT BRANCH PREPARED BY ' DATE \ PLATE B-5 BETHEL , ALASKA BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION KUSKOKWIM RIVER SECTION B-6A TO B-68 LOOKING DOWNSTREAM US. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT,ALASKA PLANNING AND REPORT BRANCH PRERWED BY DATE PLATE B-6 BETHEL ,ALASKA BETHEL BANK: STABILIZATION KUSKOKWIM RIVER SECTION B-10 TO B-0D LOOKING DOWNSTREAM U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ALASKA PLANNING AND REPORT BRANCH PREPARED BY_________ss— DATE PLATE B-7 rr 400 B-I5 TO B-I4 JULY 1979 BETHEL , ALASKA BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION KUSKOKWIM RIVER SECTIONS B-I2 TO B-I3 AND B-I4 LOOKING DOWNSTREAM U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ALASKA PLANNING AND REPORT BRANCH B-i2 TO B-I3 PREPARED BY 50 BETHEL, ALASKA BETHEC BANK. STABLIZATION KUSKOKWIM RIVER SECTION BI7 TO BI6 LOOKING DOWNSTREAM U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ALASKA PLANNING AND REPORT BRANCH PREPARED BY . OATE PLATE B-9 APPENDIX C Foundation and Exploration Drilling Results and Materials Investigation NUNAVAKOAK LAKE EEK ISLAND JACKSM/TH NE WENHAM BETHEL, ALASKA BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION LOCATION MAP U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS AK., DIST. PREPARED EW DATE PLATE C-4 CAPE NEWENHAN Locations OF \ POTENTIAL QUARRY SITE JAGGED_MTN: ELEV. 2305' BETHEL, ALASKA BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION POTENTIAL QUARRY SITES CAPE NEWENHAM U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS AK. DIST] PREPARED___Ew DATE PLATE. C-5 BELUGA HILL ELEV. 924' POTENTIAL QUARRY SITE GOOONEWS BAY BETHEL, ALASKA BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION POTENTIAL QUARRY SITE GOODNEWS_ BAY U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS AK, DIST} PREPARED BY_EW DATE AS A AMR iE SINT PLATE C-6 aA i AO MBO ik AR Re NAP ST MRC ik ER BS RC ASS A SA ACR ORE haba APPENDIX D Engineering Analysis BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION ENGINEERING APPENDIX D TABLE OF CONTENTS Item Page PROTECTION ALTERNATIVES D-2 Previous Studies 0-2 Design Considerations D-2 Plan A - Articulated Concrete Mattress 0-4 Plan B - Riprap Revetment D-6 Plan C - River Diversion D-9 Stage vs. Frequency curve D-12 LIST OF PLATES Number Title D-1 Historic Bank Locations D-2 Decreasing Erosion Rate D-3 Historic Erosion Rate D-4 Bank Protection Alternatives - Plan 0-5 Articulated Concrete Mattress - Sections and Details 0-6 Riprap Revetment - Sections 0-7 River Diversion Plan 0-8 Embankment - Profile and Sections D-1 PROTECTION ALTERNATIVES PREVIOUS STUDIES A reconnaissance report prepared in November, 1979 evaluated the following ten alternatives: 1. Sheet pile wall with rock toe protection 2. Sheet pile wall with articulated concrete mattress toe protection 3. Cutting the bank to a more stable slope 4. Cutting the bank and revetting the riprap 5. Cutting the bank and revetting with articulated concrete mattress 6. River diversion at Location #1 7. Sheet pile wall and bank sloping in combination 8. River diversion at Location #2 9. Filling the bank to a uniform slope and revetting with articu- lated concrete mattress 10. No action - relocation All of the alternatives except 8 and 9 have been rejected as either economically infeasible or unacceptable to the local interests. Alter- native 8, herein after referred to as the river diversion alternative, and Alternative 9, herein after referred to as the articulated concrete revetment alternative will be examined in greater detail as well as a riprap revetment alternative which is similar to Alternative 9. DESIGN CONSIDERATION Current and Scour It may be assumed that the maximum velocity to be contended with during construction is 4 feet per second. Armor units should be designed to resist displacement by velocities up to 7 feet per second. Scour depth was calculated assuming a nonerodible bank (revetment) and unfrozen silty sand of median grain size 0.1 mm. A flow of 179,000 cfs results in a calculated theoretical scour depth of 115 feet, however, for several reasons, this is felt to be overly conservative. In the first place, much of the river bottom is still underlain by permafrost, and the flood flows capable of scouring materials to this depth are not of the duration required to melt the permafrost. When flows return to normal after flooding, the equilibrium scour depth which is less than D-2 flood scour depth will be reestablished. A layer of bed material will therefore be deposited over the permafrost, insulating it, decreasing its rate of heat transfer and subsequent deterioration. Further evidence that the 115-foot figure is too great can be found at the face of the cellular sheet pile dock constructed at Brown's Slough in 1973. The sheet piles were driven to a penetration of approximately 12 feet. Although no soundings were obtained at the dock face, it is known that some scour has occurred. The scour has been insufficient to cause any stability problems and is therefore far less than predicted by the compu- tations. Therefore, it is proposed that a maximum observed scour of 70 feet be used in design. Wave Action A frequency analysis of 1 hour duration winds from the southeast quadrant based on 30 years of data collected at the control building at the Bethel Municipal Airport, indicates that a 54 mph 1 hour duration wind has a recurrence interval of 50 years. Using a maximum straight line fetch of 3.2 miles for winds blowing directly downstream toward Bethel a significant wave height (hp) of 4.2 feet is derived by the JONSWAP technique. With a wave length of 90 feet this wave would be a deepwater wave as it is generated in 50 feet (+) channel depth. The wave would break on a reveted slope with a breaker height (H)) of nearly 6 feet. Such a wave would have obvious effects on an unprotected slope or even on riprap sized only to withstand the effects of current scour. Drawdown Any revetment structure constructed must allow the soil behind it to drain freely and prevent build up of excessive hydrostatic pressures. Failures due to sudden drawdown can be prevented by proper slope design and drainage measures. Ice Action Ice forces that must be considered in design of protective works include impact and abrasion by large floating ice sheets, and bouyant uplift by ice masses frozen to the structural elements. Thrust due to thermal expansion will not be considered since tidal fluctuations at Bethel break the ice at the shoreline constantly. Frost Effects Insitu bank soils are predominantly fine silty sands and can generally be classified as F-2, or frost susceptible soils. Placing a rigid structure directly on these soils could result in differential heaving or settling. If a "rigid" structural alternative such as a sheet pile bulkhead or a retaining wall were selected, nonfrost susceptible backfill would be required within the zone of seasonal frost penetration. 0-3 For "flexible" alteratives, however, the differential movements would not be significant enough to effect the structures. Such flexible alternatives would include riprap and articulated concrete mattresses. Wind, Rain, and Surface Runoff The fine sands and silts of the Kuskokwim's banks at Bethel are susceptible to erosion by these forces even above zones acted on by the obvious forces of river currents and wave action. Protection against these elements may consist of vegetation as well as development of definite paved drainage ways. PLAN A - ARTICULATED CONCRETE MATTRESS General This type of revetment is used extensively on the lower Mississippi River with a high degree of success. It is, however, untried in northern rivers like the Kuskokwim. The basic unit of this mattress is a slab of concrete 3 feet 10-1/4 inches long by, 14 inches wide by 3 inches thick. These slabs are cast on and tied together by corrosion-resistant rein- forcing wire to form 100 square feet "squares" essentially 4 feet wide by 25 feet long when allowance is made for the 1 inch space between each slab and "square." No filter fabric is placed between these units and the riverbed below the wave zone and some scour may be experienced through the 1 inch spaces. The flexibility of the mattresses allows it to adjust to irregular bottom conditions and scour pockets which may occur. Filter fabric would be placed within the wave zone at Bethel. On the Mississippi, a mattress up to 140 feet in width measured parallel to the bank is assembled from the “squares” on board a specialized launching barge, to the required length and launched. In view of the nonavail- ability of this specialized launching equipment in Alaska, some variance in this procedure, probably in the form of narrower launches, could be expected. Experiments have been conducted using land based equipment to pull the mattress into the river. A similar approach would be used at Bethel. These experiments used 28-foot wide launches (7 squares). Launching begins at the downstream end of the project and proceeds upstream with successive launches overlapping by 4 feet to give a down- stream shingling effect. The concrete units would provide protection from current scour and wave action. Faces of the concrete units within the wave zone would be hardened to resist ice abrasion and treated or finished to reduce shear strength between the units and river ice. Placement of filter fabric in the wave zone would prevent piping of bank materials through the space between the slabs. Use of relatively flat slopes combined with drainage through the filter fabric and spaces would protect against sudden drawdown type failures. Details are shown on Plate D-5. D-4 Revetment Extent Along the river the revetment would extend from the mouth of Lousetown slough to the Standard Oi] Tank Farm. The revetment extent is shown on Plate D-1. Cross River Extent The flexibility of the mattress will allow it to adjust to scour at the toe. The length of the mattress has been selected so that it may "follow" the river bottom to maximum scour depth while maintaining a stable slope. The upper elevation of the revetment has been chosen as +11 feet MLLW based upon the design wave, a smooth slope of 1V on 4H and the procedures set forth in the Shore Protection Manual for determining wave runup. Slopes Limited available cross section data indicate that the riverbank slopes fairly uniformly from MLLW to its thalweg at approximately 1V on 4H. Limited dressing with a dragline would be required prior to placement of the mattress. Some debris in the form of junk cars which have been placed in an attempt to slow erosion would have to be removed. Fill would be placed from MLLW to the top of the mattress at a 1V on 4H slope which is as steep as the fine material available can be placed. Bank material above +1] feet MLLW would be cut to a 1V on 2.5H slope. Fill material would be obtained from this required excavation. Protection Above the Mattress Although this portion of the bank is above the zone of continual inundation and wave action, it is subject to erosion by wind, wave, and runoff as well as periodic inundation during extreme flood stages. From the 1968 Flood Plain Study it can be seen that the concrete revetment described above would have been over-topped nine times in the 27-year period of 1941 through 1967. Since these events are of rather short duration and since the velocities in this upper edge of the channel should be somewhat lower, it is felt that the protection provided by a grass cover would be sufficient. Using the publication entitled A Revegetative Guide for Alaska by the Cooperative Extension Servicé of the University of Alaska and U.S. Department of Agriculture, it was deter- mined that for the fine silty sand slopes and the climate at Bethel the hard fescue species broadcast seeded at the rate of 5 to 10 pounds per acre would provide protection for this portion of the slope. A jute mat would be used to provide temporary protection during the growing period. Construction Since aggregate as well as the necessary efficient production facili- ties are not available at Bethel, the mattress squares would have to be precast elsewhere and shipped to Bethel for placement. After preliminary grading of the bank, the riverward portion of the mattress would be D-5 assembled into launches and pulled into the river by tractors on the opposite bank or possibly by marine equipment with construction proceed- ing upstream as detailed earlier. Filter fabric would then be placed and the upper portion of the mattress would be lowered in place using a crane. Seeding of the upper slope would follow. Maintenance It is estimated that approximately 2 1/2 percent of initial costs would be required every 5 years to replace damaged concrete pieces and perform repairs on the mattress and seeded slopes as necessary. This will also reconcile the difference between initial design and anticipated scour. This work can be performed with locally available equipment. After the first year, more substantial maintenance would be required when the river degrades the bank adjacent to the concrete mattress. Material for this maintenance would be stockpiled during time of initial construction. Effects of Mattress Construction Channel Deepening: As a result of mattress construction the river would scour deeper at the toe of the mattress. Also, the channel would tend to become more constricted. This type of protection would slow the rate of transition of the riverflow from this channel to the chute channel near the opposite bank. A surveillance program including cross- sections into the river is recommended. Downstream Erosion: As a result of the decreased bedload material supply from stabilized bank, downstream locations may experience new erosion or increased erosion rates. PLAN B - RIPRAP REVETMENT General This revetment is similar in many ways to Plan A; however, instead of a protective surface of concrete the protection is provided by quarried stone. The stone size required for protection in the wave zone is Serene from that required below the wave zone. Details are shown on Plate D-6. Revetinent Extent The revetment would extend along the river from the mouth of Lousetown Slough downstream to the Standard Vil Tank Farm. Revetment extent is shown on Plate 0-4. Cross Section Below the Wave and Ice Zone: Riprap in the zone from -6.5 feet MLLW to the thalweg must be sized to resist the tractive forces of the river current. The 1969 Flood Plain Study estimated a maximum channel velocity of 10 feet per second for the standard project flood and 7 feet per second for the intermediate regional flood (100 year event). Using the 100-year value, a bend radius of 4,800 feet, a channel width of 1,000 v-6 R 11/82 feet, a unit weight of 165 1b/ft3 and the equations given in EM 1110-2-1601, Hydraulic Design of Flood Control Channels, a riprap size of D5q = 6 inches was found to be adequate. The riprap in this zone would he a uniformly graded material within the following limits: Weight % Lighter 150 1b 100 25 25 This riprap would be placed directly on the existing river hottom which has an average slope of 1V on 3 or 4H. The layer thickness for this riprap would normally he 1 foot in order to contain the largest size stone within the gradation; however, the thickness has been increased to 2 feet to allow for placement under water. The toe of the revetment would be overbuilt to allow for some scour at that location. No filter layer would be provided, as the rock is entirely below the wave zone and the riprap should slow velocities enough at the sand-riprap interface to Prevent loss of sand though the riprap. Within the Wave and Ice Zone: Based upon a minimum still water Jevel of 0.3 feet MLLW, and a maximum wave height (Hy) of 6 feet, the lower limit of this zone is established at -6.5 feet MLLW. Prior to placement of rock in this zone the bank would be dressed to a smooth slope of 1V on 4H which is as steep as the fine sand fill may be placed in the tide zone, but it would be more costly to place larger rock at a steeper slope. The upper limit of this zone is established at +8.5 feet MLLW which is equal to a maximum stil] water level of 3.9 feet MLLW plus a wave runup of 2.6 feet plus 2 feet. Using equation 7-110 from the Shore Protection Manual the Wos for riprap in the wave zone placed on a 1V on 4H slope was computed to be 625 pounds. The armor stone would be uniformly graded within the following limits: Weight % Lighter 800 Ib 100 600 0 - 25 450 0 A layer thickness of 3 feet is required for two armor units within the layer. To prevent leaching of fines through the armor protection, a filter fabric would he the best alternative. This would also allow water within the slope to drain freely. It is possible to construct a graded grave) filter; however, the large transition between hank materials and armor rock would require at least two layers and this is not Practical given the distance to a gravel source and the difficulties of piacement. Care would be required in the placement of the armor rock to Prevent tearing or puncturing the filter fabric. A protective layer of sand should be placed on the filter fabric prior to placing armor stone to protect the fabric. Some displacement of the armor rock hy impinging ice floes may 0-7 R 6/82 be expected, but the relatively flat slope would tend to reduce this phenomenon. Local residents indicate that ice scour has not been a major factor in the bank erosion problem. Above the Wave and Ice Zone: Although this portion of the bank is above the zone of continual imundation and wave action, it is subject to erosion by wind, wave, and runoff as well as periodic inundation during extreme flood stages. From the 1968 Flood Plain Study it can be seen that the armor rock described above would have been inundated 13 times in the 27-year period of 1941 through 1967. Since these events are of rather short duration and since the velocities in the upper edge of the channel should be somewhat lower, it is felt that the protection provided by a grass cover would be sufficient. Using the publication entitled A Revegetative Guide for Alaska by Cooperative Extension Service of the University of Alaska and U.S. Department of Agriculture, it was deter- mined that for the fine silty sand slopes and the climate at Bethel the hard fescue species broadcast seeded at the rate of 5 and 10 pounds per acre would provide protection for this portion of the slope. A jute mat would be used to provide temporary protection during the growing period. The upper bank would be excavated to a 1V on 2.5H slope prior to seeding. Construction Riprap below -6.5 feet MLLW would be dumped from barges after minor grading of the existing bottom with a dragline. The dumped riprap would than be graded to thickness by means of a dragline. Grading of the area above -6.5 feet MLLW could be accomplished by means of conventional earth moving equipment. Excavated material will be used where possible as fill material. Surplus excavated material and waste will be disposed upland. Minimal borrow of fill material from upland will be required if a shorter revetment extent is selected. Filter fabric will be pinned in place with suitable overlap and armor will be carefully placed upon it by means of a crane and “orange peel" type bucket. No access road will be constructed for purposes of maintenance or construction. Maintenance It is estimated that approximately 2 percent of initially placed rock will be required every 5 years to relocate displaced riprap on the slope and to replace it as necessary. This is designed to reconcile the difference between initial design and anticipated scour. This work can be performed with locally available equipment. After the first year, more substantial maintenance will be required when the river degrades the bank adjacent to the riprap. Material for this maintenance will be stockpiled during time of initial construction. Effects of Construction Channel Deepening: As a result of revetment construction the river will scour deeper at the toe of the revetment. Also, the channel will tend to become more constricted. This type of protection will slow the rate of transition of the riverflow from the main channel to the chute channel near the opposite bank. A surveillance program including cross- sections into the river is recommended. 0-8 R: 11/82 Downstream Erosion: As a result of decreased bedload material supply downstream locations may experience new erosion or increased erosion rates. No significant impact is expected since there is no development downstream. Erosion is taking place constantly up and down the river so there is no new hazard to the environment. PLAN C - RIVER DIVERSION General A possible solution to the erosion problem at Bethel is to divert the erosion currents away from the bank, and to provide protection against the other erosive elements by means of a revetment and seeding. A plan . this alternative is shown on Plate D-7 and details are shown on Plate -8. Diversion Embankment Location: The entrance to the chute channel which has developed through the point bar opposite Bethel, represents the upstream limit of the embankment. The downstream limit of the embankment location is at the mouth of Lousetown Slough. This slough is also a proposed small boat harbor site and the diversion embankment location downstream of the slough would cut’the harbor off from the main part of the Bethel water- front and would not protect the upstream limits of the community. With the embankment at this location a pool will form upstream of the embank- ment creating a buffer zone from moving ice and the river. This location is therefore optimum. Embankment Height: The low and level flood plain on the north abut- ment of the embankment dictates the upper limit of possible crest eleva- tions. Crest elevations above approximately +7 feet MLLW would require a long extension to tie into higher ground. Construction to lesser heights would not result in the maximum flow diversion. The +7 feet elevation would divert most normal summer flows. Embankment Cross Section: The core of the diversion structure would be constructed of rockfill. To allow for possible Placement and repair by landbased equipment the embankment crest width would be 20 feet. The embankment would be armored on the top and on both side slopes from the top to an elevation of -6.5 feet MLLW. The following gradation of armor would be required: Weight % Smaller 2,100 100 1,650 0 - 25 1,250 0 Pilot Channel - Description Without additional dredging, the existing chute channel is not large enough to accommodate the additional flows which it would receive as a D-9 result of the diversion structure. The pilot channel would be trape- zoidal in section with a bottom width of 200 feet, side slopes 1V on 3H and an average depth of 20 feet. A total of 1,400,000 cubic yards of dredging would be required along the channel length of approximately 6,800 feet. The dredged material would be disposed of at the upstream toe of the diversion structure. Upper Bank - Protection Extent: The diversion embankment and pilot channel would eliminate the effects of the river currents at normal summer flows; however, the existing bank would still require protection from waves, wind, and run- off. To provide this protection, that portion of the bank between -6.5 feet MLLW and +9 feet MLLW would be revetted with a layer of armor rock over filter fabric. That portion above +8 feet MLLW will be flattened to a stable slope of 1V on 2.5H and seeded. Revetment: The revetment would consist of a layer of armor rock over a filter Fabric which would prevent the fine material in the bank from washing through the interstices in the armor rock. To protect the toe of the revetment from scour effects of waves or river velocites due to flows overtopping the diversion embankment, the toe would be excavated into the existing bank in the manner shown in Plate D-8. The slope of the excava- tion and stone will be 1V on 2.5H which is judged to be the maximum slope at which the material can be excavated. Based on the previous wave analysis, the excavated slope and utilizing the procedures set forth in the Shore Protection Manual, the following gradation is proposed for the armor stone: Weight % Smaller 1,250 100 1,000 0 - 25 750 0 The layer thickness for this stone is 4.5 feet. Construction In order to insure that the chute channel has the capacity to handle the additional flows directed to it by the diversion embankment, and to insure that sufficient portions of the embankment are in place to act as a downstream containment berm, careful coordination of these construction activities would be required. Excavation of the pilot channel would probably be accomplished with a cutter head dredge. The embankment would be constructed by dumping the rockfill core from barges and dressing the slopes to final grade by means of a dragline. Armor stone will be placed by a crane and "Orange Peel" type bucket. Revetment construction could take place at any point in the construction period and would be accom- plished using standard earthmoving equipment. The construction season is limited to the ice free months of May through October. D-10 Maintenance The design life of this alternative is estimated to be 50 years with 10 percent replacement at 25 years. The set bank of the embankment should lessen the possible effects of river ice on the embankment and the embankment itself would prevent ice flows in the river from scouring the revetment. It is estimated that approximately 23,000 cubic yards of sediments would have to be dredged every 5 years to maintain navigability in the old channel to the Bethel dock. ; Effects of River Diversion Siltation of the Navigation Channel: Blocking the main channel would result in siltation at the downstream end of the abandoned channel that would require periodic dredging to maintain navigation to Bethel. Interference with Upstream Navigation: The diversion embankment would add 3 miles to trips between Bethel and points upstream. Additional Effects: The diversion of the river into the chute channel could have additional effects on navigation such as aggradation and degradation of the riverbed and accelerated erosion at other points. D-11 Zi-a = a cE < b a < uw z 3 a iJ “o x a ' =e a a = - td uw = E $ J ad ua 116.42 AT NEW BETHEL AIRPORT ELEV. 1.01 80 EXCEEDENCE FREQUENCY IN PERCENT 70 60 50 40 30 20 100 200 500 KUS KOKWIM RIVER BETHEL, ALASKA STAGE VS. FREQUENCY U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ALASKA Planning and Reports Branch Prepared by__L.M.W._ Date FEB 70 2 SS AVERAGE RECURRENCE INTERVAL IN YEAR Le _ EXTEND TO_RIVER THALWEG (DISTANCE VARIES) CLASS A STONE aaa Class as A Loe J B . a . EXTENO TO RIVER THALWEG (DISTANCE VARIES) | “6.5 MLLW. i 1 ‘ NOTES: |. BANK TO BE GRADED TO IV ON 4H SLOPE FROM - 6.5 MLLW TO +8 MLLW. 2. GRADE BANK TO IV ON 2.5H ABOVE + SMLLW. 3. CLASS B STONE TO BE PLACED ON EXISTING | BOTTOM. 4. STONE SHALL BE WELL GRADED WITHIN THE FOLLOWING LIMITS: (SEE ABOVE) FILTER CLOTH BENEATH FILTER CLOTH BENEATH CLASS & STONE A APRON SLOPE TO BE SEEDED - % Lighter Weight \ 100 800 1b. 25 600 i ‘0 450 i 100 150 i 25 25 | | | : | BETHEL, ALASKA ! BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION i RIPRAP REVETMENT : SECTIONS { ALASKA DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS i ANCHORAGE, ALASKA i i ‘ unk PLATE 0-6 LEGEND 1974 BLM PHOTOS 1972 BLM PHOTOS 1968 PHOTOS 1967 BLM PHOTOS 1966 PHOTOS -— 1965 BLM PHOTOS am 1963 BLM PHOTOS 1952 (APPROXIMATE) MOSAIC PREPARED BY Am-PMOTO TECH 1979, FROM 1977 PHOTO MOSAIC WOT TO SCALE BETHEL, ALASKA BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION HISTORIC BANK LOCATIONS ALASKA DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS ANCHORAGE, ALASKA surenvisto mecOMMENDKD, te eondrene eetbohe PLATE 0-1 EROSION PLATES ARE NUMBERED 2.1 THROUGH 2.9 BEGINNING UPSTREAM. BETHEL, ALASKA BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION DECREASING EROSION RATE ALASKA DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS PREPARED BY __ DATE PLATE D-2 a uJ — <= a) a PLATE D-2.2 PLATE D-2.3 Tt N a WW Ee < |] a PLATE D-2.5 o N . a WwW E < ) a AG-FPP 1672-83 PLATE D-2.7 PLATE D-2.8 EROSION PLATES ARE NUMBERED 3.1 THROUGH 3.8 BEGINNING UPSTREAM. BETHEL, ALASKA BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION HISTORIC EROSION RATE ALASKA DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS PREPARED BY__________DATE PLATE D-3 PLATE D-3.1 Po ee Ee 2) STAGED. PROTECTION. PLATE D-3.2 PLATE D-3.3 PLATE D-34 PLATE D-3.5 PLATE D-3.6 . Future Staged Protection ee ie a) eT rig eC E:Y PLATE D-3.7 road ee Ra Mahe te PLATE D-3.8 AG-FPP 203-83 east : west HIGH GROUND | FLOOD PLAIN 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN LINE BETHEL, ALASKA BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION BANK PROTECTION ALTERNATIVES 1&2 PLAN ALASKA DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS ANCHORAGE, ALASKA [77-7 7; EXISTING GROUND — LY ©) KZ 2 SE 70 MAT AND SEEDED | 4, : —— z 2 | ARTICULATED CONCRETE MATTRESS, TYPE IT { ' rs C | C J ‘C ' £ - ‘SILTY SAND FILL — neue -osmux cp db ; 4 {Hoe ae wenT 10-65 mum = Lt 310. 146" TYP ~ boc 5 | cp: 4 ARTICULATED CONCRETE MATTRESS TYPICAL SECTION (HiGH BANK AREAS) | } Z 1 | PLAN VIEW ARTICULATED CONCRETE MATTRESS TYPE IE SCALE: 1*#10° 125° FILTER FABRIC REINFORCING WIRE FABRIC | SECTION A-A \ puta enone (TOP OF REVETMENT TO -6.5 MLW) TYPICAL SECTION (Low BANK AREAS) ARTICULATE! ONCRETE MATTR . | BETHEL, ALASKA BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION ARTICULATED CONCRETE MATTRESS SECTIONS AND DETAILS ALASKA DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS ANCHORAGE. ALASKA, Se PLATE D-5 BETHEL, ALASKA BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION RIVER DIVERSION PLAN ALASKA DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS ANCHORAGE ALASKA PLATE D-7 \ L J : ry +7 of wiuw 4 ° ” 20 » AY 4 1300 1800 '7T00 1600 1500 1400 1300 1200 N00 1000 900 800 TOO 600 500 400 300 200 100 i DIVERSION DIKE - PROFILE DIVERSION EMBANKMENT. LM | SECTION A-A (sta. 0 To 10+00) HORIZONTAL 1**100° ws 3 +7 MLLW ors ere 1 LS u 7 ya , fe ROCKFILL ~ DIVERSION EMBANKMENT. SECTION B-B (sta. 10+00 To 20+00) -6.5 MLLW . BETHEL, ALASKA WAVE PROTECTION . BETHEL BANK STABILIZATION TYPICAL SECTION (HIGH BANKS) EMBANKMENT PROFILE & SECTION ALASKA DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS PLATE D-8 Nile inlaid cial United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE IN REPLY REFER TO 1011 E. TUDOR RD. ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 (907) 276-3800 Colonel Lee R. Nunn 10 SEP 1980 District Engineer Alaska District Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 7002 Anchorage, Alaska 99510 Dear Colonel Nunn: This correspondence transmits the Final Coordination Act Report of the Secretary of the Interior in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Coor- dination Act 48 Stat. 401, as amended, for the proposed Bethel Bank Stabilization Project at Bethel, Alaska. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service participation in this project was intitiated on March 19, 1979, through a letter from the Corps of Engineers. Project design information was obtained via a preliminary report dated November 1979 and through correspondence and conversations with Corps of Engineers personnel. Biological information provided is based on the analysis of limited field investigations, literature review, and discus- sions with personnel from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and Corps of Engineers. Review comments of the Draft Coordination Act Report by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and the Corps of Engineers were considered in preparation of the final document. Should you or your staff have any questions concerning the contents of the report, please contact the Western Alaska Ecological Services Field Office at 271-4575. Sincerely, « Acting “Area Director 2 cc: AOES, WAES ADF&G, NMFS, Anchorage FWS/OEC, Washington Table of Contents Page Introduction..... ccc cece cccccccccccccees wee ccaceccccccce eccccccccck=l Project Description E-4 River Blockage - Alternative A...seeeeccecccccecscscccceeeeeecEnd Fill With Concrete Mattress Protection or Rock RipRap - Alternative B.....eecceseseeeesEn4 Description of RESOUCES. occ c ccc cecccecccccccccccccccsescceeeeeee EO Physical Inventory...-scccccecccccccccccessceevcs ccc ccc cece ee ob8 Bi0l0giCal INVENTOLY..-cceececeecccscccccreecrecesceservess eee Lnd Bethel Vicinity..-..ceeccceccees cece eee cec ccc cccee cc cccceeeeEnd Quarry Sites....... ee ceeeeee seer ce cece ecee eee ceeEn le Goodnews Bay...-ecececceeeee ove cccccccenetccccsocccesccceseobe Cape Newenham.......scecccccccccecccecscccssscceccesceess cE l& Major Potential ImpactS.....cccsseccccceccccecccccsscssscessceses sbo20 Present Bank Er0SiONn.....ccecceccccccccccececcccees ee cccceeeeek=20 Impacts of Alternative A......cccececeeccccecccseccecserecees eb@20 Impacts of Alternative B...ececesecceccccccescccccvecrecveseee ebm’ Quarry Site Impacts......ceeessccececcceeceeeee see e vce cce ee eee bnee Goodnews Bay....-eeeeececeeee Cape Newenham....... ECR ERERER REECE DISCUSSION. . ccc eceecvecceveccccees cece cece ence cece veces cccccccese shee Alternative A.....seeeeees o-b-0'0 0:0 0'0'0-0-0-0-0-0:0-0-0'0.0'0 0 0-0: '0-6:0'0-0-0 0-0-0000 .0 o b= O0 Alternative B...cccccccccvccccccvececees Seecccccccssesssocreseeeb=eo Quarry Sites. .cccecccccecccccescvcees cece ce cece cccccccccccsee eb 26 RECOMMENdATIONS...ececceccccccscccccsccccccecceccccecccccceeseeee ebm e) Literature Cited. ....ccescccccccccccccecccccccccsccecccccceceseee Ered Appendices...... cece cece cece eee eeeccc ccc cccccccccccccccesssesssesEmal E-iii INTRODUCTION Bethel, Alaska, is located on the north bank of the Kuskokwim River in southwestern Alaska approximately 400 miles west of Anchorage (Figure 1). Bethel serves as the principal commerce center for 48 villages and 16,000 people, encompassing 100,000 square miles of the Kuskokwim and lower Yukon River basins. When Bethel was first settled, it occupied ground along what was a side stream of the Kuskokwim River with waterfront protection provided by a series of small islands. Around 1939, this situation changed when the river started to actively erode its banks (U.S. Department of the Army, 1979). The erosion rate has been determined to average as much as 12 feet per year along the town front and 15 to 20 feet per year in front of the U.S. Public Health Service Hospital and the Standard Oil tank farm. Bethel now finds itself adjacent to the main channel of one of Alaska's major meandering rivers (Figures 2 and 3). The bank erosion is due to the cumulative action of river currents, wind-generated waves, wind-driven rain, and thawing of the permafrost along the exposed banks. Erosion commences when southeasterly winds drive waves into the bank, eroding away the toe. Subsequently, during rainstorms accompanied by wind, rain is driven into the bank face; this, coupled with the melting of the permafrost, saturates the soil. Soil saturation and toe erosion cause the bank to become unstable, leading to the bank sloughing into the river. The river eventually transports this sloughed material downstream leaving a new bank to be acted upon by river currents, waves, and rain causing the cycle to be repeated. This degrada- tion is further aggravated by removal of the natural vegetative cover. During the last 40 to 50 years, a strip of waterfront land more than 500 feet wide has disappeared into the river (U.S. Department of the Army, 1979). In the past, buildings have simply been moved back. However, local interests now state that available land is in short supply and what remains is very expensive. They believe that protection of some 10,000 feet of riverbank from erosion would preserve existing lands, make it unnecessary to move buildings and oil storage tanks to other locations, protect important medical facilities, and perpetuate the existence of Bethel as a cultural and regional center. Consequently, the purpose of this study by the Corps of Engineers (CE) is to determine the feasibility of bank stabilization of the Kuskokwim River at Bethel. Information previously provided by the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to the CE consisted of two Planning Aid letters, Analysis of providing protection to the Bethel waterfront resulted in an initial review of ten alternatives. These included six solutions that would provide varying degrees of protection to the bank by some combination of sheet pile walls and protection of the resulting slope, or diversion of the river away from town. In addition, four solutions were evaluated that would not decrease the rate of bank erosion but would decrease subsequent loss of structures along the bank. The latter four solutions basically involved some combination of sloping the bank and protecting the resulting slope or moving the town. All but two of the alternatives have been eliminated by the CE either because the costs outweighed the benefits or because the local people were in opposition. Figure 2. Severe erosion along the Bethel waterfront near the U. S. Public Health Service Hospital. Photo by Don McKay. Figure 3. Example of previous unsuccessful attempt to control erosion at Bethel by the State of Alaska using surplus submarine nets. Photo by Don McKay. -a revetment current Figure 6, Fill with concrete mattress protection or quarry rock- Alternative B, Kuskokwim River to back up and overflow its banks (U.S. Department of the Army, 1968). Flows during the winter months decrease to approximately 15,000 cfs. The river is murky and silty, but the volume of sediment transported is unknown. Bethel's climate is more maritime than continental. However, there are usually two times of the year when the area becomes affected by conti- nental climatic influences. In June and July, temperatures in the area rise noticeably under the influence of warmer continental air forming over the broad valley during long hours of arctic daylight. Around the latter part of December and early January, cold, clear, continental air formed during prolonged hours of winter darkness becomes dominant. Extremes of temperature range a total of 142° from a low of -52° F in January to a high of 90° F in June. Mean annual temperature for the Bethel area is 29° F, During the movement of low pressure storm fronts northeastward into the Bering Sea, it is not uncommon for wind velocities in the Bethel area to exceed 70 miles per hour. Annual precipitation averages nearly 19 inches. August is usually the wettest month, with an average of slightly over 4 inches of precipitation. Snowfall averages about 60 inches per year. Biological Inventory Scientific names of vegetation, fish, invertebrates, mammals, and birds appearing here are listed in Appendix I. Bethel Vicinity Fish and wildlife resources at the townsite of Bethel are limited to aquatic species associated with the Kuskokwim River and lakes and sloughs in Bethel, and terrestrial species that are able to survive close to a settlement. Vegetation in the vicinity of Bethel consists primarily of moist tundra and shrub thickets associated with upland habitats and with riparian habitats of the Kuskokwim River. The predominant woody species associated with moist tundra are American green alder, alpine bearberry, resin birch, dwarf arctic birch, lapland rosebay, willow, and ericaceous shrubs (Viereck and Little, 1972). Shrub thickets and riparian vegetation contain dense growths of American green alder, thinleaf alder, willow, and resin birch (Viereck and Little, 1972; Ouellette, 1974). A variety of mosses, lichens, forbs, grasses, and sedges add to the diversity of the tundra vegetation. Bethel is located on the eastern margin of one of the most important waterfowl habitats in Alaska, the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. A large portion of the waterfowl that migrate along the Pacific Flyway are produced on the Delta. The most productive habitat is located 50 miles west from Bethel and includes that portion of the Delta extending from the coast to approximately 10 miles inland. The Delta is particularly important to populations of black brant and emperor, white-fronted, and cackling Canada geese. In addition, 150,000 lesser snow geese utilize the uplands of this region for resting and feeding during the fall migration. This area is also important breeding habitat for spectacled, Steller's, and common eiders, greater scaup, oldsquaw, and pintail. Rough-legged and marsh hawks are the most common raptors on the Delta. Shorebirds, also common in the region, include godwits, plovers, snipe, curlews, sandpipers, cranes, loons, and grebes (Ouellette, 1974). Ninety-six species of birds have been documented on the Clarence Rhode National Wildlife Refuge due west of Bethel (Appendix II). In the absence of adequate species distribution and abundance near Bethel, this list is presented as representative of the avifauna of the project vicinity. The extent to which waterfowl and shorebirds utilize sloughs, bays, and intertidal habitats of the Kuskokwim River in the immediate vicinity of Bethel is not well documented. However, during the spring, the following species of waterfowl and shorebirds are frequently observed near town: pintail, mallard, American wigeon, northern shoveler, greater scaup, Barrow's goldeneye, oldsquaw, black scoter, Canada goose, whistling swan, red-necked grebe, arctic loon, sandhill crane, common snipe, American golden plover, western sandpiper, whimbrel, northern phalarope, and solitary sandpiper. A few waterfowl have been documented nesting on the upper reaches of Brown's Slough (U.S. Department of the Army, 1972). Suitable habitats of the study area in the immediate vicinity of Bethel are not heavily utilized by waterfowl due to chronic disturbances associated with riverboat and aircraft operations during the open water seasons. The greatest numbers of waterfowl and shorebirds that occur in the Bethel area do so during spring and fall migrations. Few big game mammals are found in abundance near Bethel. Moose and wolves occur only occasionally (LeResche et al., 1974; Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), 1973) and black bear are rare (Rae Baxter, ADF&G, Bethel, pers. comm.). Snowshoe hares and ptarmigan occur in shrubby habitats near Bethel and on the islands in the Kuskokwim River opposite the settlement. Other small game species, such as ruffed grouse and sharp-tailed grouse, are reported to be very rare (Rae Baxter, ADF&G, pers. comm.). Other animals that occupy wet and moist tundra in the Yukon-Kuskokwim lowlands near Bethel include red fox, arctic fox, river otter, mink, lynx, beaver, and muskrat (ADF&G, 1978a; Rae Baxter, ADF&G, pers. comm). . The Kuskokwim River serves as a migratory corridor for five species of salmon from mid-June until late August. Chum salmon are the most abundant, followed in descending order of abundance by coho, chinook, sockeye, and pink salmon. According to the the ADF&G (1978b), no salmon are known to spawn in the mainstem of the Kuskokwim River from its mouth upstream past McGrath, a distance of several hundred miles. During April and May, sheefish also migrate up the river past Bethel. Kuskokwim River sheefish populations are estuarine anadromous—. In the Kuskokwim, a few spawning sites may serve the entire population. The ADF&G (1978c) indicates that the only spawning sites discovered to date are a considerable distance upriver from Bethel at Highpower Creek and Big River. Post-spawning, downstream migrations find sheefish in the vicinity of Bethel by November. Over-wintering occurs in the lower delta region. In addition, anadromous rainbow smelt and resident pond smelt are harvested in the river by residents of Bethel for subsistence purposes by a spring dip net fishery (Rae Baxter, ADF&G, pers. comm.). Broad and humpback whitefish utilize sloughs and lakes near Bethel in the summer, and move into the Kuskokwim 2/ ‘Fish that inhabit coastal estuaries and migrate upstream into fresh water to spawn. E-11l Figure 8. Potential quarry sites in relation to Bethel. a] “INGRICHCUAK HILL . _aNewtoh 2 sn J Foun Kihegtek | \ Pingurbek | * r fy 520 = 2 it Ma : Staety) Mountait oil be thas Pt Pilot Stao Hills T ngrihak Con akwaktolik” (use Lowe _ Paingakmeut . __Napakiak ” CLARENCE RHODE i TIONAL WILDLIFE RANGE : , Tuntutuliak oO ¢ Gutmut o*% Cakulurary ieee : oKongiganak VE -Kigitingok CAPE NEWENHAM EFUGE NATIONAL WILDLIFE Paradise O BONASILA 1807 ‘Dome Landing CRuesan <. Mission oxichivth 1 avons, ee . 2476 MOSQUTTO MTN Crooked Creek O 1705 MOLYBDENUM u1™ “RUSSIAN Oskawal MTS 3366 fhuathbaluk alghag sia ceutas tik O O* ‘CNapaimiut HENDERSOR MTN GREAT #550 fx - RIDGE, Pier 4, 226 2696" © 2923-THUMB MTN “a 2470 tn Wn 226 /"1SLAND MTN, « DOWNORAFT MTN ~~ 2160 ky Si Tongue Foxy SU a a - sviak &£ Le Xp Hagemeister | High | 1655" Crooked | Us KONARUT MIM *TRTAYAR NUKLUNEK MTN. 367! * omanokotg isonvilleS Relaxanak : gee Pp 2) Toklung O% "|. * Rourtd | e NDS 3 WALRUS ISLANUS STATE GAME SANCTUARY Twins ISL : Protection Pt Cape Constantine Scale: 40 miles E-13 I Figure 10. Southwestern view of Beluga Hill showing suitable quarry rock accessible by barge. Photo by Paul Hanna. Figure 11. Cliff nesting habitat for glaucous-winged gulls and pelagic cormorants on the southeastern face of Beluga Hill. Photo by Paul Hanna. Figure 12. Cape Newenham quarry sites and concentrations of colonial nesting seabirds. NEWENHAM . 3) " - Ay Ny loluttaree 4 9” ee BG th et ; SIRE ; ; ua Sa Wa Oracle’ eA : «es L DLIF &E REF UGE em Major seabird colonies -—~ Minor seabird colonies ¥% Potential quarry sites E-17 habitat. Estimates of a million or more murres, kittiwakes, puffins, cormorants, guillemots, and gulls nesting around the cliffs and rocky islands have been made. The area around Cape Newenham and nearby Cape Pierce is the most important concentration of nesting seabirds in all of Bristol Bay. For example, within 5 air miles of the USAF installation there are 7 nesting colonies of over 367,000 birds (Sowls et al., 1978). Appendix III contains a list of birds that have been identified on the refuge. A short field investigation was conducted at the potential Cape Newenham quarry sites on July 16, 1980, No seabird colonies were observed within the confines of the small unnamed bay adjacent to the USAF property. However, seabirds were seen actively feeding and resting in the bay predominantly along the northern and southern shores, The majority of the birds were murres (1,000), glaucous-winged gulls (200), white-winged scoters (200), and surf scoters (200). A substantial amount of bird movement occurred on the open ocean just outside of the bay generally from east to west. Several dozen cormorants and a few arctic loons were active in the bay also. Shorebirds included 10's of rock sandpipers, several semipalmated plovers, and a sanderling with 2 young. Perching birds included: savannah sparrow, yellow wagtail, common raven, snow bunting, and white-crowned sparrow. Bays near Cape Newenham are also important to migrating geese and seaducks. The ADF&G (1973) indicates a major migration route exists along the coast in the Cape Newenham area. During a relatively brief period in early spring and late fall, the bays are used as staging areas for ducks and geese migrating to and from their nesting grounds. Waterfowl use of the small bay near the USAF installation is unknown. However, due to the lack of extensive eelgrass beds, it is not believed to be a major staging area. There are no salmon spawning streams near the vicinity of the USAF installation, but all five species of Pacific salmon occur offshore in marine waters. A substantial number of Pacific herring spawn on the beaches throughout the small bay adjacent to the USAF installation (Rae Baxter, ADF&G, pers. comm.). Other marine species occurring in ocean waters near Cape Newenham are king crab and Pandalid shrimp (ADF&G, 1978b). Marine mammals found on the refuge include walrus, northern sea lion, and harbor seal. However, the ADF&G (1973) does not indicate any major rookeries or hauling out areas, No marine mammals were observed in the small bay near the Air Force site or along the outer coast during field investigations. In 1970, endangered gray whales were observed migrating past Cape Pierce from May through July (Dick and Dick, 1971). Terrestrial mammals include a few brown bear, moose, and wolves. Smaller mammals such as the red fox, arctic fox, hoary marmot, and arctic ground squirrel are common, Information on threatened or endangered species as listed by the U.S. Department of the Interior (1979) in the vicinity of Cape Newenham is not well documented. According to the Alaska Peregrine Falcon Recovery Team (1979), Cape Newenham is considered to be within the range of the endangered American peregrine falcon. This endangered species has been observed southeast of Cape Newenham in the vicinity of Cape Pierce. Dick and Dick (1971) reported observations of single peregrines thought to be juveniles E-19 In order to carry the increased flow, the new channel would have to be enlarged. The CE estimates 1.4 million cubic yards of material would have to be excavated, and disposal is proposed on the bank of the southeast channel. This alternative has a number of potential adverse environmental impacts associated with it, the majority of which are fisheries-related. Removal of gravel from an upstream source and placing it in the river near Bethel to construct a diversion dike would cause short-term siltation as a result of the discharge of materials into the river. These impacts are expected to be low and not significant to the productivity of fish or wildlife in the project vicinity, provided time constraints on construc— tion are considered when the bulk of migrating adult salmon are moving upstream. Normally this time period is from May 30 to July 30. High levels of sediment and/or turbidity can impact fish populations by direct damage to the gills from abrasion. These abrasions can decrease the effectiveness of the gills in taking oxygen from the water, and also make the fish more susceptible to microorganism infections. Since no salmon spawn in the mainstem of the Kuskokwim River below McGrath (ADF&G, 1978b), gravel excavation and the construction of a dike should have little effect on salmon reproduction. However, gravel removal from the river below Lower Kalskag could interfere with smelt and whitefish spawning. Therefore, gravel sources must be properly sited to prevent detrimental impacts on the reproduction of these species (Rae Baxter, ADF&G, pers. comm.). Dredging in the new channel would significantly increase the sediment load of the river while work was taking place. Once again, adult salmon and other fish species moving upstream to spawn would be subjected to adverse impacts associated with increased siltation discussed above. The magnitude of the impacts of dredging, therefore, will vary depending upon how close to the peak of migration the work is done. If dredging is curtailed from May 30 to July 30, the impacts to migrating salmon should be low. Placement of the dredged material on the bank of the new channel will eliminate shrubby habitat along the banks of the existing channel and result in the loss of any wildlife dependent upon those habitats. This action will have little significant impact on fish or wildlife species near Bethel. Diversion of the river would not be expected to significantly affect either upstream or downstream fish migration as the river naturally changes course over time. However, the present river channel would become a dead end if the diversion dike were constructed and could possibly become a trap for some migrating adult salmon or other fish species. Normally, the majority of migratory salmon moving upstream past Bethel would travel along the outside bend of the river where stream velocities are maximum. The number of fish that would enter the blocked river channel is unknown. However, the percentage of fish that may be permanently lost would probably be low due to the absence of appreciable flows attracting those individuals, Additional impacts from this alternative that would occur downstream from the site are difficult to quantify. Diverting the river may accelerate bank erosion downstream as the river attempts to meander and dissipate energy. Intertidal habitat downstream would be continually eroded from point bars and mudflats exposed at low tide causing deposition of silt to take place downstream. These impacts on fish and wildlife species are E-21 Goodnews Bay Removal of rock from Beluga Hill in Goodnews Bay will eliminate a breeding colony of approximately 300 glaucous-winged gulls and over 300 pelagic and red-faced cormorants by destroying their nesting habitat. Those nest sites not completely destroyed will be rendered unusable by disturbances from drilling, blasting, and the noise from large front-end loaders used to load the rock on barges. This destruction of habitat would cause a permanent loss in the production of these seabirds in the Goodnews Bay area. No other suitable cliff habitat adjacent to marine waters exists for a considerable distance along this portion of the western coast of Alaska. Any work done in or near the bay increases the risk of accidental fuel spills entering the aquatic environment. Barge traffic in and out of Goodnews Bay will disrupt the feeding and resting activities of terns and gulls nesting on the sandspits at the entrance and waterfowl nesting in the lowlands surrounding the bay. This impact would be difficult to quantify as a considerable amount of boat traffic already exists in Goodnews Bay from commercial and subsistence fishermen. Commercial and subsistence fishing for salmon and herring within Goodnews Bay will also be disrupted by tug and barge traffic moving in and out of the area. Confrontations with fishermen would probably result. This quarry site should not have any impact on threatened or endangered species. Cape Newenham Potential adverse impacts from quarrying rock at either an upland site or a beach site at Cape Newenham primarily involve colonial nesting seabirds and Pacific herring. Since the USAF installation is surrounded by one of the largest concentrations of nesting seabirds on the west coast of Alaska, any large scale quarry operation could disrupt these birds during the breeding season causing a significant loss in production. Removal of rock from either an upland site or a beach site will have little detrimental impact on vegetative resources. Disturbance of surface vegetation will be minor as suitable rock is exposed on the surface or covered with a shallow layer of alpine tundra. Some upland nesting shorebirds and passerines will be disrupted by drilling, blasting, and traffic from heavy equipment. However, the area is already impacted by the presence of the USAF buildings, runway, roads, and a large sanitary landfill. In spite of man's presence, numerous shorebirds and passerines were observed in the area. Although no nests were located, 2 sanderling chicks were observed in the alpine tundra close to the end of the runway. Drilling, blasting, and the noise from heavy equipment will disturb seabirds utilizing the small bay adjacent to the USAF property for feeding and resting and may cause a portion of them to abandon the area temporarily. The extent of this impact is difficult to quantify. The importance of the bay for feeding and resting to those birds nesting along the outer coast is unknown. However, in terms of density, the number of seabirds per unit area appeared to be considerably higher on the open ocean and waters within 1 mile of Bird Rock, the most important nesting colony on the north side of Cape Newenham. E-23 Potential adverse impacts on herring from a beach level quarry site and the loading of barges can be minimized provided time constraints are imposed. The ADF&G states that if no blasting or quarrying on the beach occurs from early May through late June impacts on herring would not be significant (Rae Baxter, ADF&G, pers. comm.). DISCUSSION Thorough analysis of both proposed alternatives to solve the erosion problem at the Bethel waterfront reveals that neither one is anticipated to cause significant adverse long-term nor short-term on-site impacts to fish and wildlife species in or near the project vicinity. However, we have selected one alternative that is the most favorable based primarily on the relative magnitude of impacts to fishery resources of the Kuskokwim River. In this case, Alternative B (Fill with either concrete mattress protection or rock riprap) is the most favorable as it involves the least impact on the river environment, Alternative A Alternative A, the river blockage, is less desirable in terms of impacts on fishery resources of the Kuskokwim River. Channeling significantly alters the natural environment and oftentimes leads to increased flooding and siltation in downstream areas. Sedimentation would be considerably greater than Alternative B due to the necessary dredging, in-river deposi- tion of gravel and riprap, in-river excavation of a gravel source upstream, and the potential for increased erosion downstream. Also, the dike could be a potential trap for migratory salmon and other fish species. If Alternative A is selected, the FWS would ask the CE to initiate hydraulic studies to determine the extent of downstream erosion, sediment transport and deposition, and potential channel migration resulting from increasing the depth and width of the secondary channel southeast of Bethel. Alternative B The major adverse impact of Alternative B is short-term siltation of the Kuskokwim River. On-site construction activity along the eroding bank in order to slope it to the desired angle and positioning the concrete modules or quarry rock will add silt to the river. The river in front of Bethel is 40 feet deep and 0.5 mile wide and the short-term addition of sediment from the Bethel waterfront for the duration of the construction activity should have little or no impacts on fish and wildlife. The use of concrete mattresses, barged to Bethel pre-cast, will eliminate the need for quarrying rock at either Goodnews Bay or Cape Newenham and consequently result in no off-site impacts to avian and fish resources as previously described. For that reason, concrete mattresses are preferred over quarry rock in terms of the least adverse environmental impacts. In order to help minimize bank sloughing and erosion in the future, the remaining exposed bank along the waterfront should be revegetated with grasses and shrubs. Revegetation should occur at a time that would maximize the chance of survival such as the first growing season after construction ends. A benefit of both Alternatives A and B would be the removal of junked car bodies and other debris dumped over the eroding bank by local residents, Oil, grease, acid, and other pollutants presently being introduced into E-25 buzzing of this colony could cause severe loss of eggs or young. Murre eggs and chicks can easily be knocked off the cliffs if adults are suddenly startled by aircraft. The FWS realizes that the CE cannot regulate air space or landing and takeoff patterns from the airstrip. However, since the FWS is directly responsible for the protection of nesting seabirds surrounding the area we do not feel that such a request is unreasonable. Our second major concern is the protection of herring that spawn on the beaches adjacent to the USAF property and rear in nearshore waters. Potential mortality of eggs and newly hatched larvae from both heavy equipment and barges working in the intertidal area at a beach quarry site and from shock waves due to detonating explosives can be minimized by time constraints, The ADF&G recommends that if a beach level site is chosen, no blasting or quarrying should occur from early May to late June (Rae Baxter, ADF&G, pers. comm.). If an upland quarry site is chosen, heavy equipment should not have to traverse the beach substantially and also, no effects from blasting would be anticipated. Barges would still have to be loaded in the intertidal area and some mortality of eggs and larvae may still occur. However, the total mortality would be less. If the barges were loaded during high tides, mortality would probably not be significant. Requiring the barges to be loaded only at high tide is not realistic in this case due to the large volume of rock to be moved. Therefore, we recommend instead that the CE select one area along the beach as a loading zone. This would confine the operation to one portion of the beach and prevent unnecessary mortality of herring eggs and larvae over a large area. Summarizing our recommended constraints on all facets of any quarry operation at Cape Newenham points out that May through August encompasses the critical time period for both nesting seabirds and spawning herring. It would be advantageous for the CE to schedule as much of the work as possible during the other 8 months of the year. The FWS realizes that due to severe ice conditions, barges cannot navigate to Bethel during the winter, but all drilling, blasting, and any stockpiling of rock could be accomplished from September through April. Regardless of the site chosen or the time of year, all fuel and lubricants should be properly stored in leakproof containers at least 500 feet from MHHW and the storage area bermed and lined to prevent any accidental spills from reaching the marine environment. Quarrying rock on Beluga Hill in Goodnews Bay is not recommended in spite of the fact that the unit density of seabirds surrounding Cape Newenham is far greater than the corresponding density near Goodnews Bay. Any operation required to remove 150,000 to 200,000 cubic yards of material would in effect completely destroy habitat for the present colony of gulls and cormorants. This impact cannot be minimized or mitigated even with time constraints. RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are provided to minimize the potential impact on fish and wildlife resources of stabilizing the Bethel water- front: 1. That Alternative B using fill with concrete mattress protection be chosen as the selected plan should the CE decide to proceed with a project. E-27 LITERATURE CITED Alaska Department of Fish and Game. 1973. Alaska's wildlife and habitat. Edited by R. LeResche and R. Hinman. 143 pp. and 563 maps. Alaska Department of Fish and Game. 1978a. Alaska's wildlife and habitat, Volume II. Compiled by E. Klinkhart. 74 pp. and 521 maps. Alaska Department of Fish and Game. 1978b. Alaska's fisheries atlas, Volume I. Compiled by R. McLean and K. Delaney. 40 pp. and 357 maps. Alaska Department of Fish and Game. 1978c. Alaska's fisheries atlas, Volume II. Compiled by R. McLean and K. Delaney. 43 pp. and 269 maps. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, 1978d. Arctic-Yukon-Kuskokwim region salmon fishery report--A report to the Alaska Board of Fisheries, December 1978. Unpublished report. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Commercial Fisheries, 33 pp. Alaska Peregrine Falcon Recovery Team. 1979. Peregrine falcon - Alaska population, Falco peregrinus tundrius and Falco peregrinus anatum. Agency review draft recovery plan, unpublished. 84 pp. Dick, M. and L. Dick. 1971. Natural history of Cape Pierce and Nanvak Bay. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bethel, Alaska, unpublished report. 78 pp. Fyfe, R., S. Temple, and T. Cade. 1976, The 1975 North American peregrine falcon survey. Candian Field-Naturalist 90(3): 228-273. LeResche, R., R. Bishop, and J. Coady. 1974, Distribution and habitats of moose in Alaska. Naturaliste Canada, 101: 143-178. Quellette, L. (Team Leader, Resource Planning Team). 1974, Resources of Alaska--A regional summary. Joint Federal State Land Use Planning Commission for Alaska, 618 pp. Sowls, A., S. Hatch, and C. Lensink. 1978. Catalog of Alaskan seabird colonies. Biological Services Program, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. 32 pp. and 206 maps and tables, U.S. Department of the Army. 1968. Floodplain information, Kuskokwim River, Bethel, Alaska. Corps of Engineers, Alaska District, Anchorage, Alaska. 39 pp. and 9 plates. U.S. Department of the Army. 1972, Final environmental impact statement, small boat harbor project, Bethel, Alaska. Corps of Engineers, Alaska District, Anchorage, Alaska. 15 pp. and appendices, U.S. Department of the Army. 1979, Stage I reconnaissance report, Bethel bank stabilization, Bethel, Alaska. Corps of Engineers, Alaska District, Anchorage, Alaska. 33 pp. and 11 plates. E-29 Scientific names of vegetation, fish, invertebrates, mammals, in the text. VEGETATION Common Name Dwarf Arctic Birch Resin Birch American Green Alder Thinleaf Alder Lapland Rosebay Alpine Bearberry Eelgrass FISHES Common Name Sheefish Broad Whitefish Humpback Whitefish Pink Salmon Chinook Salmon Coho Salmon Chum Salmon Sockeye Salmon Pond Smelt Rainbow Smelt Alaska Blackfish Northern Pike Burbot Least Cisco Pacific Herring INVERTEBRATES Common Name King Crab Pandalid Shrimps MAMMALS Common Name Snowshoe Hare Muskrat Beaver Arctic Fox Red Fox Gray Wolf Black Bear Mink APPENDIX I Scientific Name Betula nana Betula glandulosa ‘Alnus crispa Alnus tenuifolia Rhododendron lapponicum Arctostaphylos alpina Zostera marina Scientific Name Stenodus leucichthys Coregonus nasus Coregonus pidschian Oncorhynchus gorbuscha Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Oncorhynchus kisutch Oncorhynchus keta Oncorhynchus nerka Hypomesus olidus Osmerus mordax Dallia pectoralis Esox lucius Lota lota Coregonus sardinella Clupea pallasii Scientific Name Paralithodes camtschatica Pandalus spp. Scientific Name Lepus americanus Ondatra zibethicus Castor canadensis Alopex WASpuS Vulpes vulpes Canis lupus Ursus americanus Mustela vison and birds referencec Tree Sparrow American Robin Arctic Tern Aleutian Tern Mew Gull Sabine's Gull Glaucous Gull Black-legged kittiwake Tufted Puffin Pelagic Cormorant Murre Rock Sandpiper White-winged Scoter Surf Scoter Gyrfalcon Glaucous-winged Gull Red-faced Cormorant Pigeon Guillemot Horned Puffin Savannah Sparrow Golden-crowned Sparrow Wilson's Warbler Yellow Warbler Yellow Wagtail Gray-cheeked Thrush Say's Phoebe Semipalmated Plover Sanderling Common Raven Snow Bunting White-crowned Sparrow E-33 Spizella arborea Turdus migratorius Sterna paradisaea Sterna aleutica Larus canus Xema sabini Larus hyperboreus Rissa tridactyla Lunda cirrhata Phalacrocorax pelagicus Uria spp. Calidris ptilocnemis Melanitta deglandi Melanitta perspicillata Falco rusticolus Larus glaucesens Phalacrocorax urile Cepphus columba Fratercula corniculata Passerculus sandwichensis Zonotrichia atricapilla Wilsonia pusilla Dendroica petechia Motacilla flava Catharus minimus Sayornis saya Charadrius semipalmatus Calidris alba Corvus corax Plectrophenax nivalis Zonotrichia leucophrys Water Pipit Orange-crowned Warbler Yellow Warbler ece n n n Source: Clarence Rhode National Symbols: a — abundant r- c¢ - common n- u - uncommon n- o - occasional Snow Bunting ec on McKay's Bunting c m Wildlife Refuge, Bethel, Alaska. rare or accidental nesting migrant (i.e. non-nesting summer residents) resident all seasons E-35 E APPENDIX F SECTION 404(b)(1) EVALUATION BANK PROTECTION KUSKOKWIM RIVER AT BETHEL, ALASKA PROPOSED ACTION The proposed action involves discharge of fill material in a navigable stream for the purpose of stabilizing the shoreline. 1. Project Description The Bank Protection alternative involves sloping the bank to the required slope, placing rock riprap with filter fabric in the wave and ice action zone down to the river thalweg and placing jute mat with grass seed on the shoreline above the wave and ice zone. The rock protection would extend from Lousetown Slough to just downstream of the Standard 0i1 tank farm, a distance of 5,500 feet (see Plate D-4). The excavated material (silty sand) from the upper slopes would be used when possible as fill material. Approximately 210,000 cubic yards of rock and 29,000 cubic yards of silty sand would be required. 2. Physical Effects a. Wetlands will not be affected by the project. b. Water Column: The project would have a temporary effect on the water column from increased siltation during construction. The river has a natural high silt content therefore, increased siltation would not significantly change light transmission in the water column or esthetic values. Nekton and plankton populations would not be affected. c. Benthic: Because of sediment load and ice scour, benthic populations are low. The project would not have a significant impact on the benthic community of the Kuskokwim River. 3. Chemical The fill material utilized in the project would meet the exclusion criteria. The material proposed for discharge is rock riprap. When possible excavated material from the upper slope of the riverbank being stabilized would be used as fill material. 4. Description of Site Comparison (comparing sediment at the dredging site with sediment at the disposal site). Not applicable (NA). 5. Review Applicable Water Quality Standards. NA. F-1 9. Findings The discharge site for bank protection at Bethel, Alaska on the Kuskokwim River has been specified through the application of the Section 404(b)(1) Guideline. F-3 satin be a atc ne occa APPENDIX G Statement Recipients Federal U.S. Department of Commerce Pacific Northwest Area Representative MARAD Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture District Director, Smal] Business Administration Northwest Region, Office of Regional Director, Federal Aviation Admin. Director, Alaska Region, National Weather Service Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment, Department of Commerce Reg. Administrator, HUD, Environmental Clearance Officer HEW Department, Division of Social Services Commander/Director, U.S. Army CRREL Chief, Alaska Division, USACRREL Deputy Commandant, U.S. Army Engineer School Evaluation Branch, Coastal Engineering Research Center Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation Waterways Experiment Station American Institution of Merchant Shipping Office of Chief of Engineers, DAEN-CWP-W Coordinator, Environmental Quality Activities, U.S. Dept. Agriculture Environmental Protection Agency Office of Environ. Review, Wash. D.C. Environmental Protection Agency Region X Director, Alaska Operations Office, Environmental Protection Agency National Park Service, Anchorage Chief, Archeological Investigations, National Park Service Manager, Alaska Outer Continental Shelf, Bureau of Land Management Director Western Region, NOAA Honorable Frank Murkowski, United States Senate Honorable Don Young, House of Representatives Honorable Ted Stevens, United State Senate Division Engineer, Federal Highway Administration Regional Director, Federal Aviation Administration U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development Admin., Seattle U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development Admin., Anchorage U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Anchorage Study Director, Water Resources Studies, U.S. Dept. Interior Division Engineer, North Pacific Division Corps of Engineers Commander, 17th Coast Guard District Special Assistant to the Secretary, U.S. Dept. Interior, Anchorage Area Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Field Supervisor - WAES, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Regional Forester, U.S. Forest Service National Marine Fisheries Service, Anchorage Regional Director, National Marine Fisheries Service Director, Anchorage Field Office, National Ocean Survey Director, Office of Environ. Proj. Review, U.S. Dept. Interior, Wash, D.C. Regional Administrator, HUD, Environmental Clearance Officer State Director, Bureau of Land Management G-1 Individuals (cont) Louise Charles, City Council Don Elliott, City Council Dianne Carpenter, City Council Peter Twitchell, City Council Bob Hoffman, City Council Tony Stigall, Planning Director KYUK Tundra Drums Tundra Times Bethel Kuskokwim Consortium Library Rosie Porter John Malone Betty Hinkling Andy Edge Andy Andrecheck Robert Carpenter David Brown Mike Franks John Binkley G-3