department of transportation and public facilitiesdot.alaska.gov › nreg › projects ›...

“Keep Alaska Moving through service and infrastructure.”

Department of Transportation and Public Facilities

NORTHERN REGION Design and Engineering Services

Preliminary Design and Environmental

2301 Peger Road

Fairbanks, Alaska 99709-5316

Main: 907-451-2237

TDD: 907-451-2363

Fax: 907-451-5126

April 6, 2016

Ben Soiseth

Field Office Manager

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska District

Fairbanks Regulatory Field Office Attn: CO-R-NF

2175 University Avenue, Suite #201E

Fairbanks, AK 99709-4927

Dear Mr. Soiseth:

Re: Richardson Highway MP 235 Ruby Creek Bridge #0594

Project No. 0714(023)/Z60262000

Preconstruction Notice; NWP 23

This preconstruction notification is being provided for a Nationwide Permit #23 verification.

Project Description

The Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT&PF) is proposing to replace the

Ruby Creek Bridge near milepost 235 of the Richardson Highway, 23 miles south of Delta Junction.

See Figure 1 for a project location and vicinity map. In addition, to serve project material needs, the

DOT&PF is proposing to develop one or more potential material sites in the project vicinity. Potential

material site locations are located on Figure 1.

The purpose of the project is to provide a safe and efficient crossing of the Richardson Highway over

Ruby Creek for roadway travelers and to reduce the maintenance costs at this bridge location. The

existing Ruby Creek Bridge is structurally deficient and functionally obsolete. In addition, during high

flow events the stream deposits significant amounts of gravel near the bridge posing a risk to the

structure and roadway. The project would construct the bridge replacement to satisfy current design

standards and to improve hydraulic capacity.

NEPA and Agency Coordination

This project was evaluated for environmental effects in accordance with National Environmental

Policy Act (NEPA). A Categorical Exclusion Environmental Document approved 3/7/14 can be

found at the website address below. Agency coordination was completed during the development of

the categorical exclusion and is attached to the environmental document.

http://www.dot.alaska.gov/nreg/projects/RubyCreekCE-Signed3.7.14-FULL.pdf

http://www.dot.alaska.gov/nreg/projects/RubyCreekCE-Signed3.7.14-FULL.pdf

Richardson Highway MP 235 Ruby Creek Bridge #0594 2 April 6, 2016 Project No; 0714(023)/Z60262000

Preconstruction Notice NWP 23

Floodplain Impacts

The project appears to require work within the 100-year floodplain of the Delta River, however,

there is no FEMA-mapped floodplain or floodway in the project area. No adverse effects to the

Delta River floodplain are anticipated. The new bridge would provide a larger opening than the

existing bridge improving conveyance at the creek crossing toward more natural conditions. The

Ruby Creek channel upstream and downstream of the bridge would be reconstructed to also provide

improved conveyance.

Delineation of Waters

Waters to be impacted by the project include emergent (PSS1B) and shrub (PEM1C) wetlands along

with the streambed of Ruby Creek (R5USC). Maps of the wetlands and waters delineated in the

project area and the location of field sample points are located on Figures 2-7 of the enclosed

wetlands and waters report. Photographs detailing the vegetation, soil, and hydrology information

collected are shown on Figures 9-29. Wetland determination data forms are in Appendix A.

Assessment of Waters Impacted

An assessment of wetland and waterbody functions and services can be found in Appendix B of the

enclosed wetlands and waters report. The wetlands and waterbodies in the project area have an

overall function and value assessment ranging from low to high as noted in the report’s Wetland

Assessment Summary Tables (page 3 of 4).

Jurisdiction of Impacted Waters

The waters in the project area have a known or likely surface and/or groundwater connection to the

Delta River, a traditionally navigable water. For this reason all wetlands and waters delineated in the

project area are being treated as jurisdictional under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.

Water of U.S. Impacts

The project is estimated to result in 1.19 acres (11,752 cubic yards) of permanent fill, 1.25 acres

(234,455 cubic yards) of temporary fill, and 0.16 acres of temporary work area within waters of the

U.S. as detailed in Table 1 below and on Figure 4. Impact areas are shown graphically on Figures 5-

14.

WELTAND AND WATER IMPACTS SUMMARY

TABLE 1

Water Type Cowardin

Classification

Total Fill

Acres

Permanent

Fill Acres

Temporary

Fill Acres

Temporary

Work Area

Shrub PSS1B 0.18 0.08 0.10 0.02

Emergent PEM1C 0.55 0.43 0.12 0.14

Riverine R5USC-Ruby Ck. 1.71 0.68 1.03 Same as temp fill

WETLANDS 0.73 0.51 0.22 0.16

OTHER WATERS 1.71 0.68 1.03 Same as temp fill

TOTAL 2.44 1.19 1.25 0.16

Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts

Avoidance and minimization measures are described in the enclosed form titled “Applicant’s

Proposed Mitigation Statements.

Richardson Highway MP 235 Ruby Creek Bridge #0594 3 April 6, 2016 Project No; 0714(023)/Z60262000

Preconstruction Notice NWP 23

Compensatory Mitigation

DOT&PF proposes no compensatory mitigation for the 1.19 acres of unavoidable permanent impacts to

waters of the U.S. since the project is self-mitigating resulting in a net benefit to these waters. The

project would replace the existing bridge and stream channel with a new bridge and stream channel that

improve stream hydraulics and the aquatic environment. The project’s stream and habitat benefits are

detailed in the enclosed Applicant’s Proposed Mitigation Statements.

The project has been coordinated with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to arrive at a proposed

bridge and channel designs that enhances habitat conditions for fish. See the channel design (Figure 13)

and the bridge plan (Figure 15). Enclosed is an 8/19/2015 trip report prepared by DFG that documents

DFG participation with DOT&PF in arriving at a consensus approach to designing the bridge and stream

channel.

Rehabilitation of Disturbed Ground The proposed project would involve ground disturbing activities. Rehabilitation is proposed as

follows. Seed, fertilizer, and mulch applications are proposed in order to reclaim areas previously

vegetated and not ultimately covered by permanent improvements (i.e. road surface) including cut

and fill slopes, ditches, and other areas disturbed by Contractor activities. Seed containing

prohibited noxious weeds will be rejected. Certification of seed testing will be required. Slopes will

be prepared prior to seeding by removing inhibiting debris and utilizing surface-roughing measures

such as raking or grooving the soil surface. The Contractor will be required to maintain seeded areas

by protecting them from disturbance and, where vegetation establishment has failed, by reapplying

surface preparation, seed, fertilizer, and/or mulch.

Should you have any questions about this preconstruction notification, please contact Bob Effinger

at (907) 451-5294 or by email at [email protected].

Sincerely,

Taylor C. Horne

Statewide Environmental Program Manager

be/zb

Enclosures:

USACE Preconstruction Notification Form

Figure 1: Project Location and Vicinity

Figures 2- 3: Ruby Creek Aerial Mapping

Figure 4: Summary of Wetlands and Water Impacts

Figure 5-14: Wetland and Water Impact Areas– Permanent and Temporary

Figure 15: Bridge Plan

Applicant’s Proposed Mitigation Statements

DFG/DOT&PF 8/19/2015 Trip Report

Appendix A: Wetland Delineation and Assessment Report

mailto:[email protected]

Location and Vicinity Map

N

1 inch ~ 3750 feet

T14S, R10E; Section 30 & 31

T15S, R10E; Sections 6 & 7

USGS Mount Hayes C4

Fairbanks Meridian

MS 71-0-004-2

MS 71-0-022-2

Bridge Work

Limits MILEPOST 235

Delt

a J

ct.

28 m

iles

STATE OF ALASKA Department of Transportation and Public Facilities

Northern Region

DATE: 4/6/16 Figure 1 of 15

Donnelly, Alaska

Richardson Highway MP 235

Ruby Creek Bridge #0594

0714(023)/Z60262000

NO SCALE

O JUNEAU

O NENANA

O HEALY

O FAIRBANKS RUBY O

TANANA O

ANCHORAGE O O VALDEZ O BETHEL

COLDFOOT O

CIRCLE O

O EAGLE

O NOME

LOCATION MAP

O POINT BARROW

O TOK PROJECT

LOCATION

O DEADHORSE

MS 71-0-005-2

Potential Material Sites

MILEPOST 238

Ruby Creek Channel

Construction Extents

Bridge

Location

Upstream

Aerial Photo

Stream Channel

Stations

0+00 to 15+00

N

1 inch ~ 150 feet

Alyeska Pipeline

~450 feet Upstream

Ruby Creek

STATE OF ALASKA

Department of Transportation

and Public Facilities

Donnelly,

Alaska



Ruby Creek Bridge

#0594

0714(023)/Z60262000

Ordinary High Water Mark

Proposed Permanent Stream Channel

Existing (2014) Stream Channel

Upstream Project Limit

Proposed Richardson Highway

Existing Richardson Highway

Proposed Bridge



Ruby Creek

STATE OF ALASKA





Ruby Creek Bridge

#0594

0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly,

Alaska

N

1 inch ~ 150 feet

Delta River

Existing

Bridge




Downstream

Aerial Photo

Stream Channel

Stations

15+00 to 28+00

Proposed Bridge

Ruby Creek

STATE OF ALASKA



Donnelly,

Alaska



Ruby Creek Bridge

#0594

0714(023)/Z60262000

Summary of

Water Impacts

Proposed

Temporary Road

Diversion and

New Highway Fill

Plan View


N

1 inch ~ 200 feet

Proposed

Temporary

Road

Diversion

Existing

Right of

Way

Delta River

~800 feet

downstream

Existing Bridge

Proposed Bridge


Ruby Creek

STATE OF ALASKA



Donnelly,

Alaska



Ruby Creek Bridge

#0594

0714(023)/Z60262000

1

2

Ordinary High

Water Mark

Existing

Stream

Channel

Proposed

Stream

Channel

Temporary Road (0.10 acres, 150,000 cubic yards)

New Stream Channel Stations 15+65 to 16+65 1

2 Permanent Road (0.22 acres, 4,000 cubic yards)

(Approach Fill, Riprap Fill, Stream Channel

Reshaping Fill)

New Stream Channel Stations 13+00 to 15+55

See Cross Section Figure 6.

Ruby Creek

STATE OF ALASKA



Donnelly,

Alaska



Ruby Creek Bridge

#0594

0714(023)/Z60262000

Proposed

Temporary

Roadway Diversion

and

Permanent

Richardson Hwy

Approach Fill

Typical Section

Proposed Richardson Highway 1

Temporary Road

2 10 ft

129.31 ft 34 ft

CL CL ORIGINAL GROUND

2:1 2:1 2:1

Proposed Stream Channel

Proposed Temporary

Stream Bypass Channel


Upstream

Project

Limit



Proposed

Temporary

Stream Channel

Plan View

Upstream

N

1 inch ~ 150 feet

Alyeska Pipeline

~450 feet Upstream

Proposed Bridge Ruby Creek

STATE OF ALASKA



Donnelly,

Alaska



Ruby Creek Bridge

#0594

0714(023)/Z60262000

3


Temporary Stream Channel Fill – Berms

(0.12 acres, 300 cubic yards)

New Stream Channel Stations

3+00 to 11+00.

See Cross Section Figure 13

3


Proposed Temporary

Culvert

Proposed Temporary


Existing

Bridge



Delta River

Proposed

Temporary

Stream Channel

Plan View

Downstream


Proposed Bridge

N

1 inch ~ 150 feet

Ruby Creek

STATE OF ALASKA



Donnelly,

Alaska



Ruby Creek Bridge

#0594

0714(023)/Z60262000

“BYPASS” 21+67.65 EP


Temporary Stream Channel Fill

Berm

(100 square feet, 15 cubic yards)

New Stream Channel Station

25+00

See Cross Section, Figure 13

4






Proposed Permanent

Stream Channel

Plan View Upstream

Stream Channel

Stations 3+00 to 7+00

Alyeska Pipeline

~450 feet Upstream


STATE OF ALASKA



Donnelly,

Alaska



Ruby Creek Bridge

#0594

0714(023)/Z60262000


7+00

5

N

1 inch ~ 150 feet

5 Permanent Stream Channel

Fill

(0.12 acres, 384 cubic yards)

New Stream Channel Stations

3+00 to 7+00

See Cross Section, Figure 13

Ruby Creek

STATE OF ALASKA



Donnelly,

Alaska



Ruby Creek Bridge

#0594

0714(023)/Z60262000


Proposed New Berm





Proposed

Permanent

New Berm

Permanent Fill

Plan View Upstream

Alyeska Pipeline

~450 feet Upstream

Proposed Bridge

Berm Proposed

to be Removed


6

Permanent New

Berm Fill

(0.34 Acres, 1104

cubic yards)

New Stream

Channel Stations

3+00 to 10+50

See Cross

Section, Figure 13

6

N

1 inch ~ 150 feet


Berm Proposed

to be Removed





N

1 inch ~ 150 feet

Alyeska Pipeline

~450 feet Upstream


STATE OF ALASKA



Donnelly,

Alaska



Ruby Creek Bridge

#0594

0714(023)/Z60262000


TW

T

P

Potential Temporary Stockpile & Work Area (1.03 Ac.) TW

Permanent Fill (0.68 Acres, 5488 cu.yds.) P

Temporary Fill (0.22 Acres, 15315 cu.yds) T

P

P

TW

Total Ruby Creek

Impacts

East of Bridge

Total Impacts


Proposed

Temporary

Culvert

Proposed Temporary


Existing Bridge



Delta River


Proposed Bridge

N

1 inch ~ 150 feet

Ruby Creek

STATE OF ALASKA



Donnelly,

Alaska



Ruby Creek Bridge

#0594

0714(023)/Z60262000

“BYPASS” 21+67.65 EP


Temporary Stream

Channel Fill

Quantities included

in Total Impacts, Figure 11

T

T

P

Total Ruby Creek

Impacts

West of Bridge

Permanent Stream

Channel Fill

Quantities included

in Total Impacts,

Figure 11

P

TW

TW

Potential Temporary

Stockpile & Work Area

Quantities included

in Total Impacts, Figure 11

TW

Overlapping

Temporary and

Permanent

Stream Channel

Fills -

Representative

Section 3+50

Ruby Creek

STATE OF ALASKA



Donnelly,

Alaska



Ruby Creek Bridge

#0594

0714(023)/Z60262000

Pe

rma

ne

nt

Str

ea

m C

han

ne

l F

ill –

Resh

ap

ing

of

Ch

an

nel

Bo

tto

m

Pe

rma

ne

nt

Str

ea

m C

han

ne

l F

ill –

Be

rm

5

Te

mp

ora

ry

Str

ea

m

Ch

an

ne

l F

ill – B

erm

s

Ex

isti

ng

Gro

un

d –

Str

ea

m B

an

ks,

Ch

an

ne

l, a

nd

Berm

Pro

po

sed

Perm

an

en

t

Str

ea

m C

han

ne

l

Cro

ss S

ecti

on

6

3 &

4

Re

co

ns

tru

cte

d

Berm

T

P

T

T

P

P

T =

T

em

po

rary

Fil

l

P =

P

erm

an

en

t F

ill

Ruby Creek

STATE OF ALASKA



Donnelly,

Alaska



Ruby Creek Bridge

#0594

0714(023)/Z60262000

Wetland Impacts

PSS1B

PEM1C

UPL

UPL

UPL

Proposed

Bridge UPL

UPL

UPL

Temporary Work Area (0.16 Ac.) TW

Permanent Fill (0.51 Acres,

6264 cu.yds.) P

Wetland Impacts

TW

P

N 1 inch ~ 133 feet

Ruby Creek

STATE OF ALASKA



Donnelly,

Alaska



Ruby Creek Bridge

#0594

0714(023)/Z60262000

Bridge Plan

Richardson Highway MP 235 Ruby Creek Bridge #0594 April 6, 2016 Project No. 0714(023)/Z60262000 Applicant’s Proposed Mitigation Statements

Applicant’s Proposed Mitigation Statements

Richardson Highway MP 235 Ruby Creek Bridge #0594

0714(023)/Z60262000

1. Avoidance of impacts to waters of the U.S., including wetlands:

Please describe how, in your project planning process, you avoided impacts to waters

of the U.S., including wetlands, to the maximum extent practicable. Examples of

avoidance measures include site selection, routes, design configurations, etc.

A. Existing drainage patterns would be maintained wherever possible.

B. Hazardous material use and storage would be in accordance with all State and Federal

regulations for the purpose of avoiding contamination impacts to waters.

C. Material stockpiles or excess material would avoid permanent fill in waters by being

disposed of or stored in uplands, unless otherwise permitted for fill in waters.

2. Minimization of unavoidable impacts to waters of the U.S., including wetlands:

Please describe how your project design incorporates measures that minimize the

unavoidable impacts to waters of the U.S., including wetlands, by limiting fill

discharges to the minimum amount/size necessary to achieve the project purpose.

A. Constructing the replacement bridge and approach alignment upstream and near to

the existing bridge alignment will minimize impacts to downstream wetlands.

B. The footprint of the proposed roadway embankment side slopes would be minimized

to minimize wetland impacts while meeting design standards.

C. Appropriate erosion and sediment control measures would be implemented on or at

the perimeters of disturbed soil surfaces to minimize the transport of sediment to

waters of the U.S. Disturbed areas, vegetated prior to the project and left unprotected

by improvements, including slopes, would be stabilized and re-vegetated. Ground

disturbances in these areas would be addressed by measures such as raking slopes,

seeding, fertilizing, and mulching. This would reduce erosion and sediment transport

and help establish vegetative cover, thereby minimizing short-term and long-term

impacts to adjacent and downstream waters.

3. Compensation for unavoidable impacts to waters of the U.S., including wetlands:

Please describe your proposed compensatory mitigation to offset unavoidable impacts to

waters of the U.S., or, alternatively, why compensatory mitigation is not appropriate or

practicable for your project. Compensatory mitigation involves actions taken to offset

unavoidable adverse impacts to waters of the U.S., including wetlands, streams, and other

aquatic resources (aquatic sites) authorized by Corps permits. Compensatory mitigation

may involve the restoration, enhancement, establishment (creation), and/or preservation

of aquatic sites. The three mechanisms for providing compensatory mitigation are

mitigation banks, in-lieu fee of mitigation, and permittee-responsible mitigation.

Permanent Impact Mitigation

DOT&PF proposes no compensatory mitigation for the project’s 1.19 acres of

unavoidable permanent impacts to waters of the U.S. since the project is self-

mitigating and would result in a net benefit to waters of the U.S. The project would


replace the existing stream channel with a newly constructed stream channel that

improves stream hydraulics and the aquatic environment. The project’s stream and

habitat benefits are listed below.

1) The project would improve hydraulics at the bridge crossing toward more natural

conditions. The Ruby Creek Bridge is proposed to be lengthened by 114 feet and

raised by 9.5 feet. The currently vertical bridge abutments will be cut back to a 2:1

slope. This bridge design will provide a larger hydraulic opening that

accommodates substantially more of the channel’s natural flow. See the

preliminary bridge plan on Figure 15.

2) The project is expected to improve fish access to upstream habitats. The project

would replace the existing stream channel with a newly constructed stream channel

having a cross section more conducive for fish migration throughout the summer.

Current conditions in the creek likely limit fish passage much of the summer due

to shallow, dispersed, intermittent, and low velocity water flows. These conditions

result from a buildup of course material in the channel upstream of the bridge. The

new channel construction would lessen this build-up providing deeper and faster

water suitable for fish passage at most summer flows. The new stream condition

would maintain a better continuous surface water connection throughout the

stream.

3) The reconstructed stream channel would reduce future disturbances to the stream

and fish habitat by reducing the need for frequent in-water maintenance work to

remove deposited material.

4) The project would open up currently restricted fish habitat downstream of the

bridge in the Delta River floodplain. The new stream channel would be moved

closer to the mouth of Bear Creek and its associated wetland complex. This would

substantially increase the likelihood of fish accessing these habitats providing a

benefit for aquatic resources. When less frequent maintenance activities are

needed they could be conducted in such a way as to maintain Ruby Creek’s

proximity to Bear Creek retaining this benefit for the long term.

The project has been coordinated with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to

arrive at proposed bridge and channel designs that enhance habitat conditions for fish.

See the channel design (Figure 13) and the bridge plan (Figure 15). Enclosed is an

8/19/2015 trip report prepared by DFG that documents DFG participation with

DOT&PF in arriving at a consensus approach to designing the bridge and stream

channel.

Temporary Impact Mitigation

DOT&PF proposes to mitigate temporary impacts as noted below

1) The temporary culvert that would carry the stream during construction would be

designed so that it would adequately pass fish during construction. The culvert

design would be developed in coordination with the Alaska Department of Fish

and Game (DFG). The design would take into account culvert characteristics

including appropriate flow velocities, diameter, length, slope, embedment,

substrate, and material.


2) Follow construction the temporary stream channel would be filled to minimize the

risk of future high stream flows escaping the new channel and following the

temporary construction channel route.

3) Temporary stockpiles placed within the limits of the creek bed during construction

would be removed as follows.

Any stockpiles would be incrementally placed and removed from within

the stream bed during the construction process.

The accumulation of these stockpiles shall not exceed 60 cubic yards at any

one time within the limits of the streambed.

All temporary stockpile material shall be fully removed from the streamed

by the end of construction.

4) Following construction, the bed and banks of the new creek channel would be

shaped to conditions found acceptable for fish in coordination with the DFG.

5) Wetlands and stream banks left with exposed disturbed soils as a result of

construction would be seeded with appropriate plant species.

Appendix A

Wetlands and Waters Delineation and Assessment Report

of 4

WETLANDS & WATERS

DELINEATION AND ASSESSMENT

RICHARDSON HIGHWAY MP 235

RUBY CREEK BRIDGE #0594

0714(023)/Z60262000

ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES

JANUARY 2016

The Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities in cooperation with the Alaska

Division of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is proposing to replace the Ruby

Creek Bridge near MP 235 of the Richardson Highway adjacent to its existing location.

The purpose of this report is to provide a delineation and assessment of wetlands and waters in

the project area. Included in this report are the locations, boundaries, types, functions, values,

estimated impact acreage, and recommended jurisdictional status of wetlands that may be

impacted by the proposed project.

Project Location

The bridge is located on the Richardson Highway, approximately 28 miles south of Delta

Junction, Alaska. Figure 1 shows the project location and vicinity including the locations of

potential material sites. The following tables provide additional project location information.

Township Range Section(s) USGS Quad Map Meridian

T14S R10E 30,31 Mt. Hayes C4 Fairbanks

T15S R10E 6,7 Mt. Hayes C4 Fairbanks

Termini Latitude (WGS 84) Longitude (WGS 84)

Bridge Location 63°37'49.49"N - 145°53'21.62"W

Landscape Setting and Land Use

Ruby Creek Bridge is located in a transition area where the topography flattens and the stream

loses velocity. The 6 mile reach of Ruby Creek above the bridge descends from 4000 feet to

approximately 1925 feet at the bridge. The reach below the bridge descends 50 feet (1925’ to

1875’) through the Delta River floodplain discharging into the river approximately 0.3 miles

downstream. As a result, eroded material from higher elevations deposits to form an alluvial fan

surrounding the stream at the bridge location. A significant amount of gravel is deposited in the

stream channel under the bridge.

Wetlands & Waters Delineation and Assessment January 2016

Richardson Highway MP 235 Ruby Creek Bridge #0594, Project#0714(023)/Z60262000

Page 2 of 4

The existing bridge spanning Ruby Creek is 31 feet long by 26 feet wide and was constructed in

the early 1950’s. The majority of stream flow under the bridge occurs during the spring and

during heavy rainfall events. Very little flow occurs otherwise. The stream bottom immediately

upstream and downstream of the bridge is within a broad un-vegetated gravel bed approximately

150 feet wide. As the stream approaches the bridge its channel bottom constricts to 30 feet wide

directed by 100 to 300-foot long earthen berms on each side of the channel. Lands surrounding

the stream are primarily forested uplands. The river is considered by the Alaska Department of

Fish and Game to be fish-bearing.

Potential material site MS71-0-022-2 consists of mixed spruce and deciduous forested upland

along the Delta River bank ranging from 300 to 700 feet from the river flats. Potential material

site MS71-0-004-2 consists of a 4-acre excavated pond surrounded by mixed spruce and

deciduous forested upland. Potential material site MS71-0-005-2 consists of a partially-mined

forested upland ridge top overlooking the Delta River and Donnelly Creek valleys.

Delineation Methods and Resources

This wetland delineation has been completed in accordance with Part IV, Section D, Subsection

2 (Steps 1-17), of the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and the September

2007 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual: Alaska

Region (Version 2.0). The wetland assessment has been patterned after The Highway

Methodology Workbook Supplement: Wetland Functions and Values; A Descriptive Approach

which was designed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Resources utilized are cited at the

end of this report.

Wetland-Water Boundaries

Wetland and water boundaries were mapped within a 300-foot corridor centered on the highway

centerline, upstream and downstream along Ruby Creek, and within three potential material

sites. See Figures 2-7. Wetland and water boundaries and types in the project area were

determined using a combination of resources including: 1) USGS Quadrangle Map Mt. Hayes C4

(Figure 1), 2) interpretation of aerial photography (Figures 2-7), 3) National Wetland Inventory

(NWI) Maps, and 4) field data collected on August 7-8, 2012 (Appendix A-Wetland

Determination Field Data Forms).

Wetland Functions and Values Assessment

An assessment of wetland functions and values was completed using the attached forms (1-10)

titled “Wetland Function and Value Assessment Form” in Appendix B. The assessment method

identifies the presence or absence of fourteen wetland functions or values and six non-wetland

waterbody functions and values. Evaluation forms were prepared for each wetland and water in

the survey area. Wetlands and waters evaluated were found to range from low to high

functioning. The tables below summarize the assessment.



Page 3 of 4

WETLAND ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

Survey Area Wetland Types

Plot # 2 2 9 9 18 20

Evaluation Form # Appendix B 1 2 4 5 9 10

Cowardin Classification PEM1C PSS1B PEM1C PSS1C PEM1B PSS4B

Function

Emergent Delta

Floodplain

Shrub Delta

Floodplain

Emergent Pond

MP 235.2

Pond Fringe MP

235.2

Donnelly Creek Fringe

Bog Swale

Groundwater Recharge - - - - - -

Flood flow Alteration - - - - - -

Fish and Shellfish Habitat M M - - H -

Sediment/Toxicant Reduction - - - - - -

Nutrient Removal - - - - - -

Production Export - L - - - -

Sediment/Shoreline Stability - - - - L -

Wildlife Habitat M M M M H L

Recreation M - - - - L

Education/Scientific Value - - - - - -

Uniqueness/Heritage - - M M M -

Visual Quality/Aesthetics M M - - M -

Endangered Species Habitat - - - - - -

Other: Subsistence - - - - - -

OVERALL QUALITY RATING Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate High Low

Est. Permanent Impact (Ac.) 0.43 0.08 0 0 0 0

- = Function not Notable, L=Low Function, M=Moderate Function, H=High Function

WATERS ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

Survey Area Water Types

Plot # 4,5,6 13 15 18

Evaluation Form # Appendix B 3 6 7 8

Cowardin Classification R5USC R3UB LOWH R2UB

Function Ruby Creek

Unnamed

Tributary to

Donnelly Ck.

Material Site Pond

Donnelly Creek

Fish Habitat L L - H

Undisturbed Environment L M - M

Wildlife Habitat L L L H

Recreation L L L H

Endangered Species Habitat - - - -

Other: Subsistence - - - M

OVERALL QUALITY RATING Low Low Low High

Est. Permanent Impact (Ac.) 0.68 0 0 0

- = Function not Notable, L=Low Function, M=Moderate Function, H=High Function

Estimated Wetland and Water Impacts

The project is estimated to result in 1.19 acres (11,752 cubic yards) of permanent fill, 1.25 acres

(234,455 cubic yards) of temporary fill, and 0.16 acres of temporary work area within waters of

the U.S as detailed in the table below.



Page 4 of 4

WELTAND AND WATER IMPACTS SUMMARY

TABLE 1

Water Type Cowardin

Classification

Total Fill

Acres

Permanent

Fill Acres

Temporary

Fill Acres

Temporary

Work Area

Shrub PSS1B 0.18 0.08 0.10 0.02

Emergent PEM1C 0.55 0.43 0.12 0.14

Riverine R5USC-Ruby Ck. 1.71 0.68 1.03 Same as temp fill

WETLANDS 0.73 0.51 0.22 0.16

OTHER WATERS 1.71 0.68 1.03 Same as temp fill

TOTAL 2.44 1.19 1.25 0.16

Jurisdiction

All wetlands and waters within the project area lie within the watershed of the Delta River. A

surface and/or groundwater connection between the river and the project area waters and

wetlands is known or likely. The Delta River is a traditionally navigable water. For this reason

the wetlands and waters potentially impacted by the project are being treated as jurisdictional

under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.

Resources

Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities. 2010. Aerial photography.

Natural Resource Conservation Service. 2015. Plants Database.

http://plants.usda.gov/checklist.html.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Sept. 2007. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers

Wetlands Delineation Manual: Alaska Region (Version 2.0).

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Wetlands

Research Program Technical Report Y-87-1.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1999. The Highway Methodology Workbook Supplement: Wetlands

Functions and Values; A Descriptive Approach. NAEEP-360-1-30a. U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers, New England District. http://www.nae.usace.army.mil/reg/hwsplmnt.pdf

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). National Wetland Inventory Maps. Mt. Hayes C4.

U.S. Geological Survey. Quadrangle Map. Mt. Hayes C4.

Report prepared by Bob Effinger, Alaska DOT&PF Environmental Analyst, Northern Region,

2301 Peger Road, Fairbanks, AK 99708, (907)-451-5294, [email protected].

Location and Vicinity Map

N

1 inch ~ 3750 feet

T14S, R10E; Section 30 & 31

T15S, R10E; Sections 6 & 7

USGS Mount Hayes C4

Fairbanks Meridian

MS 71-0-004-2

MS 71-0-022-2

Bridge Work

Limits

Bridge

Location

MILEPOST 235

Delt

a J

ct.

28 m

iles


Northern Region

DATE: 1/12/16 Figure 1

Donnelly, Alaska



0714(023)/Z60262000

NO SCALE

O JUNEAU

O NENANA

O HEALY

O FAIRBANKS RUBY O

TANANA O

ANCHORAGE O O VALDEZ O BETHEL

COLDFOOT O

CIRCLE O

O EAGLE

O NOME

LOCATION MAP

O POINT BARROW

O TOK PROJECT

LOCATION

O DEADHORSE

MS 71-0-005-2

Potential Material Sites

MILEPOST 238


Northern Region


N

1 inch ~ 400 feet

Survey Area

Limit – 3000 feet

south of bridge

South of Ruby Creek Bridge



0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

Milepost 234

PEM1C

PEM1C

PEM1C

PSS1/4B

PSS1B

UPL

UPL

UPL

UPL

UPL

1

Wetland and Waters Survey Area

Wetland Boundaries

2

PF

O4

B

Wetland Photo Point

Upland Sample Point

Milepost 235

Material

Stockpiles

300’

PF

O4

B PEM1C

PSS1B

UPL

UPL

UPL

UPL

UPL

PEM1C

8

4

UPL

UPL

UPL

UPL

UPL

2

7

3

5

6


Northern Region


Donnelly, Alaska

Ruby Creek Bridge Crossing



0714(023)/Z60262000

N

1 inch ~ 400 feet


Existing Right-of-Way

Wetland and Stream Boundaries

Wetland Photo Point

Water Photo Point

Upland Photo Point

Upland Sample Point

North of Ruby Creek Bridge


Northern Region


Donnelly, Alaska

N

1 inch ~ 400 feet

Milepost 235

Survey Area

– 3000 feet

north of

bridge



0714(023)/Z60262000

300’

Delt

a R

iver

PEM1C

UPL

UPL

UPL

UPL

UPL

10


Wetland Boundaries

9

Wetland Photo Point

Upland Sample Point

MS

71-0

-022-2

150’

Delt

a R

iver

Milepost 236

N

1 inch ~ 400 feet

Material Site MS 71-0-022-2

UPL

UPL

UPL


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

11

12

Upland Sample Point



Northern Region


N

1 inch ~ 400 feet




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

950’

1250’ 2000’

Milepost 237

LOWH

UPL

UPL

UPL


Water Boundaries

13 14

15

16

Water Photo Point

Upland Sample Point


Northern Region


N

1 inch ~ 400 feet


Donnelly Creek



0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

Milepost 238 MS 71-0-005-2

650’

PEM1B

UPL

UPL

UPL


Wetland and Stream Boundaries

17

18

19 20

21

Wetland Photo Point

Upland Sample Point

Upland Photo Point

Upland Sample Point

Sym

bol

Syst

em

Sub S

yst

em

Cla

ss

Subcl

ass

Wat

er R

egim

e

PF

O4B

P

=P

alust

rine

FO

=F

ore

sted

4=

Nee

dle

-lea

fed

Ever

gre

en

B=

Sat

ura

ted

PS

S1B

PS

S4B

PS

S1/4

B

P=

Pal

ust

rine

SS

=S

crub S

hru

b

1=

Bro

ad-l

eafe

d D

ecid

uous

4=

Nee

dle

-lea

fed

Ever

gre

en

B=

Sat

ura

ted

PE

M1B

PE

M1C

P=

Pal

ust

rine

EM

=E

mer

gen

t 1=

Per

sist

ent

B=

Sat

ura

ted

C=

Sea

sonal

ly F

looded

LO

WH

L

=L

acust

rin

e O

W=

Open

Wat

er

H=

Per

man

entl

y

Flo

oded

R2U

B

R3U

B

R5U

SC

R=

Riv

erin

e 2=

Low

er P

eren

nia

l

3=

Upper

Per

ennia

l

5=

Unknow

n P

eren

nia

l

UB

=U

nco

nso

lidat

ed B

ott

om

US

=U

nco

nso

lidat

ed S

hore

C=

Sea

sonal

ly F

looded

UP

L=

Upla

nd

Co

wa

rdin

Cla

ss

ific

ati

on

Sym

bo

l K

ey

Fo

r W

etl

an

ds

an

d W

ate

rs

Ruby Creek

STATE OF ALASKA



Donnelly,

Alaska



Ruby Creek Bridge

#0594

0714(023)/Z60262000

Ruby Creek

White Spruce Forest

Soil

Hydrology

UPL


Northern Region



0714(023)/Z60262000


Donnelly, Alaska

Ground Cover

Sample Point #1

Emergent wetland with shrub wetland fringe in Delta River floodplain

Photo Point #2

PEM1C and PSS1B


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

Cottonwood Forest

Soil Hydrology

Sample Point #3

UPL


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

Ruby Creek Downstream of Richardson Highway Bridge

Photo Point #4

R5USC


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

Ruby Creek Upstream of Richardson Highway Bridge

Photo Point #5

R5USC


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

Ruby Creek 0.25 Miles Upstream of Richardson Highway Bridge

Photo Point #6

R5USC


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

Spruce / Alder Forest

Soil

Hydrology

Sample Point #7

UPL


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

Cottonwood Forest

Photo Point #8

UPL


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

Emergent Wetland Pond

Photo Point #9

PEM1C & PEM1B


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

Spruce / Alder Forest

Soil Hydrology

Sample Point #10

UPL


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

White Spruce / Alder Forest

Soil Hydrology

Sample Point #11

UPL


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

Cottonwood Forest

Photo Point #12

UPL

Cottonwood Forest

Ground Cover dominated by: highbush

Cranberry, fireweed, roses, bunchberry,

and field horsetail.


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

Stream Channel

Unnamed Tributary to Donnelly Creek, one mile downstream

Photo Point #13

R3UB


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

Black Spruce Forest

Soil Hydrology

Sample Point #14

UPL


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

Material Site Excavation Pond

Photo Point #15

LOWH


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

Photo Point #16

UPL

Cottonwood / White Spruce Forest

Ground Cover dominated by: vetch.

highbush cranberry, bunchberry,

canada bluejoint grass, roses, soapberry,

dwarf raspberry, fireweed, and lupine


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

Soil Hydrology

Sample Point #17

UPL


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska


Donnelly Creek and adjacent emergent wetland fringe

Photo Point #18

R2UB and PEM1B


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

Black Spruce Forest – Willow Understory

Soil Hydrology

Sample Point #19

UPL


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

Black Spruce Forest

Soil Hydrology

Sample Point #20

PFO4B


Northern Region


Donnelly, Alaska



0714(023)/Z60262000


Soils (Roadcut) 2.5YR 4/2 No Redox, No wetland hydrology indicators

Photo Point #21

UPL


Northern Region




0714(023)/Z60262000

Donnelly, Alaska

Appendix A

Wetlands Determination Data Forms

UPL

1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

2. x 1 =

3. x 2 =

4. x 3 =

5. x 4 =

6. x 5 =

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

Hydrophytic

FACU

FACU

Dominance Test is >50%

Prevalence Index is ≤3.0

Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide

Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1(Explain)

Yes No

1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland

hydrology must be present unless disturbed

or problematic.

Vegetation

Present?

(Where applicable)

160Total Cover:

20% of total cover:8050% of total cover:

Plot size (radius, or length x width) % Bare Ground30-foot radius 0

Total Cover of Bryophytes% Cover of Wetland Bryophytes NA NA

Remarks: Prevalence Index > 3.0.

FAC

X

X

X

FACU

FACU

FAC

FAC

artemisia tilesii

calamagrostic canadensis

equisetum arvense

5

10

10

10

15

15

15

20

20

40

cornus canadensis

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.

Is the Sampled Area

within a Wetland?

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Alaska Region

No

1

No

Soil Map Unit Name:

63°37'34.55"N Long: -145°52'47.18"W Datum: WGS 84

Project/Site: Richardson Hwy MP 235 Ruby Creek Bridge #0594Borough/City: None Sampling Date: 8/7/2012

Investigator(s): Bob Effinger, Environmental Analyst

naturally problematic?

Number of Dominant Species

Total Number of Dominant

Yes No

% Cover

Absolute

Status

picea glauca

Indicator

Species?

Dominant

VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. List all species in the plot.

Remarks:

60 FACU

Dominance Test worksheet:

(A)

(B)

That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:

Species Across All Strata:

(A/B)

60

12

X

20% of total cover:30 Percent of Dominant Species

Tree Stratum

Total Cover:

50% of total cover:

Sampling Point:Applicant/Owner: Alaska Department of Transporation and Public Facilities

Wetland Hydrology Present?

Hydric Soil Present?

Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present?

Sapling/Shrub Stratum

FACX10salix bebbiana


2

5

40%

Multiply by:

230

0

125

85

20

0

0

500

255

40

0

795

Prevalence Index worksheet:

(B)

OBL species

Column Totals:

(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)

Landform (hillside, terrace, hummocks, etc.):

Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none): none

NWI classification: Non-Wetland

Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology

Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? (If no, explain in Remarks.)Yes

Subregion: Interior Alaska

Yes

, or Hydrology, SoilAre Vegetation

alluvial fan

Lat:

FACW species

(A)

Total % Cover of:

separate sheet)

Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.46

Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:

supporting data in Remarks or on a

20% of total cover:50% of total cover: 5

UPL species

FACU species

FAC species

Total Cover: 10

FAC

FACU

FACU

2

Herb Stratum

rosa acicularus

pyrola asarifolia

petasites frigidus sagitus

viburnum edule

32

mertensia paniculata

vaccinium vitis-idaea

US Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Version 2.0

UPL

Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes NoDepth (inches):

Depth (inches):

Depth (inches):

Field Observations:

Surface Water Present?

Water Table Present?

Saturation Present?

(includes capillary fringe)

Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inpections), if available:

Remarks: No wetland hydrology indicators.

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

No

Remarks: No hydric soil indicators.

HYDROLOGY

Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)

FAC-Neutral Test (D5) 2:3 Not met.

Microtopographic Relief (D4)

Shallow Aquitard (D3)

Geomorphic Position (D2)

Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)

Salt Deposits (C5)

Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)

Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)

Drainage Patterns (B10)

Water-stained Leaves (B9)Primary Indicators (any one indicator is sufficient)

Underlaying Layer

Surface Soil Cracks (B6)

Iron Deposits (B5)

Algal Mat or Crust (B4)

Drift Deposits (B3)

Sediment Deposits (B2)

Water Marks (B1)

Saturation (A3)

High Water Table (A2)

Surface Water (A1)

Other (Explain in Remarks)

Dry-Season Water Table (C2)

Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)

Marl Deposits (B15)

Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)

Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)

Alaska Gleyed Without Hue 5Y or Redder

3One indicator of hydrophytic vegetation, one primary indicator of wetland hydrology,

and an appopriate landscape position must be present.4Give details of color change in Remarks.

Restrictive Layer (if present):

Type: None

Hydric Soil Present? Yes NoNot ApplicableDepth (inches):

No redox

No redox

No redox

Dry Organic Matter

1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.

2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.

Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:

Histosol or Histel (A1)

Histic Epipedon (A2)

Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)

Thick Dark Surface (A12)

Alaska Gleyed (A13)

Alaska Redox (A14)

Alaska Gleyed Pores (A15)

Alaska Color Change (TA4)4

Alaska Alpine Swales (TA5)

Alaska Redox With 2.5Y Hue Other (Explain in Remarks)

SOIL Sampling Point: 1

Silt Loam

Silt Loam

Silt Loam

OM

17-18

7-17

7-0

Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)

None

None

None

50

50

100

Texture Remarks

Redox FeaturesMatrix

Type1

Loc2

Depth

(inches)

10YR 3/3

10YR/4/2

10YR 3/3

Color (moist) %

17-18

Color (moist) %


UPL

1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

2. x 1 =

3. x 2 =

4. x 3 =

5. x 4 =

6. x 5 =

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.


UPL species

FACU species

FAC species

Total Cover: 30

FACU

FACU

6

Herb Stratum

18

FACW species

(A)

Total % Cover of:

separate sheet)







NWI classification: PSS1/EM1C




Yes


river floodplain terrace

Lat:


3

6

50%

Multiply by:

240

0

115

125

0

0

0

460

375

0

0

835


(B)

OBL species

Column Totals:


FAC

FACX25

salix bebbiana

alnus viridis

5





No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes


(A/B)

120

24

X

X

45


Tree Stratum

Total Cover:

salix bebbiana

50% of total cover:

FAC

FACU


(A)

(B)





Yes No

% Cover

Absolute

Status

populus balsamifera

Indicator

Species?

Dominant


Non-wetland floodplain area.Remarks:

75


Is the Sampled Area

within a Wetland?


No

3

No

Soil Map Unit Name:

63°37'46.51"N Long: -145°53'18.87"W Datum: WGS 84




shepherdia canadensis

viburnum edule

alnus viridis

20

20

50 FAC

X

X

X

(Where applicable)

90Total Cover:









Yes No



or problematic.

Vegetation

Present?

Hydrophytic


UPL

Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No

Color (moist) % Texture Remarks


Type1

Loc2

Depth

(inches)

2.5Y4/2

Color (moist) %


1002-18

0-2


Silt Loam

OM Dry Organic Matter








Alaska Gleyed (A13)

Alaska Redox (A14)









Type: None


Salt Deposits (C5)





Underlaying Layer


Iron Deposits (B5)


Drift Deposits (B3)


Water Marks (B1)

Saturation (A3)


Surface Water (A1)




Marl Deposits (B15)



No

No

Remarks: No Hydric Soil Indicators. Soils within floodplain areas can be naturally problematic and may not display typical

hydric indicators. In this case the strength of vegetation and hydrology indicators have been be weighed.

HYDROLOGY


FAC-Neutral Test (D5) 0:3 Not Met



Geomorphic Position (D2) floodplain


Depth (inches):

Depth (inches):

Depth (inches):

Field Observations:



Saturation Present?



Remarks: One secondary hydrology indicator. Hydrology criteria not met. Vegetation supports the conclusion that the area

represented by Plot #3 is a non-wetland floodplain.

Yes

Yes

Yes

No


UPL

1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

2. x 1 =

3. x 2 =

4. x 3 =

5. x 4 =

6. x 5 =

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

Hydrophytic

FACU

FACU





Yes No



or problematic.

Vegetation

Present?

(Where applicable)

100Total Cover:





FAC

X

X

petasites sagitus

rosa acicularus

calamagrostis canadesis

equisetum arvense

5

5

5

5

20

60


Is the Sampled Area

within a Wetland?


No

7

No

Soil Map Unit Name:

63°37'54.67"N Long: 145°52'53.80"W Datum: WGS 84






Yes No

% Cover

Absolute

Status

picea glauca

Indicator

Species?

Dominant


The summer of 2013 was drier than normal. Black Spruce Forest on bank of Banner CreekRemarks:

40 FACU


(A)

(B)



(A/B)

40

8

X


Tree Stratum

Total Cover:

50% of total cover:





No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes



FACX30alnus viridis


3

4

75%

Multiply by:

170

0

50

120

0

0

0

200

360

0

0

560


(B)

OBL species

Column Totals:








Yes


alluvial fan

Lat:

FACW species

(A)

Total % Cover of:

separate sheet)





UPL species

FACU species

FAC species

Total Cover: 30

FAC

FAC

FAC

6

Herb Stratum

cornus canadensis

20

viburnum edule


UPL


Depth (inches):

Depth (inches):

Field Observations:



Saturation Present?




Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

No


HYDROLOGY







Salt Deposits (C5)





Underlaying Layer


Iron Deposits (B5)


Drift Deposits (B3)


Water Marks (B1)

Saturation (A3)


Surface Water (A1)




Marl Deposits (B15)







Type: None


Dry Organic Matter








Alaska Gleyed (A13)

Alaska Redox (A14)






OM

9-18

0-9


None100

Texture Remarks


Type1

Loc2

Depth

(inches)

10YR 2/2

Color (moist) % Color (moist) %


UPL

1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

2. x 1 =

3. x 2 =

4. x 3 =

5. x 4 =

6. x 5 =

1.

2. cornus canadensis

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

Hydrophytic





Yes No



or problematic.

Vegetation

Present?

(Where applicable)

175Total Cover:

20% of total cover:87.550% of total cover:




FAC

X

X

X

X

calamagrostic canadensis

equisetum arvense

20

35

50

70


Is the Sampled Area

within a Wetland?


No

10

No

Soil Map Unit Name:

63°38'23.94"N Long: -145°53'18.07"W Datum: WGS 84






Yes No

% Cover

Absolute

Status

picea glauca

Indicator

Species?

Dominant


Remarks:

60 FACU


(A)

(B)



(A/B)

60

12

X


Tree Stratum

Total Cover:

50% of total cover:





No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes



FACX50alnus viridis


3

6

50%

Multiply by:

285

0

130

155

0

0

0

520

465

0

0

985


(B)

OBL species

Column Totals:








Yes


forested slope

Lat:

FACW species

(A)

Total % Cover of:

separate sheet)





UPL species

FACU species

FAC species

Total Cover: 50

FACU

FAC

FACU

10

Herb Stratum

35

rosa acicularus


UPL


Depth (inches):

Depth (inches):

Field Observations:



Saturation Present?




Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

No


HYDROLOGY







Salt Deposits (C5)





Underlaying Layer


Iron Deposits (B5)


Drift Deposits (B3)


Water Marks (B1)

Saturation (A3)


Surface Water (A1)




Marl Deposits (B15)







Type: None


Dry Organic Matter








Alaska Gleyed (A13)

Alaska Redox (A14)






OM

8-18

0-8


None100

Texture Remarks


Type1

Loc2

Depth

(inches)

10Y3/2



UPL

1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

2. x 1 =

3. x 2 =

4. x 3 =

5. x 4 =

6. x 5 =

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

20% of total cover:50% of total cover: 17.5

UPL species

FACU species

FAC species

Total Cover: 35

FACU

FACU

FACU

7

Herb Stratum

vaccinium uliginosum

shepherdia canadensis

24

cornus canadensis

FACW species

(A)

Total % Cover of:

separate sheet)







NWI classification: Non-wetland




Yes


forested area

Lat:


1

8

13%

Multiply by:

250

0

200

50

0

0

0

800

150

0

0

950


(B)

OBL species

Column Totals:


FACX35alnus viridis





No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes


(A/B)

95

19

X

X

30

20% of total cover:47.5 Percent of Dominant Species

Tree Stratum

Total Cover:

populus balsamifera

50% of total cover:

FACU

FACU


(A)

(B)





Yes No

% Cover

Absolute

Status

picea glauca

Indicator

Species?

Dominant


Remarks:

65


Is the Sampled Area

within a Wetland?


No

11

No

Soil Map Unit Name:

63°38'51.85"N Long: -145°53'47.74"W Datum: WGS 84




lupinus arcticus

vicea americana

viburnum edule

5

10

20

20

20

20

25

rubus articus

FACU

X

X

X

X

X

FAC

(Where applicable)

120Total Cover:









Yes No



or problematic.

Vegetation

Present?

Hydrophytic

FAC

FACU


UPL




Type1

Loc2

Depth

(inches)

10YR4/3

Color (moist) %


None1004-14

0-4


SandyLoam

OM Dry Organic Matter








Alaska Gleyed (A13)

Alaska Redox (A14)









Type: None


Salt Deposits (C5)





Underlaying Layer


Iron Deposits (B5)


Drift Deposits (B3)


Water Marks (B1)

Saturation (A3)


Surface Water (A1)




Marl Deposits (B15)



No

No


HYDROLOGY


FAC-Neutral Test (D5) 0:7 Not Met





Depth (inches):

Depth (inches):

Depth (inches):

Field Observations:



Saturation Present?




Yes

Yes

Yes

No


UPL

1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

2. x 1 =

3. x 2 =

4. x 3 =

5. x 4 =

6. x 5 =

1. vaccinium uliginosum

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.


UPL species

FACU species

FAC species

Total Cover: 20

FACU

FAC

FACU

4

Herb Stratum

vaccinium vitis idaea

epilobium angustifolia

potentilla fruiticosa

27

vicia americana

rosa acicularus

FACW species

(A)

Total % Cover of:

separate sheet)











Yes


forest adjacent to slough channel

Lat:


5

8

63%

Multiply by:

195

0

65

80

50

0

0

260

240

100

0

600


(B)

OBL species

Column Totals:


FAC

FACW

X

X10

salix alaxensis

picea mariana

10





No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes


(A/B)

40

8

X


Tree Stratum

Total Cover:

50% of total cover:

FACW


(A)

(B)





Yes No

% Cover

Absolute

Status

picea mariana

Indicator

Species?

Dominant


Remarks:

40


Is the Sampled Area

within a Wetland?


No

14

No

Soil Map Unit Name:

63°39'27.57"N Long: -145°53'9.90"W Datum: WGS 84





empetrum nigrum

5

5

10

10

20

20

20

20

25

cornus canadensis

FAC

X

X

X

X

X

FAC

FACU

FAC

(Where applicable)

135Total Cover:









Yes No



or problematic.

Vegetation

Present?

Hydrophytic

FAC

FACU


UPL




Type1

Loc2

Depth

(inches)

10YR4/3

Color (moist) %


None100

17" Refusal

3-17

0-3


Sand

OM

Refusal due to gravel

~15% gravel

Dry Organic Matter








Alaska Gleyed (A13)

Alaska Redox (A14)









Type: None


Salt Deposits (C5)





Underlaying Layer


Iron Deposits (B5)


Drift Deposits (B3)


Water Marks (B1)

Saturation (A3)


Surface Water (A1)




Marl Deposits (B15)



No

No


HYDROLOGY


FAC-Neutral Test (D5) 2:3, not met





Depth (inches):

Depth (inches):

Depth (inches):

Field Observations:



Saturation Present?




Yes

Yes

Yes

No


UPL

1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

2. x 1 =

3. x 2 =

4. x 3 =

5. x 4 =

6. x 5 =

1. cornus canadensis

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

Hydrophytic

FACU

FACU





Yes No



or problematic.

Vegetation

Present?

(Where applicable)

135Total Cover:





FACU

X

X

linnaea borealis

5

10

10

15

30

65

viburnum edule


Is the Sampled Area

within a Wetland?


No

17

No

Soil Map Unit Name:

63°40'25.75"N Long: -145°52'36.30"W Datum: WGS 84






Yes No

% Cover

Absolute

Status

picea glauca

Indicator

Species?

Dominant


Remarks:

40

FACU

FACU


(A)

(B)



(A/B)

60

12

X

X

20


Tree Stratum

Total Cover:

populus balsamifera

50% of total cover:





No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes



FACUX10picea glauca


0

5

0%

Multiply by:

205

0

205

0

0

0

0

820

0

0

0

820


(B)

OBL species

Column Totals:



Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex





Yes


forested hilltop

Lat:

FACW species

(A)

Total % Cover of:

separate sheet)





UPL species

FACU species

FAC species

Total Cover: 10

FACU

FACU

FACU

2

Herb Stratum


27


rosa acicularus


UPL


Depth (inches):

Depth (inches):

Field Observations:



Saturation Present?




Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

No

Remarks: Hydric soil criteria not met.

HYDROLOGY


FAC-Neutral Test (D5) 0:5, not met





Salt Deposits (C5)





Underlaying Layer


Iron Deposits (B5)


Drift Deposits (B3)


Water Marks (B1)

Saturation (A3)


Surface Water (A1)




Marl Deposits (B15)







Type: None


Redox below 12 inches from surface

Moist Organic Matter








Alaska Gleyed (A13)

Alaska Redox (A14)






25 Silt Loam

Silt Loam

OM

15-17

3-15

0-3

C M


7.5YR4/6

None

75

100

Texture Remarks


Type1

Loc2

Depth

(inches)

2.5Y5/3

2.5Y4/2



UPL

1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

2. x 1 =

3. x 2 =

4. x 3 =

5. x 4 =

6. x 5 =

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.


UPL species

FACU species

FAC species

Total Cover: 10

FACU

FAC

FACU

2

Herb Stratum

aconitum delphinifolium


viburnum edule

35

rosa acicularus

FACW species

(A)

Total % Cover of:

separate sheet)











Yes


base of hill,margin of spruce bog

Lat:


4

6

67%

Multiply by:

260

0

95

115

50

0

0

380

345

100

0

825


(B)

OBL species

Column Totals:


FACX10salix alaxensis





No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes


salix arbusculoides

(A/B)

90

18

X

X

10

40


Tree Stratum

Total Cover:

salix alaxensis

50% of total cover:

FACW

FAC

FACW


(A)

(B)





Yes No

% Cover

Absolute

Status

picea mariana

Indicator

Species?

Dominant


Plot #19 is near margin but just outside wetland boundary. It lies on the upland side of boundary near the edge of

a wetland swale represented by Plot #20.

Remarks:

40


Is the Sampled Area

within a Wetland?


No

19

No

Soil Map Unit Name:

63°40'32.95"N Long: -146°21'12.27"W Datum: WGS 84

Project/Site: Richardson Hwy MP 295 Banner Ck Bridge #0526Borough/City: None Sampling Date: 8/8/2012




calamagrositis canadensis

cornus canadensis

equisetum arvense

5

5

5

10

20

20

50

60 FAC

X

X

X

X

FAC

FACU

(Where applicable)

175Total Cover:




Remarks:





Yes No



or problematic.

Vegetation

Present?

Hydrophytic

FACU

FACU

Prevalence index >3.0.


UPL




Type1

Loc2

Depth

(inches)

4/10Y

10YR3/2

Color (moist) %


5Y4/680

100

16-17

5-16

0-5

C PL


20 Silt

Silt

OM

Redox below 12 inches of surface

Dry Organic Matter








Alaska Gleyed (A13)

Alaska Redox (A14)










Type: NA

Hydric Soil Present? Yes NoNADepth (inches):


Salt Deposits (C5)





Underlaying Layer


Iron Deposits (B5)


Drift Deposits (B3)


Water Marks (B1)

Saturation (A3)


Surface Water (A1)




Marl Deposits (B15)


No

No

No

Remarks: Hydric soil criteria not met. Hydric indicators are present but below 12 inches of surface. Plot is near the margin,

but outside the boundaries of a nearby wetland.

HYDROLOGY


FAC-Neutral Test (D5) 1:2, not met.




Depth (inches):

Depth (inches):

Depth (inches):

Field Observations:



Saturation Present?



Remarks:

Yes

Yes

Yes


PSS4B

1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

2. x 1 =

3. x 2 =

4. x 3 =

5. x 4 =

6. x 5 =

1. vaccinium uliginosum

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

20% of total cover:50% of total cover: 22.5

UPL species

FACU species

FAC species

Total Cover: 45

FAC

FAC

FAC

9

Herb Stratum

21

carex vaginata

petasites frigidus sagitus

FACW species

(A)

Total % Cover of:

separate sheet)






Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave

NWI classification: PSS4B




Yes


black spruce bog

Lat:


4

4

100%

Multiply by:

150

0

0

95

45

10

0

0

285

90

10

385


(B)

OBL species

Column Totals:


FACW

FACW

X

X30

salix arbusculoides

picea mariana

15





No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes


(A/B)

0


Tree Stratum

Total Cover:

50% of total cover:


(A)

(B)





Yes No

% Cover

Absolute

Status

Indicator

Species?

Dominant


Remarks:


Is the Sampled Area

within a Wetland?


No

20

No

Soil Map Unit Name:

63°40'33.06"N Long: -145°52'34.39"W Datum: WGS 84





10

10

10

25

50

betula nana

FAC

X

X

(Where applicable)

105Total Cover:




Remarks: Prevalence Index < 3.0.





Yes No



or problematic.

Vegetation

Present?

Hydrophytic

OBL


PSS4B




Type1

Loc2

Depth

(inches)

4/N

10YR4/1

Color (moist) %


100

70

13-17

4-6

0-4


Silt Loam

Silt Loam

OM Moist Organic Matter








Alaska Gleyed (A13)

Alaska Redox (A14)









Type: Permafrost

Hydric Soil Present? Yes No17" below surfaceDepth (inches):

Salt Deposits (C5)





Underlaying Layer


Iron Deposits (B5)


Drift Deposits (B3)


Water Marks (B1)

Saturation (A3)


Surface Water (A1)




Marl Deposits (B15)



No

No

Remarks:

HYDROLOGY


FAC-Neutral Test (D5) 2:0


Shallow Aquitard (D3) Permafrost @ 17"

Geomorphic Position (D2) Swale between hills

Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) stunted black spruce

Depth (inches):

Depth (inches):

Depth (inches):

Field Observations:



Saturation Present?



Remarks: Two or more secondary wetland hydrology indicators. The black spruce in the Plot #20 plant community are

stunted compared to those in the neighboring upland plant community. This can be seen by comparing the

foreground and background in the Plot #20 vegetation photo in the wetland delineation report.

Yes

Yes

Yes

No


Appendix B

Wetlands and Waters Assessment Forms

Project/Site Z60262000

Applicant/Owner Alaska DOT&PF Evaluation Form #1

Dominant Cowardin Classification? PEM1C Lat 63°37'41.22"N Long -145°53'9.19"W

Wetland Acres in Project Area Prepared by: Evaluation based on:

Adjacent Land use Date Office x Field

Distance to nearest road or development: Adjacent to Rich Hwy Borough/City Corps Manual Wetland Delineation Complete?

Subregion Yes x No

Hydrology Yes No Habitat Yes No

Is wetland a separate hydraulic system? x Is this wetland part of wildlife corridor or habitat island? x

If not where is location in drainage basin? Does wetland have a contiguous undeveloped buffer? x abuts hwy

# of tributaries contributing to wetland hydrology associated w/river Is there evidence of substantial disturbance? x abuts hwy

Comments: Comments:

emergent wetland within a depression in the Delta River floodplain Some adjacent disturbance from adjacent highway, wetlands parallels highway

Degree

Present * * H=High, M=Moderate, L=Low

Function/Service Yes* No

Groundwater Recharge x

Flood flow Alteration x

Fish and Shellfish Habitat x M

Sediment/Toxicant Reduction x

Nutrient Removal x

Production Export x

Sediment/Shoreline Stability x

Wildlife Habitat x M

Recreation x M

Education/Scientific Value x

Uniqueness/Heritage x

Visual Quality/Aesthetics x M

Endangered Species Habitat x

Other: x

OVERALL Assessment Rating MODERATEMODERATE Rationale: notable aesthetic value, some fish and wildlife value

Wetland Function and Services Assessment Form

Wetland IDs: 2

Bob Effinger

8/7/2012

Interior

Rich Hwy MP 235 Ruby Ck Brg #0524 Replacement

Type: Emergent Wetlands - Delta River Floodplain

Alaska DNR lands, AK DOT&PF right-of-way

Estimated Wetland Impact

emergent wetland sheds no substantial leafy debris

upgradient wateshed mostly natural with limited nutrient contribution

minimal contribution, lack of development downstream

~100 acres

no substantial contribution

Potential Permanent Impact Acres: 0.43 acres

None

minimal development to contribute sediment, Delta naturally carries high sediment load

no substantial known contribution to subsistence provision

wetland not in an area susceptible to bank erosion

Rationale/Comments

highwater connection to fish-bearing Delta River

Function/Value

Delta River Floodplain

Notably Present?

Fo

rm 1

of 1

0

wetland type not uncommon in surrounding area, no rare plant or animal communities

Wetland scenic and viewable from highway pull out

distant from educational institutions, similar common sites available closer to population centers

potential hunting use

provides suitable habitat for moose, furbearers, birds, waterfowl. Like habitat is abundant

no listed or proposed species documented in area



Dominant Cowardin Classification? PSS1B Lat 63°37'41.22"N Long -145°53'9.19"W




Subregion Yes x No




# of tributaries contributing to wetland hydrology associated w/river Is there evidence of substantial disturbance? x abuts hwy

Comments: Comments:

shrub wetland on the fringe of emergent wetland within a Some adjacent disturbance from adjacent highway, wetland parallels highway

depression in the Delta River floodplain

Degree





Fish and Shellfish Habitat x M


Nutrient Removal x

Production Export x x L



Recreation x





Other: x

OVERALL Assessment Rating MODERATEMODERATE Rationale: some fish and wildlife value, notable aesthetic value

Fo

rm 2

of 1

0

wetland type common in project area

Wetland complex scenic and viewable from highway pull out


hunting use limited, close to highway

provides suitable habitat for moose, furbearers, birds. Like habitat is abundant




Rationale/Comments

highwater connection to fish-bearing Delta River

Function/Value

Delta River Floodplain

Notably Present?

some leafy debris contribution


minimal contribution, lack of development downstream

~1.5 acres


Potential Permanent Impact Acres: 0.08 acres

None

minimal development to contribute sediment, Delta naturally carries high sediment load


Wetland IDs: 2

Bob Effinger

8/7/2012

Interior


Type: Shrub Wetland - Delta River Floodplain





Dominant Cowardin Classification? R5USC Lat 63°37'52.75"N Long -145°52'53.90"W

Water Body Name: Ruby Creek Prepared by: Evaluation based on:


Distance to nearest road or development: Under Rich Hwy Bridge Borough/City

Subregion


Is waterbody a separate hydraulic system? x Is this water part of wildlife corridor? x

If not where is location in drainage basin? Does water have a contiguous undeveloped buffer? x abuts bridge

Tributary of what downstream water? Delta River (0.3 mi.downstr.) Is there evidence of substantial disturbance? x abuts bridge

Comments: Comments:

Ruby Creek at the bridge location lies at transition between constricted under the bridge due to channeling dikes and gravel accumulation

its descent from the surround hills and the Delta River flats. The project proposes to provide a larger bridge opening closer to the

The stream ranges from 30' to 150' wide. the stream's natural opening. This would increase the opening for wildlife crossing.

Degree



Fish Habitat x L

Undisturbed Environment x L

Wildlife Habitat x L

Recreation x L


Other: x

OVERALL Assessment Rating Rationale: minimal fishery, wildlife, recreation, subsistence values. No endangered resources values

Stream cross section substantially disturbed by bridge constriction, dikes, and gravel removal

Fo

rm 3

of 1

0

public access to stream but not condusive for fishing or boating

Potential Permanent Impact Acres: 0.68

stream areas to be impacted by riprap previously disturbed by bridge approaches, minmial habitat value

As typical, wildlife utiizes streams as travel corridors. Travel is

watershed natural, water quality good, stream substantially altered by bridge, dikes, and gravel removal

Rationale/Comments


LOW

Lower Perennial

Notably Present?


Type: Stream


Function/Value

Multiple Use State Lands, DOT&PF Right-of-way

Alaska DFG noted resident fish present but minimally used, disturbed habitat at bridge.

Waterbody Function and Services Assessment Form

Water IDs: 4,5,6

Bob Effinger

8/7/2012

Interior

FNSB

Estimated Waterbody Impact



Dominant Cowardin Classification? PEM1C Lat 63°38'8.23"N Long -145°53'31.86"W




Subregion Yes x No




# of tributaries contributing to wetland none Is there evidence of substantial disturbance? x abuts hwy

Comments: Comments:

emergent wetland within a depression 650' east of Delta River Some adjacent disturbance from adjacent highway, wetland parallels highway

Degree





Fish and Shellfish Habitat x


Nutrient Removal x

Production Export x



Recreation x


Uniqueness/Heritage x x M

Visual Quality/Aesthetics x


Other: x

OVERALL Assessment Rating MODERATEMODERATE Rationale: emergent wetland with seasonal surface water and moderate wildlife values


Wetland IDs: 9

Bob Effinger

8/7/2012

Interior


Type: Emergent Wetlands



minimal leafy debris, distant from river


minimal contribution, small in size, lack of development downstream

~2 acres


Potential Permanent Impact Acres: None Anticipated

None

upgradient watshed largely undeveloped with limited sediment contribution

Rationale/Comments

no known fish use

Function/Value

650' east of Delta River

Notably Present?

Fo

rm 4

of 1

0

emergent wetland with seasonal surface water, limited size

Limited view from highway, shielded by vegetation



provides suitable habitat for moose, furbearers, waterfowl






Dominant Cowardin Classification? PSS1B Lat 63°38'8.23"N Long -145°53'31.86"W




Subregion Yes x No




# of tributaries contributing to wetland none Is there evidence of substantial disturbance? x abuts hwy

Comments: Comments:

emergent wetland within a depression 650' east of Delta River Some disturbance from adjacent highway

Degree







Nutrient Removal x

Production Export x



Recreation x


Uniqueness/Heritage x M



Other: x

OVERALL Assessment Rating MODERATEMODERATE Rationale: provides buffer for emergent wetland with seasonal surface water and moderate

wildlife values


Wetland IDs: 9

Bob Effinger

8/7/2012

Interior


Type: Shrub Wetlands



minimal leafy debris, distant from river



~2 acres


Potential Permanent Impact Acres: None Anticipated

None

upgradient watshed largely undeveloped with limited sediment contribution

Rationale/Comments

no known fish use

Function/Value

650' east of Delta River

Notably Present?

Fo

rm 5

of 1

0

provides buffer for emergent wetland with seasonal surface water, limited size

Limited view from highway, shielded by vegetation



provides suitable habitat for moose, furbearers, waterfowl






Dominant Cowardin Classification? R3UB Lat 63°39'27.21"N Long -145°53'8.93"W Potential Permanent Impact Acres: None Anticipated

Water Body Name: Unnamed tributary of Donnelly Creek Prepared by: Evaluation based on:


Distance to nearest road or development: Adjacent to Rich Hwy Borough/City

Subregion



If not where is location in drainage basin? Does water have a contiguous undeveloped buffer? x

Tributary of what downstream water? Donnelly Ck. (1 mile downstr) Is there evidence of substantial disturbance? x

Comments: Comments:

This is the upper reaches of small stream about 6 feet wide The watershed is largely undisturbed except for the two material sites 500-750 feet

See Figure 21 of wetland/waters report for photo of stream away to the east and south.

Degree



Fish Habitat x L

Undisturbed Environment x M


Recreation Potential x L


Other: x

OVERALL Assessment Rating Rationale: minimal fishery, wildlife, recreation, subsistence values. No endangered resources values


Water IDs: 13

Bob Effinger

8/8/2012

Interior

None


Upper Perennial

Notably Present?


Type: Stream Channel


Function/Value

Alaska DNR Lands-Material Site

limited fishery value

Fo

rm 6

of 1

0

access by foot only, stream not condusive for fishing or boating

small stream surrounded by black spruce forest, moderate wildife value

undisturbed buffer of 500-750 feet from material site disturbance, water quality good

Rationale/Comments


LOW



Dominant Cowardin Classification? LOWH Lat 63°39'27.21"N Long -145°53'8.93"W Potential Permanent Impact Acres: None Anticipated

Water Body Name: Unnamed material site pond Prepared by: Evaluation based on:


Distance to nearest road or development: Adjacent to Rich Hwy Borough/City

Subregion




Tributary of what downstream water? Not Applicable Is there evidence of substantial disturbance? x

Comments: Comments:

This 4-acre pond is man made and has been excavated within an 1/3 of shoreline disturbed by material extraction activities and stockpiling

active material site. Pond is designed for optimum material extraction not wildlife habitat.

Degree



Fish Habitat x

Undisturbed Environment x


Recreation Potential x L


Other: x

OVERALL Assessment Rating Rationale: Limited to minimal wildlife and recreation values.


Water IDs: 15

Bob Effinger

8/8/2012

Interior

None


Notably Present?


Type: Excavated Pond

no apparent contribution to subsistence provision

Function/Value


no fish

Fo

rm 7

of 1

0

informal recreation/camping, no facilites, not condusive for fishing, potential for non-motorized boating

2/3 of shoreline is black spruce forest, some wildife value

1/3 (3 acres) of shoreline unvegetated/disturbed, manmade pond, shoreline steep/unnatural

Rationale/Comments


LOW



Dominant Cowardin Classification? R2UB Lat 63°40'30.04"N Long -145°52'49.36"W Potential Permanent Impact Acres: None Anticipated

Water Body Name: Donnelly Creek Prepared by: Evaluation based on:


Distance to nearest road or development: Creek Crosses under Borough/City

adjacent Richardson Highway Subregion




Tributary of what downstream water? Delta River, 0.3 miles downstr Is there evidence of substantial disturbance? x

Comments: Comments:

The creek follows the southwest boundary of the a material site There is approximately a 200-foot buffer of undisturbed forest between the creek

then crosses under the Richardson Highway and ground disturbance in the material site.

Degree



Fish Habitat x H

Undisturbed Environment x M

Wildlife Habitat x H

Recreation Potential x H


Other: x M

OVERALL Assessment Rating Rationale: substantial fishery, wildlife, recreation, subsistence values.


Water IDs: 18

Bob Effinger

8/8/2012

Interior

None


Lower Perennial

Notably Present?


Type: Creek

resources suitable for subsistence provision

Function/Value


fish-bearing stream

Fo

rm 8

of 1

0

suitable for fishing, hunting, boating, nearby public access and use areas

suitable wildlife habitat within stream corridor

undisturbed buffer of 200 feet from material site ground disturbance, water quality good

Rationale/Comments


HIGH



Dominant Cowardin Classification? PEM1C Lat 63°40'30.04"N Long -145°52'49.36"W Potential Permanent Impact Acres: None Anticipated



Distance to nearest road or development: 200 feet Borough/City Corps Manual Wetland Delineation Complete?

Subregion Yes x No



If not where is location in drainage basin? Does wetland have a contiguous undeveloped buffer? x

# of tributaries contributing to wetland Donnelly Ck Is there evidence of substantial disturbance? x

Comments: Comments:

emergent wetland along the edge of Donnelly Creek Undeveloped material site lands currently serve as an undeveloped/

undisturbed buffer to these wetlands. The wetlands are adjacent to Donnelly

Creek a likely wildlife corridor.

Degree





Fish and Shellfish Habitat x H


Nutrient Removal x

Production Export x

Sediment/Shoreline Stability x L

Wildlife Habitat x H

Recreation x


Uniqueness/Heritage x M



Other: x

OVERALL Assessment Rating MODERATEHIGH Rationale: Wetlands associated with stream environments having substantial fish & wildlife values are

typically viewed as limited resources having high value if functioning in and undisturbed/natural condition.


Wetland IDs: 18

Bob Effinger

8/8/2012

Interior


Type: Emergent Wetlands - Finge of Donnelly Ck

AK DOT&PF material site


~ 0.4 acres


None

upgradient buffer lands largely undeveloped, limited sediment contribution to reduce

Rationale/Comments

undisturbed border to fish-bearing stream

Fo

rm 9

of 1

0

emergent wetlands, associated with stream

Scenic view from highway



provides suitable wildlife habitat within the creek corridor


fringe emergent wetlands, no substantial contribution to subsistence provision

wetlands border stream providing some protection, manmade erosion threats not great

Function/Value

fringe of Donnelly Ck.

Notably Present?

emergent wetalands, minimal leafy debris contribution

upgradient buffer lands largely undeveloped, limited nutrient contribution to reduce




Dominant Cowardin Classification? PFO4B Lat 63°40'33.06"N Long -145°52'34.39"W Potential Permanent Impact Acres: None Anticipated



Distance to nearest road or development: 800 ft. to Richardson Hwy Borough/City Corps Manual Wetland Delineation Complete?

200 feet to previously disturbed portion of material site Subregion Yes x No



If not where is location in drainage basin? Does wetland have a contiguous undeveloped buffer? x

# of tributaries contributing to wetland None Is there evidence of substantial disturbance? x

Comments: Comments:

upper end of swale between hills that extends downgradient 2 miles Distrurance from material extraction approximately 200 feet to southwest.

to the Delta River

Degree







Nutrient Removal x

Production Export x



Recreation x L





Other: x

OVERALL Assessment Rating Rationale: few notable values overall, low value for fish and wildlife


Wetland IDs: 20

Bob Effinger

8/8/2012

Interior


Type: Black Spruce Weltands in Swale



minimally developed in immediate surroundings, minimal sediment to reduce

no substantial leafy debris, no nearby stream

minimally developed in immediate surroundings, minimal nutrients to reduce

minimal contribution

~4.5 acres

Fo

rm 1

0 o

f 10

wetland type common in project area

not readily viewable, wetland type not notable for visual appeal


potential hunting use, like habitat is abundant

provides some habitat for moose, furbearers, birds, like habitat is abundant


LOW


wetland not in an area susceptible to stream/waterbody bank erosion


Rationale/Comments

no fish habitat

None

Upper elevations of swale

Notably Present?

Function/Value

department of transportation and public facilitiesdot.alaska.gov › nreg › projects ›...

Documents