Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Reel_0025C
--- ------- I .? K r" f \ PARTMENT OF THE ARMY F SEATTLE / DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS P-0- BOX C-3755 y M1?{q` SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98124 71ell /11_/ HPSSP-PL-RP 31 JUL 1981 SUBJECT: Favorable Section 205 Reconnaissance Report, Brinnon, Washington S Cossnander, North Pacific Division ? ydGsc . 1. Authority. This reconnaissance report is submitted under the authority a of Section 205 of the 1948 Flood Control Act, as amended. In a letter dated 27 February 1980 (inclosure 1)9 Jefferson County requested Federal assistance in providing flood. protection for the Brinnon vicinity. t a y4 2. Location, The study area (inclosure 2) is on the Olympic Peninsula in ° northwestern Washington State. The Dosewallips River rises in the Olympic Mountains and flows about 30 miles eastward to its mouth at Hood Canal. ,a Hear its mouth the river passes through Brinnon which includes unincorporated `-: areas of Lazy C, Brinnon Flats, and Dosewallips State Park. + k § 3. ExistiM Flood Protection. In previous years training dikes and a low levee have been constructed along the Dosewallips River upstream from the Q.S. Highway 101 bridge. Prior to 1957 the State Park land was privately P7 m awned. Shortly after the 1955 flood, the owner used river-deposited gravel a? rl to construct a dike about 200 feet long. About 1957, Washington State Parka Commission extended the dike to a length of 500 feet and strengthened it with armor stone weighing about 1,000 pounds. The dike was severely dam- aged by high water in 1964. Washington State Department of Transportation ys has constructed a training dike which extends about 200 feet along the left bank of the river upstream of Highway 101. The dike is faced with heavy riprap and guides the river toward the highway bridge and away from old overflow channels. In February 1980 Jefferson Count built a low levee just upstream of the dike to provide some protection to .e L. e 4 , ?Y rau.li ? to , 4. Flood Problems. Wind and weather patterns during the winter months frequently cause heavy rain and rapid melting of the heavy snow packs in the Olympic Mountains, with resultant large and rapid fluctuation in the Dose- wallips River. Flooding in the lower reaches of the river is aggravated by 4 shallow gravel bars and the deposition of debris. Flood damage occurs along the left bank at the Lazy C and along both banks of the river in the vicinity' of the State Park and Brinnon Flats. A 32-acre campground area on low land adjacent to the right bank in Dosewallips State Park has been inundated by the Dosewallips River many times since 1955. Water depths varied from 1 to 4 feet, while flooding lasted from 1 to 5 days. The left bank area of Brinnon Flats, about 75 acres, is also subject to flooding of residential 9F y1 ; and commercial structures. e . a ?r --91-11-2 1 3 nr ygtii f v} ti ti? M GuL ,? ,r ?It:< G WU,a« ?. k i f' 'mP ?V.,r?tl ?? •? r?<• r f :_y?°? ?p? ...- st pF lyyM?P? - xyf ? f? M y's I ?'Y4 ?? 1 tr ? k 1 t !, It ' 1??677 •„ i roc( ?'? ;lC? X R .d.• ? ? ??.$ ,fi ?? ? ?i '?1 Y}a? * .Y13dN2u. f'- -?. ? e.: Khu 4Y??". .tkr .•AN, ry ' NPSEN-PL-RP SUBJECT: Favorable Section 205 Reconnaissance Report, Brinnon, Washington 5 5. Stream Characteristics, The Dosewallips River drains approximately 117 square mules on the easterl sl f $ 4 y ope o the Olympic Mountains in western Washington. Most of the watershed in rugged, mountainous terrain, with peaks reachi x ng an elevation of 79900 feet. Heavy aggradation has resulted in continual changes in the ri h ver c annel. In the upper 25 miles, the river flows through a narrow valley with an average fall of about 230 feet per mile. The lower reach in the vicinity of Brinnon passes through lowlands subject to inundation. The gradient in this reach averages about 15 f i - ' - per m le, and the low-water channel varies from 100 to 150 feet in width. A U.S. Geological Survey stream a i a t ti g g g s a on, about 7-1/2 miles upstream of Brinnon (drainage area 93.5 square miles), was in operation f 1 N rom 931 to 1968. The largest flood of record (November 1949 with a discharge of 13 200 bi , cu c feet per second (c.f.s.)) corresponds to about a 100-year flood. A 10- f a" year lood has an estimated peak discharge of about 7,700 c.f.s. 6. Alternatives Considered. Preliminary studies were made of levee im - ' prove manta for Lazy c , BrlnnnII Flats, and the State Park. Also, at the request of Jefferson County, a damsite was investi ated at i il g r ver m e (R.M.) 1, between Lazy C and Brinnon Flats. A geological reconnaissance was made of the R.M. 1 site and another site u stream R M ti p near . . 3. At R.H. 1 the Dose- wallips River flows across bedrock for about 300 feet. Bedrock rises 10 feet on the left b k d an an about 50 feet on the right bank and is then overlain by the glacial outwash terra S J ce, composed of sands, gravel silt, and till, and is not the bottom of the preglacial valley. Since there is no way to esti- 9 ' ri" F - mate the thickness of overburden within the buried channels on either aide of the present bedrock h l c anne , it is unlikely that the R.M. 1 site would be suitable for a dam because of the pervious foundation and the great extent of leakage control (blanketing reservoir sides with silts and clays) which would be required. The damsite at R.M. 3 appears more suitabl th h e an t e R.M. 1 damsite. A study made for a dam at the R.M. 3 site indicated that a multipurpose (flood control and h dro owe ) d i sn y p r am w th a height of about 100 feet (about 10,000 acre-feet storage) would cost about $50 million " o , would produce about $2 million annually in hydropower, flood reduction and a recreation benefits, and have a benefit-cost ratio of less than 0.5 to 1 . In addition, about 250 acres of bottomland and 2.5 miles of river would be inundated, which would significantl i t i i y mpac ex st ng wildlife and fishery resources. r ``x " sR ' 7. Most Passible Alternative. The design of the alternative considered most feasible for reducing flood damages in the Brinnon vicinity consisted l a a 1- .. rl": of construction of three levee segments to protect Lazy C, Brinnon Flats and the State Park, respectivel 3 900 f t 3 600 f ye ti y , ee , , eet, and 19900 feet long. This alternative would provide 3 feet of freeboard above the desi n + ` g 100-year water surface profile. The design and layout of the levee is shown on inclos r 2 E t ` . u e . mbankment material is available in Brinnon and the riprap source is at Eldon (about 10 miles south). During detailed project report (DPR . u =ig?r;4 M? r ° ) studies, in cooperation with the Washington State Parks Commission the design of the levee will be refined to provide appropriate landscaping and river access in the State Park. fi ,• y ?T a' h 7-7 -7 y? f R y ? td u a ?4? l1 P ?b ??? 7rw Sad `f J a a ':5 A ON f> tn? ?( i?" S3 c u F s '? ?' • NPSEN-PL-RP s SUBJECT: Favorable Section 205 Reconnaissance Report, Brinnon, Washington ;i 8. Preliminary Analysis of Environmental Impacts. The principal commercial and sport fish produced in the Dosewallips River are chinook, chum, coho, M and pink salmon and steelhead and cutthroat trout. Both pink and chum salmon a. spawn in the project reach. Wildlife usage in the area is largely small l d bi d i e mamma s an r s. Vegetat on along the project reach is mixed coniferous- deciduous forest with the overstory dominated by bottoaland species, such as alder and cottonwood. The primary environmental consideration in project design is protection of the riverine environment to minimize adverse impacts to fish and wildlife, esthetics, and recreation activities in the Dosewallips Y^ State Park. Construction of the most feasible alternative would result in the loss of approximately 3.0 acres of riparian habitat and 2.5 acres of aquatic habitat from levee construction along 3 900 feet of the river and 9 ddi l l f 6 h i 5 f ildlif h bi 1 e a ona oss o . t t acres o w e a tat from construction of ' y 5,500 feet of levees set back from the river s edge. All levees would be ` seeded with native grass species as a project feature. Unavoidable habitat AS 3 losses and the associated adverse impacts to fish and wildlife and esthetics could be further reduced through limited vegetative plantings. The most feasible alternative is consistent with future plans for the Dosewallip s State Park and should have only minor impacts on recreation. There have been no prehistoric cultural resource (CR) sites recorded in the area and no ' sites are listed or determined eligible for the National Register. However, ° , ' since the area of the proposed levee has a high CR potential, a CR recon- naissance would be done during UPS, studies to determine whether a CR survey and/or salvage are warranted. ? p; 9. Preliminary Estimate of Flood Damages. Brinnon includes three geo- graphically distinct areas: -; Area I. Brinnon Flats is located on the left bank of the Dosewallips River. The flood plain consists of approximately 75 acres and includes 21 homes, 10 mobile homes, 12 commercial establishments, three public facil- ities, and approximately 6,000 linear feet of roads and streets. Residential homes range in value from $25,000 to $559000 with an average of $34,000. Total damages for a 100-year event are estimated at $760,000. Damages in the December 1980 flood (about a 5-year flood) were estimated to be $87,000. <' a Expected average annual damages are estimated to be $76,300. Area II. The Dosewallips State Park area in located on the right bank of the Dosewallips River and west of Highway 101. The 32-acre flood plain includes 27 campsites, 80 trailer sites, picnic tables, stoves, two comfort stations, and approximately 2,000 linear feet of paved driveway. Damages for a 100-year event were estimated at $2179000. The December 1980 flood cased approximately $46,000 damage, including the permanent loss of four campsites. Expected average annual damages are estimated to be $26,600. , Area Ill. The Lacy C is located on the left bank of the Dosewallips River approximately 2 miles upstream of Brinnon. The flood hazard area includes 35 permanent residences and 37 part-time residences ranging in 3 r? ¢d EPBE k ' SUBJECT: CTs Favorable Section 205 Reconnaissance Report, Briunon, Washington ftd` ? value from $10,000 to $20,000. If the 100-year event occurred under today's , prices and conditions, $342,000 in damages would be expected. The December N y, 1980 flood caused $163,000 in damages. The majority of these damages were , r q land erosion and road damage. Expected average annual damages are estimated a ° a to be $81,800. Thus, the damages to Brinnon during the 1980 flood were $294,000. The 100-year event under today's prices and conditions would cause about $1,319,000 damage with the expected average annual damages of $184,700. " tp , 10. Preliminary Construction Coat Estimate. The total estimated coat for s the three segments of levee system is $1.3 million. The non-Federal cost, _ which consists of the coat of lands, easements, and rights-of-way and ' required building, highway, and utility relocations, is estimated to be s ry $86,000. Table 1 summarizes the costs. £ r t TABLE 1 SUMARY OF OUSTS _ L (June 1981 Price Level) Construction Coat $971,000 d h f 6 ts-o -way 8 Rig ,000 Relocation, Lands, an " ? Supervision, Administration and Inspection 95,000 n 148 000 and Desi rin E i a b , g g ng nee v Total Coats $1,300,000 :3 J Vp T GE D W. RICE Chief, Specifications and Estimates q' Section 11. Preliminary Benefit/Cost Evaluation. Average annual flood damages within the flood hazard area are estimated to be about $185,000. The most feasible alternative would provide 100-year frequency flood protection and reduce these damages to about $18,000, yielding average annual inundation reduction benefits of about $167,000. Based on a 100-year period of economic analysis and an interest rate of 7-3/8 percent, table 2 summarizes annual benefits and costs for the most feasible alternative under existing condi- tions. Comparison of annual benefits and costs yields a benefit-to-cost ratio of 1.7 to 1. A determination of future benefits was not undertaken in this reconnaissance study because the benefit-to-cost ratio under existing conditions was above unity. An analysis of future benefits may result in an increase in the benefit-to-cost ratio. The Lazy C has an incremental benefit-to-coat ratio of 2.3 to 1 and the downstream levee system has a ratio of 1.4 to 1. 4 ti f) y 1 r? 1 ; } ¦ NPSSN-PL-RP SUBJECT: Favorable section 205 Reconnaissance Report, Brinnon, Washington ; TABLE 2 54..., 2 a save t>Pn_3Y .. f? a s ',''..'+'?uy w ' R6 yam `.x ?? 1 P . BENEFIT-COST COMPARISON (June 1981 Price Level) Benefits Inundation Reduction Benefit $167,000 Costs Interest and Amortization $96,000 Operation and Maintenance 4,000 Total Annual Cost $100,000 Benefit-to-Coat Ratio 1.7 to 1 12. Detailed Project Report (DPR) Coat Estimates and Schedule. Cost esti- mates and study descriptions necessary for preparing a DPR are provided in inclosure 3. A network scheduling DPR studies is provided in inclosure 4. As is shown on the study network, the DPR has been divided into two study phases. If a feasible project is indicated in Phase I of the DPR, the study will proceed into detailed Phase II work. In order to minimize DPR study costa, other structural flood damage reduction alternatives will not be con- sidered unless information developed during the Phase I DPR study indicates that the alternative considered most feasible in this reconnaissance study is inadequate. However, nonstructural measures will be evaluated. During Phase I, the levee alternative considered in this reconnaissance study will be designed, standard project floodflow estimated, and level of protection determined. This level of protection will provide the basis for the detailed project design to be performed in Phase II of the DPR. 13. Recommendations. In view of the above considerations, I recoamend that the preparstion of a DPR be authorized under authority of Section 205 of the 1948 Flood Control Act, an amended, and that funds in the amount of $369,000 be made available for this work. 4 Incl as 1 `I ater., `? 1 , LEON I Co el, Corps of Engineers and ing; 5 . i IMF. li t rDRT TOWNSEND. WASHINGTON OM3&8 A. M. O'MEARA. DISTRICT 1. CHAIRMAN CARROLL M. MERCER. DISTRICT 3 B. B. BROWN. DISTRICT Z February 27, 1980 Colonel Leon K. Moraski Department of Army Corp of Engineers P.O. Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Re: Dosewallips River - Flood Control Dear Colonel Moraski: Under date of February 20, 1980, you wrote Milton L. Sanstrom, Jefferson County Engineer, regarding possible assistance from the Corp of Engineers in eliminating the flooding problems on the Dosewallips River in the Brinnon vacinity. From your letter we understand that assistance may be available under the Flood Control Act of 1948, as amended. Your letter outlined the criteria which would be used to judge any flood control project and, on page two, outlined a number of provisions requiring local agreement. We are particularly concerned about items c and g, the agreement to maintain and operate the project and to assume full responsibility for all project costs in excess of the federal cost limitation. It is the general consensus of the Board of Commissioners that if a flood control project is authorized the cost in excess of the federal funds authorized and the expense of maintenance should be paid by the property owners who will directly benefit from the project. Our thought is that assurance for payment of those expenses could best be met by a Flood Control District for the area. Such a district is authorized by the Revised Code of Washington, Title 86. Could the guarantees which you require be provided by such a Flood Control District? We request that you proceed with the reconnaissance study, and request that you advise us on the question of whether the guarantees can be =..c I 1 ?' ?'-c.Q I ? 14 Ah ??? B a C Colonel Leon K. Moraski February 27, 1960 page 2 0 met through a Flood Control District or other local entity. Very truly yours, A. M. O'Meara, Chairman Jefferson County Board of Commissioners dlm cc: Mr. Milton L. Sanstrom w R A . JEFFERSON COUNTY COURTHOUSE NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE RORTTDWNSEND, W ASHINGTON r son County Jeffe BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS v57 Port Townsend, Washington 98368 - Phone (20% 385-2016 A.M. O'MEARA, DISTRICT I B.G. BROWN, DISTRICT2 CARROLL M. MERCER, DISTRICT3 '? . PROPOSED DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE WASHINGTON STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT :Z aS DATE: June 14, 1982 ' to PROPONENT: Jefferson County DESCRIPTION: Proposed adoption of the draft Jefferson County Flood Plain Manage- ment Ordinance. r LOCATION: The flood hazard areas of the unincorporated area of Jefferson County as identified by the Flood Insurance Administration This proposal has bee . n determined by the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners w to not have a signifi cant adverse impact upon the environment. An environmental impact statement is n ot required under R.C.W. 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review by Jefferson County as lead agency of a completed environ- mental checklist and other information on file with Jefferson County. q r' BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASHINGTON B.T. Brown, Chairman ° cc: Jefferson County Health Department Jefferson County Building Department Jefferson County Public Works Department Washington State Department of Ecology Vashington State Department of Social and Health Services Washington State Department of Natural Resources ti!ashington State Department of Fisheries " Washington State Department of Game Washington State Enclosures Parks and Recreation Commission d t r a %,AGIKU ^w r'd".Wt T?i 'T4a?5 Maty,? I, a I { I -? ` kl y I I ?- J K?1rJ'd ?A ?t L ::1 ?? ? I >• s r ? y rti ,.; tv", +? r y d Y}? E ?I ?µ I t? [' ? i _ 1 + +tr V °1tl?rl`ap?p"(?iI 3?q ?yy, jx?k 1n <A.ryI j i i 1 F"?24^%V:? I)S' ].. p % ? t? t . 4 tj.? Y 4. °f 9 t N.? `T A J? 1 + e.l' Y I,??1 ? r )I 1 ll !A ? ?<r 1.y 4, ., t .J ENVIRCNME4Tl1L CHECKLIST FORM I. BACKGROUND r. r 1. Name of proponent:' Jefferson County: J? 2. Address and phone number of propongpt: County Courthouse, Port Townsend 3. Date checklist submitted: June 7, 1982 4. Agency reouiring checklist: Jefferson County Planning Department r S. name of-proposal, if applicable: Draft Flood Plain Management Program= 6. Mature and brief description of the proposal (including but not limited ` to its size, general design elements, and other factors that will give an accurate understanding of its scope and. nature):. The proposal is the adoption of the. Jefferson County FZood PZain Mgnage- ment Ordinaizce as 'required by the National F1ood.Insurance Program. d VkNsl 7. Location of proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal, as, well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental impacts, including any other information needed to give an accurate understanding of the environmental setting of the proposal): ?:. The proposal covers all land use activties.within the flood hazard,areas ti of the unincorporated area of Jefferson County as identified by the Flood Insurance Administration. m 8. -Estimated date for completion of the proposal: •July•1982 9. List all permits;:licensesor government approvals required for the proposal (federal, state and local, including rezones): _. Approval by the Federal. Emergency Management Agency. m, 10. Do you have any plans for future additions, .expansion. or further activ- e' ity related to or connected with this,.proposal? Yes. a' If yes, explain: The county's comprehensive plan and community plans, shoreline master program, subdivision ordinance, building code ordinance, and health standards. 11. Do you know.of any plans•by others which may.affect the property covered w; by your proposal? None r If yes. explain: _ . 'y. 12.- Attach any other application,form that. has been completed regarding the p,. 'proposal; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at wr*. ?. some future date, describe the nature of.such•application form: ,l II. ENVIRONMENTAL. IMPACTS i s s,1 r, (Explanations of 'all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) f Yes Mm h No?i } Sri 1. Earth. !rill the proposal, result in: r 4i r' (a)'.Unstable earth conditions or in changes in a c??f z .? t x, geo)ogic substructures? X "1 F1ia, +Lr°; (b) Disruptions. displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil?, ` I (c) Chanqe in topography or ground surface f *r 4 relief features? "IF r (d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or'physical features? c? 771 p / ' 1. 1 Yes hla.ybe No MIA (e) Any increase in wind or {pter erosion of soils, either on or oft` the site? (f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach z $` sands, or changes in siltation, deposition '.,? or erosion which may modify the channel of, a river or strean or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? X "1. Explanation: 2. Air. !sill the proposal result in: " (a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X, (b) The•cheation of rbjectionable odors? X (c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or r temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? X _ Explanation: 4later_ Will the proposal result in: .(a) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either Marine or fresh waters? X X .,(b) Changes in abmrption'rates, drainage pat- terns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? X '?!f§ (c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood . waters? - X (?) Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? X (e) Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, Inclu- ding-but but not limited to temperature, dis-_:, i solved oxygen or turbidity? X - (f) Alteration of the direction or rate of, flow ^ of ground waters? X t 77, ,Change in tho ouantity of ground waters, (g1 + either throuqh eieect additions or•with- f drawals,'or trough interception of an y aquifer by-cuts or excavations? X (h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either r through direct infection, or through the x seepage of leachate, phosphates, detergents, a i"y waterborne virus or bacteria, or other sub- i f_.<5 stances into the ground waters? X ,(i) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise ° 'y3 ' s a available for public water supplies? X_ Lo ?sat rr lry?rlr r ?, Explanation: See Attachment "A n ?4 ..f FYV .A'/ 1 4. Flora. 41111 the proposal result in: e a (a) Change in the diversity of species; or num- bers of any species,of flora (including ?} ?} w trees-shrubs', grass, crops, microflora and X + w aquatic plans)? F 4 fi ? 4 y ,1'':i ri3 + fr ?P Yw p .. r a-A , aa- t fi A t ? f k. Y Yes !faybe to (b) Reduction of the numbers Af any unique, rare+ or endangered species of flora? X c4 (c) Introduction of new specles of flora into an "t area, or in a barrier to the normal replen- ishment•or existing species? x (d) Reduction in acreage'of any agricultural'.- crop? X Explanation: _T1 - 5. Fauna.' Mill the-proposal result in:: ? gt f" (a) Changes in the diversity of species, or num- bers of any species of fauna (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)? X (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of. fauna?., X' (c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area; or result in a'barrier'to,the.migration x; or.movement of fauna?. X (d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife # habitat? X w Explanations Li 6 ''Noise Will the proposal increase existing noise t e5 vets? ?. 1L. ?- '" r Explanation: 7. Liqht and Glare. Will tho proposal produce new X ' light-or-glare? Explanation: ' "8 .:L nd Use. Bill the proposal result in'the alter at inn of the present or planned land use of an ? ?,: :'.t i? j t aT Q=^ , .?wX .- r F Explaration. See Attachment, "A" - 9. Natural Resources. 4N 11 the proy:sal result in:' (a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural Y resources? X (b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural X R a r ,a resource? 'Explanation: See Attachment "A" 10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of aon or the release of hazardous sub- stances (including, but not limited to, oil, 'k pesticides, chemicnls or radiation) in the event W z of an accident or upset conditions? X +ro?nVl ,r•., r..9ti=Jt: '77,h.1+:. ,/. ne ly ? f ?. L- t .rl f v? ? ? t , a l Salty ? ? ? ? ;5F 174? r @, Yes Maybe !Lo r Explanation: It! Population. t•Jill the proposal alter the location, „ distribution, density, or growth rate of the g human population of an area? ? # u': Explanation: See Attachment "A" r. 12. Housing, Will the proposal affect existing housing, 'S or create a demand for additional housing? X &,, oy- h Explanation: See Attachment "A" 13. Trans ortation/Circulation. Will the proposal a result t r. mov X ement? t nx_ (a) .Generation of additional vehicula WE, (b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or. demand for new parking? X - •-(c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? X Inn p (d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? X ;r (e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air X traffic? - - (f) Increase.in,traffic hazards to motor vehicles, - X L yu bicyclists or pedestrians? Explanation: 41 A4. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered " s*+' ' ;governmental services in any of the following :areas: .,r (a) Fire protection? X rl? (b) -Police protection? r X 1 (c) SchoolsT:: Parks or other recreational facilities? X f? (e) t4aintenanc8 of public facilities, including' X roads? - ,., (f) Other governmental services? Explanation: See Attachment "A.. ?k??. IS. Energy Will the proposal result in:. p 4 f'??. fi?? wxr (a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? XE,My?c r (b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or r require the development of new sources of at° energy? - 8__ a , Explanation: r ?h ?? Y????d r k ..:??.y?? .i ?`? r i•,.?+ 5??.? r?h :??7'z tiT_ "?F l£.?ki .,r?L1 ,.?3i. '?'? :???' .; L ? ?iY' `c a 4 ??, V, Ti,,; AIRII!, Tc 7" ? r ,t k ?,? 1 . ,. , k f b?!t ? I35?u1 t A ? ?,?1ht7 ?( ISM ?l! I? a ,..S NOW-- Lg- 4 N 141 . Yes Maybe No i P ` 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities: (a) Power or natural gas? X (b) Communications systems? X 4 (c) IJater? X ?, M - (d) Sewer-or septic tanks? X Pa (e) Storm water drainage? X (f) Solid waste and disposal? X Explanation: See Attachment "A" ' Will the proposal result in the 11. Human Health. . creation of any health hazard or.potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? X Explanation: 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the e' obstruction of any scenic vista or view open-to ,g - the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? X -;Explanation: 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result-An an impact ?. upon the quality or quantity of existing recrea- tional opportunities? _ Explanation: See Attachment "A" rs ?' 20 Archeological/Historical. Hill the proposal result " in an alt eration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? X ,? Explanation: - li III. SIGNATURE d th ab f l i f a t k b h now e ge e ove n orm - es o my at to the I, the undersiqned, state t pu tion is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may with- p draw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon F this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack Yar ` w of full disclosure on ny part. ?y h Proponent: at Rachel Nathanson, Associate Planner rJ°`= Jefferson County Planninn Department ,. 4 ATTACHMENT "A" t ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST DRAFT JEFFERSON COUNTY FLOOD PLAIN 14ANAGEMENT ORDINANCE A'? W:a The proposed flood plain management ordinance prescribes standards that must be A met by any development within the flood hazard areas of the county. The ordinance in itself is not a project proposal; however, as the ordinance does contain standards for existing and future residential, commercial, and industrial development, as well as other land use activities, the following checklist attempts to address the environ- mental concerns of these actions. 1 3. Water (a-c): Changes in the course of water movements, rate of surface water run- -off, alterations to the course or flow of flood waters may result from development a within the flood hazard area. However, conformance with the standards of the 1 ordinance will lessen such changes in water movements and any resultant impacts. 3. k'at r e (e, h): Development within flood hazard areas could cause deterioration of '. surface and ground water due to infiltration of pollutants at the time of a flood. Conformance with the standards of the ordinance will ensure minimal alteration of surface and ground water quality. ' 8. Land Use: Alteration of planned land uses within the flood hazard areas may result from the enforcement of the ordinance. Particular activities that are not consistent with the ordinance will not receive permit approval. 9. Natural Resources' a • An increase in the rate of use of a few natural resources may result from the installation of required flood-proofing to existing and future struc- tures. The increase, however, is not expected to be substantial. v 11. Population: Enforcement of the ordinance may alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population within the flood hazard area. Subdi- visions are prohibited within the flood way and individuals may choose not to-con- struct residences within the flood hazard areas. 12. Housing: Existing housing within flood hazard areas will be affected by the ordinance as they will be required to provide flood proofing measures. i 14. Public Services (f): The requirement of a flood area certificate will create the need for increased services from county representatives. 16. Utilities (c-fl: The alteration of existing utilities may be necessary to ensure ' compliance with the ordinance. The standards of the ordinance are designed to minimize potential damage to utilities during the time of floods. 17. Recreation: The quantity of recreational opportunities may increase as a result of t e?i o rjr finance enforcement. Recreational uses are encouraged within the flood hazard areas as these activities are generally temporary in nature or readily removable at the time of flooding. y ? t j?i t eal.. S f ? , MEMORANDUM ,'.;.. TO: Interested and Affected Parties PROM: Board of County Commissioners DATE: March 17, 1982 SUBJECT: Dosewallips River Flood Control Study m As many of you are aware, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have completed their Dosewallips River. An th l ' e ong initial reconnaissance of the flooding problems a at 7:00 p.m. at' 1982 March 23 d s ;.. , , ay, informational meeting is scheduled for Tues the Brinnon Booster Club building to discuss the corps' findings and the next steps d„ towards completing the project. Agenda items will include: . The corp's reconnaissance report . Local obligations towards completing the proejct . The federal flood insurance program r DG:bk t ? G cc: Jefferson County Public Works Departmen Jefferson County Planning Department h { Washington State Departrent of Transportation r , Washington State Department of Ecology A Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission Y r 5 ? o-4t?"?? ? r ytA?11MIMIM?rYr '?! r E ? 75ti 'G?) ?;'? }?"??Y ? 11 ?'"? ? ? ° deP'S"'i?RJ'dr'Ai;NV, fa,? a 6 ? i r" ? P?i?i(?' ; F?V?N?,?n" ` ?? t '? y?, ? ??' ? ? 'b 1 ?? ?? ? r C t ?. 'i t ? [ r + r y ?, p ? w : ? ? . ? , y t ' ??ri ?<<: ? ? ' ??? + ? s ,? ? r , , ? + ? ?, 41 ? t r{ ? F1F i? w?G yy,?? ?Y r} ? cif ? ,?` ??. i, ??? --?Y ' ? j4i " I, ' .? "A v!? . : . ., r r w " DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY Ake \ r}\/' SEATTLE DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS ;, P.O BOX C•3753 l f .y.?.! y" SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98124 17 MAR 1982 NPSEN-PL-ER I I .. 4 i Dear Recipient: f'71ci1 CGOri i 2w This letter is to initiate the scoping process for the U.S. Army Corps of _ Engineers flood control study on the Dosewallips River near the unincorpo- rated area of Brinnon, Washington. A reconnaissance report describing the i- .;.. flooding problem and potential solutions to this problem was previously pre-, pared under the authority of Section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 and is attached for your information (inclosure 1). A number of concerns have surfaced during the preparation of the reconnais- sance report and are briefly discussed in paragraph 8 of the reconnaissance ° - report. These include potential impacts to the salmonid resource, cultural# mi resources, and esthetic values of the Dosewal lips River. We would like to know, at this time, if you know of other areas of potential impact which we should consider or if your agency has any specific information on the study _ area or the resources of the study area that would assist.us in our planning''. efforts. Additionally, we invite your comments on identification of major issues, development of alternative solutions, and possible mitigation measures. /lltc t' We also request that you designate a person on your staff as the contact for this study to aid us in our coordination efforts. If you have any yl ?, questions, please contact David Masters, Environmental Coordinator, at Y +'r telephone (206) 764-3624 (FTS 399-3624). Sincere1 DWAIN F. HOGAN, PE. a; r Chief, Planning Blanch r I Incl Y r,1?5' As, stated 1 , MAR 19 1992 JEF=FERSON COUNTY ENGINEERS O:=FICE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY '.. SEATTLE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEER WL'_'I'•ia yC Ev- `n P.O. BOX C3755 SEATTLE WASHINGTON9B72d / _ _ Y/ t i NPSEN-PL-RP ? 25 MAR 198 . ,. :. . 1 - ' Mr. Milt Sandstrom Jefferson County Public -"`- i - _ Works Director '-_ -- Courthouse _ _----- ""`?- V J- Port Townsend, Washington 98368 Dear Mr. Sandstrom: This letter confirms a telephone discussion on 6 March 1981 between you and Mr. Forest Brooks of my office concerning a reconnaissance study on the Dosewallips River flooding problem in the vicinity of Brinnon. - .y ? A. M. O'Meara, Chairman of Jefferson County Board of Commissioners, by . letter dated 27 February 1980, requested the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to ° u.? proceed with a reconnaissance study for the "Brinnon vicinity." Mr. Knutson of this office replied, by letter dated 13 March 1980, that the Corps would v schedule a study for the Brinnon area" for early 1981. During meetings with local residents last month, some questions were raised over the exact area Jefferson County wished the Corps to include in the study. Based on the 6 March 1981 discussions with you, we understand that Jefferson County intended to include both the Lazy C and Brinnon Flats in the study request and would provide the items of local cooperation for each area, if necessary. I would appreciate it if you would confirm this understanding by letter. We would also appreciate any further information you believe could assist us in analyzing the flooding problems of Brinnon. Mr. Brooks will be visiting the - area in the next month or two and will contact you ahead of time so that you can accompany him if you wish. t `.5..{ Thank you for your assistance in this matter. If you have further ques- tions, please con! ac Brooke at the address above or by telephone 1?a ` - (206) 764-3621.-- CF, Sincerely, S R ?` ' ? AR 2 6 1961. ? r M 3Epp6RSON OFF CE LEON ENGINE6 Co el, Corps of Engineers strict Gnpincer N cMINE m ? F, 7, ? ? ix t BFI, ' r. } f h V, / yy uu? , S P 1r y? ?1 ? C t ? - ? b?td?'w r yh R y, •w . 'k'' NPSEN-PL-RP Mr. Michael P. Shay 1126 Maraden Road Port Angeles, Washington 98362 ?Jf CO. F.ft!2itli?f:H r CO?lS7....._. --------I. _ EIll;IFliicR 26 MAR 79a1, ro;.ll:;lssiriar-_k:s ? 11 PRE 9 Dear Mr. Shay: This is in reply to your letter of 14 January 1981 regarding streambank erosion and flooding on the Dosewallips River at the Lazy C. On 19 February 1981, Messrs. Bill McKinley and Forest Brooks of this office visited the Lazy C development and met with Messrs. Leroy Wright, Lyle Tinker, and Otto Gregorie. They inspected the flooding and erosion problems and discussed applicable authorities under which the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers could be involved. These authorities include: Section 14 of the 1946 Flood Control Act, Section 208 of the 1954 Flood Control Act, Sec- tion 55 of the 1974 Water Resources Development Act, and Section 205 of the 1948 Flood Control Act, as amended. Corps personnel have previously, in November 1978 and January 1980, investi- gated this problem under our Section 14 emergency authority and determined the area did not qualify since no public facilities were involved. Although erosion is continuing on the left bank of the Dosewallips River, it is affecting only private land. However, if erosion continues, the county road - (Appaloosa Drive) and the community water supply line could be threatened in some future flood. Only if the county road were in imminent danger of failure could the Corps of Engineers consider remedial measures under r Section 14 authority following a specific request from Jefferson County. Section 208 of the 1954 Flood Control Act provides for removal of accumu- lated snags and other debris and for channel clearing and straightening for flood control. Each project must constitute a complete solution to the problem involved. All revetment for erosion protection is a non-Federal it cost. Corps of Engineers' assistance is not warranted under this authority because it would not provide a complete solution to the problem. If you and your neighbors should decide to resolve the problem yourselves, 7 the Corps of Engineers has authority, under Section 55 of the Water t i. Resources Development Act of 1974, to provide technical and engineering 1 CEIVED RE MAR 2 7 1981. TY JEFFERSON COUN ENGINEERS OFFICE c a1 ` ! V i ?g5, ? {?'(5 ?'? , ? +? i? a ?? v? ,;k: nmd-• p . 7 ?,. .t ?,!! ?YS ?'T^ I m,??d ?,G. f '•u; ?, ,? , ` Y'1, ? r r??'(?'f° r i ??? ' ?' 't' ?13? w's?? ? ?a u ?%' " ? , . r . ! r ,• , . ? + w ?? T? ? + I 1 l 1 ?t1M 1, r. i , f a i ? 1 7 r; deb Mr. Michael P. Shay assistance to non-Federal public interests in developing structural and nonstructural means of preventing damages caused by shore and streambank erosion. This assistance can include review of the specific problems, advice on potential methods to prevent erosion, and review of plans and t ) - - specifications, We cannot conduct surveys of the problem area, prepare plans and specifications, nor fund or supervise construction. We would be able, within funding constraints, to assist Jefferson County in regards to erosion problems at Lazy C if we receive a specific request from Jefferson 1 - ' County. z r, { c on 27 February 1980, Jefferson County had requested the Corps of Engineers to conduct a reconnaissance study under the Section 205 authority covering flooding problems in the Brinnon vicinity. The Corps of Engineers responded r.#.e. by letter. dated 13 March 1980 that such a study would be scheduled for early Ms+'' 1981. Subsequent to the 19 February 1981 meeting, Mr. Brooks discussed the Lazy C problem with Mr. Milton Sandstrom, Jefferson County Director of Pub- lic Works. Mr. Sandstrom indicated the county intended the Corps to examine both the Lazy C and the Brinnon Flats problems in the same study. We will be able to perform the reconnaissance study covering both the areas this y spring. If the reconnaissance study identifies potentially feasible measures, then we would conduct more detailed studies and produce a detailed - project report which would include an environmental assessment/environmental t impact statement. If a flood damage reduction project were recommended, the - t earliest construction could start would be during 1984. I do not know of any specific programs other agencies could apply to this ' - problem. However, from past experience, you may be able to obtain help on s erosion prevention from the U.S. Soil Conservation Service. The District , Conservationist for Jefferson County, Kerry W. Perkins, is located at: Room 203, 206 South Lincoln Street, Port Angeles, Washington 98362, tele- phone (206) 457-5091. If you have further questions, please contact me at telephone (206) 764-3690 or Mr. Walt Farrar, Chief, Regional Planning Section, at telephone (206) 764-3604. {r Sincerely, LEON K. MORASKI CoWsl Corps d Engineers OWA Engineer Copy Funished: (See next page) 2 y? '? p r f rt 4 1 't n e 1 3 J i } Ir p?r5 S ?1? Ytr ) r ?l ? 4 1 his ?3P ' t • NPSEN-PL-RP ? Mr. Michael P. Shay Y. Copy Furnished: , Mr. Lyle M. Tinker ' Post Office Box 127 c Brinnon, Washington 98320 M f Mr. Leroy D. Wright syyr 5103 Rehklau Road Southeast Olympia, Washington 98503 u r U "s Mr. Milt Sandstrom Jefferson County Public .q Works Director Courthouse Port Townsend, Washington 98368 Lt. General William R. Peers (Ret.) 120 McAllister Avenue Kentfield, California 94904 Mr. Otto Gregorie - c/o Mr. Lyle M. Tinker' Post Office Box 127 Brinnon, Washington 98320 ?v Mr. Kerry W. Perkins Soil conservation Service 206 South Lincoln Street, Room 203 Port Angeles, Washington 98362 ;w 3 'jp iw 71 7 F7, C r yt 1 1 Cry F ?,?•. JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 7 Y I(t Carrot M. Mercer B.G. Brown A.M. O'Meara /,/,EMBER BER V. :•• ?y " l •, CHAIRMAN MEM ' f?•.TR., }F -, Works bli f P " r 1 c u o Jefferson County Department COURTHOUSE `?"`?•??.? ^ T - ' PORT TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON 98368 Milton L. Sanstrom, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS 7 Department of the Army Colonel Leon R. Moraski Seattle District, Corps of Engineers P. 0. Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Dear Colonel Moraski: Re: This letter is to confirm the telephone conversation in which the term "Brinnon vicinity" was clarified. The "Brinnon vicinity" is intended to mean the flood plain occupied by the Brinnon community including the Lazy C development imme t and adjacent to Brinnon. Your study and proposed control •of' dTately ups ream the Dosewallips River should be extensive enough to cover these two areas. ~i The usual handling of flood waters on the Puget Sound rivers. is to build dikes, I have concerns for the con- f the two i yY' . on o dredge the channel,or a combinat r bed that is continually silting due to the steep i ve tinuing maintenance on a r tream gradient and the relatively soft sedimentary rocks of the Olympic f the l ups opes o Peninsula that underlie the main river stem. The precipitous s dimentation of the river bed. tributary streams add to the erosion and se I would like to have you consider the possibility of a solution that would be lti-use facility. Specifically, the long tern and provide Jefferson County a mu all dam with powerhouse and fish ladders sized to a 10 year f a sm construction o average river flow. The Dosewallips River water shed is roughly 25 miles east miles) with elevations from sea to west and 5 miles north to south (125 square The average annual precipitation for Brinnon 000 feet 7 l ,., . , y level to approximate as 74.81 inches. A dam that provides 100 feet et) is reported 80 f : e (elevation of head with 690 c.f.s of water with a plant efficiency factor of 50% will Storage KIJH 0 . 1 per annually generate about $550,000 electric energy at 03. C would require resettling the residents L aze for the natural dam site below the The present erosion in the Lazy C is going to continue flooded out . that were and require some of them to move anyway. In summary, I am opposed to spending the public's tax dollars to benefit, tempor- that can provide much needed arily, a few private citizens. A multi-use plan r 1; Ah Ail, energy, flood control, fishery resources, and recreate should be considered. The initial construction will provide jobs to the area now having a slump in the logging industry. The water shed is an unending source for the production of energy, and the revenues from the sale of electric power will amortize the cost. The reservoir will supplement the already existing state park at Brinnon for recreation and protect it from further flood damage. The multi-use concept fits well with National goals for energy sufficiency and is cost effective as compared with traditional diking and dredging. Yours truly i t. L. Sanstrom, P.E. ' Director of Public Works NLS:ejs cc: File Board of County Commissioners -'- & reez, t i J u L. I V ? ? ff 11 . ffh4RhM- f .? fJ 7 N ? ? ? ,4Xy7d< ?:, , a w r DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY .?? SEATTLE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS 4 P.O. 13OX C-3755 14? SEATTLE. WASH IN GTON 98124 NPSEN-PL-RP copy = 1 AS I C I-•1 - r I. /?,p, (IGY/?> JAN 2 2 1982 Milt Sandstrom, Director --' ? ------ I - - Jefferson County Public Works I '•I _ _ I Jefferson County Courthouse > Port Townsend Washington 98368 1 •-°------- °- Dear Mr. Sandstrom: . -...'lcy . o , We are initiating detailed studies for flood protection, on the Dosewallips River in the vicinity of Brinnon, Washington, under authority of Section 205 of the 1948 Flood Control Act, as amended. A copy of our Section 205 recon- naissance report, completed in July 1981, has been included for your infor- mation (Inclosure 1). Many flood damage reduction alternatives were identified during the reconnaissance study. Based on office estimates, a levee to protect the Lary C development, Brinnon Plate, and the state park was found to be economically justified. This is a preliminary finding and subject to change, based upon public input and detailed engineering, econo- mic, and environmental studies. The detailed project report is scheduled to be completed in 1984. We will be in contact with you as our study progresses and as additional information becomes available. Should you have any questions or comments, please write to D.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, Post Office Box C-3755, Seattle, Washington 98124, or call Ms. Linda Smith, Study Manager, at telephone (206) 764-3620. This same correspondence has been sent to those listed in Inclosure 2. Sincerely, 2 Intl i NORMAN C. HINTZ As stated Colonel, Corps of Engineers District Engineer RECEIVED JAN 2 51982 JEFFERSON COUNTY ENGINEERS OFFICE "eNLi i r: fPc: i sus .- ?6 o M l - I WO a „ Mf W??a4 r w . f 1 ° ? r 4. W 1 t f ?f h ? 1 II t I '. ? I f { ! S 5 1 5? 7 .s w• i..- M 4 NPSEN-DB-CP ?A DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY r SEATTLE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS 1 P.O. BOX C-3755 SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98124 ?v A reusT• e;IC?1?r.Ee ROAD Sll?'T Mr. J. P. (Pat) Martin ?---- ?- Post Office Box 81184 1$ 5700 Sixth Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98104 LLE?/ . Dear Mr. Martin: This is in regards to a request for a meeting to discuss erosion and flood- ing problems along the Duckabush River at Olympic View Tract. This request came via the Olympia office of Congressman Don Bonker which had received a petition (about 70 signatures) requesting a meeting. On 31 March 1982, a field inves tigation was made with,the following ej individuals: ' ; Art Martin Aid to Congressman Bonker J. P. (Pat) Martin Property Owner ;. J. Richard Rint Jefferson County PDD No. 1 I Milt Sandstrom Jefferson County Engineer Peter Friedman Jefferson County Planning Department Grant Fiscus Washington Department of Fisheries _ I Lester Soule Corps of Engineers investigation showed that the Duckabush River is actively eroding the right bank and threatening a private residence and the PUD's waterline standpipe (see sketch, inclosure 1). The waterline is not active at this time and will not be for a few (3 to 5) years (present worth is $18,000). The river- bank is protected from upstream of the standpipe to below the private resi- dence. This work was accomplished exclusively by the property owner except for around the standpipe which was placed recently,by the PUD. The concern is that the river will continue to erode the unprotected bank, thus bypass- ing the present protection, and also scour some of the protected bank. Dur- ing high flows this point receives the full force of the river and should it go, the residence downstream will be in jeopardy from erosion and flooding. Compounding the erosion problem is the development of a gravel bar which is directing the river into the unprotected right bank. This gravel bar is creating the riffle which is very beneficial to the fish habitat along this reach of the river. .'.3: } j ?' .a(a ?+ ue , t4 df Fp?,?m¢d ,a lva x Q, a I ,, p..?+6 1%d .eel ^,as x ? .R?'?SNI?rF. b/?.i t s i 4mry ?°.Tip?rwyv?,t .,.wramo ? yyy"""wvv!!l?,,';;;P{{{ ?4 n , 4n'4,gi I, L?q a , , I 3 1 J . s 5 r k ' n1 ? / ? h loll, I 1 NPSI''N-DB-CP Mr. .1. P. Ono Martin r The best solution is to return the eroded bank back to its preerosi.on loc.,- tion and ri ra it , p p s slope. This would force the river into the gravel bar and ultimately provide a smoother alinement. Some overlapping of existing rock would be required. Part of thi s rock could be salvaged and reuned. In order to be a permanent solution, the bank should be protected upstream to the existing old rock, a distance of about 300 feet . The necessary fill material could be borrowed from the gravel bar immediatel downst th - y ream and on e same bank as your cabin. Since the riffle has developed over many years, the realined bank may not cause much adverse eff ects to the riffle. - `' c -? The exact scope of work, such as repair limits, amounts to encroachment into the stream d an protection design can be worked out with the Depnrtment of Fisheries Cl . ose monitoring of the effects will be required. The down- stream opposite bank i s very susceptible to erosion and must be closely watched. The riffle i i s mportant and should be preserved if at all possible. A permanent solution would be the best altern ti a ve. A piecemeal solution would require both additional disruption of th a e stre m and additional cost in equipment, manpower, and review. '1 The U.S. Arniy Corps of Engineers has no emergency authority available to assist in correcting the problem. If you decide to undertake erosion pre- ' vention measures, we can offer general technical assistance in the form of r advice on permit requirements, data or information we have on file, and o technical review of your proposed plan. If you have any further questions or wish clnrification of any of the above items, please contact Mr. Lester ?.: Soule at telephone (206) 764-3699. Sincerely, I Intl An stated Colonil, Ccrps of Engineers Copy furnished; District Engineer (see next page) i m? •? '? hY a ? ply a1 ,` 11,A m ..? ,1 yrl : x fi??jth9 ?( 'Y?^V7?Ml? h? N{ ?q? J L r 1 AI ?y ar ? 1 ? 1 rI )? i ?? 1 k r 'fi' P I ? r 1 { 4 5 ? t r j r.. ti iL ' NPSEN-DB-CP 1. Mr. J. P. (Pat) Martin Copy furnished w/incl: Honorable Don Booker Representative in Congress Federal Building, Room 207 Olympia, Washington 98501 Mr. Peter Friedman t _ Jefferson County Planning Department County Courthouse . Port Townsend, Washington 98368 Mr. Milt Sandstrom, 6 • • Jefferson County Engineer t". `._ County Courthouse _ Port Townsend, Washington 98368 is Hr. J. Richard Rint RE - Jefferson County PDD District No. 1 CEIVED ,.,.' ' ' County Courthouse - c 1 Port Townsend, Washington 98368 MAY 11 1982 2rt g Mr. Grant Fiscus JEFFERSON COUNTY ,e Washington Department of Fisheries ENGINEERS OFFICE General Administration Building, Room 115 Olympia, Washington 98504 3 U. S. APMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, SEATTLE PROJECT L?rnclcA DCCS tt ?1V Ek SUBJECT Ba,r .E 6?es:nn (? /VL a..?:. Q.o rr-? RYJ„5.-J? DATE z. CHECKED PART PACE OF Y fe?frer !I i . N f ? Q 1 ? J ?t a J ? Q '- ' -. can+•n iv* I Dr.r ?.rro ?.v ?. i?rrvi cn,u 0 f I I R/ FFLE ?Pprc o"t - '?-?? s+a,.d?. P< ?? N° T T o ?A y p ?F JN?S r?T'",?r' a +l v } r i;l k ? ,'?1 y 1 ? 4 I 1 1 4 1 1 ? f A f;. l? SCF?LG 1 .F r ? ray -(1 I ? b Yh'??FI J ! 1 i s\ i t n S ' M 11?IY•VRS0N GOUNIY CUUICHIOUSI'. NAI IUNIIL IIISI UIIIC SITI'. I-I I I O W NSLNII, WASHING ION TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Gary Rowe ?Q Construction Engineer I? DATE: January 11, 1982 SUBJECT: Flood Control Milton L. Son,Irom, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS As is usual for this time of year, the county is faced with river washouts, breaks in dikes, debris removal, etc. With funds diminishing each year, I feel that setting up a fund to pay the costs for flood control would be appropriate. R.C.W. 86.12 FLOOD CONTROL BY COUNTIES provides for a river improvement fund. The county may levy a tax to pay for improvements not to exceed 25 cents per thousand of assessed value. The Road Fund is limited to making repairs that are considered maintenance on roads. With this fund, we would be able to make further repairs when needed. If work is extensive and only a select group of property owners would benefit then a flood control district or diking district would be more appropriate. Thank you for your consideration. cc: File Jefferson County Department of Public Works COURTHOUSE PORT TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON 98768 r t" A I-id 6?'`?.-.? l?"' }T 'y? P,..ie ..ni". ?_J•'`i?i? _. '-Ya u'0? ...e?.. 4t?'3. 'hMatt6tiiY,Md.:-, ??_-_ M „@?, j Flood Control b .Counties Y 86.12.037 p '• as 'river im rovement fund.'. There is hereby created to ' ';Statutes, or to any'general law now or hereafter enacted ': t• ' ? .. r•' each such river improvement fund an account to be ' governing eminent domain proceedings by counties. The , .{ known as the, flood control maintenance account.' title so acquired by the county shall be the fee simple ti. ' [1973 1st ex.s. c 195 § 129; 1941 c 204 § 8; 1907 c 66 § tie or such lesser,estate as shall be designated in the de- r " 1; Rem. Supp. 1941 § 9625. FORMER PART OF SECTION:. 1907 c 66 § 4, now codified as RCW : cree of appropriation. The awards in and costs of such proceedings shall be payable out of the river im rove• a ae , 86.12.033.] . p ment fund. [1941 c 204 § 10; 1907 c 66 § 3; Rem. Supp. _ J - Severabllity-Effective dates and termination dates-Comtrua tioa-1973 tat exa, a 19S: See notes following RCW 84.52.043. 1941 § 9627.] • ' ' •? -! it- Limitation on levies: State Constitution Ad 7 ¢ 2 (Amendments 55 and 59); chapter 84.52 RCW. Reviser s note: sections 921 to 926, inclusive, of Remington's Re. viscd Statutes' (except for section 923) are codified as RCW 8,20.010 °i ~ - through 8.20.080. Section 923 was repeated by 1935 c 115 § I but compare the first paragraph of RCW 8.28.010 relating to the same ` s ' 86.12.020 Authority to make Improvements- C subject matter as the repealed section. t ondemnation. Said fund shall be expended for the pur- poses in this chapter provided An fo count th . y y, r e con trot of waters subject to flood conditions from streams 86.12.033 -Expenses to be paid out of river Improve- ment fuhd All - b i tidal or other bodies of water affecting such county, may;} i id id . expenses to e ncurred in accomplishing the objects authorized by this act shall; be paid out of _ r 7 ns e or outs e the boundaries of such county, ;con ! struct, operate and-maintain dams an&finpounding;ba said river improvement fund and which fund shall be p , stns and dlkes,,l4vees, revetrtieni bulkheads rip lap or§ - used for no other than the p i purpose pur purposes cantem- other: rotechon; FI p may temovC,bare, logs„snags and.de b ' plated by this chapter. [1907 c 66,§ 4; RRS § 9628. ' Formerly RCW 86 12 010 art] ?^ as from. and clgaf deepen widen ptraightcn,,change relOCatC 0[ Ot}IerN'ISC„improve it nd.,maintaIn. S•tream4 . . , p •• . `` , channels, main or overflow;; may: acquireany, real 6i 86.12.034 County entitled *to abandoned channels, l t b d persona proper y or. rights and interest therein for the e s, and banks. Whenever a county of this state, acting prosecution of such works or to preserve any flood plain pursuant to RCW 86.12.010 through 86.12.033, shall - or regular or intermittent stream channels from any in- make an improvement in connection with the course, k I terference, to,the free or natural flow of flood or storm channel or flow of a navigable river thereby causing it !I, L water; and may construct, operate and maintain any and , to abandon.its existing channel, bed, bank, or.banks for std all other works, structures and improvements necessary the entire distance covered by said improvement, or for for. such control; and for any such purpose may pur- any part or portion thereof, or by said improvement shall chase, condemn or otherwise acquire land,. property or rights, including. beds of nonnavigable waters and state, prevent a river from resuming at a future time an, an- cleat or, abandoned channel or bed or shall construct ay,, county and school. lands and property -and may damage any land or other property for any. such. purpose, and , improvements intended so to do, all the right, title and interest of the state of Washington in and to said aban- may condemn land and other property .end rights and interests therein and damage the same; for any other . ; doned channel or channels, bed or beds, bank or banks, ; up to and including the line of ordinary high water shall public use arter.just. compensation having. been first d id i , be and the same is hereby given, granted and conveyed t 'r ma e or pa nto court for the owner in the manner prescribed in this chapter. The purposes in this chapter to the county making such improvement: Provided, how. _ specified are hereby declared, to be county purposes. ever, That any such gift, grant or conveyance shall be subject to any right easement or interest her t f y [1970.czs. c 30 § 10; 1941 c 204 § 9; 1935 c 162 § I; 1919 c 109 § 1; 1907 c 66 § 2; Rem. Supp. 1941 § , e o ore given, granted or conveyed to any agency of the state. 1963 k r,. f 9626.]' [ c 90 § 1.] t b Sevenb111ty-1970 ixo. c 70: RCW 36.89.911: Authority and power of counties are supplemental. RCtV36.89.062• IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY `V Storm water central faeilide; county powers and authority: Chapter 36 89 RCW t• s t . . 86 12 030 E i ' 86.12.037 Liability of county or.counties to others. No action shall be bro ht i i d i ? eft . . m nent domein, how exercised, The tak• ug .or ma nta ne aga nst any ing and damaging of land, property or rights therein or thereto b i id h i county alone or when acting jointly with any other county under an law its o th i ff y any county, e t er ns e or outside of such . y , r e r agents, o icers or l f county, for flood control purposes of the county is h b emp oyees, or any noncontractual acts or omissions of h 1 ere y declared to be for a public use. Such eminent suc county of counties, its or their agents, officers or ^ r AMMA domain proceedings shall be in the name of the county, employees, relating to the improvement, protection, reg. 6 w shall be had in the county where the property is situated, ulation and control for, flood prevention and navigation v and may unite in a single action proceedings to condemn purposes of any river or its tributaries and the beds a + g for county use property held by separate owners, the jury to ret rn se a t di f h , banks and waters thereof: Provided, That nothing con i d i u p ra e ver cts or t e several lots, tracts tw ne n this section shall apply to or affect any action h or parcels of land, or Interest theroin, so taken or dam- aged The roc edi f now pending or begun prior to the passage of this sec } 1 . p e ngs may con orm to the provisions of •sections 921 to 926 inclusive of Remington's Revised lion, [1921-c 185 § 1; RRS § 9663. Formerly RCW 87 12 180 ] , , ?w . . . It rrltte 86 RCW (1979 Ed,}-p 291 w `? 4 1 i • rs 1 u( ? $kGtl ` Mai' 7,7 , 1 { rh I , t rrk y J 1 ? . tl IJ,v 4 r l: "` 1 .. C • 9 h ;y, I I ' ( _ .? an I i ? T V I? - q l I M i .14 ,, /t W Ca ..:^'4 ox,: `hTM;i R t '? r< I 3 sx r's,' r. .sFrn. re?s .r o22 ritle 86 RCW: Flood Control t F1 r' zP3 268; RRS § 9663E-208.: Formeily RCW 86.08.830, 86.09.900 Other statutes preserved. Nothing In ihG } ' S part.) chapter contained shale be construed as affecllpg or Dissolution ofdistricesr Chapter 53.48 RCW. any wise limiting the powers of counties,'' cities; !owns, x:41 diking districts, drainage districts, or other municipal or t F i - 86.09.625 Dissolution of districts-When com- public agencies in the manner authorized by law,tocon- 8§ plate. When the obligations have been fully paid, all struct and maintain dikes, levees, embankments or olho [ moneys in any of the funds of the district and all collec- structures and works, or to open, deepen ,'straightcn ia! tions of unpaid district assessments shall be transferred otherwise enlarge natural water courses;, waterways a6d to the state reclamation revolving fund as partial reim- other channels, for the purpose of protecting such:a• RS [ r t n bursement for moneys expended and services rendered ganizations from overflow. 11937 c 12 § 210011 by the state department of conservation for and in behalf 9663E-210.j district, and there ate shal file aistatement of the folio ¢o mentdoftthe districts bli! 86.09.910 Chapter supplemental to other acu Naitr t ''j ,',. q s? s gations for record in the county auditor's office in each ing in this chapter contained shall he held or wnetrua]';y county in which any lanais In the district were situated as in any manner abridging, enlarging' or'modifyinil and thereafter the dissolution of said district shall be statute now or hereafter existing relating. to the ergad• complete and its corporate existence ended. [1937 c 72 § zation, operation and dissolution of flood control tlo7. v " 209; RRS § 9663E-209. Formerly RCW 86.08.830, tricts. This chapter is intended as an mdependuji " 4 i } part.] chapter providing for a separate and an addlllonal is w a thority from and to any other authority now existing fq; ' it Reclamation revolving fund abolished, moneys transferred to reels- the organization, operation and dissolution of flpodaxt.) metion revolving account; RCW 47 79336-43.79.334.. t " a trot districts, as provided In this chapter'[1937 572?7t i„ r 86.09.627 Disincorporation of district located in 211; RRS § 9663E-211 j li a rv ?{ 1 I 'i s+ tq& class A or AA county and inactive for rive years. Sec : + 2 S `"'fj`1 1 chapter 57.90 RCW. 86.69.920 ; Chapter liberally construed, the pjprGlaNl? ,1 dz of this chapter and all proceedings thereunder shall b{'t t? r 3 86.09.700 Revision of district=Petition. A board liberally construed with'a view to effect ,their +objny3t{+1} It q .rya " may amend the district comprehensive plan of flood [1937 c 72 § 212; RRS § 9ti63E 212 ] ',?N to? control, alter, reduce or enlarge the district system of 86.09.930 Severability-1937 c 72; If any oat{ h Y I i A improvement, within or without the district, and change or provision of this chapter shall be'ad3udgal {o lqT, ' 7 • the district boundaries so as to include land likely to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall tttl{' j' benefited by said amendment, alteration, reduction or affect the validity of the chapter as a whole or any uo J. enlargement by filing n petition to that effect with the l ianhf'ysr? Yx[?h director. [1965 c 26 § 14.] Lion, provision or part thereof not adjudged to be or unconstitutional [1937 c 72 '§ 213, RRSJ:) ia, I 2 .§ ;.ell i?t } 86.09.703 Revision of district-Establishment of 9663E 213.1 revised district-Review of benefits-Liability of u ....... bit T 'f ^ original district-Segregation of funds. If funds are Chapter 86.12 r 1fe Jt)l?v`? h^ available the director shall, at the expense of his depart-' ment, refer the petition to the supervisor for a prelimi- FLOOD CONTROL BY COUNTIES vy I I nary investigation as to the feasibility of the objects Sections I.;;ll sought by the petition. If the investigation discloses that I the matter petitioned for is feasible, conducive to the COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL ..s 66.12.010 County lax for river improvement, fund-•fL+t public welfare, consistent with a.'comprehensive plan of control maintenance account. ` development and in the best interest of the district and 66.12.020 Authority to make improvomenu-•Coademarti, 1 will promote the purposes for which the district was or- 86.12.030 Eminent domain, how exercised.ry ganized, the director shall so rind; approve the petition, 66.12,033 Expenses to be paid out of river Improvemeol foal [ enter an order in his records declaring the establishment 66.12.034 County entitled to abandoned dnnnch Euh W banks. of the new boundaries as petitioned for. or as modified by him, and file a certified ropy of the order with each IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY } county auditor, without filing fee, and with the board, 66,12.037 Liability ofcounty orcounties toothers. The board shall forthwith cause a review of the clas- ly; ' 0 sirications and ratio of benefits, in the same manner and COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL + with the same effect as for the determination of such,, I t a matters in the first instance, ! 86.12.010. Cpunty tax for river: Improlty" , l c The lands in the original district shall remain bound fund-Flood control maintenance account The casryri r for the whole of the original unpaid assessment thereon • commissioners of any county.may,annually;levy a ta i• t for the payment of any outstanding warrants or bonds to beginning; with the year. 1907,, in such amount is, q I be paid by such assessments. Until the assessments are 'their judgment they may.deem neccssaryor•tdvlstblr 'J r I ? § collected and all indebtedness of the original district f but not to exceed, twenty-rive cents per thouund dofhll I I' q 1 C paid, separate funds shall be maintained for the original of assessed. value upon all taxable. property" lt:ticis II' tQ district and the revised district, 11963 c 26 § 15,1 ` counts, for the purpose of creating a fund to be knots ,l+y1 r wD"a, i. I v rl IT!de 86 DCW (1919 Ed.)-Is UI 17? i NIA [V?) {t it 1 t, ?+?.. Pep `1 • ' ?i 1 . +uFmwi ut i, `Yy Ww•« ",? "q ?' :ln,rs °S ..,i,:.y,v B - 1' " t { t , M tsfP ' , r 4 Fr q? F?. r n . lc a, ?o v .iq OLYMPIC CANAL MAINTENANCE CORPORATION M P.D. Box 11 e, COUNTY ENGINEER Brinnon, WA 98320 ASST CO ENGINEER EONST• ENGIN ER OFHCE ENGINEER` YRO June 24, 1981 ADISUP'T ERS '- Jefferson County Commissioners Jefferson, County Court House, Port Townsend, WA rho _ .. FILE /„rpic a De r Sirs: ! F/eo fo„? I,wish to call your attention to the condition of the river erosion near the :PUD well, located at the Olympic Canal Tracts on the Duckabush River. . we feel that it is imperative that the river be rip-rapped this summer.. If it-is`,not done, the river will change course and wipe out one-half mile of •county road during the next high water. ,.? We feel. it is the responsibility of the county top_7zathe roads in this area, and ask that you take action to prevent any further damage to this area. S Sincerely, ?J . NORMAN L. NSF! President i MM. vjb ' . r cc: Jefferson County Engineers Jefferson County Court House RECEIVED JUN 2'6 1981. JEFFERSON COUNTY ENGINEERS OFFICE P1 r 6- JOHN SPELLMAN d? Governor IAn cN NA',1 IPa.IA V,1 t I-EPAI:IMFNI Of F 'IFR INI SFR%/)Cf '221) E AI-6111%11 • tJlrl J .i, ll,i>I tif. ?i ??l ?i ?1 ???Ji June 15, 1981 M E M O R A N D U M - J S I COUNTY ENGINEER Diu AS.'i CO ENGINEER CONST• ENGINEER __- OF CE ENGINEER C- ROAD SUPT oil-. FILE ?L!'J??H?izv? ALL LOCAL EMERGENCY SERVICES DIRECTORS, COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL OFFICERS (COUNTY ENGINEERS), MUNICIPAL OFFICIALS, STATE STAFF HUGH H. FOWLER, DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AVAILABILITY OF SANDBAGS FROM THE U.S. CORPS OF ENGINEERS FOR FLOODFIGHTING The attached letter and memorandum were recently received from the Seattle District, Corps of Engineers. The memorandum establishes Corps of Engineers policy that it is the responsibility of local and state govern- ments to stockpile sandbags to be used for floodfighting. Because the state of Washington is not able to stockpile or supply sandbags for floodfighting, the responsibility for obtaining and storing adequate supplies of sandbags rests with local governments. Local officials should pay particular attention to the policy spelled out in the second paragraph of the Corps of Engineers memorandum regarding replacement and return of unused sandbags, Also attached for your use is a listing of sandbag supply companies. O ? HHF:hh Attachment V VQ J? GB OVA J?N?, N6ER GOFVFN\O N / 11 r., 9 *a ? `? 1 ! I i # ` y + I 'y ? Y r i I j L V l Y '?,? ` 4r n ? ,? f I` ftx +,,11 ? ??I F '1 () , s WEER W., YN p DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ??V??•I I/,?)?ji„\I SEATTLE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS G3733 SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98124 NPSOP-EM 28 May 1981 Hugh Fowler, Director Department of Emergency Services - 4220 East Martin Way a Olympia, Washington 98504 1• Dear Mr. Fowler: Inclosed is a copy of a letter from the office of the Chief of Engineers, ??;'• Washington, D.C. dated 20 May 1981. This letter reconfirms the policy th at Corps furnished sandbags are to be supplemental to the local stockpiles of sandbags, and that it is the responsibility of the local and stat e agencies to replenish those supplies when they h •. been consumed during an emergency. 5 We hope this letter will be helpful for your future planning. r. Sincerely, 1 Incl A, stated CF w/Incl: William R. Thomas District 1/1 Coordinator Montana State Civil Defense Missoula County Courthouse, Box 557 Missoula, Montana 59801 RECEIVED JUN 2 01981. JEFFERSON COUNTY BRIAN APPLEIIURY Ch, Emergency Management Branch •1i l•d 1 1981 ? Y N !$"_ f h D.-P AR NIE.IT OF 71d7C ARMY /':•.: '< OFFI CE OF T142 CHr:.? CF CNG;rIZERS WASHINGTON. D.C. 203I4 Jf-'ll DAEN-CWO-E rIC SUBJECT: Furnishing Sandbags for Flood F.mer,nency Operations ? Q 61A1.., ool SEE DISTRIBUTION 1. Now that the spring flood season is nearly passed, local interests and State emergency agencies may request that the Corps resupply their stocks of sandbags. In order to provide a uniform Corps response on this issue, it is important that the established policy contained in ER 500-1-1 be followed. The following paragraph outlines the responsibilities of local and State agencies and procedures for providing Corps assistance. 2. Local interests, including State governments, are required to make full use of their own resources before Federal assistance is furnished. Local responsibility includes stockpiling sandbags and other materials needed for immediate emergency response. During flood fighting situations, Corps assistance is supplemental to the maximum efforts of local and State resources. Sandbags may only be provided in actual emergency situations when local supplies have been or will become exhausted. Consumed sandbags will be replaced in kind or paid for by local interests to the extent considered feasible or practicable by the division or district engineer. Unused sahdbags will be returned. This policy is somewhat flexible based upon local governments' ability to budget and finance for emergency flood protection. No specific local expenditure or contribution level has been established to determine when Corps assistance is made available to snnntement local. efforts. This detorminati.on is left to the discretion of the division or district engineer. 3. This policy should be appropriately dlssr-minated within your headquarters and to State mncrgeney organi::aC:Lona as needed. FM '11113 CIItEr OF ENGINEERS: r' Chief, Cnn>;truction-Operation:a Division ! DCrectorato of CLvLI Works 3157:; t f Lr1i0;1 !, . (5)o pago 2) 4n ntl' V V n 'Y \ lF z'_ d (R \' qr 1 n 4? l I t` M '.I 'h 9 0 ? V( L d o ?_ 3 I y 1 t °(? F., "z : #'';r; b «;g x ?tiU u1 n,x?l?ki9Er_ e Ott G'F = YLiYRde'p90.&S+L°F.A wt A4:'. :'ossN -..J83Y IX!'.9.Y ?. 'ifa??b't??'-_,?J'u-.sia?'?- TF? y?d a?? k e SANDBAG SUPPLY COMPANIES y American Bag & Salvage Company .71 7152 1st South Seattle, Washington 98108 fff// (763-2345) r7l?JfS'aEx ti Bemis Company Inc. 55 South Atlantic Seattle, Washington 98134 (623-0660) Fisher Bag Company 1560 1st South Seattle, Washington 98134 (523-1966) Bemis Company Inc. West 2328 Gordon Spokane, Washington 99205 (509-327-7440) Justus Bag Company Inc. East 11205 Trent Spokane, Washington 99202 (509-924-8353) RECEIVED JUN 2 0.1981. JEFFERSON COUNTY ?4 k ;mot r .tiTN4}A^ h"Y ,c nA. aY q hr i)I I f I 4h!1?? ? AVOY P. -77 ? •1 74'p -?o?sq ? 59i1J? ? ?rd?acPc 114 1XL6q?.JL0 t > > ;- - , ,_ ? ? . Lr ? . -3 d . ?,. ? 8 ?+ir ? _ 6? a '.., _ ?1?,?? ??' ? s :? rC k'd -us??' aa.ccc? ?2? ??.. ._ ? .. ?v I t , 11 I ?" i _ i i 1 <? >-1 ,? ?s a `si , i j ?^ '` ,r r:, ? N x'.41 _ ;i`i:?? ) }4.1.,6 Q U :? Q ?wj$ ' r ?,? 'i.' l,?it i'l ;'f/' .? ,? ? ,? 9 d ' ' i '? 9 i 1 t'?' x'>g y e ("'y f r?0 D?.Z? ? X - i '. , yjs? ? y nHAI ? RECEIVED °. ^` Ily rr l.n ? 1 „,? a FEB 2 5 1988 tilAll IlF WA!,I IIN(; I()N ?, w'?' ? i DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTJEFFERSON COUNT! ? ? ? (AVISION (.)F IMFH(:INCY MANAGEMFN1' ENGINEERS OFFICE , 4!!U f. hl.rnln Way, PFII • Olympia, Wd1hmghm')N504-tNfll (2G5) 7.53-5255 • (SCAN) 234-5255 February 23 1988 t '? , , # ( M E M O R A N D U M - To: Distribution 1 # ?? Fr T ? ' om: ??y?",/.?."' erry R. Simmonds, Administrator Community Support Pro ra ? ' I ' 1? - g m Subject: Emergency Activities in Watercourses ' _" I For quite some time there has been a difference of opinion "y?" between local government officials and the resource agency's representatives as to who could do what in watercourses during times of emergency. u The enclosed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is the result of a tremendous amount of cooperation and a sincere desire by all concerned t k t h o wor oget er effectively in emergency situations in the future It was the re u t f y' . q es o many and the consensus of the committee to resolve this problem in a cooperative manner and not to pursue litigation or legislation. a 5? We ask that you use these procedures and most importantly provide us with comments about them. We need to monitor the x, procedures and their impacts, and if necessary, make appropriate . '?L b ` ?34Sv changes. You can give your comments to any of the committee members or send them directly to me. I would like to recognize and personally thank the committee members for their efforts and cooperation: Mr. Jim Williams, Association of Counties; Mr. John Whitener, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission; Ms. Jennifer Scott, Governor's office of Indian Affairs; Ms. Merle McNeil, State Emergency Management Directors; Ms. Chris Drivdahl, Department of Wildlife; Mr. David Mudd, Department of Wildlife; Mr. Paul Dour, Association of County Engineers; Mr. Martin Carty, Association of County Engineers; Mr. Jerry Louthain, Department of Ecology; Mr. Millard Deusen, Department of Fisheries, Mr. Doug Baker Washington Association of Cities; and the Honorable Doug Sayan, Washington State Representative. In addition to the [40U, we have af, F 9 prepared a single sheet (poster) that can be placed in strategic locations for personnel to use. If you need additional posters please contact your local 3` r Emergency Management Director, who have been given a supply. r.) ' If you have any questions, please call me at (206) 753-5255, scan 234-5255, or contact any of the committee members, n 1. I rir rrl Ir .r Ir. . x .p r 4f?rr .•? • Irtvrr;r ?1, v t • If. ? i ...r xx Vi..rr • I.xXI IL. 'IX' N' •1 I+xr x.,; • I x.rl I,rxr lrrrrvr rr, r •114a..x V-k, Nff1? 1 i k f ? 4 f i ) ?r p?pff •, y,"?1i1 "m °"}` i d 5 eCi p'°r 8X °u '' ' ue ;?1 > i st)st rA , & ?1r ? - ? r ? .? . 4 ( ` l fl I 'y r'i , i 1, s ? ? . I r ., "6'Y r'ffl;Art,? 1 h 1E1EN?N? ` R k r MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING These procedures are endorsed by the Washington State Asso- ciation of Counties; Association of Washington Cities; Wash- ington State Departments of Community Develo ment Fi h- a p , s eries, Wildlife and Ecology; Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission; and the Washington State Association of 1 Emergency Management Directors. x e i t BACKGROUND: Counties have authority to work in watercourses for the purpose of preventing floods which may threaten life and property or cause dama e t bli g o pu c or private property under R i u, ev sed Code of Washington (RCW) 36.32.280, RCW 36.32.290 , RCW 36.32.300, and RCW 38.52. The cities have similar authority under RCW 35.32A.060, RCW 35.33.081, RCW 35.33.91 and RCW 38.52. -. The Department of Fisheries and the Department of Wildlife , r . are mandated to preserve, protect, perpetuate and manage the fish and wildlife resources of the stat (RCW 75 x e .08.012 and RCW 77.12.010). These agencies protect fish life and habi- , tat through administration of the Hydraulics Code (RCW 75.20.100) which is applicabl t i i e o c t es and counties. The county and city authorities, the Department of Fisheries and the Department of Wildlife authorities are based on different purposes which result in otential fli E p con cts among all parties involved. ' The signatory agencies, which have certain responsibilities for emergency work in watercourses, have developed these ' procedures which are to be used as an alternative to a leg- i l i s at ve resolution of these differences in the statutes. PURPOSE: ? Th 1 1 ;ti l e following procedures were established through mutual understanding and intent and are to b f ll e o owed by the coun- ties, cities, the Department of Fisheries and the Department ' of Wildlife. a q The intent of these procedures is to mutually cooperate and ( o establish procedures for emergency flood control work when the normal i ' l i, perm t processes cannot reasonably be utilized. Therefore, these procedures are hereby endorsed by the sig- natory parties l? ! ? . r I ? r 1? ,a r? I Fe ._ Y 1 w. it ? } !? S } r4f N 1 y ` 4 1 ? ° 1 'I Il' ? } r 4 y ?? yh ? '1 i y? _r•?r.• ? , ?s r f 4 I r S l _ .i f '? 1 t 1 y ? . f i c 1r ' vt r ? 1 4 rd : , r' 1 { 4t ? ;... r 4 ri, y EMERGENCY FLOOD CONTROL WORK Y Ra ? PROCEDURES k, An emergency will be declared by the county legislative authority or county executive under their authority in RCW a 36.32; or by the city officials under 35.32A.060, 35.33.081, v and 35.33.091, and the county or city will accomplish the necessary work to eliminate or lessen the immediate threat to life and property. The work needed to repair, mitigate, or prevent damage will be accomplished in the shortest time- frame possible. a The definition of emergency, contained in the Hydraulics code, will be used by the counties and cities when declar- ing the emergency. Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 220.110.020(7) defines emergency as, "an immediate threat to life, public or private property, or an immediate threat of uw serious environmental degradation arising from weather or stream flow conditions or other natural conditions." When an emergency, as defined in WAC 220.110.020(7), is declared by the county legislative authority or county exec- utive or city legislative authority, this set of procedures will be utilized as a Hydraulic Project approval only when in the reasonable determination of the county legislative authority or county executive or city legislative authority :., prior notification would have placed the jurisdiction in jeopardy of failing to meet their emergency obligations. Within 30 days of such non-prior notification, a review board of affected parties shall be convened (by the Depart- ment of Community Development, Division of Emergency Manage- ment) to assess the emergency and the actions taken. ? d. In an emergency condition in which the county legislative i authority or county executive or city legislative authority ) determines there is sufficient time to obtain oral approval" before proceeding with the necessary emergency work, the r Department of Fisheries and Department of Wildlife hotline { -' (206-753-6618 or scan 234-6618) will be called to obtain r oral approval before proceeding with the necessary emergency a rc work. f t, t', p An on-site consultation meeting between the local government; and the Department of Fisheries and/or Department of Wildlife shall be held within 48 hours of the emergency r t declaration to review the emergency, the scope of work performed, the conditions provided by the Department of ?'+ 1 1 r Fisheries or Department of Wildlife, and any other matters of concern. Such meeting may be cancelled upon mutual agreement of all parties. b'y 2 l1-1I If significant differences of opinion exist after the aw consultation meeting outlined above, the parties shall, prior to taking any legal action, schedule a follow-up meet- ing with policy level agency personnel and other mutually agreed upon parties to resolve conflicts. If, as flood waters recede or after they recede, it is dis- covered that additional emergency work as defined above is needed, the Department of Fisheries and Department of ?'P Wildlife hotline (206-753-6618 or Scan 239-6618) will be called to obtain oral approval for the additional emergency work. The resource agency shall give the oral approval for the emergency or shall use an expedited permit process for = situations involving eminent threat and the county or city will proceed with the minimum work necessary to repair the damage caused by the flood emergency. An emergency declaration issued by the county or city will remain in effect until official action is taken by the local government to rescind the declaration. f. .t, PLANNING FOR FUTURE WORK IN STREAMS In an effort to reduce overall flood damages and the need to perform emergency work in streams, and to reduce processing time for permit applications by state agencies the following planning and application process will be used. Counties or cities will initiate a joint effort with state diti id if d h i .a r ent y con ons an projects t agenc es to at are neces- sary to minimize risk of flood damage to life and property. in This effort will result in a plan of the work to be done such as stream channel maintenance, bar or debris removal, lacement culvert cleanin or re etc Additionall e l g p , . y, g nera criteria will be identified which would be followed in per- forming the work. Applications for specific projects will be prepared in accordance with the plan. To ensure that projects can be completed prior to the next flood season, applications will be submitted and acted upon in a timely manner. The planning activity discussed above may be considered as part of a comprehensive flood control management plan devel- oped by a county or city in accordance with Chapter 66.26 RCW and Chapter 173-145 WAC, administered by the Department of Ecology. The Department of Ecology can fund up to 75 percent of the cost of the development of these comprehen- sive plans if a written agreement between the county and Ecology has been prepared. 3 r II il -m. ?jA G CIZ CONTINUING EVALUATION AND PARTICIPATION The signatory agencies will continue to evaluate means to improve these procedures. Revisions will be prepared as necessary. TERMINATION OF THIS AGREEMENT Any cooperating agency may terminate their participation in these procedures by providing all other agencies thirty days written notice. 4 / Ytf CIf r •LYaa /: n /"p'.;,F.4A N e l 1p.Jr i W?n ? +44 y"1 {yry?m 2,N?6 ? ui..C?{ yI ply( {. ^? li ?_ t 4,,t4 /! l i { 47,71 . ? x Y . ., µ '?11p , NNt 1 NA1Fk 41r.{3 , A ' II l+ ll i fi?YY _ ,; ' , , .l 3 k r ? ? f i ,•' a l f `, ? r r , f . ' r ' hh ?? N J. f I? r I t.. ..,.. `°?'` . _... t , 9-15-87 J es A. Metca f, Execut erector Date W shington State Association of Counties / J - - um, Director Joseph R. B1 Date /Department of Fisheries ayla , D' ector k Date epartment of Wildlife u r Kent E. Swisher, Executive Director Date Association of Washington Cities -- Andrea Beatty Riniker, Director Date Department of Ecology I G e Chuck Clarke, Director Dat 1 , Department of Community Development Shcahan, President Date Washington State Association of Emergency Managers VNI F q k t Uarr? t rtn?. 1 IN-STREAM WORK "In an emergency, a city or county will declare the emergency, notify the affected agencies and accomplish the necessary work. The work needed to repair, mitigate or prevent damage shall be accomplished in the shortest time frame possible. An emergency v 1 condition shall continue after the waters recede to allow r discovery and repair of damage caused by the emergency." PROCEDURE TO BE RECOGNIZED; a? An emergency will be declared by the county commissioners under<n Cheir authority in RCW 36.32., The definition of emergency as used in th H d x e y rauhcs code will be followed by the counties when declaring the emergency. WAC 220 110 020 (7) "Emergency" means an immediate threat to life public or private property, or an immediate threat of serious envi.ronmenta egra a ion, arising from weather or stream flow conditions or other natural conditions. Following the declaration of emergency, the emergency work will commence immediately, with the resource agency being notified for t consultation to minimize damage to the fisheries resource. p Whenever feasible, the resource agencies will be contacted prior r_,(V to work being commenced. he emergency declaration issued by the city or county will X. emain in effect until an official action is taken to rescind the [declaration. 0 C If, as flood waters recede or after they recede, it is discovered that additional emercenc work is needpej- the resource agency hotline 06 3 ?i1 or Scan 4 6618 will be called to obtain oral approva for t e a 3' iona emergency work. The resource agency shall ive the oral approval and the county or city will procee with the minimum wor necessary to repair the damage caused by the flood emergency. An on site consultation meeting between the local the Departments of Fisheries and/or Game shall be heldrwithina48 hours of the emergency declaration to review the emergency, the ' J scope of work performed, the conditions provided by the Departments of Fisheries or Game and any other matters of concern. Such meeting may be cancelled upon mutual agreement of y all parties. ti If significant differences of opinion exist after the consultation meeting outlined above, a follow-up will be ` scheduled with policy level agency personnel and other mutually agreed upon parties to resolve conflicts. If this meeting is not uF ,I 1 "PLANNING TO PREVENT/MINIMIZE FLOOD DAMAGE s and undertake a Counties will notify affected state agencie identify conditions/projects that are necessary t o joint effort to,minimize risk of flood damage to human life and property. The county will prepare a plan for such work, including dredging, bar and debris removal, culvert cleaning and/or replacement, etc. plication to the an a b p ecome The adopted county plan will then state agencies requiring permits. The future planning program is to allow greater coordination te for prevention of potential flood t a between counties and the s This proposal is to be examined in light of the - damage. Department of Ecology's Flood Control Assistance Account Program. hieve this t : m o ac The suggestions of the state agencies on how best greater coordination are welcomed. To accomplish better communication and coordination between the state and counties, increased education will have to occur. To re a flyer for posting in w f that end, the state agencies will prepa ublic works departments outlining accepted operating t h y p e coun t procedures for in-stream work. in addition to the flyer, on-site demonstrations to the counties by the agencies will be done, as t the i ons a well as having the resource agencies make presentat Association's district meetings. ,i ?? y? - i ??? ? ???? ?? ? ,?. r??;; U i F,t??.•. ,?.'; ? , ?, ? ? i ????? w3 > y`y?d? ?? ???' j ., ? ,, `' , , ai. ?; ?, 1 ?.? J.f ? ;F/ ?j ??}y; ? ?? ;? ,? ?? ??, ? ?? I ' ??' ? ' ,? r? , ? ? " ?? k.; ?. ,?, , ?-'? .? ,xa ? i k '? A?, ? ?r l `",?„ , , ,,? ??' t, ? ? ? r}wwi?s?f ?^ r ? Jnr t.+y?'^" +?7c? ^?eM r ?? ? tie ? r ? ?h ffr ? 7vr ?3 ???? ,?q, S??4 r:? ? ?„h Jai ?? r?.. c ?r ,q 4 ? ? t r r ,y/ a ti J i ?., r t !? ?? ° ?. ? K? v ?,. 1 yi , w i p1J?f'G ri t ?r.c.r?41 ,:?"?? ,.,?! 'G..n`,r j" ,nefr.?-;, ? ???,^f , '3?r ?` ? ? ?is4 7 ? ? t ; ?ti ?: a f? ??i ? ? t ?'. s t ? ? is r? t ? r ? 1r; ? F{ ? ?+ i. ?? ? t^ ? r Y?i;? ?1'? ?i d p?M, r' ? s <, R r ri? ' ? `' ? ? _ ., - ? "? ,. _ • R s .?:. y •" 1 COUII? v'.F.R _ n S'7 J ------------ BEFORE THE !4- DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY ! i STATE OF WASHINGTON IN THE MATTER OF GROUND ) ORDER WATER PERMIT NO. G 2-23680 ) OF A TO APPROPRIATE PUBLIC WATERS ) CANCELLATION TO: Jefferson County Department of Public Works Courthouse Port Townsend, Washington 98368 On August 8, 1977, this office issued Ground Water Permit No. G 2-23680 which authorized Jefferson County Department of Public Works, permittee, to appropriate public waters of the state. The permit provided that construction be completed on or before August 1, 1979. It appeared to the department that the requirement was not complied with. This office advised the permittee of the status of his permit on August 14, 1979. On October 9, 1979, the permittee advised this office by letter that this project had been abandoned; therefore, IT IS ORDERED that Permit No. G 2-23680 be and is canceled. Chapter 43.218 RCW provides that any person who feels aggrieved by such an order may appeal to the Pollution Control Hearings Board of Washington, with a copy to the Director of the Department of Ecology, within thirty (30) days of receipt of this order. Procedures for requesting a hearing may be obtained from this department. DATED this 6th day of November , 19 i? i l ? BRUCE R ss i tart-Director Department of Ecology State of Washington Distributed as follows: Initials Name No. of Copies of Sender I! ta) Department of Ecology File No. G 2-23680 rn % D Vi^r ,? I,? y. yy@jypq?, } eJ• y. I p? ?{ 1 _ r ? 1 4r? Z M x ? ! ! I J ? ? I I ?If ? 5r 1 ?1 ti f? r ? I 1 MIN Alf :M.. .L S f 4Er I M tt a till 11(,Of 11. Ltil lil u;l(n 1 -- I c h11'1111('111 . f )i i l'Ok )gy ? r August 3, 1977 s Jefferson County Department of Public Works Courthouse p? m _ d Port Towsend, WA 98368 t is Dear Sir: 5 Enclosed is Permit No. G 2-23680 P for your water right application with the same number, together with a form for filing Notice of Beginning of Construction when the work is started. 7 Please read carefully the instruction sheet as well as both sides of your permit. Sincerely, , Jon Pace Resources Nnnagement JP:pw Encs. Southwest Washington Regional Headquarters Olympia. Washington 98504 Telephone 1208) 753.2353 Ift' r On I ? V 1 1 ? ?j r j ???'+AI?XI4 kw?tii?ap±fnLt ' Ecv 040 1 zo (naY . n1 .,?1. , PERMIT r? t ?j?r r 8rt ti ' Nnw irl. X S't• !•,. it .I.iS Ff r ? 7t l,, v'S rCl1 ,tir it r;l:` _ 1 -?i.,"r?:`a'+?N:r• '?? ,14511 ' 'ri I ?.., t N ry,"• (,? r A ?' .im. 4011 11 A". PERMIT TO APPROPRIATE PUBLIC WATERS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON E] Surface Water amendments thereto n'dht e8?htsee?dn' &,e ions ot117, Laws of Washington for 1917, and the Ground Wate; o Partment of 99E..i.gy.) © am(endm ians othare oen'djtnh Provisio regulations r the, Law, of Washi Edon for)1945, and Department of . PRIORITY GATE APPLICATION NUMBER January 24, 1975 G 2-23680 PERMIT NUMBER CER c 2-23680 o TIFICATE NUMBER - NAME JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ADDRESS (STREET) ICITYI Courthouse Port Townsend - (STATE) ZIP CODE) Washington 9836 The applicant is, pursuant to the Report of Examination which has been accepted by the applicant, hereby granted a permit to appropriate the following described public waters of the State of Washington, subject to existing rights and to the limitations and provisions set out herein. SOURCE PUBLIC WATER TO BE APPROPRIATED Well 7 Tfl IBUTAgY OF IIF SURFACE WATERS) 6 Acre-feetper-yea-r" 6 Irrigation of 3 acres April 15 to September 15 LOCATION OF DIVERSION/WITHDRAWAL 11150feet North Tando500vfeetNEast fr mAthe Center of Section 11 That portion of the SW.NEk of Sec. 11, T 29 N, R 1 W.W.M, lying easterly of County Road. IB2VuVW TsuOTSaH 'auTlsTass •g ................................................. .?. ( .. .,.... .............. ..HO Kr V1V0 ONIH33NIo N3 l _" 9 aoloog 3o juawlpdaQ 2IOZO3HI0 `TI8[1VggVH 2If18ZIM :t ......... d LL 61 ........................ Isndiiy Io fDpiy:'q"""""SIl/I '1101d111118D1}I uTdw6T0 ID aalff0 S11jlIO jOJS 01/1 ptlD pl1Ol/ di".laplln Imaig , 'aa11DIlduloo 11a11S l 1. 81lllue noop juawlinllaa 1D1p dq papldo.ld S2[IJOf zio rfRoloog fo lllal[1ppdaQ alll Ol a0poll a,118 of J1DI AOlpim alilpall.7S luawdoladap adogD alll 1//pH r/jl11110a 01 j1Df adllluuad atll p1not/S t1011D1laouvo of laalgns alt jjDt1S jjtuiad.qqj H•(sTTOM IDIOM 30 a0ueualuTuw puu uoTlonalsuoO a03 spaupusls wnwTuTw) OVM 09T-£LT aaldOgO pun (TL61 30 33V u0Tlunal8u00 TTaM aaIOM u0l9uTgseM) MOU 701•81 aaldego aapun papTAoad su aauuualuTnw pue uoTI -0nalsuoo ao3 spaepuuls wnwTuTw agl laaw TTugs alOls aql uTRITM palonalsuoo STTaM aaluM TTV„ •palua33e ATsnOTanpuT OIL' slgSTa SuTIOTxa 3T alua SuTdwnd TuneapglTM sTq aluTnBaa o3 paaTnbaa aq ,Suw aq legl pasTApO pun awns Opaunol .TITTTgTsuodsal STll 30 papuTutaa ST 0033Twaod otp 'STTOm SuTaoggSTou 30 ,SITwTxoad Otp oI SuTMO •laod OsaOou agl of uoTlTPpu uT 02DS pue auTTaTu uu TTulsuT of gsTM 'ODUOTuanuoo uMo sTg ao3 Atno 'aallTwaad otlZ -31113 a aaluM 3o a3u'3T3Tl1ao TuuT3 30 aouenOOT of aoTad paaTnbOa oq TTugs I 'ON uSIOTTna salnM punoa0 uT pogTaasap su land ssaDOu uu 3o u0TIOTTeI9uT aqZ SNOISIAOUd 086T IT IsnSnV 616T IT IsngnV 8161 IT Isn9nV 131VO SIHl An 3sn rind of lnd U31tlM X3010 SIH1 An 103f OHd 3.01d W03 131V0 SIH1 AO 103f OHd Nt03n 3'H103H3S 1N3Wd0l3A3O ,0£ X „8 - TTOM SN80M 03SOdOdd A0 N011dIHOS30 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED. WORKS Well - 8" X 30' BEGIN PROJECT BY 7HI$ DATE: DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE - August 1, 1978 COMPLETE PROJECT THIS DATE: WATER PUT TO FULL USE BY THIS DATE: August t 1, 1979 August 1 1980 PROVISIONS The installation of an access port as described in Ground Water Bulletin No. 1 shall be required prior to issuance of final certificate of water right. The permittee, may for his own convenience, wish to install an airline and gage in addition to the access port. Owing to the proximity of neighboring wells, the permittee is reminded of his responsibility :towards same and advised that he may be required to regulate his withdrawal pumping rate if existing rights are injuriously affected. - "All water wells constructed within the state shall meet the minimum standards for construe- tionand maintenance as provided under Chapter 18.104 RCW (Washington Water Well Construction Act of 1971) and Chapter 173-160 WAC (Minimum Standards for Construction and maintenance of Water. Wells).". Y This pertrdt shallbe sublect to cancellation should the permittee jail to conrplP with the aborn derelopment schedede andlor fall to gh'e notice to the Deparnnent of Ecology on furne.r prodded by that Department doeeernendng such compliance. Giren ender my hand and the seal of this ojJlce at Olympia Washington. this .......... ftCh..., day, Of ..............: Augua t.......... .............. 19.. ?.?.......... WILBUR RALLAUER, DIRECTOR J ,_I ! III'l Department of i:cology I q 7j"?' KNnINRRRINn DATA I 9 OK.... ?:dGM'1.? ................ b{`4t.,:.'1rQACf?Q.. Cl.......... . ej ?7, y t ffrI ................................. E.W. NRSClstine, Regional Manager rd , I r ;??aS ? M1r ® 14 ? , .k,. IP I !!! 3 .I v.pt 'I ? wlYw Y LiW 3 7 ? r r .y h ? L aC i. ? (±w is r Z - ? '' yTr.. Y - ?f+ IMPORTANT INFORMATION # 1 _ y On Protecting Your Water Rights + qp: 'r 4 L This permit is not a final water right, but a license to proceed with construction and use of water in accordance with the provisions listed on the permit. It should be understood that the diversion or withdrawal will be so regulated that it will - I Y, not injuriously affect any existing or prior rights. k _ 2. Accompanying this permit is a form for reporting the progress of your project. Please complete the form and return it to this office A l '. . ctua construction work must begin, the project must be completed, and water must be put to beneficial use within the time limits indicated on the Development Schedule. Failure to file ` this required notice, or negligence in complying with the provisions, may result in cancellation of your permit. 3. Should it be impossible for you to begin or to complete the work and put the water to use before the expiration of time fixed in the permit, you should request the Department of Ecology to extend the time limits, stating the reasons why such an y, r extension is needed. For an extension of time in which to begin construction a , statutory fee equal to one-half the recording fee on your permit is charged and should accompany any request for extension except that the minimum shall not be 'h lees than $5.00 for each year that an extension is granted. After work has been started and an extension of time is needed in which to complete construction or to completely apply the water to beneficial use, a fee of $5.00 is charged for each " r year such extension is granted. 4. Upon completely applying water to the uses prescribed in the permit, the Department T? 3' t of Ecology will issue a certificate of water right. At this time a request will be Jy made for certificate recording fees, which are $5.00 for the Department of Ecology and normally $3.00 for the County Auditor. r- 5. Should you sell the property covered by this ° permit, before final certificate Is issued, your interest must be assigned (transferred) to the new owner. By statute, ; a $5.00 fee is charged for recording such an assignment. A simple form for this K purpose will be provided upon request. s I r. 3 ,^? I'i4 LRl6. ,ti1IJ' SflNu1'?IN!'T?f?r? Y .IdS. Sn ".r,."ci.A - 7'P71^7a•-u^,•.•" ».•,••?yl. iA' ? r? l C / ! v ?. k n . ?'I1FW : ? fl !? n y i* 4 - {Il i . .r w rt _ i 4 r E ? I 1 r ? f t' ? 1 t _ A ? f 1 r ? SLATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY CONSTRUCTION NOTICE 1, the holder of the above indicated permit issued by the Department of Ecology for the State of Washington, in accordance with the actual con- the terms of such permit and the limitations endorsed thereon by the Department of Ecology, have completed stntction of the works described therein as shown. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand Ehis day of SIGNATURE Or APPLICANT r 16 x :I ?i ?' P?iryMa?9r ( 1. 1, .:? :I?1yfk :. ECY 040-1-30 , 19 PRESENT ADDRESS CONSTRUCTION NOTICE ? BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION y¢ ? d' .a ATTACHED IS A WELL DRILLER'S REPORT. THE GROUND WATER CODE REQUIRES THAT THE WELL DRILLER OR OTHER CONSTRUCTOR OF WORKS FOR THE WITHDRAWAL OF GROUND WATERS .' FURNISH A CERTIFIED RECORD OF INFORMATION. THIS REPORT MUST BE COMPLETED AND SUBMITTED BEFORE A CERTIFICATE-OF WATER RIGHT CAN BE ISSUED. WHEN THE INFORMATION IS PUT ON THIS REPORT, PLEASE t r INCLUDE YOUR APPLICATION NUMBER AND/OR YOUR PERMIT NUMBER IN THE SPACE PROVIDED ON THE UPPER RIGHT HAND CORNER OF 'tie THE FORM. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS PLEASE CONTACT OUR OFFICE. >?r Uiy, an. ARM, I [m4 1 NIN'Is,'V? 4( ??++?9?, '?w 53i?1 e 1, W f ?I A k ' ?, ` I t ? ? ? Ir 4L 7 1 ? 1 IF, 5 h K p ltd , ? l 1 1 J 'J I 1 - 11 C ? ?r 1. d r - J ? File Original and Fltst COPY with aana?•q?4?i --' Department of -a.. y ATER WELL REPORT APP1lntion N Second ' 1G 111 wner a :P., TNrd copy-nmtera copy STATE OF WASRINGTON ...... ry ' ss w • Permit N (1) OWNER: Name ................. Ada ............ _. __ _ ? ? _ na. OF WEL IG+ : fff D aubdiv ,lon corner ............._..........._......_. ............... ............ ,.............sa S................. T............. N., R.._........ .W.M.. _ m:r ' Beating and distance (3) PROPOSED USE: nome.tm ? tnau.lrlol p Mtmielpm ? (10) WELL LOG: $m .- { -, Irrigation ? Test Well ? Other p Formed scribe well (4) TYPE OF WORK: owner. number ` I pe t led kin u re and the h or least 0. ?a a t; to ?tl for each hange g of 1ts ,,.and cfa,? in C? _it.. vx' g` • l<a i tIf more than one.... ... .._....... . . ? New well ? Method: Dug ? Dosed . ATERIAL in m k TO Deepened 13 Cable ? Driven ? , Reconditioned [3 Rotary ? Jetted ? (5) DIMENSIONS: ' Diameter of well ...... Inches. ............ t nduea ...........................n. Depth of completed well ................_.......1t. flwa (6) CONSTRUCTION DETAILS: ' r Casing ? Installed:....... _...._^ of=. from ................ n. to _..._.._.._ n. ,'.. -? . . • Threaded ? clean. from ........... n. eo . . it .? e . . ........... . Welded ? .........._. " Diane. from ......... .... a to ft 71 %• '} . _ - .........._...m Perforations: ye, p xo ? " r Type of aertprator used ............._............. ,. . SIZE of perforations ....._........ ............. In. by ................... ...... In. ., ? ........_.._..._... perforations from ft. to ft . ' ._.._...... __ Perforations from ....... ........ ..._ ft. to ft , v „na ..--....__...... Perforations from ft. to ..... _............... it. p Screens: yes [3 No E3 11 n d r . Manufacturer's Nama......_...__......._.. ................._........._.._........_.____... • . Type........'""-....._....... _........... ......_.._...... Model No...--"----_....._.. , Dl em........ ,_...... Slot slza ...._......... from .......... it, to tt. : ' '' - Dlam.._...._._... Slot alu from ............ ft, to ft . ' .. - GFAVeI packed; Yea E3 No (3 Size of gravel:.. ?-? ' ' Gravel placed from .._._...._............. . tt to ...................... ........_. ft ... '....'. ?.i ,. .' - Surface seal: yes ? No ? To what depth] _............... If. ? n Material used In seal ...................._....................................._........ *n ? - ? Did any insole contain unusable water] Yes 13 Na E) ' Type of water? .... ...... ......._.__.......... Depth of tests ........................... d Dlelhad of seshng strata a a ........................._......................._....... q (7) PUMP: M.-Matmer'a Name ? a • ..__..__.....__........_.._...xs_._...._......_ ...... y ?•1? ,y, (8) WATER LEVELS: b to -surface.le,aeton oove mean sea l l eve . ................ ..._._..ft. st l _ , 4! ? al ...vel ......... .........ft. below for, of well Data ......... .. ........ A i ... t t • ? ??t an r es presntn ........... ............ the. per squire inch Date... _ • # r Arte.um water is controlled b D, valve. ) • ' n Drawdown la amunt o unt water level f (9) WELL TESTS: l d b l ? r `fr owers e ow nmm el lev was • pump test made] Yes ? No C3 It yes, by whom7........... . .. Work staved_..._ ..................._..... 1a........... ComDleted__............. _........ _. ?-?, 1 1 SF Yield: gal?min. with ft drawdown after n e WELL DRILLER'S STATEMENT W.aU ? YS : I u d1r { •• This well was drilled under MY Jurisdiction and thi true to the b f t k s report is :`. : 1 necoe.ry data fume taken as are hen Pump turn d ll ea o my nowledge and belief, - 7 ?i p e •t' meuur.a from well lop to war level) e a (wear Ievel I u S rime watt. Lee. ................ ............... _...... elm. water lAVA Time Water L...1 NAME ................ IP..........^........................t................. coon, rm, or corpora on • o r „..i'.,....... w ., ? D n '- .................................. ... , ,r... . aF ................ ..................... ............................ ... ) ? ' . . ? '. t Data offset ..__.,. ... _. , - Dallas last_.,_..._..galJmin with . .ft dlwdown otter .... ..hn (Signed] ............................................................. ............,.......... i ,..,.............. ,?.? .7 ) i • ., 1.. i . Art .-g?Past. D I ..... ..... .........._._.....__ 1•ampontun of ..far.. Was a chemical ...ly.l. made] Yea p No ? ' (We l D[11Iar Llceme No ............................................. Date.... ?• rid 1? (USE ADDITIONAL sl1EETS IF NECESSARY) tcv fL p ? ?? oiot?m .'1r S ?y ' y '?' u?•Iilr m,? .?M,1' -C4 ., r . i' ? ? ?pma ? V ? ? . , .•1'al?r ? tl "^b`Ght _ L . ?a i,. f 3 n 1 and tint C ith File Or opy w te DepartmenC of remogr ATER WELL REPORT Application ao. Second (ppY Dwner'IC opy Dr Tmrd Copy luer'o copy STATE OF WASMNOTON Perm6 No.... OWNER (1) . .. Nome _..... ..... .................... Addreea (2) LOCATION OF WELL co tY . .............. .._.... _..... . ............ ._............... ......... ....... _..... )a ............ .;a Sec_ .. T............. N. R_ ....... W.M. Hearing and distance from netlon or subdlvtalan corner (3) PROPOSED USE: Domestic ? Industrial ? Municipal ? (10) WELL LOG: Irrigation ? Test Well ? Other ? Formation: Describe bF color, ch-ctc2 six, of material and st%ture, and how f a (4) TYPE OF WORK: Owners number of wan : tragc to th at taut can saw, for see change of . formation. (if more than onel .... ................... ...._...... MATERIAL FROM TO N ew well ? Method: Dug ? Bored ? Deepened ? Cable a Driven Q Reconditioned ? Rotssy ? Jetted ? i 5) IME ( D NSIONS: Diameter of well .......................... leeches. Drilled .................... ....... _.R. Depth of completed well _......._..._...___.._.ft. (6) CONSTRUCTION DETAILS: Casing installed: ........... _" Dlam. rrom ....... n, to ........ _.- 1t - .. :? ' . Threaded ". Dim. from It. to ft. . .. y Welded ? ........ _J' DWn. from fa to ..._....__. ft. Perforations: yea ? No ? k ' TYp<i 1 derforalor Wed_................ ....._..._...:...?..........:.__ tD : , - SIZE of perforations In. by ..__..... .............. , In. t ?_._.__...._ perforations from __ ................ ft. to ........... ..... ....... It. a perforation from ................... ft. to __...._._..:.._ ft. T . __ _. perforations from .__ ................ . ft. to ..... __...._..... It. - Screens', Yes ? No ? Ma [ ctuseY Name____..___..._........_......._.._._...__....._........_..__.. ' t• .Type _ Model - 1 Dism. .._..:._.. Slot size __......... from ............... fl. to ft. .. Dlam.._._.._..._. Slot sire from .............. fl. to ft. - ' a. Gravel packed: Yes ? No O Slze of gravel.... _ ......... ........_.... - Gravel placed from ft. to ..................... _._...... .... ft. Surface peal: Yes ? No ? To what depth? _.._..._........... _ ft. Mated.) used In seal................. _.................... ..._.................. _.... _........ Dld any estate corltdn unusable waterr yes ? No ? Type of water? .............. _.... __._.... .._ Depth of strata... Method of seating etrota oft_..... __......... ..... _........ ' (7) PUMP: Manufacturer's Name___.........................._..._. _._.._._......_.... ....... Type:......,. HF_........... __. (8) WATER LEVELS:. Iand-mrface elevotlon. " ' .-. Wlove mean sea revel. .. ..............._...... ft. Static level ............ ................. _._....__ft. below top of well Dale............. _........... _ ' Anal prey an ..... ___.. __...----- Ibe. per square inch Del. ..... ..............._ ? .... ' ., Artesian water 1s controlled by_._.____... ( 1 (Gp valve, etc ) (8) WELL TESTS: Drawdewn to amount water level 1. e lowered below static level Wu a ins mods? Yee No If Pump Q ? yea. by whom? ............... Work started..,........ I9__...... . Completed...... ....................... 1D......._ " ? ? . Yield: pl n. with fl. drawdown after hn WELL DRILLER'S STATEMENT: This well was drilled under my jurisdiction and this report is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. aeoovary data (time taken M se hen pump turned o8) (water level measured !roan wall toll to water 1-1 ' Tama We(Ir !fuel Time wa tsl I- I Tinre Water fwuel NAME ............................... .. . ....................... . . .......... ... . ........... ?????•?? 8r m , c (Parson. rpora or tl n ) ITY Dur Dnnt) .............._ ................................... ..................................... Address _ .......................... ................................................................ Data of tact ______......._.__............ _... (Signed] ..................... ?. Bolin with _...... ..._._..It. dnwdown after ..,...... ....... hn• .............................. .... (Well Drtan) Artealan Baw_.._._._.__......____.....__.gDm. Date ...................._....-..._........... ! Tamparatara of waleR...... ...... Was a chemical analysis made? Yee Q No Q License No ............................................ Date ............. _...................r I9 ...6... (1186 ADDITIONAL RHXXTG IF NECESSARY) tcv Dad, t0 , a asaj L J L J a uiC°arwlth nea nm°n° iEd a c and CoDY-Own a CaDY APplicallott No ........ ATER WELL REPORT Tnirtl eropr-Dauer Capy STATE OF WASHINGTON P ariah (1) OWNER: Nerve .... ....................... ........... ............ ._.. Addres.............................. _........................... (2) LOCATION OF WELL: count ...........: ..............!i ........_..Si Seo......... ._. T_........ .N.. R W.M. . ar rig and dlalanca from xetlon or subtllvlalon corner (3) PROPOSED USE: nomeeu. ? Industrial ? Municipal ? ? (10) WELL LOG: n Irrigation ? Test Well ? Other [ _ y . it,, or. characte size of mate uL and structure and (4) TYPE OF WORK: owners number of well ? ? MI east f =V. 7. 'rated. h change .1 . f (it more than anal ............ .................._........ New well ? Method: Dug ? Bored ? FROM e TO D.pened 13 Cable El Driven C) Reeonditloned ? Rotary ? Jetted ? (5) DIMENSIONS: Diameter of well ................ _.......... Inch... Drilled ............ _...... _....... ft. Depth of completed well ........ _.... _.._ (6) CONSTRUCTION DETAILS: Casing installed: " ....___._ a Dim. from _.......... it. to It. Threaded ? ............... Diem. form .......... _... It. to __..... ..... ft. Welded ? _........ ._'• Dim. from ........ _..... ft to ft Perforations: Yea ? No ? Type of perforator used _.__......... ........ _....... ..... ......... . . . . . ... _._.............. SIZE at perforadom ._.... .................... In. by ............ _.................. Jr. _ .... part ..uses from _.... .... ...._.... It. to ........ ............. ft. {{g perfarations from _........... _......... ft. to ._...... ............. ft. C - ' perforations fro an _ ................... ft. to It Screens : Yee ? No ? Manwactwers Name........ __....................... Type- _..___......._.__....____,.___..__.__ Model No_....... __,._. . . ...... Dim. Slot size from ...__..... ft, to ft ._......_... . Olson ..... _......... Slot acre ..._....... _ from ........ _.._.. ft, to ft Gravel hacked: Yee ? N S - o ? ire of gravel:........_....... _........ Gravel planed from .................... ......_._ ft4 to ..................... _. . Lt. Sltrfaee Seal: Yea ? N T o ? o what depth? _........ _.......__ ft. ' Material wed In seal ....... ..... .......... _.._ ..... ....... .............. _............. Dltl any strata cantata unusable water? Yea ? No ? - ' . Type of woteri ...................._.....__ Depth of strata ..._........... .._.. - - .._._ - Method of rearing strata of_....... _. (7) PUMP: Manufacturer's Nome....._._..._. Type: .__... .................___.._..._.......................... II.P_........ .... _._.._ (8) WATER LEVELS: Lana-swI.ce elevation. .` - aDOVe mean rm level.... ..........._......lt -,; Static level ............ -.4t. mew top of well Date r ..: Acton- ptess-le _............ .....Ib.. per square Inch note ...................... . r .. Anestan water in controlled by.. ............. (Cap, valve, etc.) .. (B) WELL TESTS: r level I. or A ea Cel w ° l ! Nf ) ?rt' ) w r it une was . pump int m.do? Yea ? No ? If yea. by whom?..... ....... Work aerted..._..._.........._._..__..... lp.........., complelea _.. ... Iy a vlel ; ..1?mm. wi h n. drnwdown after hr. WELL DRILLERS STATEMENT: '• This well was drilled under my jurisdiction and this report is true to the beet of my knowledge and belief. a.covery data (lime taken as ro rhen pump turned off) (water level It Id from web to to p water level) Time Water Level Time Water Ixu.i Time Water I..l NAME ......................................................... ....................... ............. ........................... (Peron. arm. or rnrporellonl ITyp o Prl t) •••••• . r n 1 ............... _..... . . .. ............ ...... .... .......... ......... .... .. ................ .. Address ........... _ ................................................................................ ..... nat. of Cast ...__._....... .. . ......_..._.__ . Better galJmin. with......... drawdown After............... hn .... (Well Drtllar) Artesian Aow__-_g.pm. Date ...._ _ . •. . ._... Temperature of water_...._.., was a 1h-ICAI AnAlYal. made? Yes ? No ? License No ................................. . Data .? . .......... ................................... 16........ " eGr 06D1•20 (VSE ADDITIONAL SIIEXTS Ir NECESSARY) - (M a mob March 26, 1975 Jefferson County Dept. of Public Works 'tk ,5 County Courthouse Port Townsend, Wn. 98368 yu. . I r? ?„? ' 4O2C».a?r :-v Gentlemen: RE: Ground Water Application No. G 2-23680 Your application for the appropriation of water has been given the above number for our records. Will you please refer to it by this number in future correspondence. SMU 1 c II W Isl lif 1,1 N 1 I uF Irh l ('1 II l l -X-lloz, Enclosed is a notice of your application which must be published once a week for two consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation published in JEFFERSON County as provided in RCW 90.03.280. Such a paper should have general circulation in the locality where the water is to be diverted and used and must be qualified as a legal newspaper as provided in Chapter 65.16 RCW. Please draw to the publisher's attention that the actual date of the (proposed) second publication must appear in the space in the notice over the caption "last date of publication." To assure accuracy, it is the responsibility of the applicant to check the notice carefully before havlnQ it published. If you find an error, do not submit the notice for publication, but return the notice to this office for correction and/or resolution. After publication, kindly send the affidavit of publication to this office. Publication should start within thirty NO days from the date of this letter. Sincerely, ?-CZL-,? JON PACE Resources Management JP:et Enclosure Soelhwest Washington Regional Headquarters Olympia, Washington 08504 Telephone (206) 753.2353 i ?. s _ i gg++ ? F'_ WL 1 17 ` STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY NOTICE OF APPLICATION TO APPROPRIATE PUBLIC WATERS TAKE NOTICE: That ............................................JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS .............................. ...... .._.. .................... of ............................ort Townsend, Washington Tanuar 2 . ......................................... on ........... ............?....4? 1975 .................................. under Application No..,,,,,,,,, G„2-23680 filed for permit to appropriate public waters, subject to existing rights, from ....__ a well N ' d l s k R A z in tite amount of,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 30 gallons per minute each year, for,,,,,,,,,,,,, irrigation during irrigation season ..........................sE ...E .................................................................... The source of the proposed appropriation is located within .................... ?. ................. .......................................... ........................................................... of Section..........ll ...... Township........ 29......... N., Range .......1.. W. W.M., in .............Tefferson ...... County. .................. Protests or objections to approval of this application must include a detailed statement of the basis for oblections; protests must be accompanied by a two dollar (82.00) recording fee and filed with the Department of Ecology, Southwest Regional Office, Olympia, WA. 98504 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ...................................................................................... within thirty (30) days from .................... ................................................................................... . ................................................. abov ... (Last date of publication to be entered e b y . pu ?.61i ?s . I ?. er ??. ) mss.. z f N • ? L 5 of ?A S,X ? aa, q r »Fe n w ',; ... ) o ' 1 a 1 IY h l ;S tl L rt g?I t I`; T 3 3, ?y t 1 } I I ?t ?p STATE OF WASHINGTON z^-%?'=4J PARTMENT OF ECOLOGY E (quilcene Park) l.J W ER RIGHT CLAIMS REGISTRATION - WATER RIGHT CLAIM. 1 { 1. NAME COUNTY OF' JEFFERSON 3J} y ADDRESS COURTHOUSE PORT-TOWNSF.ND, WASHINGTON ''COOE 98168 SOURCE FROM WHICH THE RIGHT TO TAKE AND MAKE USE OF WATER IS CLAIMED: ('ROLTNTI ' ' - 2 „ - (SURFACE OR GROUND WATER), - WATERS W.R.IA, (LEAVE BLANK) A. IF GROUNDWATER, THE.SOURCE IS A: WELL B. IF SURFACE WATER THE SOURCE IS- 3.-THE QUANTITIES OF.WATER AND TIMES OF USE CLAIMED: A. QUANTITY OF WATER CLAIMED P G.P_M PRESENTLY USED 1 G P.M.- (CUBIC FEET, PER SECOND OR GALLONS PER MINUTE) ,"-. app B. ANNUAL QUANTITY CLAIMED 3.2 A.F./yr? PRESENTLY USED 1.6 A.F /yr 6 p (ACRE FEET PER YEAR) ] p C,.IF FOR IRRIGATION,,ACRES CLAIMED '- PRESENTLY IRRIGATED { 1 "D:TIME(S) DURING EACH YEAR WHEN WATER IS USED: '?-ENTIRE YEAR d. 4. DATE OF FIRST PUTTING WATER TO USE: MONTH May YEAR " 1954 5. LOCATION OF THE POINT(SII; OF>DP1EX3PQ;lf/WITHDRAWAL: 905 FEET South AND, 91+2 I FEET West-' FROM THE North Quarter CORNER OF SECTION' 24 `. BEING WITHIN ??' ?' NEB NWa'• ? OF SECTION 24 T..27 N., R.._ 2W '(E.okW.) W.M. IF THIS IS WITHIN THE LIMITS OF A RECORDED PLATTED PROPERTY, LOT 2 BLOCK 5OF A E JOSEPHINE CAMPBELLS ADDITION TO "QUILCENE (GIVE NAME OF PLAT OR ADDITION) 6. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF LANDS.' N WHICH. _THE WATER IS USED: All of Blocks `1 2 , 4 and s of Josephine Campbells Addition to Quilcene. FI t F 1 COUNTY Jefferson -, 7. PURPOSECS) FOR WHICH WATER IS USED 'Municipal Supply, (for i ublic use at nark) ' P 8. THE LEGAL DOCTRINE(9L) UPON WHICH H THE RIGHT. OF CLAIM IS BASED: Appropriation , I S DO NOT USE THIS PACE I HEREBY SWEAR THAT THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND ' , TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND AEUlF. ACLU RAT[ L THE FILINGOF A STATEMENT OF CLAIM DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN ADJUDICATION , r " 1 F OF ANY CLAIM TO THE RIGHT TO USE OF WATERS AS BETWEEN THE WATER USE, / V y y l L! ? (r/"' - CLAIMANT AND THE STATE OR AS BETWEEN ONE OR MORE WATER USE CLAIMANTS 1 " T•- • ? ' AND ANOTHER OR OTHERS THIS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CONSTITUTES RECEIPT FOR :. ? ..THE FILING FEE. 'DATE Dec. 1 1971 f DATE RETURNED THIS HAS BEEN ASSIGNED IF CLAIM FILED BY DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE. PRINT OR TYPE WATER RIGHT CLAIM REGISTRY NO. FULL NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS OF AGENT BELOW. Edwin A. Becker 1 Count y_EnQineer AOOITIONAL NPURM HON LLAIINO 11, WAT'R QUALITY DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT CY ECOLOGY AND/ 01 WFIL CONSTRUCTION IS AVANABI DIE, RETURN ALL THREE COPIES WITH CARBONS INTACT, ALONG WITH YOUR FEE TO: DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY k J n t t E E . F [ [ 1. 1? kk T m7 T h _t 4c r I F WATER RIGHT CLAIMS REGISTRATION ORIGINAL DWR 0 'p l ?J , P ? ? )y w 8501 T P.O. BOX 829 OLYp,M?PIA WASHINGTON ?.i .,).M.,,, ,. ?R cxT , ?F,•` , (I n "'?!L^TBRS: ! ' "?i`*"- / f, , it?'? ??RS?? S?, r S 1 Y? ?(,a• 4M. T ?•I - t ? F r 4 r 1 `Y ? I 0 I ?L .I / a S ? T I I" I ?Iai 3 y° 8A r b ? 1 iv N ?5 ati? }}?/ t ) ? la'vtk M •l xf , s J tl, . -a...- -- ,- 1 n l., RETURN ALL THREE CO _a WITH CARBONS INTACT. ALONG WITH YOUR fEE TO: A9?w • •' DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY ORIGINAL DWR WATER RIGHT CLAIMS REGISTRATION - P.O. BOX 1179 OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98501 ^ STATE OF WASHINGTON EPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY (Lake Leland Park) ? 4)f $J R RIGHT CLAIMS REGISTRATION ATER RIGHT CLAIM IJ F1 W ADDRESS COURTHOUSE (r 1. Q, ' MEDiCRO TtQT) SOURCE FROM WHICH THE RIGHT TO TAKE AND BE USE OF WATER IS,C , (SURFACE OR GROUNO WATER) WATER W.R.KA EAVE BLANK) - ', ?, ( (L _ , A. IF GROUND WATER, THE SOURCE- IS A WELLB IF SURFACE WATERJHE SOURCE I? t . THE QUANTITIES OF WATER ANDJIMES O,F,U,SE.C,LA1MED: PRESENTLY USED -.. I r P M (CUBIC FEET PER SECONO OR GALLONS PER MINUTE) LV USED i6 A ?P./yr B. ANNUAL QUANTITY CLAIMED 3.2 Aj.'.L)'.(?c _PRES'NT. RE FEET VLK Y-) PRESENTLY IRRIGATED --- C. IF FOR IRRIGATION, ACRES CLAIMED 2 ENTIRE YEAR, D. TIME(Sj DURING EACH YEAR WHEN WATER:IS U ISED YEAR 1958 WATER TO'USE: MONTH` ril DATE OF FIRST PUTTING 4 T , . LOCATION OF THE POINTMOF*F4W4F5f4 IiHDRAWAL: 'J25 FEET West AND 440 5 _1! , CORNER OF SECTION -- 24 28 N.,R: 2 W (E.oRW.) W M BEING WITHIN SE? SW1? OF SECTION 24" T.. r IF THIS IS WITHIN THE LIMITS OF A RECORDED^ATTED PR6PERiY,'L0T. BLOCK ---OF (GIVE NAME OF PLAT OR ADDITION),, at the South Quarter Corner of 6. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF LANDS,'ON WHICH`-THE WATERiS •mnr or Te¢¢ +n +h + i + 2 thctice "io?ih 69041) 4811 W 6P91 28 N R 24 T S F . . . ec. , N 39010112" W 288.84' to the thence 1 _B fl mean Anr 11nn +n d er mean 50°49'48" E N 894 1?? E 143.61', thence N 1 thence f the south line of Sec. 24 ti , .4 , sec on o 48 W 165 0' thence N {}g 49'48" F thence N 890??? '-!thence S 50 1 16 , 5. 225' more or less to the true point of beginning. Less n/w for County Road. Jefferson CnUNTY public use at Park) 7. PURPOSE(K) FOR WHICH WATER iS.USED: "Municipal Supplv -(For B. THE LEGAL DOCTRINE(34 UPON WHICH THE RIGHTOF CLAIM IS BASED: _Appropriation ; WEAR THAT THE ABOVE INFORMALION IS TRUE AND 1 HEREBY DO NOT USEJHIS SPACE. 9 . " O 70 THE REST OF MV KNOWLEDGE AND BRIEF. ACCURAT N T I THE FILING OF A STATEMENT OF CLAIM DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN ADJUDICAL OF ANY CLAIM TO THE RIGHT TO USE OF WATERS AS BETWEEN THE WATER USE . x CLAIMANT AND THE STATE OR AS BETWEEN ONE OR MORE WATER USE CLAIMANTS AND ANOTHER OR OTHERS, THIS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CONSTITUTES RECEIPT FOR DAN Dec. 1, 191 _ THE FILING FEE. N ASSIGNED IF'(LAIM FILED BY DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE. PRINT OR TYPE DATE RETURNED THIS HAS BEE WATER RIGHT CLAIM REGISTRY NO. AND MAILING ADDR[SS OF AGF Ni BELOW. FUJI NAME Edwin A. Becker County Engineer 1110NAL INI DRMAI UN R(IAtIN 10 WATfR OUALIIY N IS AVAIL APIE TR CT , U IO /OR WELL CONS fj?m ? ,RI ` u+ '? B x r YY? E .,11 A h 1 .:? Y5 I L ! / T y.. I I ----------------- --ter STATE OF WASHINGTON IIACPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY (Clearwater Courthouse Annex) I WA ER RIGHT CLAIMS REGISTRATION F II WATER RIGHT CLAIM PRE 1. NAME GO @1'T'Y OnN - r " ADDRESS _ COURTHOT. - PORT TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON CODE 98368 F 2. SOURCE FROM WHICH THE RIGHT TO TAKE AND MAKE USE. OF WATER IS CLAIMED.,•(suRFACE OR GROUND WATER) µ . " WATER W.R.I.A. (LEAVE BLANK) A. IF GROUND WATER, THE SOURCE. IS A "WEB' . B. IF SURFACE WATER, THE-SOURCE IS -° 3. THE QUANTITIES. OF WATER AND TIMES OF USE CLAIMED: A. QUANTITY OF WATER CLAIMED . 5 C P M- PRESENTLY USED 5 (` P M (CUBIC FEET PER SECOND OR GALLONS PER MINUTE) " B. ANNUAL 0UANTITY CLAIMED_ 8.0 A F • ZVr PRESENTLY USED 8 0 A F lyr (ACHE FEET PER YEAR) C. IF FOR IRRIGATION, ACRES, CLAIMED " --- ' . PRESENTLY IRRIGATED --- D. TIME DURING EACH YEAR WHEN WATER IS.USED: ENTIRE YEAR . " .. 4. DATE OF FIRST PUTTING WATER TO USE: MONTH May YEAR 1970 5. LOCATION OF THE POINTOM OFXEURftStZ (WITHDRAWAL: 446 FEET West AND 101 FEET North FROMTHE" South Quarter --CORNER ?OF SECTION'S 8 ,..: -- T-94 N•, R. 19 W (E.ORW.) W.M. Ek SWk OF SECTION _ BEING WITHIN S E IF THIS, IS WITHIN THE LIMITS OFA-RECORDED PLATTED PROPERTY, LOT BLOCK OF (GIVE NAME OF PLAT OR ADDITION) te (`orner I r LSED Beginning at the South Quar 6. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF LANDS,ON WHICH THE WATER IS of Sec 18, T."24 N R 12 WWM thence West' 34P 0 feet, tbcnce N aDOI, 2665 feet to the ture point Of beginning thence East 349'8 feet thence North 21+9.2 feet thence West 349.8 feet thence South 249.2 feet to the true point-of beginning. COUNTY Jefferson , 7. PURPOSE(S) FOR WHICH WATER IS USED Muhicinal!Sungl}C_ i r - -- P) B. THE LEGAL DOCTRINE(9Q UPON WHICH THE RIGHT OF CLAIM. IS BASED: Annrnn in+Rnn - DO NOT"USE THIS. SPACE. HEREBY SWEAR THAT THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, , } THE FILING OF A STATEMENT OF CLAIM DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN ADJUDICATION 7 OF ANY CLAIM TO THE RIGHT TO USE OF WATERS AS BETWEEN THE WATER USE 7 X 7 7 CLAMANT AND THE STATE OR AS BETWEEN ONE OR MORE WATER USE CLAIMANTS AND ANOTHER OR OTHERS. THIS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CONSTITUTES RECEIPT FOR DATE Dec. ZR 1971 THE FILING FEE. DATE RETURNED THIS HAS BEEN ASSIGNED' IF CLAIM FILED BY DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE, PRINT OR TYPE FUJI NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS OF AGENT BELOW. WATER RIGHT CLAIM REGISTRY NO, Edwin A Becker } Cio_unty Engineer AI A 4 U ITY ftl RECTOR • DIIARIMlIIT OF ECOLOGY 11{ 1 EE E V I 0071IONK Hf O4M UN REI AI !IG TU W D/ OR WEII CONSTRUCTION IS ANLE- r CAN a xl "lSY . 5 l t ?t?l t 1}r k h, I I 'i?{WWf ' ?L ? lal ? ^-? ,?R I ?aF. 1 J I t 4 ? ? O yDyfrtl , I""+ y I ?4 rAP JI RETURN ALL THREE COPIES WITII CARBONS INTACT, ALONG WITH YOUR FEE TO, EET I"'C DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY J -_I } WATER RIGHT CLAIMS REGISTRATION l r ` (T E P O. BOX 829 OLYMPIA nWASHINGTON 98501 ORIGINAL DWR E , ?RB.ry '"? t. 1 -Mi '.a?^?,+.: ??, /•"la?'?'a'Y,?(?.?,N?., i.ti': ".'B{. 'R'?Z ? yy,, lY' r F .,. ?J,r P.1 •t T II ` xr.A 4 r 1A. p ,? a r I -RAJ J ) ?T f? I I f? 'vE ,r. U .i R r - ??- t _ a nc?awlrtn nvrv % WATER RIGHT CLAIM 1, NAME COHNRY O ADDRESS- CO MTHOIFSE - I= TMEEND WAR - P WcNrTOT7 CODE gA?FR , . 2. SOURCE FROM WHICH THE RIGHT TO TAKE AND MAKE USE OF WATER IS CLAIMED: GROCTNTI RFACE WATER OR GROUND WATER) ' - - - itK) (LEAVE BL A. IF GROUND WATER, THE SOURCE IS - A WE'i.T. j) B. IF SURFACE WATER, THE SOURCE IS 3 THE QUANTITIES OF WATER AND TIMES OF USE CLAIMED; A.. QUANTITY. OF WATER CLAIMED 9G_p M -PRESENTLY USED I R pu (CUBIC FEET PER SECOND OP. GALLONS PER MIDJUTE) B'ANNUAL QUANTITY CLAIMED .2 r - PRESENTLY USED ] .Fi p F4 - I ' (ACRE FEET PER YEATt) -C. IF FOR IRRIGATION, ACRES CLAIMED ---?- - PRESENTLY, IRRIGATED --- D. TIME" DURING EACH YEAR WHEN WATER IS USED: . PNTTRR YVA T 4. DATE OF FIRST PUTTING WATER TO USE: MONTH REPTFmL'R YEAR. 1QF,p 5. LOCATION OF THE POINT(S) OF SEW Z=. M/WITHDRAWAL: 2G3 FEET W 0 _ - -.t AND 2SO ` J FEET South FROM THE---jjoj??he&at CORNER OF SECTION Z J BEING WITHIN NrL?h OF SECTION 3 T--P-q-, (E.ORW.) W .m. j IF THIS IS WITHIN THE LIMITS OF A RECORDED PLATTED PROPERTY, LOT 37 BLOCK I OF f _ ( M1IITARF Rq pn7)TTTON 40 (GIVE NAME OF TRONTIATF a{ AT 0! ADDITION] t LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF LANDS ON WHICH THE WATER IS USED Tnt 9 tl , 7 n : ,r , 1TF 7 th ;-It 27 thru 47, HlOck 1 and Lots `9 thru 1T Ond 14 thrh 24nTnnk p CTinifflgrsi Additlen to Trenflalo I COUNTY jL?7FERRDN ! 7: PURPOSEM FOR WHICH WATER IS USED:- miA icinaT Sunnly (for yub i ,ar• at D ? 8. THE LEGAL DOCTRIME(i) UPON WHICH THE RIGHT OF CLAIM IS BASED:- ATrt,reT,rintinn - I HEREBY SWEAR,THAT THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND THE FILING OF A STATEMENT OF CLAIM DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN ADJUDICATION ? ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF MY NNOWLEOGIE AND BELIEF.. OF ANY CLAIM TO THE RIGHT TC USF OF WATERS AS BETWEEN THE WATER USE CLAIMANT AND THE STATE OR AS T V BE WEEN ONE OR MORE. WATER USE CLAIMANTS AND ANOTHER OR OTHERS. THIS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CONSTITUTES RECEIPT FOR A THE FILING FEE, DATE Ilnr _ 1 It DATE RETURNED THIS HAS BEEN ASSIGNED .,, _ _ IF CLAIM FILED BY DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE PRINT OR TYPE WATER RIGHT CLAIM REGISTRY NO. , 1.11 NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS OF AGENT BELOW. ' NOY1271006578 ` *c ?{ /1i" Edwin A k r -oun v Emtinea ?,y DIII CTO4"01 PAgTMIT IjF '(01,00Y A r l ODIEIONAL IN ON-10N FI ATING TO WATER QUALITY .... I ANO/OA WfLI CONSTRU CTI ON IS AVAILABLE. . F 1{ 7 E / k ai k d RETURN ALL THREE COPIES WITH CARBONS INTACT, ALONG WITH YOUR FEE TO. DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY WATER RIGHT CLAIMS REGISTRATION ri Y l PO BOX 879 OLYMPIA WASHINGTON 90501 YfM P'N7f'7?1R ""T B^ R On' m Tv WWII WATER RIGHT CLAIMS REGISTRATION U 1 WATER RIGHT CLAIM k1o; I_ 11 0 0 0 7 8 4 1 I NAME _ COERITY OF a-F TTRSOid - ADDRESS C(')TTRTROTiFlF ZIP PMT TrMNSFTJDk WASTTTAE`TAN CODE- ElR3FiR 2. SOURCE FROM WHICH THE RIGHT TO TAKE AND. MAKE USE CF WATER IS CLAIMED: r I 'C C O - (SU RFAC ON GROUND WATER) ?J ..WATER W.R.LA 4 //i F?VE BL A1IK) 11 A. IF GROUND WATER, THE SOURCE IS A WELL - I B. IF. SURFACE WATER, THE SOURCE IS L3. THE QUANTITIES OF WATER AND TIMES OF USE CLAIMED: A. QUANTITY OF. WATER CLAIMED 2 G P X PRESENTLY USED 1 G. p.M. (CUBIC FEET PER SECOND OR GALLONS PER t,'INUTE) - B.ANNUAL QUANTITY CLAIMED . 3.2 A.F:/yr -PRESENTLY USED 1.6 A.F.wr I (ACE[ FEET PER YEAR) C. IF FOR IRRIGATION, ACRES CLAIMED '-- --PRESENTLY IRRIGATED -- f, D. TIME(S) DURING EACH YEAR WHEN WATER IS USED: FNTTRF Y'r'.AR - (! 4: DATE OF FIRST PUTTING WATER TO USE: MONTH MAY YEAR - 1954 I 5. LOCATION OF THE POINT(30 OF30 k EDE/WITHDRAWAL:- .905 FEET _South AND_q42 I 1 FEET Went FROM THE. ITOrth-Qua_rter CORNER OF SECTION 5h BEING. WITHIN TTE Mi1 p r, OF SECTION 24 , T.P_ N., R._2W (E.ORW.) WM, j? l IF THIS ISWITHIN THE LIMITS OF A RECORDED PLATTED PROPERTY, LOT- BLOCK G OF. F C T (`AMDRFT TA ATEDTTT(NIT T(1 OEITTIRFh`^ ' O (GIVE NAME ME . OF PL PAT OR ADDITION),,. b. LEGALOESCRIPTION OF LANDS ON WHICH THE WATER IS USED: - All of Illnrkw l 2F 4 and 5 of - i Josephine Campbells Addition to Quilcene COUNTY' Jeffnrwnn? 7.PURPOSE66) FOR WHICH WATER IS USED: .-MUniE+i ne 1 Reply ?fnY ?I het ?Pn,nk) S. THE LEGAL DOCTRINE(l) UPON WHICH THE RIGHT OF CLAIM IS BASED: rpnrlw*inn '' - IHEREBY SWEAR THAT THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND. THE FILING OF A STATEMENT OF CLAIM DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN ADJUDICATION ACCURATE TO THE .0151 OF MY RNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, OF ANY CLAIM TOfTHE RIGHT TO USE OF WATERS AS BETWEEN THE WATER USE Y yy? • CLAIMANT AND THE STATE. OR AS BETWEEN ONE OR MORE WATER USE CLAIMANTS " -? `ILGF ?-`mss-I?? AND ANOTHER OR OTHERS. THIS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CONSTITUTES RECEIPT FOR THE FILING FEE. DATE- 'rl '. . DATE RETURNED THIS HAS BEEN ASSIGNED _ IF CLAIM FILED By DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE,' PRINT OR TYPE WATER RIGHT CLAIM REGISTRY NO. FULL NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS OF AGENT BELOW. NOT' 1271006579 Rdvin A Rorknr '') A° t!^?3 _ CnuntV F.nainCAP '?f DIRLCTO, DEPARTMENT CT1 FF COLOGY - O AppITIONAL IN OMMA ON RFIAi ING TO WAIER QUALITY AHD/ OR WELL CONSTRUCT-ON IS. AVAILAfl LE. ?f 1 I I ?y1 1 ' 1 a I b SL 1 I f z" k: L s` T f k {{`rr A ` s ? Y: RETURN ALL THREE COPIES WITH CARBONS INTACT, ALONG WITH YOUR FEE. TO: DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY WATER RIGHT CLAIMS REGISTRATION ? ?'? - D? PO BOX 829 OL YMPIA. WASHINGTON 98501 iI .Ilro,??rr..tt+e-?1namE: ? m>li'?eJnp'y?rrr i°TSf'14G'cP'ra?iC C qq R7 Ctr m- F? ^?ac ut+?' En ?^?rti' r Ia+eyR?'7^;. r± Aa.a - n? a,{a k P nl W A EPARTMENT -IF ECOLOGY ~ (Quilcene Shop)~ Y WER. RIGHT CLAIMS REGISTRATION. rr!7 D WATER RIGHT CLAIM L E . r!nV. 71 nnn7nC ?` r` IAA ? I 2. S.' fr 2 I; f IG ?.t i v SIAIt UI-W/HbHINIvIVN rEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY - ] (Lake Leland Park) ` WATER RIGHT CLAIMS REGISTRATION j " U r Icni it EG .?,y WATER RIGHT CLAIM i N?y.l2?110 0 8186` (. NAME COMM OF JEFFERSON } ADDRESS COURTHOUSE Id 1i i z T `?cr,I e T ?V h ' v ' r 0 L w ., u i A' { J. s'r - ---- -- -- aIAItUI-WASHINUIUN {(PARTMENT,OF ECOLOGY (Cleaivater C Jrthouse WATER RIGHT CLAIMS REGISTRATION Annex WATER RIGHT CLAIM C 1. NAME COIIHTY OF JEFFERSON I' ADDRESS CGTHYPH(MISP - q FORT TOWESEM, WASILINGTON COO, 98368 2. SOURCE FROM WHICH THE RIGHT TO TAKE AND MAKE USE OF WATER IS CLAIMED: GROUND (SURFACE OR GROUND VJAT ER) )f?LTE? W R I A 21 , . . . (LEAVE HLFVJK) A. IF GROUND WATER, THE SOURCE IS A WELL B. IF,SURFACE WATER; THE SOURCE IS - 3. THE QUANTITIES OF WATER AND TIMES OF USE CLAIMED: A. QUANTITY OF WATER.CLA.IMED - '5 G.P.M. PRESENTLY USED (CUBIC FEET PER SECOND OR GALLONS PER MINUTE) B.: ANNUAL QUANTITY CLAIMED _ 8.0 A.F.wr PRESENTLY USED 8.0 A.F_?yr (ACRE FEET PER,YEAR)" '.C. IF FOR IRRIGATION, ACRES CLAIMED -- PRESENTLY IRRIGATED D. TIMET DURING EACH YEAR WHEN WATER IS. USED: II'TM YFAR 4, DATE OF FIRST PUTTING WATER TO USE; MONTH'" ma YEAR. 1Q70 5. LOCATION OF THE POINT,49? OF)bB(/WITHDRAWAL: 446 FEET West AND 3D1 '.FEET North_ FROM THE - South Quarter CORNER OF SECTION 18 BEING.WITHIN SFi TRW OF SECTION 18 ; T. :14 N:;R. TP W (E.ORW.) W.M. j IF.THISIS WITHIN THE LIMITS. OF A RECORDED PLATT ED' PROPERTY, LOT - BLOCK -- OF !GIVE NAME OF PLOADDITION) 6. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF LANDS ON WHICH THE WATER IS USED::?Og nni?g nt+hP'RO+ .h Qu YH' r r F•r :.'of-See, 18 T ?4 A F'.R T9 i"j",?FI th n CPR 3421 D few the r•P N aQw 266 5 feet- to P the taro Vint of beat njTg,th r East R49,$ fe_ty t n Hr4 ,p, feDt: ' thF%nsP , Went 349.8 feet, thence South 49. rnwt to _ to the true gQ tnt of hwgf not ng, , COUNTY Jefferson 7. PURPOSE(S) FOR WHICH WATER IS USED;. v11wi1,tp.supply (E or Ptn rib aw Annpv , . RR Shop) 8.1 THE LEGAL DOCTRINE(Sd UPON WHICH THE RIGHT OF CLAIM IS BASED:_AFp-op-tion 1 HEREBY SWEAR 'THAT THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND THE FILING OF A STATEMENT OF CLAIM DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN ADJUDICATION ACCURAIE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. . Of'ANV CLAIM TO THE RIGHT TO USE OF WATERS AS BETWEEN THE WATER USE V r CLAIMANT AND THE STATE OR AS BETWEEN ONE OR MORE WATER USE CLAIMANTS A AND ANOTHER OR OTHERS. THIS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CONSTITUTES RECEIPT FOR THE FILING FEE. DATE Dec 1 1971 DATE RETURNED THIS HAS REEK ASSIGNED IF CLAIM FILED BY DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE, PRINT OR TYPE SEOtr 12 71 i"" f CLAIM REGISTRY 110.. FOIL NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS OF AGEIIT BE LOW. _$Qvin A_Acckwr c rountv DIRICTOR Dl , IAR1VEHi Of ECOLOGY _OM IION NG 10 WATER OIJALITY Jlp lJ AND/OR OR WELL CONS iRUCT1ON 01/ IS IS' AVAAN IL ABI [. ' RETURN ALL THREE COPIES WITH CARBONS INTACT. ALONG WITH YOUR FEE TO'. y - ERTMFNT OF ECOLOGY F , ` WATER RIGHT CLAIMS REGISTRATION fp O BOY 879 OLYMPIA WASH NGTO N O8501 'T51Y71M, '? O q TR VOT "r .MDIRdn l).ii<, IYJ,. ?I .t{,1 FIIC°i.';''!.;11N _1 ?, T? l"t ? l j?{hT l!'. I? n ?All ''r r? i r J v u g? ,y? a r e x 1'f b 511+Rg? ?tx'1? Y ?7 t "F7 PhfyYSr/ ' ?i k1 till, 1'?. -r4 t r?? Sy?F?Yn'?Y't3 t?t5,,ly,r3Tti ] ' "G! t4_?iW (vC _9i?N >r7p?J hit'"?il `y?'? e 1 e i ?r ? 0 far[ e:l?l ly?l?i ? M, ?et?y? a All 4 `R Y ?t RECEIVED JEFFERSON COUNTY ar, ,,.Qb FEB 2 3 1991 ANDREA BEATTY RNeKER f (J Direct« ?„ PLANNING 0 EPARTh1ENT tl ` STATE OF WASHINGTON "........... ?., DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY t A1ail Stop PV-11 • Olympia, Washington 985618711 • (105) 459.6000 { .? February 20, 1987 Dear Potential Grant Applicant: ?s Enclosed is one copy of each of the following for your information and use in filing applications under the Flood Control Assistance • Account Program: - Program Guidelines P Fact Sheet Chapter 173-145 WAC F - Application Form Certification Checklist - Budget Information (Sample) The enclosed copy of Chapter 173-145 WAC is the final version which was adopted January 27, 1987. Please discard any previous editions of this regulation. The following is the schedule for applications to be considered for yy a funding by the beginning of next biennium: d' * March 31, 1987 - Deadline for submittal of prioritized applications by counties to Ecology. April 13, 1987 - Ecology review of applications for eligibility. * May 13, 1987 - Priority list developed by Ecology and available for review. * May 28, 1987 - Public Hearing, 2:00 P.M. in Yakima, Department of Ecology Regional Office, 3601 W. Washington, Conference Room 1 - t I1. r * May 29, 1987 - Public Hearing, 2:00 P.M. in Lace I' V'? Department of Ecology Headquarter's Office, e Room 273, Abbot Raphael Hall, vq WSt. Martin's College Campus * June 15, 1987 - Ecology sends grant agreements to counties for signature. 1 k * July 1, 1987 - Earliest date Ecology signs grant agreements. l a i Applications will be accepted throughout the biennium for grants not *•1.t" 1?. intended to start on Jul 1 1987. The application form should be reproduced and a separate application afi i,r form submitted for each application for a non-emergency project or an emergency project. The application form may also be used to apply for nt r grant assistance to develop a comprehensive flood control ' management plan. All applications must be submitted through the i dl t r' appropriate county official. n1w ??, o h a ? V i 1.' 3. ,/ci ? A T r F 9 k ?i} ???.?F?7h .t,?^ Ll?dhi '/w,f `f'11'r?;! ? `Z ? i Y?, t ?? ??Ett? b9y G 1 I is P `R ? .r " yp ? 7A ?? ,? ? ?t? ? , +;?A?S ?115s;, i'l?•+1 .` ?' ?' a ?`?'a^r --tidPii_ ? ? ?e? ?? t 4 ? ' ? `+ r ? P1 tl Y? i ( 1F ??ryl e15 .. 1 '?, J? 11 r ? 4 page two February 17, 1987 ,i. a r F s r A condition of all grant agreements during the 1987-1989 biennium, ° except those for emergency projects, will be a certification relating ik6s y to the development of a comprehensive flood control management plan within three years from the date of signature of the grant agreement N by Ecology. The enclosed certification checklist is to be used for this process. The scope of the plan and the time schedule for completion of the plan will be developed by the local authority responsible for preparation of the plan. Department of Ecology staff will be available to assist in this process so that agreement can be reached prior to certification by Ecology. once a completed ; checklist is received and approved by Ecology, conditions related to the comprehensive flood control ranagement plan will be incorporated 5 into the grant agreement. The date of certification will be the date of final grant execution by Ecology. No grant agreements, except for emergency projects, will be signed by Ecology for the 1987-1989 biennium until the certification process is complete. Since funds from this account can now be used to assist local governments in the preparation of comprehensive flood control management plans, and development of these by counties, cities, and ` towns is a condition of receipt of state funds for non-emergency projects, the Department of Ecology is placing high priority this biennium on providing funding assistance to local governments for development of their comprehensive flood control management plans. You are therefore encouraged to assign a high priority to development of your comprehensive plan during the next biennium which ends on June 30, 1989. If you need state financial assistance in the development of this plan, please include this as one of your applications for the next biennium. Please contact Carl Glatze at x' (206) 459-6776 or SCAN 585-6776 or Lisa Randlette at (206) 459-6792 or SCAN 585-6792 if you have any questions. ' Sincere y, l Jerry Louthain j Flood Plain Management Section Shorelands and Coastal Zone k'.. Management Program Enclosures ti{ SWh„!'?'rF3Ct?i? G??f d ??p .? ,? 1 a t 5 1 r ?? {, 1 y1,t; ? wy } Y f! i Aru? t F. ? t +d P ? 1 .Zd 't` ? Ado „, >y S . I,?{ t yK , 4f ? y l i rc1?:. k r x F a4 A" 1 ? '>? ryv i . B ' 4 A 6uBL Flood Control Assistance Account Program (F.C.A.A.P.) , Guidelines di x Department of Ecology February 1987 1 r, r ? ? rig 1 xy :Y{ (n? 4f+ l ?I I ?.? ii r. Wll 1 ff G15 ?, ? uH 5 ?44j `?'?'S?e { 0 El TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Chapter 1 - Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Chapter 2 - Program Highlights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 01 - Legislation and Regulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 02 - Applicant Eligibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 03 - Summary of Major Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 04 - Communication with the Department of Ecology. . . . . . 3 Chapter 3 - Eligible and Ineligible Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 01 - Scope of Chapter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 02 - General 4 03 - Category 1 - Comprehensive Flood Control Management Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 04 - Category 2 - Non-Emergency Projects . . . . . . . . . . 4 05 - Category 3 - Emergency Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 06 - Ineligible Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Chapter 4 - Application Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 01 - Scope of Chapter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 02 - Preapplication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 03 - Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 04 - Budget Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 05 - Funding Approval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 06 - Grant Agreement Preparatiou . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 07 - Effective Date of Grant Agrcenu•nt . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Chapter 5 - Grant Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 01 - Scope of Chapter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 02 - Contract Officer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 03 - Construction Plans and Specifications . . . . , . . . . 8 04 - Bid Awards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 05 - Grant Award and Authorization to Procved. . . . . . . . 8 06 - "Financial Guidelines for Grants Management". 8 07 - Efficient and Effective Management. . . . . . . . . . . 9 08 - Conformity with Agreements and Project Objoctives . . . 9 i F 351 ? f ' ? ? fy 4 ? } ? 1 1 j i ?l ?. 1 NI I Sh #?"'? d 1 ? I i 1* r y 1$ ?S ?i} I r} 3 r;,r'r 1 i i `.-r? r .'e a.. fa?au, ? .??g( 1?Y • ?Je 4J, M I Flood Control Assistance Account Program Guidelines F 's { j s Chapter 1 - Introduction i These guidelines define administrative policies and procedures for public bodies to artici ate i th Fl d =,p p p n e oo Control Assistance. Account Program (FCAAP). They define procedures to be followed by both grant recipients ' and the Department of Ecology from the preapplication stage through audit m " . s These guidelines contain procedures which apply specifically to the Flood Control Assistance Account Program. The program assists local authorities - - in flood control maintenance projects with associated public benefits. The program also provides assistance for development of comprehensive fl d ' - oo control management plans which are required as a condition of 2 receiving assistance for maintenance projects. These guidelines are ?- supplemented by a second set of guidelines entitled "Financial Guidelines f " or Grants Management also published by the Department of Ecology. The financial uidelines cont i l g a n genera grant administration procedures - ; - which are used for all of the department grant programs. " _ f • • . : Both sets of guidelines are to be followed in the Flood Control . 41 Assistance Account Program. } ' Chapter 2. Program Highlights a = .• 2.01 Legislation and Regulations ' Substitute (louse Dill 1531, passed by the Legislature in 1984, created F ?Sr + the Flood Control Assistance Account Program (FCAAP). It authorized the Department of Ecolo to ad i i t d f a gy m n s er an en orce the program and estab- lished the sum of four million doll.ars to be administratively designated - for flood control maintenance projects and related comprehensive flood + ? =.,?'•;? control management plan development. This legislation, codil'i.ed as + C a Chapter 86.26 RCW, Was the basis for Chapter 173-145 WAC which was ori inall ado t d i 1985 - g y p e n . Substitute House Bill 380, passed by the Legislature in 1985, amended the a - •-. 1984 legislation to require that an approval process for floodplain * ti- p f - management activities and comprehensive flood control management plans be established. r ` .. .. ?'' L}`: .. .. Substitute House Rill 1622, passed by the Legislature in 1986, amended the 1984 and 1985 legislation to allow project planning and design and comprehensive flood control management plans to be eligible for'funding. As of February 1987, Chapter 173-145 WAC is revised to be consistent With tiro current legislation. Chapter 86.26 RCW and Chapter 173-145 WAC provide that grants will be available to public bodies for up to 50 percent of project planning, design and ronstruction costs fur uoucnu•rgency projects, up to 80 percent. of emorgency projects, and up to 75 percent of comprehensive floor) control management plan preparation costs. ? . ...::w y +?>o- 4? +a .ari'naeat .91M Frra miii IF!u z.I ? rr:,a a e ?u5°nsrM"em? f2?ti; 1>b ?"' y 'r9 1 tie ??) J ?? L.({. 1 . ! a I j 1 ? 1 1, I F p I +! _ ? 4 T¢ I , + l ?a r tL' ? I ay -.}r?q iF'rvv? 9 A .f 1 V j °6 , 4 J t + ? I ? 4 rl ? 1p. .t1?, } % f }, w 14 Y - ''1? I A 4 • Y Y R ? 2.02. Applicant Elj2,ibiliL Any agency may apply to the Department of Ecology for funding assistance provided that it is an eligible county, city, town, conservation s ' district, flood control zone district, or any special district subject to flood conditions. ;'. The following requirements must be met before an applicant is eligible for consideration of a grant: ` 1. The applicant must have flood control responsibilities over the area r where the project will be located. 2. The applicant must have an approved budget for flood control y p purposes. y' - p¢ 3. The appropriate local authority (county, city, or town) must be ,;. engaging in floodplain management activities including participation ,--; in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). _ 4. The appropriate local authority must have adopted or be preparing a comprehensive flood control management plan. 2.03. Summaryof Major Policies f 1 1. Projects planned or constructed under a grant must meet all p o- _ applicable federal, state, and local regulations. All necessary permits or authorizations must be obtained prior to final signature of the grant by Ecology. All grant agreements are written between )r the Department of Ecology and the county within which the project or comprehensive plan is located. In cases where the county is not the applicant, the county will prepare subagreements with the applicant. For purposes of these guidelines the county is always considered as D `yy the grantee even though the applicant is the public entity which fr will be ultimately reimbursed for a portion of the costs incurred. .? 2. A comprehensive flood control management plan (CFCMP) must either be in preparation or be completed and adopted by the appropriate local authority and approved by Ecology. The plan must be completed and adopted within three years of the date of certification. Certifica- tion is the written agreement between Ecology and the applicant which verifies the understanding as to what the local planning effort will be, the timing and anticipated product, and a reporting schedule that will allow for Ecology review and input during the plan development. Certification of comprehensive plans will be a condition of all FCAAP grants except for emergency projects executed for the 1987-1989 biennium. Area of coverage for the comprehensive plan shall include, as a minimum, the area of the one-hundred year frequency flood plain within a reach of the watershed of sufficient length to ensure that it comprehensive evaluation can be made of the flood problems for a specific reach of the watershed. Counties, -2- N ? 1 q ! ' Y +?1' +1 l "h.1 'i?Y Y ? L?l M 11 J g F 14i x ?rt d x ?.1 ')YIMY b Nn?Cr VR } i l ? r t ,. 1 i {t I ? ? ?, ? ? Ay y? + ]? Yf?? ' Dl? ? 3 t Yek t i A r ' la ? Y ? y r.? r r ? ? r i ". 1 xt s 40, cities, and towns are encouraged to include their entire jurisdictional area in the development of a comprehensive plan. If appropriate, analysis of flood problems for separate drainage basins - - (watersheds), may be incorporated into the plan at a later date, provided this planning effort is done prior to or concurrently with the performance of any FCAAP funded non-emergency flood control maintenance work within those basins. n? 3. Upon establishment of applicant eligibility, an execution of the grant agreement is contingent upon availability of funds. +r 4. Grants are made on a reimbursable basis, whereby the grantee expends its own funds and submits vouchers to the department for - reimbursement. 5. All grants are awarded through means of a contract document that legally binds the grantee and the department to specific commitments. 6. Grants for projects and plans which continue for more than one biennium may be prepared or may be extended to the estimated completion date. Grant agreements which cover more than one _ biennium must include the portion of the work and associated costs estimated to be completed in each biennium. The grantee must notify Ecology in writing at the end of the biennium of the portion of the work completed and submit the associated billing. Funding .? for any work performed during a new biennium is subject to further FCAAP appropriation by the legislature. 7. Any costs incurred prior to execution of a grant agreement, following expiration of a grant agreement, or outside the terms and conditions of an executed grant agreement. are ineligible. If pre- viously approved by Ecology, preconstruction costs incurred within 60 days of commencement of construction are eligible. 8. llost costs associated with comprehensive planning, and engineering planning and construction of an eligible project are grant eligible if: (1) they are necessary and reasonable, (2) they are consistent. with federal, state and local laws and regulations, and (3) they are consistent with these Guidelines and the "Financial Guidelines for Grants Management." 9. An applicant must demonstrate that the project will. provide a public benefit. Where appropriate, this may include a cost benefit analysis. 2.04 Communication wiLh_the Department of Ecology Questions regarding these guidelines may be addressed to: Department of Ecology Floodplai.n Management Sectiun Shorelands and Coastal Zone Management Program Mail Stop PV-11 Olympia, WA 99504 -3- Chapter 3 - fligihle and Ineligible Costs :1.01 Scope of,ChaI)Le.r This chapter provides guidance on the grant eligibility of various components of flood control maintenance programs. 3.02 General FCAAP grants will be awarded for flood control maintenance work and for . the development of comprehensive flood control management plans. The Flood Control Assistance Account Program is intended to restore, main- tain, and repair natural conditions, works and structures. Construction of new facilities will not be eligible. Costs associated with the pre- paration of the grant application are not eligible. Administrative costs associated with the execution of the project or plan must be consistent with those costs identified in the "Financial Guidelines for Grants Management." The following; categories summarize the types of costs eligible for project assi:;Lance. The specific examples listed are typical examples and are not all inclusive. 3.03 Category I Comprehensive Flood Control Management Plans _ The development and implementation of Comprehensive Flood Control Management Flans involves a series of activities which are eligible, including: • Grantee expenses such as the costs of salaries, benefits, and expendable material that the grantee incur- for the plan development; 0 Professional and consultant services costs associated with the plan development; Comprehensive Flood Control Management Plans involve: • Determination of the need for flood control work: drainage and hydrologic evaluations, historic damage and flood control efforts, development. patterns, and public facilities; • The evaluation of alternative structural and nonstructural measures for reducing flood damages; • proposed solutions and implementation strategies. 3.04 CaLcgory_2- Non-Emergency Projects Eligible costs for nonemergency projects include., but may not be limited to the following: -4- 1 I i J j` The preparation of construction drawings and specifications, ?j IB C' -_ • Cost estimates, - • Project specific planning, • Construction contract documents, - a Restoration of the capacity of the channel through removal of debris blocking the channel or removal of gravel or sediments, - e Repair or restoration of existing dikes or levees, which provide flood protection above the existing bank elevation, - - • Restoration of the predominant channel alignment, • Protection of an existing eroding bank which may or may not have _ 'J - had previous bank protection measures with rock riprap, jetties, revegetation, or through other means which do not provide flood r - protection above the existing bank elevation, - " r • Removal of brush, trees, etc., from existing flood control facilities, ! ' • Repair or reconstruction of pump plants, flap gates, culverts, trash racks, tidal. control structures and other machinery or equipment intended for flood control, `. 4 • Repair or reconstruction of roadways or trails leading to flood - control facilities, - _ • Work on settling basins used to prevent soil, gravel and debris ' from settling and plugging downstream facilities. - ' 3.05 Category 3=_Emergency Pro.-iects All work shown in 3.04 Category 2 - Non-P"mergencY Pro jects as non-emergency 4r projects is eligible for emergency projects. An emergency project is one which has to be done immediately to protect ? - life or public property. r 'e t To be eligible for emergency funding, the declaration of an emergency by the appropriate local authority roust be made. ,r J ? ti r A grant agreement for an emergency project will only be executed if 4'k ?'-- approval has been obtained from the Department by the applicant prior •y,,' ?,l? yid ^'F f to construction activities. ti µ Costs 3.06 lncl igihlc ,_ Ineligible costs include, but may not be limited to the following: ;sityti ??`,?,. • Haisiny, or extending dikes or levees, -5- 7 ??.w??h?X. .1+r LYl.: rr ' • ` f d ^' ! ' ? ?? I {r / r r ? . , 3 1Nf f r N 4 5 ? 4, y + Q r ions , 1 1 t + 1 _ t ?• ti ?, ). µ? (} l i Try f/J ?{ fl? '] ? y f1 A., I 0 C • Structures or works which are used solely for the detention or storage of flood waters, • Roadway culverts or bridge replacements to increase channel capacity, • Neu dikes, levees, bridges, culverts, or other flood control facilities, • Work associated with the State Environmental Policy Act, including increased planning costs related to a determination of nousignificance or preparation of an environmental impact statement. Chapter 4 - Application Procedures 4.01 Scope oC_Cha er This chapter explains application procedures and the grant agreement processing sequence used by the department. 4.02 Prplication The applicant may request a preapplication conference with Department of Ecology personnel. This conference will better familiarize the applicant with eligibility requirements and application procedures. The applicant is encouraged to consult with the county engineer and the departments of Fisheries and Game regarding the development of the project. 4.03 AlTlication Application forms may be obtained from the county engineer or from the Department of Ecology address listed in 2.04 Communication with the Department of Ecology. The application should be completed by the appli- cant and submitted through the county engineer of the county in which the application is to be made. The county engineer should assign a priority number Lo the application in relation to all projects within the county. The engineer should then submit the application to the Department. The grantee must be the county in which the proposal. is to be done. 4.04 lfudgel.,.ln(ormalion The Budget Information portion of the application shall consist of a detailed project or comprehensive flood control management plan descrip- tion and a cost estimate with detailed budget information. This informa- tion is used by the Department. to determine the grant eligibility and priority and must be sufficiently detailed to enable the Department to make an adequate evaluation of the proposal. -6- t?r° i S ' *` 10 ?? t 6 5 y pp ? ' 1. ? f 1 ^r tl 4.05 Funding Approval The Department will evaluate the application for eligibility. This evaluation will be done in consultation with the departments of Fisheries and Came. The Department may find it necessary to meet with the applicant to clarif the l y proposa as to intent and scope of work. Upon establishment of eligibility, the Department will determin th i i e e pr or ty of this application in relation to other applications received. - The applicant will be notified in writing as to the status of its application. s 4.06 Grant Agreement Preparation , F Upon approval of funding, the following administrative departmental _ procedures will occur: • a grant agreement will be prepared; • the grant will be approved and signed by an Assistant Attorney General. as to its legality; • the department will administratively reserve funds for the proposal. r • Two copies of the grant will then be sent to the County engineer for signature. The copies of the grant must be returned to the Depart- ment for signature. a, 4.07 Effective Date o1' Grant Agreement The effective date of the grant agreement is normally tho date of signature by the Program Manager or the Deputy Director. For purposes of comprehensive plan development, this dale will be the date of certi- fication. See also 5.05, Grant Award and Authorization to Proceed. Upon signature, a copy of the grant agreement will he sent to the county. Grants for non-emergency projects will not be signed by the Department until it has been shown that all necessary permits have been secured. Chapter 5 - Grant Administration 5.01 Scope_of Chapter This chapter explains policies and procedures from the date of grant agreement until completion. -7- a: r ?i n uYS r? u ,. ? i w r ac l ?? t 'W?1 '; a px 4.l» ;EtiPr P ?ml'?: F Sa a ' ? war a ? ? ? Ta s G. ?`" f 7 ' .fir MY ° f 4??? n ??,? ; r `- i + Y ? y ,< r f , . r f A grant award is made when a grant agreement has been fully executed. The date of signature by the Program Manager or the Deputy Director of 'o. the Department of Ecology is generally the effective date of the ` agreement. tic costs incurred prior to the effective date are grant eligible unless specific provision is made in the agreement for such costs. Any such specific provisions must have been verbally approved by the appropriate representative of the Department prior to the work being performed. 5.06 "Financial Guidelines for Grants Management" The publication entitled "Financial Guidelines for Grants Management" published by the Department of Ecology Office of Management and Budget contains the general grant administration guidelines to be followed by the department and the grantee. The grantee should tic familiar with the ti financial guidelines in order to assure that proper procedures are being followed. A? A0 x °•" 5.07 Efficient and Effective management i Each grantee is responsible for the efficient and effective administration of the grant program through the application of sound lp ?. management practices. The County Engineer or designee is responsible for this administration. The appointment of a designated individual to administer the program must be indicated in writing to the Department r ` - I ,;v4 prior to construction commencing. For purposes of these guidelines, the term "county engineer" has been used, where appropriate, the Public Works Director may be substituted. a t[ I ' 5.08 Conformity with Agreements and Project Objectives ? The grantee assumes responsibility for seeing that program funds have been expended and accounted for consistent with underlying agreements and ' program objectives. Ott , ' 5.09 Reimbursement Policy k Grants made to counties are on a reimbursable basis. The participant N FFF initially pays costs in full, whereupon after presentation of a billing ' to the department, the department's share is reimbursed to the partici- pant. Ten percent of each voucher is withheld as security for the - - grantee's performance until the Department is satisfied that the work has been completed in compliance with the grant agreement. Payments will not be made more often than once per month. - u 5.10 Projects not Constructed It is the responsibility of the grantee to notify the department when it 1 has been determined that a project in which a grant has been executed ,- t will not be done. Funds allocated to a county for a specific project but "? not used for that project must be released to the department. for reauthori- zation. The county may submit a request for funding of additional pro- jects but the allocation of funds will be contingent on availability of _ funds and the previously established prioritized list established by the t department. fir _ w 5.11 Progress of Work Following the grant award, the applicant is expected to initiate the work as soon as possible. The department realizes there are unfore- seen circumstances that may result in delays. It is the responsibility of the applicant to take all necessary actions to ensure that the work progresses satisfactorily. Depending on circumstances, failure to complete the work within Lhe period specified in the grant agreement may result in withdrawal of. the grant. regardless of the percent of the completion attained. It is the grantee's responsibility to notify the department as soon as it has been determined that work will not be completed within the intended time period. -9- - 5.12 Billing Prucedures Requests for reimbursement will be submitted b the voucher request forms provided by the department. Big an e should n state be submitted at least quarterly and not more often than monthly. Payments must be made to the grantee who will then reimburse the applicant. 5.13 Site Inspections The department reserves the right to conduct site inspections of all grant projects. Interim inspections will be made during the project period to ensure satisfactory progress on the project and to help resolve any apparent or anticipated problems. A final inspection will be made prior to final reimbursement to ensure that the project has been completed in compliance with the project contract. 5.14 Grant Aprcement Amendments A formal contract amendment signed by the Program Manager of the '.: Department of Ecology and the authorized county official is necessary for any significant change in an agreement. A significant change includes, but is not limited to, any change in the contract schedule, which will result in the work being completed after the contract completion date, and any increase to the total cost. Contract changes which do not change the overall project scope may be implemented by the grantee provided prior department approval is obtained. Verbal approval may be given by Ecology provided that proper written documentation and approval. follows. Justification for contract changes must be provided in writing if required by the Contract Officer. This justification should include an explanation of the situation necessitating a change, the effects of the change, and the alternatives reviewed. 5.15 Final Billing Following project completion, or comprehensive flood control management plan approval, final billing, and a final inspection by the department, final payment will. be made within sixty (60) days. Final payment will be to the grantee who will. then have the responsibility to reimburse the applicant. If any grantee fails to submit a final billing, the contract officer will notify the grantee in writing of the need to comply within thirty (30) days after receiving the notice, and the contract officer may close the grant agreement file without further payment or refuse to accept further applications from the applicant until final billing has been submitted. -10- i k J? d e •. ANDREA BEATTY RM2KER y _ y>1? t y+ M+ Di ecla I " I STATE OF WASHINGTON ' . DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mail Stop PV-11 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8711 • (2W) 459-6000 February 17, 1987 FACT SHEET ON ll z FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM The Flood Control Assistance Account Program (FCAAP) is established under the authority of RCW 86.26 State Participation in Flood Control Maintenance. The program assists local authorities in flood control maintenance projects associated with public benefits which maintain and `rt restore the normal and reasonable stable river and stream channel alignment and capacity for carrying flood waters with the minimum of damage from bank erosion or overflow onto adjacent lands and property. The Flood Control Assistance Account Program also seeks to restore, maintain, v_ and repair natural conditions, works and structures for the maintenance of such conditions. Protection from inundation or other damage by the sea or other bodies of water is also included. A total of four million dollars in state funds tr' per biennium is set aside for this program. FCAAP funds are available for the development of comprehensive flood control management plans (CFCMP), with a minimum of a twenty-five percent local match. A local match of at least fifty percent is required for nonemergency projects and emergency projects projects require at least a twenty percent local match. Certain planning and regulatory activities are required in order to be eligible for matching funds for maintenance projects. Local authorities must be practicing flood plain management activities that are approved by the Department of Ecology. The local authority must also adopt comprehensive flood control management plans and submit them to the Department of Ecology for approval. Emphasis will be placed on funding comprehensive flood control management plans in the 1987-1989 biennium. Program regulations have been revised and were adopted on 4!",`'1 January 27, 1987 and will become effective on February 28, 1987. Applications are available from the Department of Ecology, Applications are submitted through the appropriate county engineer. Applications will be accepted throughout the 1987-1989 biennium. March 31, 1987, is the deadline for grant applications to be considered before the beginning of s the biennium. .9g., OTS-1336:1 Ali: E3 - Chapter 173-145 WAC ADMTNISTRATTON OF THE FLOOD CONTROL ASSTSTANCF. ACCOUNT PRIlc HAM WAC _ 173-145-010 Authority and purpose. 173-145-020 Definitions. 173-145-030 Eligibility criteria for FCAAP funds. 173-145-040 Comprehensive flood control management plan 173-145-050 Flood plain management activities. 173-145-060 FCAAP project application process. 173-14'.-070 FCAAP project approval prccosr. ? 173-145-080 ((Prietily-of-f'fAhF-prejeeln)) Cr iter_=for allocation of funds. 173-145-090 Flood control assistance account ((ean lribnkinnm-enA Prejee+-mnt'+ )) fundLng and natching requirements. 173-145-100 Emergency fund administration. 173-145-110 Multi((-))year projects. _ 173-145-120 Work standards for all FCAAP projects. - 173-145-130 Project construction monitoring. 173-145-140 Written agreements. - 173-145-155 Approval of changes to written agreements. AM_90AIM-1-fECTION (Amending Order DE 85-10, filed 6/21/85) WAC 173-145-010 AUTHORITY AND PURPCSF.. ((f he Pt et-?i?;-hnwe-ef i9P.4;-regn}nr-s enmien;-enended-ekeeker-86:$6-FEW;-e!nle--Pnekicinatien - in--£ioed--eenl re}--mainlenanee-the-eek};-FeW-86:?f -Oi B-nnd-Be.i6:igO Peoride-thel-lhe-Neehingtee-deperlmenk-a£-eee}egy-{WOGS}-she}}--ndmin- ieter-en01-enferee-ehe-f}<ed-centre}-easietepee-neeenn!-Progtem-jffAR9} 'ode enteh}iahed--hy--lhe--net:)) IICW R6.26_O50_nro_vfjes that counting -nM : other annicinal corporations r_., n^tble for fl I rr :1 mi nt ?r cc " -fl' ___ __ may apelv_t o`th_rlepact Went of egnlogy_for fin an cia l____:i sl7ncn__for manner in act. nls cnapter uescrlne_: the nt the provinions of the A]yMnAF?3y_5_FCTl4 (Amending Order DE 05-10, filed 6/21/00 WAC 173-1a,-020 DEFINITIONS. For the put f"tu c•s of thi:: ch:mtcr ((nnd-man' egnnn!-r r gn rotten 1-f "me in eed-for-f lead p}n i n- eenmq-t- rro- grnan-in-Weahfngeen)), the following definitions shall be used: (1) "Applicant." ((!e) ) An eligible municipal corporation cooking match Ing fundu for flood control maintenance work. (2) "APprm pri i to local authority." ((}e)) F county, city, or town having planning and land use jurisdiction within ((the)) d__qfv_ey irca wA ls("_j_ covere.l by the ((ePen7)) ggMEFffI!_°11.fye_f loon cone r_j__anlgg_ eln3_nlan• (31 .S^_LS1:zjnt4f nn:__'.?SnFSitlsAllsn..1M? +Le__wSfff^_n__Sonf.,S:L_jtf nn hetwg nn__cgnjn7 Y__1nd __thp__pnF oLrtnto lg c?i l_MptheL ity__i nit_tlic_cnuMty ( 1 ) S ,11 i i f F_119;1:1 Cd o'P^-1335:1 ' 4 rv? h•"S.. - engineer vh ich ve rif is s_the_understn n3ing an_ uhat_th e_comnrelennivv_e fl ai eg_n erol_xna ge ert?an i_L1 containi_the ti ing_nl antic l ted prp3uctL_nd a_re _orting_scl dole that vt31 silo. Eor_ cglojy _re i _ nn_innut dnri ng_the_Ll3p develgpmcnt. ev 1uL -,Comprehensive flood control management plan (C.CIIP)." ((is)1 A document which ((prerides-e-means-e'.-piartni ng-for-end-ern}nnling-the iepaete--of-a-f}eed-eer.tre}-peegres-within-a-ewer-batirv-ea}hesin,-er ocF.er-Wren-to-ensure-thae-werk-done-on- spee4f ie-rrejeet-nntiriti --4e e eepnt4}}t--tit h--the-g na}s-and-ehjeehiroes-fee-the-e r«n-earerti-hY-the e}an)) deters is es_the_need__3r_f to cii contrcl world=onsi?lprs__nltecn3- ii a to in stream fl d=or trill work tienr !Fla. in can ii r p t.N n_ teal in racts_?f i !ream fl_oA con tr_1_vcrk n tl ..stet. _ l.r__trc im re n3 tees s d i_icntifigs thi river' m__n ,ler_hi11__pt Lond ?l y, an dercribed in WAC 173-145-040. (({4})) 151 "County engineer." ((is)) The appointed public works director, county engineer, or the person designatol to act for the county en gincer. ne ((inc}ndea-}nt-iy (({5})) 1FL "Eligible municipal corporation." e-}inited-to)) Counties, cities, towns, conservation districts, ((nod)) flocd_c outrol_zone districts. pr any special distrir.t.. ((rhieh heve-f}eed-eertm }-respenaibititzenj) subject to_fl_d can?titfpns. (({5})1 17L "Emergency fund." ((4n)) 2hat portion of the biennial appropriation allocated to the flcad control assistance account which is set aside for emergency projects. ((17k)) 1221 "Emergency project." ((is)) Flood control work npc! sarY_f or_reae ens rleclured by_r i,e _acp ranria to local. antLority__And as authorived and approved by ((WfleW ecology which must be done immedi- ately to protect lives ((nod)) or property. MA})) 12L "Flood compatible land uses." vhoso uses of the land withir. the river's meander belt or flood way which comply with the min- imum state, federal, and local flood plain management rogulatin:: CegnlCC 6f :tt .".. l(1g}--"`}eed--senora}-reapon•+ibi}ityw-irnny-etntntnry-r«ypennt- hi}ity-rbieh-iee}odes-et-is--diree k3 y--re }e tei--to--e ent2e}}ing--fiaai ratera;--prerenlion--et--f}Wad--dosages;-er-the-proteetien-nf-}tfe-erd properly-Free-E}eed-dneagens)) (10) "Flood plain management activities." (late--rtelivif its--nn defined) ) Actt_vitie des c);i bed in WAC 173-145-050 ((+o-be)) performed by local governments through ordinances or ether moans to reduce the damaging effects of flooding. (11J "Floolway." ((m enna--lhe-toga}story-f}nodrey-ns-defined-ire WAF-4 a.3 45-Jv'9{94h1) The chanpol cf__I - gr r. the r_va?o rc puree nn•i the_Te]lacen t?_ingn__are_s that most he 5e_er_vet in u_N_e r_Co_ili ^,chZrgc. laS tdsK19II9_hl'p1Led__'g]S _SEe33encYL_S3ccal wt_theu. cumulnti_ve1-_v ig?fea ai ng_SiLO__y3teL_suSf nco_elevation nore_thin i !l o_s iquand_hri1tf• (12) "Maintenince project.' ((ts)) ?he vmrk necessary to prosnrvo or restore the natural condition or to restore man-made flood control facilities to their termer condition using in-kind replacement matcri- als or no captable al ter natiwas. This work is neeesuary due to dnSici- patel_oL_actujl damage or destruction from flcoding by action of croaion, stream flow, sheet runoff, or other damages by the soi or other bodies of viter- (13) "Meander bolt." ((is)) :hat porticn of the flood plain, ((for--nt reeee--rhieh--hnvt-meandered-ever-resent-timesr)) that can be identified by the evidence of present and previous moanders. This shall include the present stream channel. Whecn_thelo-i_l19_LAC1111_ 5151_5133'Lw.ilYa_Sh3S_9L'3il_Yti9t_i.°__51499pF9n£_?0'!__b77--n1Li1dL__S9Q3_ 9Liphi3__sh>ZLnsS4Ll?Sis$?8_IILS9s9!_2p1_hi st 9L19_9fio_nL"= h?+_pss1-_gh31! Fc seem) ((-R{i s_1_3L_t9i5. (tuJ ((w Reqa}ttoelry-E}eedreyv-assn ?-the--ehe tens}--of--n--ri ter--nr elher-rntereenrse-end-lhe-edjaee nt-ieni-rtreen-lhrtt-mn sf.-bn-re nerved-in seder-te-di Webs rg e-ehe-bnerjene-hn ndred-Meer-f 2egneney}-'. }ewi-tithes! euau}ec ire}y-inerenning-the-refer-enrfnee-e}eve!}en-mere-tfi nn-a-desig- nnted--hetghlvll _CII1'liS_t9II95iSi" -.?3peSSS_S9_!h9_hS3!Sh._57:L'SYa !?L lfl0.3Ld1_"_g11IIi3_3!_4hp_3iS!E9IIp_35?t3_pS9Sp?L_?3NP9g!SY__3!__Lnig! Ebi.h_Ln5II13. _f t3-11 _URN_E3IISL31_P=Jj '1S_9L_IIlan.._3L__s@3_hsn9!il_t•, Yhi9h__1h91L?Lilhlp__3L_iifltill!i99 n64?55P9S9'!_Lh9t_hn_n0_915n9!_4L C 2 k[t? _ . LA 1 A, 51- }?t?1pp? w. w 'v Tn'. . '''.r ?,.,v?':?F•? ? '7':'-,?f .+"WL 7PlCiS :,•,'?.r+'h'>?'??. rl AW 7 , 'k4 4 ?° st ' !J ?w??Rc ?? 4 ?av?3f 31 r '? 1 r ? i t S 4 r •. 1 i ? r ?t s r a •, ` dd 4 ? Alf?'jtxrNl?. 1• L ? 1 , 1 _ t U ) l 11, kup ? 3 $ J n Sri MW %V y ha'r ,wf)" d y> n+ "? Yk'maa - Am oft 1 ` SOTS-1736;1 _ ?nu blic nr art or f cilities owned or maintained _h an eli able ., •?' - ?... municipal corpgrrt ion_ ' 11? 5 dal di trict_rA _A_din_t riot as defined in chapter _85.38 - FCU vhech eith r a dik>.ng district a dra in aye distri t a dlking? d in age un d[or ev_er_ge improvement distri t ar._intercn sty ltkiny '? and dcain_ge rlistr icty_a consolid tad diking _di trio` tra t Iikinn improvement_d istrict`nd[cr drainage iopro_vement dis- ;!: r ?' tricty_ r a_flood_antrol dr.stric!_ _ - A y A 3 A ( ? C a AME NDA TOpY S^CTION (Amending Order DE 85-10, filed 6/21/85) Y WAC 171-145-030 ELIGIBILITY CRIT EDIA FOR FCAAP FUNDS- Criteria 8 to be used in determining eligibility ((of-mp)) for FCAAP ((nrajeet epn}ie•etion)) Eunds arc as follows: (1) Eligible municipal corporation. The applicant must be an eligible municipal corporation as defined in VAC 173-145-020(({5})) - M 161- 1 (2) Public benefit. ((it-mhn}}--te--a}eeriy--demenetreted).) The agglic_ant_ must demonstrate that ((the)) their comprehen siv_e_floorl con_ ,? trol aa_n agement_ plan _and flood control maintenance projects shall .y( ((d imp}ey e) ) further the general public and state interest as differ- entiated from a private interest and that they shall bring about pub- lic bene-'its commensurate with FCAAP funds provided. 1 (7) Comprehensive flood control management plan. The reauire- ments of WAC 173-145-040 must be complied with by the appropriate local authority with flood control jurisdiction over the area where the proposed project is lccated. (4) Flood plain management activities. The appropriate local, + authority within whose jurisdiction projects are located shall he engaging in ((those-eertain)) 12pro3!ed flood plain management activi- ties as dcscrib ed in WAC 173-145-050. S o (5) Budget report. Any eligible municipal corporation seeking } x FCAAP funds shall submit its annual budget for flood control purposes to the county engineer within thirty calendar days after its final ' adoption. the county engineer shall then forward the budget report for eligible municipal corporations and for the county ((she}}-he-oat- r^m? _ vi tted--to--WBB E--by-the-eeunty-engineer-net-}e ter-then-February-45-of 1 F' > 7r, every-year)) to nralo4y__The Snformatipn_yill provilic the hr_i, fgr j - preps rati n of a pr limina [y plan for the most F npfielal and orderly _ iljocatian f FCAAP Eund Soil cnnservit ion distri ct sha l_1 Fe 2 ,? ? ,`, exempt from_th__pr__i_t ens of this section - -- It 3 ;.`? , ?.. ? ? 3tMMAIOgy_5_'C,^ION (Amending Order DE 05-10, filed 6/21/05) u%C 173-145-040 COMPREHENSIVE FLOOD CONTROL MANAGEMENT PLAN 1Cec!PL• The county engineer of the county within which the mainte- nance project is located must certify that the ((p}en)) cpr.Ilf has been completed and ldoptod by the appropriate local authority or is being prepared. Cemp12hen}1jye clooi cgntro l_mgnyg_omonts lg ns? inLf_,Lny_rrvi_ niopp_tn_the :+l gpsimup t_be apprnverl by_gcol agy`ig_oonnn lt,at ion___v ith th&__14P3ES4eIlt_45?tLSherJoy__?nd_n nge. Th. ((eempeehenmiwe-p}ne7) lefgmpL must bo completed and adopted within three years of the date that it in certified an being prepared. Tf,,_nftgr_thn_thrnocL^nr ?YLind_hS:_rlups4l?_844h_J_p1nIl_ha s_ngt_hgep?c amnl L+t_d_ and_ ?dontada Punt s_12r_ 1 1n ,2d-seaLul m.1 a tanapce_pg o?ects_hallnot_tp_mad e_ to the °4Il4Y_ 2E_Lr??^_S?u_i+Y_ShQnpi+I4n5.1?ty_345311th9Llt.Y_4!]eit_tj(i _cfr. np n rpm t1er eJ,ugd_adopt ed_hY_th4_dPPLnnLt3 t. 14g91_44th4E1tYe__4url ng hq thLpn_YY3L_p45i4da_FS414ytn_v_ifhig_u_1L41!!9yS_nL4n<_i1L'9.19nutEd_ns dY_Sf?nP_n1s1Y_r!S4da_p9Y_hS_l9pd21_49_E4r1_4f_!_ELd?^A_prn1g51_Pin4a [ 3 ? t`Y d I r u nt u- V, W I n i. 1'f q t Y tl r vya ( . r1 - 4 v t ? i. i r k ;: +l n 1 t, r s ? t r J. k ?n1 1 ? V 1 M 1 (1 1 ?,? I YJ 1 1 + ;' N?t J Fr'1 lei. ? ? 7 1 r Ire i .',I I 7;., , } „p? N - _Aeen__conducted__tn studies_for the CFCNp havo pro vi dpd prm_nary -- _ _ _ _ _f l.ood _p lain_p?oh 1. m r ^-_and year f?egne n one-h un;lcd idcnt iEY th _ _ _ fat r contra 6uting [o floodingl_anA p_ lded_t hat the_propo_ad_pre_ ?: •. ects h v Aeen rte n ttzed_ta achieves the_Sr. test eff ut.ncy sin tarton nn The ae ltm r a t d __ i __ u y flood control for the av_erTll CFCgP s grants shat; n t p[eclude all catinns_f_r emerg_n y jurgn_e mule_pir_ tSm _ t. suant to_pcu 95 26_060_ The appropriate local authority nay reg;irc the applicant to fully or partially fund the preparation of the CFCMP. The plan must include: - (1) Determination of the need for flood central Work. - (a) Description of the watershed. l bl ' pro ems. (b) Tdentification of types of watershed floo: (c) Location and identification of specific prohlem art;;. (3) Description of flood damage history. _ (e) Description of potential flood damages. - (f) Short-term and long-term goals and objectives for the plan- h ning area. 14Lescri pt_on of_regulatjons w_h_cl;_applv_yit hi n_the _watersheds man ag ement nantrr rro- but not limited to local shoreline including 1 i - _ - a sioni_ and flood hazard ordinances grams ? and zonang? subdiv - . ?.: - _ _ _ _ 1h i_Determ in at ion oE_io stream flood_gontrn l_rork hefng_cgr___t.e rat v_ith nnnl3cah le pal i_c res and reg ulations_ - (2) Alternative flood control work. a (a) Description of potential measures of instream flood -trol work. -"" (b) Description of alternatives to instream flood control work. otential impacts of tion of id d x cons era p (3) Identification an instream flood control work on the following instream uses and 3 resources. u la) Fish resources. l (b) Wildlife resources. (s) Scenic, aesthetic, and historic resources. - (d) Navigation. ' (e) Water quality. (f) ffydrology. p (g) Existing recreation- (h) Other. j (4) Area of coverage for the comprehensive plan shall include, as tha area of the one-hundred year frequency flood plain a minimum , within a reach of the watershed of sufficient length to ensure that .a comprehensive evaluation can be made of the flocd problems for a spe- cific reach of the watershed. The plan may or may not include an d i d fl d h 1 G azar nc lu o oo entire watershed. Comprehensive plans shall also areas not subject to rivarine flooding such as areas subject t.e , coastal flooding, flash flooding, or flooding from inadequate drain- i•w, t age. [ither__the meander bolt or ((reg«lntery)) flood lay r. hall he identified on aerial photographs or maps which will be included with a the plan. (5) Conclusion and proposed solution(s). The CFCMP shall be fin- alized by the fallowing action from the appropriate local authority; 1 Ev (a) aluat ion of problems and needs; ' (b) Evaluation of alternative solutions; I.;. (c) Recommended corrective action (s) with proposed impact reselu- ??- Lien maanures for res ourco losses; and (1 ) Corrective action priority. g£ cgmmupj,5y_rlev't_ ih= n43 191MUEnni 16d L rtlLisdtisn Ls4a 1 _ _ _ _ _14c11_f'mpS44n£Y_9anagepent orgap?za t_bSp_i_ 49m101.s t.. r. 4p9SpS_1113St112 ? i 1 J r b v_4_.ggeS pncY_SI9Lg1 1n. 2Dn_p SL9_]J1_1G?npSShag_g4@pESh9n3 .` h 4 - y' AUMAI4EI_2191101 (Amending Order DE 05-10, filed 6/21/85) ;;- I(4n-he-e}t- VAC 173-145-OSO FLOOD PLAIN YANAOEMF.NT ACTTVTTTES. ?, r giA{«--for--a2AAP--tiund}ngl--lhe--nppr«prie ce-ker.«1-n nlherit!«.-rittin ? 8 + !. .R 4.,vWN ? !, ..T I } 'P, R M ? OTS-17 1G 1 td g7.. : . rhos.-jurisdiction-!he)) imcal jurisdictions within vhich_ flood_ con- ?Z9 s trol x_intenance projects are Located, must be engaging an flood plain management activities ((r hieh--vxii-pcotee! er-prevent E}oed-dome gs. £rem-eocmrring-te-fntuxe-structures voeksT .nd -imp xav nen,s--rilhin - lheir--jn r isd}e tionc--Fhe--dePeet. met--of-e.ole gy-.h.I}-f tnd-the,-they -? -_ ere)) - Pur=rant to chanter eGs26 PC4 the director ofthe_ department i J _ v of ecology n t approve the flood pia n management_acti itie of the the h 'A ere county city, o_ to n havingujuris lieti_n o er the r ? v_ the loc l f l F C b a ing_ unr le for _ C A Al! _ project_w_111 hr located_ To be eligi jridiction sh all_be_reouar d tm: (1) ((Pertiexp.king)) Participate in the National Flood Tnsurance ll of the NFIP requirements. t u a Program (NFI P) and ((meeting)) mee (?) ((Bert}f y-th reegh-the-slaate-department-ef--e me rgeney--m.nnrye- ` .ant-that-the-}see}-e.exgeneT-snnngement-ergenirntion-is-edministeeinq - ? en-eeeeplnhesteemprne-emergency-operel}nn: - j8}--Reolri?ting)) R 1estrict land uses within the meander belt cr floodway of rivers to only flood compatible uses. Yhrte annlicn blc? r - - adopt ed_shorgline_management ma_tet_pr og Saps ill he c nsid-red a min_ F , ?- ` FIV - imur?_land else measure_ _ q¢v..; x 1 - A1Et12A12PY_SECT1OP. (Amending Order DE 85-10, filed 6/21/85) VAC 173-145-060 FCAAP PROJI CT APPLICATION PROCESS. The project ible munic iral corporations' applica- the eli ess fo ti li A" g ca on proc r app iven e uence l h 'S . q g e genera s times shall include the follovinq in t (1) The applicant shall prepare the project application to comply h with the previsions of chapter 86.26 RCW and this chapter. The appli- " cation shall be made on a form furnished by ((WBBE)) ecology. A com- plete application shall include the following: (a) A written description ((.nd-cost-esexme,ep of the project con?ining_ !he_ followi?__a_s__a minlm_uml_17ame_of applicant?_name of allgct d itrr h dy yroject u mart' location noon n5 of 1 cal mat hi ' t '^ d_1nc 1 funding s uFce and propo se. 2 projr5_ lc_ent_1 ientifying major (b) A detail d o.? gtAmate '._ tF z _ _ 1gl A ((viein}!y)) map ((end--s ketch)) to identify water body A k names, stream river mile action-tcvnship-range; ((teY-A-ge nern}-peen dr.ring-eftthe-prejeet-en-Zn-°B-9f9-x-ii°tee iruction p11gs: and 4 w-sheet)) (d1 Con _ , ((fd})) ,(_l A description of the project benefits which describe l <i1 _ opment how the project will mitigate flood damages and describe deve which exists on adjacent and nearby lands vhich are protected by the facility. (2) The applicant shall review the preliminary project proposal with the county ongir.cer, the Washington departments of fishecien or gave and the depactment of natural resources and any affected Indian i tribes. ' (3) The applicant shall submit a prioritized list of project + applications to the county engineer. (4) The county engineer shall submit p prioritized list of all .). q{ r?'"'7 project applications within the county to ((WBBR)) cgplogy. u80e)) t id i h , * o (( ence ev s (5) The county ocgineec shall furn described in t l r r p an ogy that the comprehensive flood control managemen VAC 173-145-040 i@_hSSniLHEOP1Ced_ og is completed and_1lnpiml hY_!hg gnpjf11!KJ1ir_1gc11_a21p2ri ty or ((nnderveyl) and the flood plain man- i .j' °.-.ft ?, agrment activities described in WAC 173-145-050 ace being implemented. ^- ( 5 1 Ewm,.";.;;, tyW T »tt7J''rTW?? yi? LL{iSrW q.M?? a .. A- 'P'e' r:qe ?j ,m V_ne°?°u !i+r '?q(r°''p?i M ,t r lf4 Y + ? i r j .( ? 5 ! rs ?;r'r S ? i ? •_ r l J t i it' F'? 5 c 21 ? r 1 f 1 ??"cE,?Y ?.5 y ;,?1I1 { r 11,' ? 5 -I t ? ?? ; ? FRI :gym C h OTS-1336.1 L' t - aMEHDATOPY_SECTI09 (Amending Order DE 85-10, tiled 6/21/85) tiAC 173-145-070 FCAAP PROJECT APPROVAL PROCESS. The project approval process foe the eligible municipal ccrperatiens' applications incl ude the 2olloving is the general sequence given. shall (7) ((w BBE)) _ology will ceviev all projects for compliance with the rnguire meats pucrsuant to this chapter and chapter 86.26 RCA. (2) ((ifBA°)) Ecology shall consult with the _tate de pactmen[s of fisheries((;)) 3n1 game((,-end)) in the Jewel pmc nt_af a project Pr i_ o;lty_1=tT_ Tho_st to dePT rtment of natural rc ourcas ((a d--en Y)t< -177- ..a „noon tribes ((regarding-lhe-}ist-oE-ptejeet?)) anal =then prior to 2.-Eproya1 "- (3) ((liBBE-wi}}-ineetperate-the-pr ieritiredt-ef-a}igib}e-pro- egyp b, ?j ,3g: feels-into-ite-tsennia3-Ledge!-far`£nndinq: ^Q cw + he Riven that the e appro_e_therojee t_prl ority_list asy+Loposed or s rev_rse__i - snce vith_public co ments_ Ecology shall prepare and finalize the written agreements with the counties. (({5})) _L71 The counties shall prepare and finalize the written _ agreements with the involved eligible municipal corporations within the county. (({6})) M The construction plans and specifications shall be prepared by the applicant for approval by the county engineer prior to submission to ((w BAE)) ecology for review and a_Eyro_vaI of each project for compliance with all requirements. t (({7})) 19L The applicant shall acquire the necessary federal, " m 3 state, and local permits or authorizations along with any other per- eission required to complete the project. Ae_11DpTOB1_HECTI21 (Amending Order DE 85-10, filed 6/21/B5) LhC 173-145-080 ((fR}AEiRy--BP--fE##P--PB2d8EPH)) OBI:EgZTA. POR is all O PUVRS. The priority given to projects by ((XBBB) ocol- Qqy, the countion, and ether eligible municipal corporations shall involve consideration of the following criteria: (1) The Lolatlons)+i n_ of public benefits ((£rnm-the-prefer.!-ehn}} he-eemnenaerete-wkkh--lhe--eeeonl--of--PE##P--f nnde--grertked--fen--khe prejeet:--R}gher-prieritien-wi}}-ke-given-ke-thoee-peejeeka-which-din- play-grenler-pnh}ie-krnefite-erlhey-re}e!e)) to ((!he)) total projo.ct co.ta. (2) ((4he-priority-liven-tn-the-project a-by-4BBR-nhe}}-eeneide r)) The priority which has already been established by each county. 1 intenr. ity?$ local Elrod con4cyt. aP?gQ mont_FLot+l em?__inclurl_ inohut_not_Amite$_S2thei? 1Ill-rely 12lioh-Ue vini 1?1_!'Oe?ld.tisn ?ttngtsdL 1L'LPLPPQLSY_a_nd?Sl9te d_+jov ntoPmePt?ff1g5P4. 1c) Land nm4e_neny_ a d_34?1?oi 1d1_&El<Lt?g_t1Qn1_cogtLQl m4P]1Q?e?1PL7gt.1Qe9z 141__9heC?!hnSF.&?E_3? eemnl?od_yqQ,.dd-2+ted?_thu_12112v_ing--l3l ni'_oQPi11£Ledi 13L_CoILplBtoncY_Ylth_t1L_tl4lLOrP13n__L3mnnt'?d'3tlnn?l 1o1_LLloC15Y ^f_PLPjo?9P_ldo?tlflel??--4he_219P. 1Q1_? Pore nld.tl2n_QLe dP?LJ!3q?_FQSmm?Ae9At1o??. 11L__..t _n__11_1PPns_n_t_1P?tL99__ge_• _311__t_' og L_e5i f67 nmdvb, YES :Y? C: ?Luhere a CPCM bsLng_ developed cr has not- been-initiated con sideredl for b n ,. y--- e y?ill the_2oLlori of ultijnrlsdictlonal _gooper t-i °- n_??-E__a5 t ro rehensive nr d ' - y _- e un laL i C-r °-u l?ic of a co ptehen ive dev lapgent CYCMP f Logd control management plan ,[-_-.11 pet aoonnel_cr-re_ou re-f_ pla_Oin_g ofAc uah fLnd bilit , iL - y_ 1hL,A Va ila pnrpo sel P-j- ailabilil to£_2ualiEiedme5-ennel oc_resour cesfor ro ect ) Av l i ? _ c construction ou 5oosesi ro c ed vi th in__the effotts undertaken- or__a_P_ n trol c i d ' _ - - g ng .its).-OL erpla nn relationship_to-f1 o their and n _ t - - - - __ ph nning_-jurisdictl0 manaaelentl A.1 lily to mate clSid progte_ss tova d dev_elopment_of-a__com- lan • ment ?.- i n arehenpiv_e flood control manage sed?rticipation of coming oily gr0uns, 21:1= r op asd uh l v* , a ;K _ _p _p jELF.xistiny_ fes-onal oyaniratioll- the gene;a v_gte ir.d us[r ro elamment and implementation of_the ro d the de _ o ters_to_ar t control man amem ent_p3a nn• f loo e i i y v _ prehens AMENDATOPY SECTION (Amending Order DE 85-10, filed 6/21/85) BB J? ((E NAC 173-145-090 FLOOD CONTNOL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT hefe}}ers AND MATCDING DEOJINEMENT S. ((? > ANB--pEBdEE4-N#'FEB)) FUNDING --need--regarding--lhe--pE##P--funding--ter--n}} . 0 'xng-erieerie-she}}--he Peejeetee eo ee!-ehn}}-ne! j;}--4he--.mean!-ef-fE##p-eentr ibntiene-fer-any-F j t-eertetrnetie n-coal: v ?. exceed-fifty-pereenl-af-lhe-lele}-peejee }}-fl enemer gerteY-Prajeete-}n l j?)-4he-tee.}-pe##p-centribnlion-fore in¢v ? eey-eennly-ehe}}-net-exceed-i5001BBB-Per-hienn er-biennium-vi}}-he--ob}igeled--efl__e__Przoezly - F {3}-f?eY-ni}}ien b r r h.eie-f<r-nartener9ene y-prejee {Y}--tlp--te--350070BB--per--bienn iae-ri}}-be-4nrtded-on-e-prierity -f node--ore--erzz}- efle r•_' i9' ?. y d-emerg bee'r+-by-vBBp-rhen-dettvmived-that- ft... eb}e-{5}-. ." eg-e 00B?Pe rebiennin m-mny-be-need-fer-YBBB-ndminislee- l .. fo_l lov ing !}re-ee.te_)) 1],e-flood co-ntjolt assnatofcea-4h biEnniu m.e_The - i??p?L,na.y cjjo, (Amonding Crdar DE 05-10, tiled 6/21/115) V'AC 113-145-100 EMEECENCY FUND ADMINISTRATION- F8L3?___ha11__hi DY911gh1S_-.1s.___S1g2- gP?SFP1__Ei?jS5tn__i?--F°-tp-00?='2tg--g?g?nala ?ntgcpgeahls???d !±meCg??rug?1_gPDlltl?PA dlld_ph bbl-hP_9llo5ncc1--l? [ 7 ) WIMP OTS-1336:1 E or_the p[eser _vatton of_lite amt_property_ The fol- amounts ade2ud te Eund_ _ lowing criteria shall be the basis of allocating the eme rgency y ((meneym)) (1) Appropriations from the FCAAP fund for emergency projects - local i ate will require the declaration of an emergency by the appropr r _ authority. (2) Application for emergency funds must be made on the form 2 used for nonemergeney fund applications. (3) Payment of FCAAP funds for emergency projects will he based on project construction costs. Flood fighting ccs is may he included. hall he k s (4) Payment ((from-!he)) f2r emergency ((4nnd)) _or d shall not be hosed on allocated on a first-come first-sorve basis an - any priority system. (5) ((:aergency-Prejeet-gremtm-shed-le-npPreved-by-the--direetee P o£-tb -1eP.rlmert-o£-ec.1-37r t'6}--She-maxienm-e meaat-ef-aeney-e}lee ated-for-emer genet'-projects , ,(y - shn}}-be-6598;089-per-bienn}nm: lo emergency funds may etion of ((4fl09)) eo di h scr {a})) At t e ((rhea future-emer be made available for use on -emergency projects geaeies-ere-imprebabi e)). - (({9})) d6L The maximum amount -Ofeme rgo nc nEunds initially. available for any one county is ((5959 9ee)) one h mi rod_ fif ty_ the_u_ ,. sapd__tolla5s per biennium. If the total ((S 5BB 890 im net n ed-by ether-eenntieel-and)) available emergency ((work exceed m- 9;0 889-in=a other conntie mn?t the am_unt of b ` y emnntyr)) funds are not_D&DIL, ccuntnexceeds one hu nd red _f>:f t,ntC ^?Gand 1,, ,, ded in a f d 1L _ _v pee un emergency_ uest additional emergency funds. can re t g q y dollars the coun f({5})) 1I1 The flood control assistance arcount contribution f ( shall not exceed eighty percent of the eligible project co,t of an t. $ a emergency prcject. 1g1__v!ergepcy_fuods 1 cplY_be m_adn av-ilabte_to_mrojects_yhicch eco l-_ the department oE s by Eund h i - _ _ _ ng_ have been given apmroval_f o[ matc ior to ons1pucti0}1_ork beind P. [formed_ o pnpr P 9 AtMr NDATORT_SECITOM (Amending Order DE 85-10, filed 6/21/05) + t WAC 173-145-110 MULTI((-))YEAR PROJECTS. Approval for eligibil- will only be required onto for a project which 173 ecolo gy ity by (( but funding ((after-the-firmt)) For i _ um, continues more than one bienn t biennium is subject to further FCAAP appropriation 1,y h neguen u aeh_ su the le.lislature. A&?L. Ay;NPAI4PY_s?CSZON (Amending order DE 85-10, filed 6/21/05) W A C 173-145-120 WORK STANDARDS FOR ALL FCAAP PROJECTS. All work which is fun dno from the flood control assistance acccunt shall con- form to the ntindards and specifications of ((!he-RrS--Army-eerpn-ef 8eg£neersr-the-Br Sr-Beperlmenl-ef-#g of en},nee-Seii-Eenservelien--Serr- fee-er)) the county engineer. w.?p?txs?,±s y.++kx.. i^ 4 ?,+ y I, 7LN1AI4P7LflLSTIgfl (Amending Order DE 85-10, f11nd r,121105) i '94 1 7 ., ? M1 n7 VAC 173-145-130 PROJECT CONSTROCTtON MONITORTN' IhC-Lo110v moni- i r edT E 4?, f on ire the responsibilities and criteria for project construct toring and final approval ((r));, r r h [ ) + ct A i + r ? Y •? 4 l,? 1. ( ? + x ? I F ?,? 3 bvEv (NammEJs)a 2 ?!y ) 1 , ,,,, , in° Mh??.tie7, ?u ,' °h' e J ? 1 ;?, + + hr+a t r ti'' ? , ' ? - E 1? * 1 ?. r r +? 1 E ? 1 + ? ? Y y t l ` a 77 ??? ? 1 ? ?r; q 1rY , ; T1Aq??.F ? _. 0T5-1336:1 R (1) County engineer responsibilities. Associated with rosponsi- r .a bility for project plan approval and supervision of the project work, the county engineer shall provide' inspection to assure that all£ project work is conducted and completed according to the construction .?,i. plans and specifications. (2) (("BOB)) F.colomv!s responsibilities. The authorized renre- sentative of the department of ecology shall ((menitee)) hnv_g the rjght to enter at ail_reasonable times_in_or uoon_ny_nronert-v,,tiubl is or_nrivatei for_the--Eurpose of monitoring and ((lnspee!)) tnrpe ting the project work as necessary to assure compliance with the terms of 1' - the appropriate written agreement The aut orized_repre ngntati_ve of the d_eoartment of ecology is_the c ntra ct officer and hall he ¦denti- > - fied in the written agreement. The county_eng ineerwill he rnformed prior__to_ainsneg_t ion fornuccoses of eonsttucti_nnitoring_ahd guidance_ty_any representative of _gcolpgy_other than the contract officer Renresentatives of ecology nay_eb_erve the consrruction_Fro- cess_ tth_ t orior_notification of the county engin ee r_ (3) Final inspection and approval. Upon completion of the work, i a final detailed inspectioa shall be made by the county engineer along with representatives from ((WBBS)) ecology and the applicant. Results v' of the final inspection shall be displayed in a written report pre. ij pared. by ecology and, when appropriate, on "as built" construction „)( plans. ((Theme)) "As built" construction plans shall be submitted to ((WOOS) ) ecology within thirty days after the final project inspection. 4fi - A!1FNOATO21_SECTION (Amending Order BE 85-10, filed 6/21/85) F EAC 173-145-140 WRITTEN AGREEMENTS. Written agreements will be prepared by ((WB9B)) ecology as a means to reimburse eligible mnnici- pal corporations for work done on approved eligible projects pr_ for dove l9iment of M:11!-s. ((The-de}}nr-ameen!-mpeeif}ed-in-lhe-wri2len ngreemenla-she}}-net-exceed-lhe-metlmaled-eeahtmt'ef-lhe-preTeet{e}-nn q d imp}eyed-on-lhe-peejee!-app}}eat-ion jn)-x)) _vritten_agement s, bill- ing, and payment shall comply with ((the-MB9B)) ecoicy!s adndacd requirements for grants and contracts. Motification to r_guired__uhgn '.a vritten__agrCnmentn?wi ll not_be nccopted or executed to_illo otology r thc_opnnrtuni ty_tn _v_ard_priorit izeA `enf and e_d_pE91_gt__ .. NEE S Z-91192 VIC 171-145-155 APPROVAL OF CHANCES TO WRITTEN AGREEMENT^a. All flood control aain tenancu and comprehensive flood control management planning (CFCMP) projects subject to the provisions of this regulation shall be conducted in accordance with the plans, npecificat foss, and conditions approvod by ecology. Any contemplated changes during con- struction or planning process which arc significant deviations from conditions of the approved agreemont, shall first be ruhmittcd to ecology for approval. Any changes to the total cost of the project fallowing execution of the written agreement must be nubmitted to ecology for approval prior to construction or plan completion. 1 0 1 Z 4K?i 'm '1 i i i ?N ? 4?1) 7 L 1 ? 1 1 A ?t f B?aa rl?x1A y I , 1? - 1 ;V G a. S E_PPALE? The following section of the Nashingtcn Administrative Code is re pesled: MAC 173-145-150 EQUIPMENT RENTAL. E' uy C 10 ) U T w '? b ?? STATE OTATE OF WASHINGTON15 GR ' k W ?w ANT NO. n s ? PATE RECEIVED DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY t owl Y. USE ONLY), APPLICATION FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (Chapter 86.26 RCW) _ COUNTY PRIORITY RATING OF a m ,now 1. APPLICANT a. Name of Entity b. Department/Division c. Address d. County e. Telephone No. f. Contact Person 2. COUNTY ENGINEER a. Name b. Address C. Phone No. 3. PROJECT a. Title b. Location: Water Body A_ Section Township Range Note: Attach detailed plans, construction drawings, vicinitymaps & general plan. 4. TYPE OF GRANT a. Comprehensive Flood Control Management Plan b• Nonemergency Project c, Emergency Project 5. TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $ Attach detailed breakdow f n o estimated costs. 6. TOTAL STATE FUNDS REQUESTED $ 7. SOURCE OF LOCAL MATCH general obligation funds ( ) cash ( ) revenue bonds/ certificates ( ) other ( ) 8. PROJECT DURATION FROM: To: c ?t t ' H4 t ?d[yt9 ? tt? 9. FLOOD FREQUENCY PROTEC ION PROVIDED BY PROJECT FACIL Y Prior Year Flood Frequency Present -_. Year Flood Frequency Future __-Year Flood Frequency Not Applicable _ 10. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL AND PUBLIC BENEFITS Attach a detailed description of the proposal and alternatives that were considered. Describe the public benefit in detail and demonstrate how alternatives would be less beneficial to the public. Describe the development which exists on lands protected by project facility and how this project will mitigate flood damages. 11. STATUS OF APPLICANT'S COMPREHENSIVE FLO OD CONTROL MANAGEMENT PLAN Planning process has not been initiated Preparation underway Completed _ Anticipated completion date _.______._ 12. HAS AN ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION (SEPA) BEEN MADE FOR THIS PROJECT OR FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHICH INCLUDES THIS PROJECT? YES ( ) NO ( ) (Please enclose environmental documentation) 13. APPROVALS/PERMITS STATUS a. HYDRAULICS PROJECT APPROVAL pending ( ) date received_.__. preliminary consultation ( ) yes 1 ) no ( ) NA ( ) ............................................. ...._..............---'-°-•-'...... b. CORPS PERMIT pending ( ) date received---_- _ - preliminary consultation ( ) yes ( ) no ( ) NA I ) ................................ .................................. ... ..................................................... c. SHORELINE PERMIT pending ( ) date received preliminary consultation ( ) yes ( ) no ( ) NA ( ) ...................°....._.......... . .. ......'_......................................----.. d. WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION pending ( ) date received preliminary consultation ( ) yes ( ) no ( ) NA ( ) ...............•......... ................................................................ e. FLOOD CONTROL ZONE PERMIT pending ( ) date receivers preliminary consultation ( ) yes ( ) no ( ) NA ( ) ................................................. .. . .....................................•-•--......-.... I. OTHER (list) pending ( ) date received___, preliminary consultation ( ) yes ( ) no ( ) NA ( ) 14. SIGNATURE of authorized representative of APPLICANT _. _, .... Date SIGNATURE of authorized representative of COUNTY (if different from above) ate -- .,,s - r V- k g h ? t Ita + i • COMPREHENSIVE FLOOD CONTROL MANAGEMENT PLANS ;`3 _ - CERTIFICATION CHECKLIST r This checklist will serve as the basis for certifying eligibility for x -p? Flood Control Assistance Account Program funds. Chapter 86.26.050 " {•- RCW requires that comprehensive flood control management plans must be completed and adopted within three years of the date of certification that they are being prepared in order for eligible municipal corporations to continue eligibility for FCAAP funding. Prior to execution of a grant by the Department of Ecology, this checklist must be completed and submitted. Once a completed p checklist is reviewed and approved by Ecology, conditions related to the comprehensive flood control management plan development will be w incorporated into the grant agreement. The date of certification will be the date of final grant execution by Ecology. INSTRUCTIONS: Please fill in the following information. 1. The following cities, towns, counties, and special ` districts have signed an interlocal agreement for the 5 development and implementation of the comprehensive flood control management plan (please attach copies): c 2. The following city, town, or county is designated as the appropriate local authority responsible for developing the comprehensive flood control management plan: 3. The extent of the planning area shall be: (Cities, towns, and counties may develop the plans to apply jurisdiction wide. If less than the entire watershed, please explain how the extent of planning area was determined.) r "? ? '>4r fcvN X13, N ??.7ii .•) ?? :~w'bi?i ?nN!Q ?1"" ?Aka'`?. G k A?a9U;j?'?ti M, W ?? 1??' { . 4 +?1 ,.. h V d ? k ti ? ? ? ? r 7v t y ? t ? ? y t d R t'M?? L t,, ; k ?.Y ?1' 3. 4. Status of the comprehensive flood control management y f plan: A. Scope of work developed yes ( ) no ( ) t` (Please attach.) B. Request for proposals developed yes ( ) no ( ) a (Please attach.) TM r?. C. Development of plan has begun. yes ( ) no ( ) If yes, which of the following plan elements has been completed? i) Description of the watershed ii) Identification of the types of watershed flood problems iii) Location and identification of specific problem areas iv) Description of flood damage history v) Description of potential flood damages vi) Determination of the need for flood control work vii) Short-term and long-term goals and objectives for the planning area _ 5. If the comprehensive flood control management plan has not yet been completed, please describe the anticipated schedule: A. Draft complete Date B. Public hearings Date C. Review complete Date D. Adoption consideration Date E. Submittal to Ecology Date 6. Which of the following state agencies have been consulted during the development of the plan or scope of work? A. Department of Fisheries Date B. Department of Game Date C. Department of Ecology Date SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF APPLICANT Date SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF COUNTY (if different from above) Date x , ? nap vN •..r d )? a " 7hL" Mal, ??a l: r , x?? ? r ? , ` 1 T? t s 'i'rr ?X? •? y g ? '. t it ? r x?? ?m { r •r ? t ri r f V? BUDGETItdFORMATIOId PROJECT TITLE Pine River Maintenance and Dike Repair PROJECT DESCRIPTION Riprap two sections of streambank,_each ap_proximate500 lineal feet and placement of geotextile mat beneath rock. Clean out debris from section of stream channel. BID ITEMS # UNITS QUANTITY UNIT COST COST Riprap Tons 425 $20.00 $8,500.00 Crushed Rock Sons 55 $15.00 825.00 Geotextile Sq. Yd. 1 100 $ 3,80 _ _ 4,180.00 Excavation C.Y. 410 _$11_00 _ _ 4,510.00 County Labor 8,925.00 Equipment Rental 1,200.00 PN \ TOTAL BID ITEMS COST $28,L4.0.00 __- S DESIGN PRE-ENGINEERING 3,000.00 ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS _1,500.00,._._ INSPECTION FEE 1,500.00_._ MISCELLANEOUS _11000.00_ SALES TAX * * (7.5%) $2,110.50 TOTAL PROJECT COST $37,250.50 IF (attach additional shoots if necessary.) "based on applicable taxable Items k7f tl5?;. t- d ! 9 t w + R3l ,IL'tna h IL ro f {7,?'?l'o"tA'hY-tv+eerJr 9'9 4 :&ti 'J s1P re MA" N i r ST. S Y^ea? l i r;? ANDREA BEATTY RINIKER d eo^?L Di rector STATE OF WASHINGTON r DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY - Mail Slop PV-17 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8711 a (206) 459-6000 . ?i November 26, 1986 Dear Potential Grant Applicant: Enclosed are the following materials for the Flood Control Assistance Account Program: - state Participation in Flood Control Maintenance Act + Fact Sheet - Chapter 173-145 Washington Administrative Code , Administration of the Flood Control Assistance Account Program - Chapter 86.26 RCW State Participation in Flood Control Maintenance The enclosed copy of Chapter 173-145 WAC is a proposed revised version. The following public hearings have been scheduled to receive comments on the proposed amendments and you are invited to attend. Workshops to discuss the grant ill program w be held immediately following each public w hearing. Applications are due February 28, 1987 and must be submitted to the Department of Ecology through the appropriate county engineer. * December 9th, 2:00 P.M. - Spokane, Department of Ecology Regional office Conference Room " N. 4601 Monroe, Suite 100 y December 10th, 2:00 P.M. - Yakima, r ?]w I Department of Ecology Regional Office, Conference Room 1 3601 W. Washington l+' , r * December 11th, 2:00 P.M. - Redmond, , Department of Ecology Regional Office, Conference *4 Room A & B a.[e 4350 150th N.E. }Y, December 12th, 2:00 P.M. - Lacey, ' ;$}z Department of Ecology 'RECEIVED Headquarter's Office, Room 273 y Abbot Raphael Hall ', v-' GE:' i 1986 St. Martin's College Campus JEFFERSON COUNTY ENGINEERS OFFICE ,c- ?y s „r November 26, 1986 page two Program Guidelines and application forms will be available at the workshops and copies will be mailed to eligible municipal corporations after December 12, 1986. Please contact Jerry Louthain at (206) 459-6791 or SCAN 585-6791 or Carl Glatze at (206) 459-6776 or SCAN 585-6776 if you have any questions regarding the program. p ` 4 Sincerely, • ";,m,f •' D. Rodney Mack y Program Manager Shorelands and Coastal Zone Management Program R Enclosures 3 U 3 ANDREA BEATTY RINIKER - R Director +dS1 ATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mail Stop PV-11 . Olympia, Washington 98504-8711 • (206) 459-6000 November 26, 1986 FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM The Flood Control Assistance Account Program (FCAAP) is established y under the authority of RCW 86.26 RCW State Participation in Flood Control Maintenance. The program assists local authorities in flood control maintenance projects with associated public benefits which maintain and restore the normal and reasonably stable river and stream channel alignment and capacity for carrying flood waters with a minimum of damage from bank erosion or overflow onto adjacent i lands and property. The Floc3 Control Assistance Account Program l a so seeks to restore, maintain, and repair natural conditions, works and structures for the maintenance of such conditions. " s Protection from inundation or other damage by the sea or other bodies of water is also included. ais A local match of 50 percent is required for regular projects and emergency projects require a 20 percent local match. Certain planning and regulatory activities are required in order to be eligible for matching funds for maintenance project.. Local authorities must be practicing flood plain management activities that are approved by the Department of Ecology. The local authority must also adopt comprehensive flood control management plans and b it i su m them to the Department of Ecology for approval. FCAAP funds are available for the development of comprehensive flood control management plans ( CFCMP ), with a 25 percent local match. Emphasis will be placed on funding comprehensive flood control management A1` ` plans in the 1987-1989 biennium. Program regulations are being revised and are expected to become + effective February 5, 1987. Guidelines for the 1987-1989 biennium will be available from the Department of Ecology after December 12, 1986 A li i . pp cat ons are submitted through the appropriate county engineer. Applications are being accepted and are due by February 28, 1987. If you would like additional information on the 4 b,) regulations or guidelines, contact Jerry Louthain, Flood Plain - Management Supervisor, Department of Ecology, Mail Stop PV-11, Olympia, WA 98504, (206) 459-6791, SCAN 585-6791. .rye.., 4.W T } ti ' `? y i ,? t i + n n k 18 4 ! 14 Y F ? ANDREA senor lswueR Wector : . STATE OF WASHINGTON u DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mail Stop PV-11 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8771 (206) 459'6000 November 20, 1986 INVITATION FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ' ON AMENDMENTS TO REGULATIONS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM The Department of Ecology is seeking public comment on ' proposed amendments to regulations which implement Chapter 86.26 RCW State Participation in Flood Control Maintenance. The proposed amendments affect Chapter 173-145 WAC Administration of the Flood Control Assistance Account Program. Four public hearings have been scheduled to receive comments on the proposed amendments. * December 9th, 2:00 P.M. - Spokane, Department of Ecology Regional Office, Conference Room d N. 4601 Monroe, Suite 100 December 10th, 2:00 P.M. - Yakima, Department of Ecology Regional Office, Conference Rori 1 ! 3601 W. Washington ,71 J * December 11th, 2:00 P.M. - Redmond, Department of Ecology Regional Office, Conference Room A & B 4350 150th N.E. t * December 12th, 2:00 P.M. - Lacey, Department of Ecology Headquarter's Office, Room 273 Abbot Raphael Hall r i ' St. Martin s College Campus A summary and copy of the proposed amendments and a copy of Chapter 86.26 RCW are enclosed for your review. If you have any questions, please call Jerry Louthain at the Flood Plain Management Section, telephone (206) 459-6791. twi mu s v? r ? IVk? ?F ? i I?dywAP ? ? J r ,? '?' 14 . Nf l? ' t 4 S { r 11? 1 fl Ian N AMENDMENT SUMMARY _ --Section 010 Authority and purpose - The amendment clarifies and elaborates on the authority and purpose of the rule. --Section 020 Definitions - The amendment adds the definitions "public benefit," and "special district," to the u original rule. The amendment modifies the definitions of - "appropriate local authority," "comprehensive flood control management plan," "eligible municipal corporation," "emergency project," "floodway," "maintenance project," and ' "meander belt." In addition, the definitions "flood control responsibility" and "regulatory floodway" are deleted. --Section 030 Eligibility Criteria for FCAAP funds - The 6 amendment clarifies what is considered "public benefit" and "flood plain mana ement activities" and adds bud et re ort g g p requirements. --Section 040 Comprehensive flood control management plan (CFCMP) - The amendment clarifies that comprehensive flood control management plans, and any revisions must be approved ecolo in co b lt ti ith th d t t f - gy, y nsu a on w e epar men s o fisheries and game. The amendment clarifies the purpose and timing of the plans. In addition, the amendment requires a the description of regulations which apply within the watershed and a determination that proposed instream work be x consistent with the applicable policies and regulations. rr --Section 050 Flood plain management activities - The I amendment clarifies that ecology must approve the flood '-•' plain management activities of the county, city, or town having jurisdiction over the area where a proposed project would be located. --Section 060 FCAAP project application process - The „t amendment adds the requirement that a detailed cost estimate identifying major project elements be submitted and that the county engineer shall furnish evidence that plans are m adopted by the appropriate local authority. --Section 070 FCAAP project approval process - The amendment clarifies that affected parties may review and a_- comment on the proposed project plans prior to approval. The amendment adds public notice and hearing provisions. --Section 080 Criteria for allocation of funds. The amendment changes the section's title and adds criteria for evaluating the priority given to proposals. Mk ` =x11., _ u clarifies and elaborates on the authority and purpose of the 'Ad i rule. A r ly. --Section 020 Definitions - The amendment adds the j definitions "public benefit," and "special district," to the original rule. The amendment modifies the definitions of £ "appropriate local authority," "comprehensive flood control j , ' management plan," "eligible municipal corporation," . L[ "emergency project," "floodway," "maintenance project," and p "meander belt." In addition, the definitions "flood control n responsibility" and "regulatory floodway" are deleted. --Section 030 Eligibility Criteria for FCAAP funds - The ; amendment clarifies what is considered "public benefit" and "flood plain management activities" and adds budget report requirements. --Section 040 Comprehensive flood control management plan N (CFCMP) - The amendment clarifies that comprehensive flood control management plans, and any revisions must be approved by ecology, in consultation with the departments of fisheries and game. The amendment clarifies the purpose and timing of the plans. In addition, the amendment requires the description of regulations which apply within the watershed and a determination that proposed instream work be consistent with the applicable policies and regulations. --Section 050 Flood plain management activities - The amendment clarifies that ecology must approve the flood plain management activities of the county, city, or town ; - having jurisdiction over the area where a proposed project would be located. ..! --Section 060 FCAAP project application process - The amendment adds the requirement that a detailed cost estimate x identifying major project elements be submitted and that the ;e county engineer shall furnish evidence that plans are adopted by the appropriate local authority. --Section 070 FCAAP project approval process - The amendment clarifies that affected parties may review and comment on the proposed project plans prior to approval. The amendment adds public notice and hearing provisions. --Section 080 Criteria for allocation of funds. The amendment changes the section's title and adds criteria for evaluating the priority given to proposals. ,4 &;?'."> ' n 10 --Section 090 Flood control assistance account funding and matching requirements. The amendment changes the section's title and deletes breakdown of FCAAP funds for non-emergency projects, emergency projects and Ecology administrative costs. The amendment adds language related to the availability of FCAAP funds for preparation of comprehensive flood control management plans. The amendment adds language , qualifying an intercounty agency formed under Chapter 86.13 ' RCW (Flood Control by Counties Jointly) to qualify for up to $100,000 in FCAAP funds per biennium. --Section 100 Emergency fund administration. The amendment adds language clarifying that funds shall be available for M: unusual, unforseeable and emergent flood conditions and '° shall be allocated in amounts adequate for the preservation of life and property. The amendment deletes the requirement ' that the director of the department of ecology must approve the emergency project grants and deletes the maximum amount ` of money to be allocated for emergency projects. New language is added to clarify that approval for funding W emergency projects must be obtained from the department of ecology prior to construction. --Section 110 Multiyear projects. The amendment deletes language regarding future appropriation by the legislature. The amendment adds language clarifying the process for agreements which will continue for more than one biennium. --Section 120 Work standards for all FCAAP projects. The amendment deletes reference to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service and clarifies that the county engineer shall consider all local, state, and federal standards and specifications pertaining to flood control projects. ' --Section 130 Project construction monitoring. The amend- rent clarifies that any authorized representative of the department of ecology shall have the right to enter at all reasonable times in or upon any public or private property for the purpose of monitoring and inspecting project work. --Section 140 Written agreements. The amendment adds language requiring notification when written agreements will not be accepted or executed to allow ecology the opportunity to award prioritized, unfunded projects. --Section 150 Equipment rental. Amendment deletes section. ' --Section 155 Approval of changes to written agreements. Amendment adds this as a ncsw section. Any significant i deviations from the conditions of an approved agreement or any changes to the total cost of the project must first be ` submitted to ecology for approval. department gv Por financial essistance for the oreparation of ?e comprehensive control management plans and for flood control flood _i maintenance protects. The purpose of such Plans is described in RCW 86.26.105. The deoartment shall debermSne orioritiea and allocate available funds from the flood control assistance account program (FCAAPI among those counties applvlna Yor assistance. and shall adopt ' ?eguletions eatablishina the criteria 11 which such allocations shall be made. Such criteria shall be based upon oroposals which are likely to ?,,,' ., ' bring about public benefits commensurate with the amount of state funds allocated thereto. This chapter describes the manner in which ((WBBE)) " ; ecoloav will implement the provisions of the act. AMENDATORY SECTION (Amending Order DE 85-10, filed 6/21/85) - 4R WAC 173-145-020 DEFINITIONS. For the purpose of this chapter g ?+ ' T - ((end--enbeequent--regn}ntiems--fermr}aced--for--F}ood--lr}a2:r--?rtattngement . _ pregrems-in-Washingten;)) the following definitions shall be used: (1) "Applicant." ((is)) gn eligible municipal corporation seeking matching funds for flood control maintenance work. (2) "Appropriate local authority,." ((is)) A county, city, or town .1 having planning and land use jurisdiction within ((the)) give area ' which is covered by the comprehensive flood control management plan :- _ ((eFeMP)). `.. (3) "Comprehensive flood control management plan (CFCMP)." ((is)) g document which ( (preyidea-e-meenpo-plenntng-farertdemhw4ing-the ,. _..J--: ? impeets-of-a-f}eo&-eentrel-progrnm-Ni•thin-n-river-bee}nr-enb} sin;-vr - ether-eren-te-enenre-Chet-Work-done-en-specific-prejeet-aetivitian-in eompabi6}e-uitti--2lte-geaia--and-ebjeetivee-Swr?-bhe-emcn-?Z,vcnli-by-the Plan)) determ toes the need for flood control work, considers , x-;; alts rnativgn to in-stream flood control work. identifies A-" consider, pQtontial impacts of Sn-stream flood control work on the state's 11L . stream resources. and identitis the river's meander bolt or floodwav, as described in WAC 173-145-040e. a (4) "County engineer," ((is)) The appointed public works director, county engineer, or the person designated to act for the county engineer. (5) Eligible municipal corporation," ((Ene?ndes--buC--in--f+ot limited-to)) fountioa, cities, towns, consurvation districts, ((end)) flood control tong districts or any special districts gyhjQOt to flood ,' conditions. ((which-have -flees-centreI-reepensibilitieer)) 41 (6) "Emergency fund," ((in)) That portion of the biennial i i appropr at on allocated to the flood control assistance account which 1s sot saido for emergency projects. r (7) "Emergency project," ((ie)) Flood control work as dq]arod by ,.k th.4_.ppgLBgZ?gS,a local nuthority and authorized and approved by ((WBBE)) ecology which must be dons immediately to protect lives ((nod)) gt property. +-„ (8) "Flood compatible land uses,-' Those uses of the lend within the rivor's meander belt or floodway which comply with the minimum state, federal, and local flood plain management regulations Mh: C ??.??r ° 1d K< requirementa, w ._ . ( I ) W- A, Fr 9 (g) ((aF}eed--eontro}-_? aibi3it Ian yy--i--'e*n}`-?LYrtutory ' •? reepenszb}}fty- niticyr-i'rte-l?tehr-or--Ee-?i-reedy._re}nted--te-cronMvl-l-i-ng £}eed-Wator.T-preroentien-ef-fa..d-dsmagan7-or?tlfo-proteetiorrof•i3•f¢-.snd •` preparty-£rem-f}sod-demagear -----;-K-0))) "Flood plain management activities." ((are-ectiroities-w ' defind)) Activities described in WAC 173-145-050 ((to-be)) performed by .a local governments through ordinances or other means to reduce the .. •. damaging effects of flooding. ((.(}}})) 1101 "Floodway." ((means-zT,r-regn}aterp-idoedtroy-as ••• daf}ned--}n_?.}M}_ r}r1 !}pEl,?)) ) The chann¢1 of a river or other 9 watercourse and the adjacent land area. that must be reserved in order $o discharge the base lone hundred year freauencv) flood withou he t nz. cumulatively increasino t water surface elevation more than a des anated a ht. W (({}g})) 11 "Maintenance project." ((}s)) The work necessary to preserve or restore the natural condition or to restore man-made flood control facilities to their former condition using in-kind replacement h materials or acceptable alternatives. This work is necessary due to anticipated or actual damage or destruction from flooding by action or erosion, stream flow, sheet runoff, or other damages by the sea or other 'y bodies of water. ((f}3})) ,(,12) "Meander belt." ((}s)) That portion of the flood - plain, ( (£er-streams-tles4-kaye_maandered-ovex--±?ce.a-t.i?ae?,) ) that can >b?r be identified by the evidence of present and previous meanders. This shall include the present stream channel. Where there is no identified ;; ' floodwav. that area which has similar topoeraphic cha acteristics to ti+? ??F present and historic stream -------n shall be considered a a meander ' belt. _q . t at affected such ap -51 9--proverty :4! ntained by an elial BNENDATORY SECT= (Amending Order DE 65-10, filed 6/21/85) e '. WAC 173-145-030 ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR FCAAP FUNDS. Criteria to ?. - be used in determining eligibility ((Of--an)) for FrAAP ((prejee'e app}}eatfen)) funds are as follows: ) y (1) Eligible municipal corporation. The applicanu must be an eligible municipal corporation as defined in WAC 173-145-020(5). (2) Public benefit. ((fit-yhe•ld--tw)) Tho anglicant must clearly, demonstrata((d)) that ((the))a it comprohensivo +'???.+ c +r-+ 1 management plans ono flood r?gntrol maintenancs projocts shall ((04ep}eY)) furth¢r the general public and state interest as di fforontiated from a private interest and they shall bring about public benefits commonnurato with FCAAP funds provided. (3) Comprehensive flood control management plan. The requirements of WAC 173-145-040 must be complied with by the appropriate local - - authority with flood control jurisdiction over the area where the proposed project is located. a x 1 2 1 s . (4) Flood plain management activities. The appropriate local ,y - authority within whose jurisdiction projects are located shall be ( engaging in ((theme)) approved ((eerie?n)) flood plain. management activities which Protect or Prevent flood damages from occurring to - exi existing and future structures or works, and as described in WAC 173- sti 0. (5) Budget report. Any eligible municipal corporation seeking FCAAP funds shall submit its annual report for flood control purposes to the county engineer within thirty calendar days after its final adoption. The county engineer shall then forward the budget report for eligible municipal corporations and for the county ((she}}__?{{? ? . Ee-i3D0H--bY-?-eoantY-rngieerr-not--hrter-there--February-i5--et-tiwerY ? Year)) to ecology. The information will provide the basis for preparation of a nreliminarv clan for the most beneficial and orderly, .i allocation of FCAAP funds. Soil conservation districts shall be exempt from the Provisions - gP this section The budget report shall contain the Pollowin. as a J name of applicant name oP Pfected water body project summarylocation amount of local match and proposed local finding sou 1 rce. e ' AMENDATORY SECTION (Amending Order DE 85-10, filed 6/21/85) - WAC 173-145-040 COMPREHENSIVE FLOOD CONTROL MANAGEMENT PLAN (CFCMPI. The county engineer of the county within which the maintenance project is located must certify that the ((plea)) CFCMP has been completed and adopted by the appropriate local authority or is being Co.."eh. flood control nanaaement n1ans. and anv revisions to the 4 121" S..I Mheri.. an of d game, it Th. t( camprehensive--pl-&n)) CFCMP must be l t d d d t d hi h a comp e e an op e w n res years of the date that it is certified as being prepared. It. after the three-year Period hA 5y _ elanned. su9b !I Plan has not been completed a to for , flood control mainteD5113ce Projects shall not be made to the county until the CFCMP is completed and adooted bv the an-opriate local authority . j draiDage area w , ' ( 3 1 (1) Determination of the need for flood control work.. (a) Description of the watershed. (b) Identification of types of watershed flood problems. (c) Location and identification of specific problem areas. (d) Description of flood damage history. (e) Description of potential flood damages. (f) Short-term and long-term goals and objectives for the planning area. fat Descriptionlimiof reaulations which npp1y wlthip_5he watershed. including b{lt_not ted C.4 local ehorelina managament master oYggrams. and zoning, pyhdiyWon,, and flood hazard ordinances. f11 Dgtorminatlon of inetroam flood control work boino copal @,xant yiph_gpplicable poli+g_gnd rogulations. y .,.. ':t'M:. 1 ?.ati _?yk r '-i ak??.M-1P1 .. ?'? .... ..-.. _•. ?, &?if ? .' .S$:?.'-; .'.-.x?.!.m:.? , a r' (2) Alternative flood control work. (a) Description of potential measures of instream flood control work. (b) Description of alternatives to instream flood control work. (3) Identification and consideration of potential impacts of ins'',ream flood control work on the following instream uses and resources. (a) Fish resources. (b) Wildlife resources. (c) Scenic, aesthetic, and historic resources. (d) Navigation. (e) Water quality. (f) Hydrology. (g) Existing recreation. (h) Other. (4) Area of coverage for the comprehensive plan shall include, as a minimum, the area of the one-hundred year frequency flood plain within a reach of the watershed of sufficient length to ensure that a comprehensive evaluation can be made of the flood problems for a specific reach of the watershed. The plan may or may not include an entire watershed. Comprehensive plans shall also include flood hazard areas not subject to riverine flooding such as areas subject to coastal flooding, flash flooding, or flooding from inadequate drainage. iE ther the meander belt or ((regulatory)) floodway shall be identified on aerial photographs or maps which will be included with the plan. (5) Conclusion and proposed solution(s). The CFCMP shall be finalized by the following action from the appropriate local authority: (a) Evaluation of problems and needs; (b) Evaluation of alternative solutions; (c) Recommended corrective action(s) with proposed impact resolution measures for resource losses; and (d) corrective action priority. (61 A certification from the state department of community development that the local emergency management oroanization i admini t i cceptable comprehensive emeraencv operations plan an a AME.KDATORY SECTION (Amending Order DE 85-10, filed 6/21/85) WAC 173-145-050 FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES. ((12 fie e } }gib}e--for-=.:-,d..^--fand#ng--the-oppropske4'r-3ecn}--arlherftri-ea-?r4hhiT whose-jnr4ed4etlen-the)) Local i?riadictions within which food control maintenance projects are located, must be engaging in flood plain management activities which will protect or prevent flood damages from occurring to future structures, works, and improvements within their jurisdiction. ((9?he-v}npnrtmetft--ef-e,eo-logy-she}}--lhet-they--ere)) Pursuant to chanter 86.26 RCW the diroctor of tho department of ocol ogy mflpt approve the flood plain manaoement aft ivities of the county• clt a or town haying iurisdiction over the area whoro the prpj ect will bo located, To be eligible far FCAAP fundlna tho lo4al__'Lurisdirtion shall be required to: (1) ((Parllelpaling)) Particlpato in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and ((meeling)) meet all of the NFIP requirements. (2) ((Bertlfy-threagh-the-okete-dgmlmsnt-ofemargax-y-management that -{tra--}seal-bmergency-management-rorga;r4aebioa-irr-edmin 4stering-en eeeeptnb}e-ee;nprehenelve-emergency-eperat4ens-pion.)) ((f3}-flestrictinq)) Restrict land uses within the meander bolt or floodway of rivers to only flood compatible uses, (a3 ni i? ?• 4 1` t1, M?1? k 4 if G f ? S '` P wo, N"" } 1 a} Rf ? <g ? e bf S. sxi Aq. Ai% eel AMENDATORY SECTION (Amending Order DE 85-10, filed 6/21/85) - WAC 173-145-060 FCAAP PROJECT APPLICATION PROCESS. The project application process for the eligible municipal corporations, applications shall include the following in the general sequence given. J (1) The applicant shall prepare the project application to comply with the provisions of chapter 86.26 RCW and this chapter. The application shall be made on a form furnished by ((WBOE)) ecology. A complete application shall include the following: (a) A written description ((and-cent-estfmnte)) of the project; (b) A detailed cost estimate identifying maior project elements; h` u A ((yfefnfty)) map ((end-sketch)) to identify water body names, stream river mile, section-township-range; (({e})) (d) ((A-<Jenera-1)) Construction plans ((drawing- c--the pre?set-en-en-ae-}fg-x-}}u_er-ae-}fH-x-34s-nheat)); and (({d})) ) A description of the project benefits which describe how the project will mitigate flood damages and describe development which exists on adjacent and nearby lands which are protected by the - facility. (2) The applicant shall review the preliminary project proposal - with the county engineer, the Washington departments of fisheries or game and the department of natural resources and any affected Indian tribes. (3) The applicant shall submit a prioritized list of project applications to the county engineer. (4) The county engineer shall submit a prioritized list of all ( _ a project applications within the county to ((WBOH)) ecology. (5) The county engineer shall furnish evidence to (("eE)) ecology that the comprehensive flood control management plan described in WAC 173-145-040 is completed and adonted by the appropriate loco authority V or ((underway)) is beino prepared and the flood plain management activities described in WAC 173-145-050 are being implemented. a AMENDATORY SECTION (Amending Order DE 85-10, filed 6/21/85) , WAC 173-145-070 FCAAP PROJECT APPROVAL PROCESS. The project ? ,' approval process for the eligible municipal corporations' applications ' •, i shall include the following in the general sequence given. (1) ((WBBB)) Ecoloev will review all projects for compliance with the requirements pursuant to this chapter and chapter 86.26 RCW. (2) ((WBOH)) Ecology shall consult with the state departments of fisheries ((7)) g13SI game ((r-'a*w]•-nntnrn}--rcaources._end-•erry)) in the doyelooment of a project priority list The state depertme t r f resources. affected Indian tribes ((regerd4ng-;Cho--1•tat-of--pro•}cc4s))y and other a>tPected nartiee mn i d t - ri ti v rev ew en commen on the Proposed p,roiect olaDS prior to anprovnl. t (3) Thirty daVa Dublic notica shall be given that the Pro,-, Q9 priority _LtffJ__W.J_U b.o the subiect of a public hearing. Notice of this hearing shall appear in the state Register Pursuant to chanter 34.08 RCW, f41 The project list W1ii >+? ??••??•?+?? of i it l l i pr or y the f oody a n management section of the de Pnrtment of ecology, at least fifteen dev? ps for to the Public hearing . (51 The Public 99 to will be reviewed and the director shaij approve the oroioct ?,rlority list as proposod or ea revised in 4;. occ danco with p.=ic comments. (({3}---WBOH-ui-ii--Fneerpsrate-ti'o--pr4erbt•faed-dial-e1 -eiigiirle pre}Beta-4nte-}ta-1+4enn}e3-budget-ter-fund}ngr :,?, ------- f+)--WBOE)) (61 Ecology shall prepare and finalize the written agreements with the counties. Y ((f5})) ,(U The counties shall prepare and finalize the written agroemont0 with the involved eligible municipal corporations within the county. ( 5 ) 1Y "kq?;C, '!?.(. ^t :K.N (?+\??.+9M?a" r i a, ?.? " ° d it ?f.1..`'}} -T[ ??. ? r.1 y 6 P?kY dltk''d ;( .r? F ?.+? .}l ,{+ M 1' it Y'w t... F tlWN J e>rc? kS ?...}kV.. ; ?s P?. p RN w it, i8 rxS .. g • ?' .?. aa 'J, ? h %e ?J? ?I r r A `4 i^? ? G Y.4'% I ?l ?• r ? { I 4T I ' S f. ?r?hJ i tl r f 1;1 1 J, ? t Y -I 1 A i`? .. ' t AMENDATORY SECTION (Amending Order DE 85-10, filed 6/21/85) WAC 171-145-090 FL400D CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT ((eeNRRi-BUT.TeNe ANB--PtiO,IBOan-MA4`f!i) ) FUNDING AND MATCHING REQUIREMENTS. The flood =`f' reryerd}nry-the-PeAAP-fend}nry-for-a}}-prejeeler ?,,` ?,_.. ------{}}--8?ho--mnoiml-ef-PenAP-eontributiene-i?or• -emu-pre}eet-eheii-ytot exceed-f }fty-percent-ef -the-fete}-prolee!-eenetreet}en-eeet: .. ---(ry'y---The-totof-PeAAP-centr}bet}en-4er-aii-nopemorgoncy-profecl.?-fin env-eeenly-ehe}}-net-exeead-65887898-per-b}enn}nIDr i? ?;'? ____-__E3}--.F?.h-4--?nktr4en-per-i?#etm4um-xkbl•-be--olrl-}gehod-ron-a-priority ----------(?1----+3f --to- adn}n4eera!}?e--eente.)) n.it asnS.jng?:AAP?nsta_1 ( 6 1 purppses. (61 Availability of cmalified Personnel or resources for pro- ect construction Purposes. (7) Other Planning efforts undertaken or Proposed withjn_th@ Planning 1urisdjgti2n and their relationship to flood control m_anagement? (a) Ability to make rapid progress toward development of a comprehengjuo flood control management plan, (91 Existing and Proposed Participation of community groups. private industry. Profesnional organizations, the general public, and =ers toward the development and implementation of the proposed comprehonsive flood control management pla_n,, k? ?h G;. ° ? t f • C ii '21 i ol e; F d_1 do .jt r_f CA are il -1 'ne amount .. K, 12rol set yjy ??M' 3 a .. or e to lo al y fm c authorities. u? ... 5 °uAg- H? AMENDATORY SECTION (Amending Order DE 85-10, filed 6/21/85) WAC 173-145-100 EMERGENCY FUND ADMINISTRATION, u ds-? sh 1 be available Pow flood co trol or sects i ; unP rseeaJele and emergent flood conditions and ehal ns* to u usual n r' l cated n amounts adequate for the n • 4 ..:R t reservatlon of life and rope following criteria shall be the basis of allocating the emergency funThe ((meneye)): ds !T ?s .1 rAY? (1) Appropriations from the FCAAP fund for emergency projects will require the declaration of a ? r n emergency by the appropriats local authority. ) -. (2) Application for emergency funds must be made on the same form used for nonemergency fund applications , , } . (3) Payment of FCAAP funds for eme project r9enc y projects will be based on construction costs. Flood fighting costs may be included. (4) Payment for ((from-fine)) emergency work ((fund)) shall be allocated on fi ? a rst-come first-serve basis and shall based on any priority system. not be based on ` (5) ((Emergency-prejeet-grenCS-shed,-}{-apprered-bY-the-director W?: .-. ..,, - _ - mum--amowrib -o-8-mangy-e}}seabed-far-emergency-pro•}egks shall_be-$S$See ee- eeeBB er-b} } .i, aS43 P enn Umr)) may bQ(fmade avail At th for on disuret on of ((reene e ° ° emergency funds eaergene}ee-ere-}mprebab}e)), g y Projects ((who -Lututw avail ((f")) M The maximum amount of e_ me geW_y_?unds initially able for any one county is $150,000 per biennium. If the total ((65ee7eBB-19•-not--once}_.by._ekher--eouabici r-mid)) evaila23e emergency ((work)) funds ((exeeeda-635e7ee9)) are not used by other counties, and the amount of emergency funds needed in a county exceeds 5150 000, the county can request additional emergency fund.. ((f9?)) .0) The flood control assistance account contribution shall not exceed eighty U_ percent of the oligibla project cost of an emergency project. ye boon given npgrov for matching fin' ti xa&AMRIO to prole t is which for to count +?f ion wo k bsiia performed ho department of sc919.gY AMENDATORY SECTION (Amending Order DE 55-10, filed 6/21/85) [ B' $ WAC 173-145-110 Og (MULTI-YEAR)) MULTIYEAR PR . Approval for eligib ility ( e6)) rglv will only be required ed on once fora project which conti k }+y'?M1e ININ mo nue uos more than n Ono ono biennium b}ennium-}e-eabieeb-be•farkhar-PeAAP-epprepr}et}en he-}eg} }gt r t C f e h e) Writt4IIagL44D10nts mu o d nt the end of the, onnly?D new ngroomont ex r d f f S nunia 'i; ? p.1+ q ',., 1 p? ecu e op nv tSll gdowoTk. Anv nroiocts__ W-... hny_q boon gluon approval by ?ooev b l t { ;?"1 4 ' f F 1 7"' u pr nq Will 122 iv.gn high gri '-'-?--?p?loted in ono hiQIIplyiip orlty for the following bi l , y? , ,g s onn gm• Application LOrms moat bo roepbmitt°d• 4 h. , t .+ i ..a ( 7 ) tabs {.? T, ' ' ti t9 ! SAS t W .. y lltr (y ... ^ ! 1 f r ??1 -iii r0.4Y V r.riYl:?? j, 4 f ?". w l? ? , i I 1 ? f • ?a? ! I I ? r ... i .fir; •?-urn A t S N m i r? a ??? ? AMENDATORY SECTION (Amending Order DE 85-10, filed 6/21/85) t. WAC 173-145-120 WORK STANDARDS FOR ALL FCAAP PROJECTS. All work which is funded from the flood control assistance account shall conform ti • to the standards and specifications of ((the--HrSr--Army--eerp&-- ? Eng4neere;-the-f1 :fr.--Depnrtfrten4-ef-Agr4en}tore-6oi}-{?om?eryetion-v:.zvi.;e r • ;?l or)) the county engineer who shalltioncon sider all local, state and -j federal standards and oecifi as o rtaining to flood control - projects. - 'F ? F - AMENDATORY SECTION (Amending Order. DE 85-10, filed 6/21/85) WAC 173-145-130 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION MONITORING. The following y are the responsibilities and criteria for project construction A monitoring and final approval((r)).L (1) County engineer responsibilities. Associated with - responsibility for project plan approval and supervision of the project work, the county engineer shall provide inspection to assure that all project work is conducted and completed according to the construction plans and specifications. -? ?(2) ((WBeE)) Ecology responsibilities. Any authorized reoresentative ?!;W, the department of ecology shall have the right to enter at all noble times in or upon env property. public or private for the purpose of monitoring and inspect-IDg the project work 9 as necessary to assure compliance with the terms of the appropriate written agreement. v'7 r (3) Final inspection and approval. Upon completion or the work, a final detailed inspection shall be made by the county engineer along - sF t? with representatives from ((WBBB)) ecology and the applicant. Results of the final inspection shall be displayed in a written report and, when y, f appropriate, on as built" construction plans. These shall be submitted ¢ "?• to ((WBBE)) ecolog within thirty days after the final project vx i'. inspection. q? AMENDATORY SECTION (Amending Order DE 85-10, filed 6/21/85) WAC 173-145-140 WRITTEN AGREEMENTS. Written agreements will be prepared by ((WBBE)) ecology as a means to reimburse eligible municipal corporations for work dene on approved eligible projects pr fog ?'- develgpment of OFCMP's. ( (the-doiierr`-emennb--gyp !-f ?--4n-thr-written agreement-she}}-net-exceed-the-eet?meted-coat{a}-ef-the-pr. a}set{e}-ee d4ep}eyed-en-the-±±rg;?±et -appt}eetion(?}.)) Written Agroomentg--§illing and payment shall comply with ((the--i3)OE)) ecology-a standard requirements for grants and contracts. Notification is required when ten egreomsnte wi1J?Dot be agar oted or oxocuted to allow_gpg}_qgY th° << gpp5}?tunity to award nriori{?jy,ad. unfunded p[Qj.Q? sps 'pj. (Amending Order DE 85-10, filed 6/21/85) ((HA8-i9d-3i5-i58---DQ(tEi'!H'rtYF-RBHPAhr--for-f?oncontreot<ml-wor3?--Nw egnipment-rentai-•raMo--for-app}4eenb-owned-or-?•e«!"•3-eqn 4pment-need-•on the-preJest -ehn}}-net-exeeed-the-rates- la#. z ir'ed-im ccgordenoo-uiCh-t•#w -bndgeb-eeeannting-end-repenting-eyatem-{BARBj-or•retee•provided--trj state the-enrre nt-{PEMA}-renle}-rote-eeheda}er)) ( 13 1 r J 2• k S' FF ' t u t4i ry ` NEW SECTION WAC 173-145-155 APPROVAL OF CHANGES TO WRITTEN AGREEMENTS. All flood control maintenance and comprehensive flood control management planning (CFCMP) projects subject to the provisions of this regulation shall be conducted in accordance with the plans, specifications, and conditions approved by ecology. Any contemplated changes during construction or planning process which are significant deviations from conditions of the approved agreement, shall first be submitted to ecology for approval. Any changes to the total cost of the project following execution of the written agreement must be submitted to ecology for approval prior to construction or plan completion. A - [ 9 1 % '? X t! i r •A 1'r ? 16 Y w Y - ? V `, s 4, • e 'i'. I?1H1Ls JCHlClli,ll"H11V1V flat Y'LVV1J l.V1V11iCVd. MAINTENANCE IJY; Y ,,t sections 86.26.005 Declaration of purpose 86.26.007 Flood control assistance account-Use-Earnings. 86.26.010 Administration and enforcement. 86.26.040 Duties of local engineer-Approval of plans, otc., by department of ecology-Grants to prepare compre- hensive flood control management plan. 86.26.050 Projects in which state will participate--Allocation or funds. 86.26.060 Allocation of funds. 86.26.070 Flood control maintenance fund of municipal corpora- tion-Composition-Use 86.26.080 Annual budget reports of municipal corporations- Allocation of funds. 86.26.090 Scope of maintenance in which state will participate. 86.26.100 Agreement as to participation-Limit on amount. 86.26.105 Comprehensive flood control management plan-Rc- quirements-Time for completion. RCW 86.26.005 Declaration of purpose. It is the purpose of the state in the exercise of its sovereign and police powers and in the interest of public welfare, to establish a state and local participating flood control mainicnanco`policy. [1951 c 240 § 2.) RCW 86.26.007 Flood control assistance ac- count-Use-Earnings. The flood control assistance account is hereby established in the state treasury. At the beginning of each biennium after June 30, 1985, the state treasurer shall transfer from the general fund to the flood control assistance account an amount of money which, when combined with money remaining in the ac- count from the previous biennium, will equal four roil. lion dollars. Moneys in the flood control assistance account may be spent only after appropriation for pur- poses specified under this chapter. All earnings of in- vestments of balances in the flood control assistance account shall be credited to the general fund. 11986 c 46 I; 1985 c 57 9 88; 1984 c 212 § 1.1 F.ffeetbe W-1985, 57: S. note rolloaing RCW 15.52,320. RCW 86.26.010 Administration and enforcement. The department of ecology shall have charge for the stale of the administration and enforcement of all laws relating to flood control. [1984 c 212 § 2: 1951 c 240 § 3.1 RCW 86.26.040 Duties of local engineer-Ap- proval of plans, etc., by department of ecology- Grants to prepare comprehensive flood control manage- ment plan. Whenever state grants under this chapter are used in a flood control maintenance project, the engineer of the county within which the project is located shell t VA6 1 -1 approve all plans for the specific project and shall su- pervise the work. The approval of such plans, construc- tion and expenditures by the department of ecology, in consultation with the department of Fisheries and the department of game, shall be a condition precedent to state participation in the cost of any project beyond planning and designing the specific project. Additionally, state grants may be made to counties for preparation of a comprehensive flood control manage- ment plan required to be prepared under RCW 86.26- .050. [1986 c 46 § 2; 1984 c 212 § 3: 1951 c 240 § 6.1 RCW 86.26.050 Projects in which state will partici- pate-Allocation of funds. (1) State participation shall be in such preparation of comprehensive flood control management plans and flood control maintenance pro- jccis as arc affected with a general public and state in- terest, as differentiated from a private interest, and as arc likely to bring about public benefits commensurate with the amount or state funds allocated thereto. (2) No participation for flood control maintenance projects may occur with a county or other municipal corporation unless the director or ecology has approved the flood plain management activities of the county, city, or town having planning jurisdiction over the area where the flood control maintenance project will be, on the one hundred year flood plain surrounding such area. The department of ecology shall adopt rules concern- ing the flood plain management activities of a county, city, or town that are adequate to protect or preclude flood damage to structures, works, and improvements. including the restriction of land uses within a river's meander belt or floodway to only flood-compatible uses. Whenever the department has approved county, city, and town flood plain management activities, as a condi- tion of receiving an allocation of funds under this chap- ter, each revision to the flood plain management activities must be approved by the department of ecol- ogy, in consultation with the department of fisheries and the department of ganic. No participation with a county or other municipal corporation for flood control mainlcnancc projects may occur unless the county engineer of the county within which the flood control maintenance project is located certifies that a comprehensive flood control management plan has been completed and adopted by the appropriate local authority, or is being prepared (Jr all portions of the river basin or other area, within which the project is located in that county, that are subject to notxling with it frequency or one hundred years or less. (3) Participation for fluid control maintenance pro- jects and preparation of comprchen%ice flood control 1( h. 86.26 R( "-p I I r' • t t °atg ,? 2d r ?rru; tts?ly 1 t iiii! 86.26.f1;50?.?`i State Particip managemdl plans shall be made from grants made by the department of ecology from the flood control assist- ance account. Comprehensive flood control management plans. and any revisions to the plans, must be approved by the department of ecology, in consultation with the department of fisheries and the department of game. [1986 c 46 § 3; 1985 c 454 § I; 1984 c 212 § 4; 1951 c 240 § 7.1 RCW 86.26.060 Allocation of funds. Grants for flood control maintenance shall be so employed that as far as possible, funds will be on hand to meet unusual, unforeseeable and emergent flood conditions. Allocations by the department of ecology, for emergency purposes, shall in each instance be in amounts which together with funds provided by local authority, if any, under reason. able exercise of its emergency powers, shall be adequate for the preservation of life and property, and with due regard to similar needs elsewhere in the stale. [1984 c 212§5; 1951c240§8.] RCW 86.26.070 Flood control maintenance fund of municipal corporation-Composition-Use. Any municipal corporation subject to flood conditions, may establish in its treasury a flood control maintenance fund. Such fund may be maintained by transfer thereto of moneys derived from regular or special lawful levies for flood control purposes, moneys which may be law- fully transferred to it from any other municipal fund; and gifts and contributions received for need control purposes. All costs and expenses for need control main- tenance purposes shall be paid out of said flood control. maintenance fund, which fund shall not be used for any Other purpose. [ 1951 c 240 § 9.1 RCW 86.26.080 Annual budget reports of municipal corporations-Allocation of funds. Any municipal corporation intending to seek state participating funds shall, within thirty days after final adoption of its annual budget for flood control purposes, report the amount thereof, to the cnginccr of the county within whose boundaries the municipal corporation lies. The county engineer shall submit such reports, together with reports from the county itself, to the department of ecology. On the basis of all such budget reports received, the depart. local may thereupon prepare a tentative and preliminary plan for the orderly and most beneficial allocation of funds from the flood control assistance account for the ensuing calendar year. Soil conservation districts shall be exempted from the provisions of this section. (1984 c 212§6; 1951c240§10.1 RCW 86.26.090 Scope of maintenance in which slate tdll participate. The stale shall parlicip:ltc with cl- igiblc heal authorilics in maintaining and restoring the normal and reasonably stable river and strcam channel alignment and the normal and reasonably stable river and strcam channel capacity for carrying off flood wa. lcrs with a minimum of damage from bank erosion or overflow of adjacent lands and property; and in rector. ing. maintaining and repairing natural conditions, works anon, Maintenance and structures for the maintenance of such conditions. The state shall likewise participate in the restoration and maintenance of natural conditions, works or structures ,-for the protection of lands and other property fnnm in- undation or other damage by the sea or other bodies of water. Funds from the flood control assistance account shall not be available for maintenance of works or struc- tures maintained solely for the detention or storage of flood waters. [1984 c 212 § 7; 1951 c 240 § 11.1 RCW 86.26.100 Agreement as to participation- Limit on amount. Stale participation in the cost of any flood control maintenance project shall be provided for by a written memorandum agreement between the di- rector of ecology and the legislative authority of the county submitting the request, which agreement, among other things, shall state the estimated cost and the per. centage thereof to be borne by the state. In no instance, except on emergency projects, shall the state's share ex. ceed one-half the cost of the project, to include project planning and design. However, grants to prepare a com- prchensivc flood control management plan required un- der RCW 86.26.050 shall not exceed seventy-five percent of the full planning costs, but not to exceed amounts for either purpose specified in rule and regula- tion by the department of ecology. [1986 c 46 § 4; 1984 c212§8; 1951 c240§ 12.1 RCW 86.26.105 Comprehensive flood control man- agement plan-Requirements-Time for completion. A comprehensive flood control management plan shall determine the need for flood control work, consider al- ternatives to in-stream hood control work, identify and consider potential impacts of in-strcam flood control work on the slate's in-stream resources, and identify the river's meander belt or floodway. A comprehensive flood control management plan shall be completed and adopted within at least three years of the certification that it is being prepared, as provided in RCW 86.26.050. If after this three-year period has elapsed such a comprehensive flood control plan has not been completed and adopted, grants for Ilood control maintenance pro. jects shall not be made to the county or municipal cor. porations in the county until a comprehensive flood control plan is completed and adopted by the appropri. me local authority. These limitations on grants shall not preclude allocations for emergency purposes made pur. suant to RCW 86.26.060. 11986 c 46 § 5; 1984 c 212 § 9.1 ':1 r?U ' t k? t 2 1 1 bar f v F-?[ pia ?e fL0 O Z ^ ... Jefferson County BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Port Townsend, Washington 98366 t > '•, (k ;•: _}° i ;J Phone (206) 385.2016 IEFFERSON COUNTY COURTHOUSE February 25, 1986 Dept. of Emergency Management 4220 E. MartLn May PT-11 OLympLa, WA 98504 ATTN: TERRY SIMMONS Dear Mr. SLmmons, LARRY W. DENNISON, DISTRICT I B.G. BROWN, DISTRICT 2 JOHN L. PITTS, DISTRICT 3 ThLs Ls to Lnform you that Robert NesbLtt, P.E., Jefferson County EngLneer, has been desLgnated by the Board of County CommLssLoners as the LocaL representatLve for emergency management. SLncereLy, John L. Pltts, haLrman cc: PNA 02 a 4 t' r iF.. Dear Mr. Rowe: "' As you know by now unfortunately, this past week's weather created a number of problems in this area. I have property on Highway 101 in Quilcene that has also been u: affected by the storms and reported this to the engineering _ department yesterday. Since you undoubtedly received a great number of calls, I thought it best to confirm in writing what I had reported. The Little Quilcene River, at least where it touches my pro- i •??t perty, has overflowed and caused considerable erosion to the surrounding land. It also appears that this erosion may al- , . ; v so undermine the adjacent Wildroad Road, causing possible harm and danger to the public in this area. I would appreciate an inspection of the area as quickly as r possible. One of the neighbors, Mr. Frank Hyde, said he woul - i d show someone around in the event I was not present at the time. •,.ym '.=1 Thank you for your prompt attention to the matter. Sincerely, BARBARA LAWSON i BL:jlr ? a fx (Seattle home phone no.524-3656 Quilcene number: 765-3822) 5 , RECEIVED ?F• 'sN w , JAN 2 4 198 Y 6 - i JEFFERSON COUNT ENoINEERs OFFICE iy il?? : + f y t _ ! L ?p?` ypp??,?r 7 u. rw. t n, -i. ,c ' , L_ E T° mt? JEFFERSON COUNTY COURTHOUSE NATIONAL 111SIORIC SITE PONT TOWNSEND. WASHINGTON January 24, 1986 PLannLng Department Jefferson County Port Townsend, WA 98368 ATTN: Bob Duffy Jefferson County Department of Public Works COURTHOUSE PORT TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON 98368 TEL. (206)385-3505 GARY A. ROWE, DIRECTOR Bob, On January 23, 1986, Bruce LaurLe, ConstructLon EngLneer and Bob S NesbLtt, County EngLneer, Looked at the damage and potentLaL dam- age to the County Maintenance Shop compound on the Hoh RLver wLth- <.. a Ln Sec. 29 T27N R11W. DurLng the heavy raLn thLs past week, a Log jam forced the Hoh RLver to ch ange Lt's course Ln a northerly dLrectLon. Part of the rLver L s now usLng a channel of a smaLL creek that runs Ln back of the maintenance compound. When the rL ver moved Lnto the area of the smaLL creek Lt uprooted trees which are causLng blockage to thLs part of the rLver and are- sLon of the Land by the compound. WashLngton State FLsherLes Looked at the area wLth Jack Corey from the County Maintenance Hoh RLver Shop and saLd he would aLLow Km three weeks to work aLong the stream to protect the shop compound. Our pLan Ls to puLL some of the downed trees Lnto the bank and an- chor them. We wLLL then pLace rock aLong the bank to prevent fur- ther erosLon. The total Length of the rock work wLLL be about 400 feet. If you have any further questLons, please caLL me. SLncerely, Robert G. NesbLtt, P.E. County EngLneer cc: MA 02 fir" U O -Z 3 K ^O ?` YY 1 h n r 0 \e Z !I I 1 ?S r i E u NOW' ?r 81 At 9}RI?Y?'?,p1x?' K' . ' r ?? ' I19h ?-*? r ?f ?, f ,?4 l?"+?41??.'YtAiL?t?fSli?l? ) PIT, S N l 4 r ? _,il Y ? 1 d {lY - ? 4 r !. ? (Y r _ F -? r 1" 0, rFzl A ? ?'? ??k ?? '?17? Y 1 I ? it{? • "?7' ?'S 11 4 - l I i T Y - r t S' 1 1 ? j r ?z w , I , x ? S 1i3:} y 1 i 1 i a L. , nfa, nF fwu?mr?r..•••?rr??,nav+•wow lF t*% ) .. r y p r + w,r4 0 b 4? ,S x t pq' 7 3M1f y. ANDREA BEATTY RINIKER ,? STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mail Stop PV-17 • Olympia, Washington 98504-6777 a (206) 459-6(X10 July 1, 1988 Robert Nesbitt Jefferson County Department of Public Works 1820 Jefferson Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 Re: Flood Control Assistance Account Program Grant No. G0088160 Dear Mr. Nesbitt: Enclosed are two unsigned copies of the subject grant between the Department of Ecology and the Jefferson County Department of Pub- lic Works for the comprehensive flood control management plan. (Please be sure to use the referenced grant number in all corre- spondence, billings, etc.) After your review, have both copies signed and dated by the appropriate official and return them, in entirety, to me. Upon, receipt of both copies, the grant will be signed by the Department, the date being the effective date of this grant. Once copy of the duly executeu document will them be returned to you. If you have any questions, please contact me at (206) 459-6792 or SCAN 585-6792. I look forward to working with you on this grant. A" Sincerely, 1??G`oot' Lisa Randlette Floodplain Management Section Shorelands and Coastal Zone Management Program Enclosure JUL. 'r 1SP.$ ENCINEERSi UFFicE -:_-1 , 0V July 25, 1988 Steve Ralph Point No Point Treaty Council 7850 NE Little Boston Rd Kingston, WA 98346 Randy Johnson Washington Department of Fisheries 505E. 8th Street - - . Port Angeles, WA 98362 ... ... - .:....... Dear Steve and Randy Thank you for meeting with me on July 6 to discuss management options for lowering the watertable on the Big Quilcene floodplain. I agree that the most efficient way to plan and implement a project like this is to use ,a coordinated approach incorporating fisheries, shellfish, and other natural resource issues as well as social needs. Flood control planning in exclusion to these and other issues can, and has, resulted in less than optimal management. Your assistance in identi 1 Eying options at this early stage will allow me to focus my efforts on options that are acceptable to the major affected parties. We also discussed the short term versus the long term needs of river management. We don't now know enough about channel aggradation to make decisions on long term management. It is my hope that the flood management program funded through DOE to the Public Works Department will address these need. Your input in that process will be invaluable. The short term issue that I am committed to resolve is the need for immediate action to relieve the high water table. The extremely shallow water table affects septic systems and wells for approximately 45 residences on the floodplain. Rather than try to combine the short term and long term needs, I believe that we can effectively initiate a short term program prior to or during the development of the long term floodplain management plan. Unfortunately I had to leave our meeting before we were able to decide where we need to go from here. Like I said during our meeting, I am fundamentally ignorant of fisheries management issues as well as of ;Fc t?.NY,? (4w I I ?;?( yy,I - ? Pr.. kP« U ! ?& 'r"In 8 l ) 1' j f i ? 4 7fA" Z 'f 1rti I ?? ' ;" 'M ? yR ? t i tr f? 1 5 y =`„?t rt Sf ? ? ` ',?? rb? u f ,? F , channel morphology and hydrology. I would like you to identify a number of acceptable options so that I can move ahead with this project. I will be hapPY to provide you with whatever additional information I can for you to begin considering management options, please put your preliminary ideas together for me by August 15, and send them along to me. I will then schedule another meeting to discuss their merits and costs. Sincerely _ N Janet L. Welch i r'. ' Ak rr - i Y. BIG QUILCENE FLOODPLAIN CONTAMINATION ASSESS4MT _.rs (PRELMNARY) x t? ??'p Introduction As part of its water quality program, the Department of Ecology awarded the Jefferson County Planning and Building Department a grant in 1987 which included funding to conduct a preliminary analysis of septic system impact in the Big Quilcene River Floodplain. While avoiding a costly hydrologic analysis, the analysis set out to achieve two objectives: Assess the impact of on-site sewage disposal systems on the Big Qu12cene River floodplain on drinking, fresh, and marine water quality. Evaluate the political, technical, and economic feasibility correcting the situation, if necessary. This assessment will discuss septic system impact and introduce some alternative correction strategies. It will then be used as a starting point to evaluate correction options. When complete, this information will be used as a management tool for policy makers at the county, state, and federal level while addressing issues frequently absent from flood control management plans and engineering reports. It will be used by Jefferson County Public Works Department when it develops a comprehensive flood control management plan for the Big Quilcene River. That project is scheduled to run from July 1988 to May 1989 and will then begin the lengthy process of review by state agencies. Implementation of the plan is not likely to occur prior to 1990. F`?I Area Histo The Big Quilcene River flows into Quilcene Bay in the southeastern portion of Jefferson County. The majority of the watershed is in timber production with residential development in the lower 1/2 mile. At the mouth of the river is a large alluvial fan created by historical riverbed deposition from the once meandering river. On this fan is a 170 acre residential area containing approximately 45 hones. These homes are served by single family wells and on-site sewage disposal systems. In addition to providing a substantial "neighborhood" character in an otherwise low density community, the floodplain is highly valued for its natural resources. It is a major chum salmon producing stream as well as the site of a US Fish and Wildlife hatchery for coho, spring chinook, and chum salmon. The tideland of the floodplain lying south of the river is well suited for shellfish and is under commercial production. Annual fish production from the river exceeds $1.1 million, while annual shellfish production from the floodplain area alone exceeds $.e million. S Optimal management on the floodplain should be able to meet the needs of both the community and the natural resources. ?t 7 i i ? A r .Y 4 ' ?i ' s ? n n",mW'?v e 4 +` i?i'`7r iu,: ?? P 3.,5?•!"t °?: ? .?1? ' _r dj C?.'. .r ur ?.rn p +rs/ {r >'lt ?y Vi y^Ir?..??gydr n t h:. ` q?C? xdtld ?? L i`tLp Y N'' ,µV r 5 ?,R• ?)! 4i r ? 1 tlkAP.,?' ?fI?61t?' r iNI 5?l ,, L r i /. ? t? 7 ?S t r r? r ? ! ?u 1 ? r ?......nw•+..,nrwrwM.n r Floodplain management began in the 1940's when levees were first built aw as a means of restricting the meandering nature of the river. L ,{{ Intermittent dredging of the river by floodplain residents also occurred. Flooding continued to plague the area, however, until the flood of 1968 ?y which prompted the Port of Port Townsend to sponsor a flood protection project. A more detailed investigation by the Army Corps of Engineers "r followed. The third draft of this report, Unfavorable Section 205: Detailed Proiect Report on Bic Quilcene River, was released in 1972. ?z , In that report, thirteen alternatives were considered to remedy an r estimated annual flood damage of $11,000. All structural alternatives were rejected based on cost/benefit analysis. The preferred alternative, based largely on economic considerations, was management by local interest. "This alternative would include such measures as zoning of flood plain land, flood insurance, evacuation of the flood plain, flood warning, floodproofing of existing structures, and preservation of undeveloped land along the stream for such uses as parks, golf courses a .- h and agriculture" (Army Corps, 1972). Except for the adoption of the Floodplain Management Ordinance, which is required for floodplain insurance under the Federal Emergency Management Act, the county has not s. enacted any planning or health department policy intended specifically at relieving the flood issue. Problem Description ¢ ) 7 Recent attention to health related concerns the situation on the Big _ Quilcene River floodplain was a result of a water quality project that began in 1986. The purpose of that project was to identify and correct sources of bacterial pollution into the bay which has resulted in its closure for shellfish harvest in 1985 and included water sampling from s and The findin i t ib t i f h t g ar es. r u ts res wa er Quilcene Bay and recommendations of that project were published in. the Dabob and Quilcene , Bays Water Quality Project Report in 1987. High bacterial counts in the head of the bay pointed to animal keeping, septic systems, and the resident seal population as probable sources. The use of septic systems on the floodplain also came under question as a possible source. The conditions that result in an unsatisfactory situation on the floodplain are the presence of both septic systems and extreme high water table during winter months. These conditions result in inadequate treatment and disposal of septic system effluent with potential risk of disease transmission via direct contact with pathogenic agents, shellfish and drinking water consumption, and recreational swimming. During the wet winter months, the river rises to elevations ewceeding ground level of the floodplain. Because the soils are quite permeable, saturation of the soils throughout the floodplain occurs during this time. Septic systems installed into these saturated soils do not achieve adequate effluent treatment and may allow nutrients and pathogens to travel long distances within the soil. What makes the situation unique is that, because of bed deposition in the river, bed elevations are at or above those of the floodplain. As a Z O N J J N W 'S W Q = 3 w ' O LL Z Q O ? • rt? r a ' k , , result, subsurface flow, including potentially contaminated groundwater, does not move toward the river where it can be easily detected. Instead, the subsurface flow through the floodplain is probably from the river across the plain and to the bay. As expected, sampling of the river over a 24 month period showed very low levels of bacteria. Numerous studies on movement of bacteria through saturated soils indicate that under certain conditions it is possible for bacteria to travel over long distances. It is not known whether these conditions exist on the floodplain. The greater likelihood is that bacteria would move through the soil until intercepted by a ditch or s;,ele. They would be carried by surface flow the remainder of the way to the bay. Sampling in those ditches and surface waters during flood conditions in March and December 1987 did reveal bacterial concentrations which exceeded standards. Although corresponding marine sampling at the same time revealed a significant increase in bacterial pollution in the bay, identification of the floodplain as the primary source'bf the bacteria cannot be made. It was in an attempt to quantify the nature of this problem that this feasibility study was begun. In January 1988, a monitoring program was initiated to determine the contribution of bacteria to the groundwater from nearby septic systems. A total of 12 shallow wells were placed throughout the floodplain. The locations of these and 5 surface water sampling stations which comprised the study are shown. The monitoring plan called for sampling during periods of high river flow when saturation of the soils on the floodplain would be the greatest. In addition, sampling would also be conducted when the water table was lower and greater treatment of septic effluent could be expected. Monitoring wells were placed in roughly concentric rings to provide as much data as possible on groundwater quality above, in, and below residential areas. i7 Unfortunately, draught conditions from January through April 1988 prevented the river from reaching its typical wet season flood levels and substantially limited the degree of soil saturation. One monitoring well was in place through both the winter of 1986-87 and 1988. That well showed a water table the first year at 11 to 19 inches, while 1988 levels remained from 18 to 28 inches below the surface. Discussion Sampling conducted when soil saturation was at greater than 24 inches from the surface did not show excessive bacterial concentrations. These results are consistent with expectations since some soil treatment of septic effluent would be taking place in unsaturated soils. These values represent conditions on the floodplain during the moderately wet period. However worse case conditions on the floodplain during peak river flow and saturated conditions cannot, at this time, be documented. Far from being a stable, though less than optimal situation, conditions on the floodplain appear to be deteriorating at a significant rate. Although river bed deposition was not a parameter monitored as part of the water quality program, it was estimated from measurements n _ ?b Kd t{4 . 1?` ff f+w,n±?unAVC?ni?'YI???G?G?.4Lj'+T???'F"^'.'.?'1¢ 1 ,31 f! rMl)i?b4?t4 L'S nltef??i4?Y1'/.??}"fl`tGS!?I"M?4?7? '."?,w:Mrt 1f1 ( 'r ?h,? `n , ' - 1 I U, Y f r ( i ', ? ? 1 6 T 1 r V. u r ? ? t 1 b yid r ?n I ' ? i ck w taken to determine streamflow. These measurements indicate that at the Linger Longer Bridge fran January 1987 to April 1988 the streambed rose approximately 1.75 feet, with a total accretion of approximately 113 s square feet. This situation is much different from river bed deposition prior to levee constructio h th q n w en e river was free to meander across the alluvial fan ll i as we as n the more recent past when periodic V dredging operations were conducted. 1 17 Becl deposition in both the channel and the bay has subsequently slowed water movement in the river, allowing suspended solids to drop out at increasing rates. This deposition may also have a direct effect on the est bli h a s ment of log and debris jams. These jams were the cause of 4 floods in 1986, 87, and 88. Diversion of river flaw by the jam during ;k the flood of December 1988 resulted in millions of dollars of damage to adjacent shellfish resources in addition to road and hone damage. t This accelerating problem points to a need to consider a short term remed if l y ong term management is not immediately forthcoming. A no action alternative will not reduce the bacterial hazard, benefit floodstri k id c en res ents, or protect the fisheries habitat and shellfish b d e s. t The options for eliminating this health hazard fall into two general 77 categories: discontinuation of the use of soils in the floodplain for wastewater treatment, and 3 Improving the treatment capability to the soil by permanently lowering the water table. F. ^' It would not be necessary to correct both situations to remedy health related concerns Locali d fl di y . ze oo ng would not carry with it disease C. hazard if effluent were not being discharged into the soil from on-site r septic systems. Conversely, septic systems could function adequately with a reduction in the cater table. Each of these options can, in turn , be broken down into a number of alternatives. j It is important to note that, for the purpose of this investigation , the primary objective is the reduction of bacterial pollution in the area. Alternatives which may also result in associated benefits or liability to shellfish, fisheries, and convmrnity are noted. Alternatives that may eliminate flooding or other problems but do not reduce bacterial hazard (such as raising the levees) are, therefore, not included. ELIMINATING USE OF SOILS FOR EFFLUENT TREATMENT These alternatives addresses the elimination of contamination by removing the source of bacteria. They will not result in appreciable changes or improvements in bed loading, flooding, river channel movement, or fisheries habitat. E 1 ' Ar 4• ^4'?tY'? ? ? l A ? t 9 A : ? A 1 ?vl ?'I ? l1' x {? 1tb7fl y,r }i k4 A ? 1 I ' Y` h r { 11 Tii`? ? 4 +V f'. }'s 7t ? ? Y ,? S . [ t f 1 F 1 ? r ? '? i ?. 4 + t Ij ? [t 1 , yW { 1 1 I l . _ 1 ? , 1 II 5r rl } { '. ?f.' boor 11 . ' Option 1: Individual sewage treatment Septic systems which rely on native soil sewage treatment would be replaced with systems using sand or other filtration material. This would include engineered above grand systems or proprietary devices p approved by the Department of Social and Health Services. Upgrading of systems would be required on virtually all residences. ;- t d van ages: A ^a" Installations would be in accordance with well established waste disposal practices. Repairs could begin immediately. ` Disadvantages: Systems would.be subject to damage during flooding. Blooding could still lead to system malfunction. ?. Required setbacks to wells and surface waters might not be met on all sites. Systems could not meet new construction standards in most locations. s Upgrading of the property might not be permitted if new construction $ standards were not met. . i lication d A i h L . pp an t Option 2: Community Sewage Treatment w a System could consist of one or more community drainfields located off u site in areas of suitable soil or a collection of treatment devices serving clusters of hones. Advantages: - Greater flexibility than option one in siting and design. y Possibility of grant funding for design and/or construction. ` Disadvantages: Delays during engineering and design stage. MMMMM If treatment devices are used, routine monitoring will be required. Option 3: Sewer plant with discharge to bay System would consist of a small sewer plant discharging to marine waters. Advantages: Greater control over quality of treatment than would be likely with individual systems. Disadvantages: , AN.? Mandatory shellfish closure area in vicinity of outf-all. ;. Impact on marine waters with possible effects on shellfish resources. r r Option 4: Remove Homes/Allow River to Meander Acquisition could take place gradually with properties bought as they r torte onto the market or through condemnation or other procedures. Advantages: Lung term solution with no ongoing maintenance required. Disadvantages: High social impact to neighborhood. The river would breach the levees and ultimately resume its meandering flow across the floodplain. The existing bridge on Linger Longer Road would eventually need to be abandoned and alternative access created. I F6, LOWERING OF THE GROUNDWATER TABLE This alternative addresses the elimination of contamination by lowering the water table, allowing effluent treatment by soils underlying existing septic systems. It will also result in associated changes in bed ?. loading, flood frequency and duration, river channel movement, fisheries r habitat. Option 5: Lower the Riverbed Lowering the riverbed could be accomplished in a variety of ways including dredging, gravel operations, etc. Advantages: Reduction in flood damage and expense. Resumption of subsurface flows into the river where bacterial pullutants can be readily monitored. Less risk to drinking water supplies. Not dependent on participation by individual residents. Positive social impact to neighborhood. Disadvantages: Possible adverse impact to fisheries. On-going maintenance required to prevent the resumption of bed loading. Would require engineering. multiple permits, and lengthy planning and review. yp. •x '?+ u 7 a n, h? Y t V d9d a II f n 7° w li,' L 1 ?? r L d Iti r? v g ? 1 L .i 7 F+ t,-1 r t J ? ?'7?iNl I { p+. r V? Aa r S ? ? - - 1 q. ?. t? IAA I?t ntHf 1 tan,.. ., .. ... . . .. . ,. .. ... .. ., w I??a° s°wa5fitia?sa" n.v#eleod9auu.?SXt uH§ Nl , . .. . _ . F ? N 4 tlitlTYO 1 ? `.F; O CHUCK CLARKE f? Director p STATE OF WASHINGTON •' DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT L DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT - 4220 E Martin Way, PT-71 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8617 • (206) 753-5255 • (SUN) 234-5255 June 14, 1988 Mr. Robert G. Nesbitt, County Engineer r y, M t '. Jefferson County Public Works P. O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Dear Mr. Nesbitt: i Thank you for responding so quickly and sending in your ?:7£S application for possible federal Hazard Mitigation Assistance monies for FFY 89. We will be b itti su m ng your application as the first priority to FEMA for consideration for these funds along with our other state requests under the Comprehensive Cooperative Agreement (CCA). r Only one of the applications in the region may be chosen , depending on what may be coming in from other states. It may be some time before we have confirmation of the decision on this request; but we will let you know as soon as we hear a anything. We may also get requests for further information and y will contact you with those also. r fi Sincerely, y ' a DO a E. Murphy, Coordinator State Disaster Plannin y r g { LEM:ts ,...' 5 {-. gyp, cc: Sheriff Mel Mefford RECEIVED Jefferson County DEM ,r fiEj { i a s M t, JUN 16 1988 i JEFFERSON COUNTY t 7 e „a. uet tx ENGINEERS OFFICE Ncfueology and Hi+tmic Pr-alion • C x nny Scrvicn, • Fn gtln, Manago , 1 • Fire PlOWI-'.-ke, • local Dr ekmr-l and Fb,ning • Local Go 1-nl Service, • Public Work, i OFI? Telephone ( 06 ) 385-9166 ?srae HAZARD MITIGATION ASSISTANCE MONIES REQUEST G .ate . County Jefferson Count Contact Name Robert G. Nesbitt Title_ County Engine eer Organization Public Works Department Address P.O. Box 1220 City port Townsend State WA Zip Code 98368 General sheet if necessary): tiof ro'ect to be done (continue on back of Jefferson County wishes to develope a comprehensive flood control manaaement plan for Jefferson County's Big quilcene River and the Dosewallips River.' Field work and Report will be done by a consultant. The work to be accomplished is explained on page 2 under Specific Tasks. V ,r ??f w (?y;y?.?yy F 7 1's 1 .,7 N,+ i X ? ? Y! '?'??Y' t r d ? .•1?^Y t E> n? f + nx ti 64ey? ' ?t/'lT?c?;l rt1? ? 5 k a6 ? i"r+ a? j r ! i ! y?` c ?4 ?i r , ?n yam"' Page 2 -.Hazard `Mitigation Assistance Monies Request Specific Tasks (continue on back of sheet if n/e/cessarye Lines Products L}oh7??e-l i/ ? ?d J may' ? x Hazard Mitigation Assistance Monies Request 1. What are the short and long term reductions in hazard vulnerability through this project? Explanation: The management plan will determine the best corrective methods to reduce flood . damage for both short and Iona terms. These plans will also take into consider- ation the impact on fish, game, shellfish, water quality, and aesthetics: 2. Does this project address a serious or repetitive hazard v' vulnerability problem which could cause damage in the next 5-10 years? YesX No (If not, please identify why this project is special.) Explanation: ,t. 'a The study and plan will determine the best methods to reduce flood damage to houses, septic systems, and wells along each river. If corrective work is not done the flooding will continue to cause increasing damage each year. We have had major flood problems in January 1986 and December 1987. 3. Is Your attach acompleted u hazard vulnerable other analysis hazards? dlist Please hazards. We have other rivers that flood and cause damage to the structures and people living near the rivers. Flooding is the main hazard to the people of Jefferson County. E ?E ? ff ?S ? rk` 1 1 ,,.sue G w !'. N, y q_. ,#x _ .. ? .L.?-, a "a SAfFf`kst ,._ 'i.' ...._. ?. .`F ?F m'?i„(?V%Y?...... • ` •?? t* ? ? 'Ail :?[. 'Gm ,n Page 4.r Hazard Mitigation Assistance Monies Request 4. Is this project in compliance with requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program and state regulations? Yes X No_ Explanation: n w Jefferson County is trying to determine how we may be able to reduce flood ^. damage and still comply with all requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program. t ; S. Does this project involve the general private sector and r public in its initiatives? Yes X No If so, explain whom and ' _ how: The Sub Zone Flood District advisory boards will be involved with the County and consultant as the plan is being written. There will be public meetings for citizen input and the plans will be reviewed b St d F l A i t d ,j y e an era genc a e es. d 6. Is your community committed to long-term mitigation and does it have previous active programs for risk reduction? Yes X No Please briefly describe such programs: Jefferson County has a County wide Flood Zone and later developed the present ` two Sub Zones. The first study and plan will be for the two Sub Zones, when KU;, these are completed we plan to develope plans for the other major river basins. ? . 74, 7. Do you feel the issues, problems recommendations, and implementation measures of this project are of value to other communities? Yes X No Would there be a problem with sharing your information with other communities? Yea No X Explanation: I believe the work Jefferson County is planning will be helpful to other counties with same minor changes. The changes will have to be made as each river has different slopes, cover, and soils. ,re .. t.' ? ' t 1 v t y ? i i ? . 011 ? air KGII ??? F`??om - A r ?'? ? 1 t l a v ' i? NN rL{?'A ?7hw ?'i,?,ery?i?v ! d J F ] - J ?' -I S I i. I I 1 ?? v „l Y41a r?Aai a' x Page 5.-' Hazard Mitigation Assistance Monies Request Costs- . - Types of workers t " t Salaries S i Benefits Printing S Equipment (list type) $ R Supplies S #? Purchases Services (Define) S a Travel S Indirect Costs S 4 Total S y 1. Collection and Review of Existing Information $15,000 > 2. Evaluate Alternative In-Stream Flood Control $30,000 Measures and Non Stream Control Measures 3. Evaluate Potential Impacts of Alternatives $15,000 l i 4. Prepare Recommended Plan $24,000'; Nonfederal funds being spent on the project Please list amounts f rP4 organization sources, and program sources. S r•n.nnn r)pnt. of Frolnav FreAP S e.nno Ipffprgnn Cnunty Fl and 7nnp Fund i y S ? ?:3 t 1 5,,. i a Hazard Mitigation Assistance Monies will be 21 % of the total ? monies spent on this project. 1?af 41, . c May 27, 1988 Dear /Wz (7y/,//,,,, ? Reference is made to your telephone discussion with Terry Simmonds on May 27, 1988, regarding possible hazard mitigation assistance monies that may be available from the Federal Emergency Management Agency. There is only $18,000 in the entire region and that can be made to any community within Alaska, Washington, Idaho and Washington. FOR THAT REASON, PLEASE CALL TERRY OR ME AFTER YOU HAVE READ THE ENCLOSED INFORMATION TO DISCUSS IF YOUR POTENTIAL PROJECT EVEN FITS WITHIN THE CRITERIA. PLEASE CALL BEFORE YOU FILL OUT THE ATTACHED REQUEST FORM. Due to the short amount of time for us to get the request into FEMA, please have your completed form in the mail by June 7, so it can be here by June 9. If you have any questions, please call either me or Terry regarding this subject. Sincerely, Lora E. Murphy State Planning Coordinator Plans and Preparedness Unit Division of Emergency Management Enclosures cc: Terry Simmonds j ?.?Q- IF. k-?. Y Cl nl LI-.,?`j C,, ?-? k' 6l-?c , CQ J I ' //? ( -! 0p0 am ten: k t „ HAZARD MITIGATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (HMA) °• ' PROGRAM AUTHORITY ster Relief Act of 1994 (PL 93-288 Di Th e sa ), as amended. 1 PROGRAM PURPOSE 4 The basic purpose of the HMA Program is to reduce a state or , local government's vulnerability to risk through hazard mitigation planning, or implementation of mitigation measures. - The HMA Program encourages a state or local government to assess r - the degree of risk to natural hazards, and to develop a r . comprehensive mitigation strategy that will reduce loss to life r„? " 'and property when a disaster strikes. Hazard mitigation planning ?• may be done either before or after the occurrence of a disaster. + Target areas for the program are those which are threatened by e repetitive or potentially severe hazards, thereby increasing the likelihood that there will be an opportunity for the plan or -"I y other mitigation project to serve its intended pupose. A EXAMPLES OF PROJECTS x Local hazard mitigation plans (either pre- or post-disaster) _ ; for very vulnerable cities or counties t A state program to conduct flood-audits for home owners and small businesses in coastal areas ? * A plan for reconstruction and maintenance of malfunctioning ., tidal gates g * A statewide post-flood mitigation seminar for local officials ?r• x Development of a mitigation guidebook for coastal communities * A study of the effects of rising lake levels for 20 lakes L1 within a state, including a mitigation strategy for each lake * A statewide levee policy conference ° ' * A multi-hazard mitigation plan for an area undergoing rapid development 1 * A flash flood conference and video-tape ', Nbh ?5 - 4 ) 2 t i FUNDING The HMA Program is funded through a Comprehensive Cooperative Agreement (CCA) between FEMA and the State. The current annual HMA Program budget is 5200,000. Each of ten FENA regions is 18 000 i ven $ , g to fund HMA projects within their states. 520,000 1 is retained at FEMA headquarters for discretionary projects. No state or local match is required, though it is encouraged. j ? EVALUATION CRITERIA The FEMA Regional Office selects those projects to be funded each year. Generally, FEMA looks for projects in which the applicant ) Z , has a strong commitment to mitigation, and which have the v t greatest chance of being implemented and eventually resulting in t t ? 1' longterm savings of life and property. The applicant should consult the HMA Program guidelines for specific evaluation a ? criteria. ? 'ash b)}'o' Y 1` ? ' t ?} 5 r? k i' Y A- t ,i,.d? t ? t Y Y L 5 ti { - ? 4? 1 tF r , i? rd ? ? 1'. 1 S fi t 4 ti AYw ! ty? _ LS e' FY 1989 Comprehensive Cooperative Agreement Executive Program Summary HAZARD MITIGATION ASSISTANCE (HMA) 1. Program Synopsis This program is intended to assist States and local units of government in reducing vulnerability from recurring or potentially severe natural hazards by supporting hazard mitigation planning and implementation activities. This program typically funds either site specific mitigation plans for a particular community or area which faces a serious threat of disaster; funds specific mitigation activities on a statewide basis, such as development of a statewide acquisition and relocation plan; funds implementation of hazard mitigation recommendations from Section 406 Plans or Interagency Hazard Mitigation Team Reports; or funds any other appropriate mitigation project which adequately satisfies the criteria outlined in the Program Guidelines. II. Program Changes There are no significant changes from the FY 1988 HMA Guidelines. III. Major Program Emphasis A. Develop mitigation plans for State or local governments that identify short and long-term mitigation measures which can be implemented both in a post-disaster situation and in day-to-day decision making. R. Fund Section 406 mitigation activities or Interagency Hazard Mitigation Team recommendations that cannot be funded through other means. C. Fund projects that complement, where possible, other FEMA, Federal, State or local hazard mitigation projects. 0. Fund projects that best meet the evaluation criteria listed in the Program Guidelines. E 14 su -: d , FY 1989 Comprehensive Cooperative Agreement Annual Program Requirements HAZARD MITIGATION ASSISTANCE (HMA) 1. Introduction. Chapter 8 of Civil Preparedness Guide (CPG) 1-3 contains the guidelinesr for the Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) Program. These guidelines include all pertinent background information on the HMA, as well as information on the expected outputs and evaluation criteria for the HMA. The following Annual Program Requirements merely supplement the HMA guidelines and serve to highlight special requirements for the FY 1989 CCA. In order to fully understand the HMA Program, one must first read Chapter 8 of CPG 1-3. When preparing a CCA package, care should be taken to select the most appropriate source of funding for the CCA projects. A key factor to bear in mind is that the HMA Program has very limited funding and is not automatically available to States each year. In fact, States will quite possibly not receive funding for HMA in successive years due to the limited program budget. Therefore, it is important that HMA projects either be self-contained or that non-FEMA funds be available 'if total project costs are expected to exceed the current FY HMA funds. In many cases the HMA Program funds have served as an impetus for further mitigation activities in a State or local government. Opportunities for cost sharing or for funding the implementation or expansion of HMA products should be sought among other Federal, State, local or even private sources to make the most of the limited HMA program funds. II. Program Requirements. The following requirements apply to FY 1989 HMA proposals. A. Evaluation Criteria. HMA projects should satisfy as many of the Evaluation Criteria listed in Chapter 8 of CPG 1-3 as possible. At a minimum, project applicants must meet the following criteria. 1. Serious or repetitive problems of hazard vulnerability which make it likely that the community/area can reasonably expect to sustain damages in the life of the plan/project. 2. Demonstration of a commitment on the part of the responsible State or local governmental unit to the objectives of long- term recovery and mitigation. r t r , r? R 7 HMA-2 3...Compliance on the part of the responsible governmental entity with all regulatory requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program, PL 93-288, E.O. 11988 and E.O. 11990 (if applicable), 4. Potential for the achievement of long term benefit as a w result of the project through reduction of hazard vulnerability. 8. HMA for All States with Presidential Disaster Declarations. FEMA should encourage States which have had one or more Presidentially declared disasters in the past year to consider how funding provided through the CCA can be used to help implement measures recommended in their Section 406 hazard mitigation plans. The work program should include a brief statement under the heading of Mitigation Assistance" which describes how the CCA is being used to help implement recommen- dations contained in the Section 406 hazard mitigation plan. If the State does not feel the CCA can provide assistance in implementing this plan, the statement of work should state so with a brief explanation as to why. C. Reporting. As shown in the attached sample, the Activities-Results List will be used to monitor outputs described in the HMA statements of work on a quarterly basis. This format will, in fact, serve as a care for the statement of work, though is not in itself sufficient as a statement of work. The narrative statement of work which accompanies the Activities-Results List shall con- tain an identification of the specific products or activities which Will be produced under the HMA, along with an explanation of the methodology used to complete the project and a list of milestones to allow at least quarterly evaluation of the project. An estimate of staff hours, travel and other resources needed to complete each output should be shown in the statement of work. III. Special Considerations. The following questions will be considered to assist in ranking HMA proposals for available funding. ...:iii 5 IVR HMA-3 A. Is a HMA grant the most appropriate source of funding for the proposed activity? Would other CCA Program funds (or other Federal, State, or local funding) be more appropriate for the proposed activity? w B. Are non-Federal funds to be used along with Federal funds to t complete the proposal? What percentage of the total proposed cost of the project is to be provided by HMA? What are other sources of potential funding, the dollar amount requested, and dollar amounts likely to be received from these other sources? C. Are the goals of the proposal consistent with the goals of the NFIP, PL 93-288, E.O. 11988 and E.O. 11990 (if applicable)? D. Does the proposal reflect intent to reduce non-Federal hazard mitigation to a supplemental rather than a sustaining level? E. Does the proposal provide the basis for continued or enhanced :y- activity in support of hazard mitigation' goals? Is the project part of.or does it serve to complement an established compre- hensive long term State or local program of hazard mitigation (i.e. Section 406 or other hazard mitigation plan, redevelopment ' or relocation plan)? F. Does the statement of work clearly identify specific products or activities which will be delivered under the HMA, along with adequate milestones to allow at least quarterly lit evaluation of the project? Does the statement of work include an estimate of staff hours, travel and other resources needed for each output? Are the time and staff commitments in the statement of work sufficient to ensure successful completion? y r r c' 4 }. u. 'A IL I ?,?av..'.g.+. 1SYY: ? rf? ?' '; ?vt^!.! P??S?s P _ ?;Aa r5n ,rav„y`vsw,?abi-?°...id'ss?r?"_.ssmc+ _ ^.11F ;N Y June 2, 1987 CPC 1-3 CHAPTER 6 ?- x t Hazard Mitigation Assistance Program ily , 6-1. General. The HMA Program is designed to reduce a State or local government's vulnerability to risk through hazard mitigation planning and implementation activities. 6-2. Scope. The HMA Program provides a limited amount of funding to States to-cover or to assist in covering the cost of preparing a site n specific or functionally specific hazard mitigation plan, one or more " components of such a plan, or a related activity which will contribute to " reducing vulnerability to hazards either throughout the State or for a ?. a selected area within the State. Hazard mitigation plans may be prepared by general purpose local governments, including counties, or by State government agencies with responsibility for one or more aspects of disaster recovery or mitigation. 6-3. Objectives. The HMA Program is intended to encourage a State or local government to assess the degree of risk and to develop a comprehen- sive mitigation strategy to effectively reduce potential losses. Hazard mitigation planning may be carried out either prior to the occurrence of di a saster (predisaster planning), after the occurrence of a disaster (postdisaster planning), or may be an ongoing project of the State or ! local government. Target areas for the program are those which are threatened by repeated or potentially severe hazards thereb in r i r y c eas ng the likelihood of implementation within the useful life of the plan. 6-4. Definitions. The following definitions help clarify the basic objectives of the HMA Program: a. Hazard Mitigation. Hazard mitigation is defined as actions intended to reduce the degree of risk of vulnerability to hazards present in an area, such as adopting and effectively administering building codes which include features to prevent vulnerability of structures to earth- quakes, floods, fires, etc. Hazard mitigation does not include actions which simply involve preparing for or responding to the existing level of risk or vulnerability such as developing warning systems and plans for temporary evacuation of hazard-prone areas. Mitigation actions involve modifying the degree of risk or vulnerability of an area over the long term. Mitigation activities complement preparedness and response measures in that successful mitigation can reduce or eliminate the need for response capabilities. b. Predisaster Planning. Predisaster plans are those developed in advance of a disaster so that (1) recovery efforts can be guided in such a way as to minimize the potential for recurrence, and (2) routine decisions such as the adoption or enforcement of building code standards 6-1 Ch 6-1 u R1 i?. ? t n or zoning regulations can be influenced to reduce vulnerability to a disaster. r c. Postdisaster Planning. Postdisaster plans are simply those which are developed after the occurrence of a disaster, though in ;. actuality become pre-disaster plans which are to be implemented before the next disaster event. The occurrence of a disaster heightens the awareness of a community or State to the reality of hazard vulnerability and often results in calls for official actions to address hazard vulnerability. As a condition of Federal assistance following a presi- dentially declared disaster States are required by FEMA under PL 93-288 Section 406 to evaluate their hazards and identify measures to mitigate x these hazards. HMA funds are not to be used to develop plans required under Section 406, because that is a State commitment for receiving Federal disaster assistance. HMA may be used, however, to fund mitiga- tion actions identified in Section 406 plans if the mitigation actions satisfies HMA guidelines. HMA may also be used to fund other post- disaster planning efforts aside from the Section 406 requirement. d. Hazard Mitihgation for All States. Each State should work toward creation or a azard mitigation section or annex of the State 1 emergency plan. This annex should clearly identify significant hazards d present in the State for which mitigation measures are appropriate. (This identification of hazards and mitigation measures should be drawn to the extent practicable from assessments conducted in accordance with HICA/MYDP outlined in CPG 1-36, 1-35, and 1-35a.) For such hazards, the annex would identify what mechanisms are currently in place for reducing long term vulnerability (e.g., State building or fire codes, authorities for construction of flood control facilities, awareness and training Program-for developers and building inspectors, etc.) and what mechan- isms, programs or authorities are needed to address reduction of long tern vulnerability that are not already in place. 6-5. Exoected Outputs. The basic responsibility of the applicant will be to comp y with the requirements and produce the final output, and any interim outputs or reports, as described in the statement agreed to by the State and FEMA regional office. Generally speaking the final output will be a hazard mitigation plan, or implementation of specific mitigation measures, which would be drawn from one or more of the key elements and processes gutlined below. The format of the product should be designed to meet the needs of the audience whose support the State or•community must enlist to accomplish the actions required. The following key elements and processes are to be used in developing the hazard mitigation plan, or in implementation of specific mitigation measures: a. Hazard Evaluation, An indepth analysis of the principal hazard(s) affecting the area to provide a basis for proposed mitigation strategies. Ch 6-4b 6-2 "Y { s p .1 i '?i '? ti z rf ns ?R, n ?u?a• ?e r 'a'7""'r'te""" tq"T VIP , S)W4 s ' r, xz t ? Fv?f ? i P? r „ ? 4 J v ? 7 a } 1'L Y?1 h A-` OR _WALZ:ZZV6M f June 2, 1987 CPC 1-3 q, b. Communy 0evelooment Issues/Objectives. An identifies r the major communi itty, area or, State development issues or Objectivetin f sowhich would be affected by the occurrence of a disaster and would therefore become a part of the mitigation planning process. `c. Miti ation Capabilities. A review of existing ' - policies, aws, regu ations or activities which are designed gtomhave the effect of reducing vulnerability. 1 d. Recover and Mitigation Ontions/ODOortunities. An identifica- tion e r of mitigation opportunities such as mitigation measures identified in a Section 406 Hazard Mitigation Plan or an Interagency Hazard Mitiga- tion Team report. e. Mitigation Constra;?ts legal, pol financial or administrative obstacles toaeither othefpr eparatiioniorcaT, implementation of mitigation strategies. a dr f. RecoMitiaation Plan Action Items a > rmulatin + specific mitigation tasks, actions or procedures tohbeffollowedoinothe event: that an anticipated disaster occurs. h' s o a `" ,: ® i 6-6. Evaluation Criteria. i In order to select the most worthwhile projects the following factors will be used in evaluating proposals: a. Serious or repetitive problems of hazard vulnerability which a ° make it likely that the State/locality can reasonably expect to sustain damages in the next 5-10 years (i.e. within the useful life of the HMA plan or project.) b. Commitment an the part of the responsible State or local govern- mental unit to the objectives of long-term recovery and mitigation as fA, demonstrated by previous support for active programs of risk reduction. c. Compliance with all regulatory requirements of the NFIP, y? $ °•; PL 93-288 Section 406, and E.O. 11988 and E.O. 11990 if applicable. d. Potential for the achievement of long term benefits as a result of the project through reduction of hazard vulnerability and promotion of State/local development objectives. 3 ? 4 e. Capability to involve the private sector and general public in i recovery and mitigation initiatives. Transferability of issues s problemsi recommendations, or i i n implementation measures to other States/localties w A areas, ith hazard-prone 6-3 Ch 6-Sb i. CPC 1-3 June 2, 1487 g. Vulnerability to multiple hazards such as the following: earthquake, hurricane, tsunami, riverine flooding, coastal flooding, landslide or other earth movement, tornado, drought, avalanche, dam failure, hazardous materials incidents, etc. h. Established and active community development program, 6-7. State Application Responsibilities- HMA Program proposals are to be submitted to accordance with CPG 1-38 and the current year's CCA request for application package. a <.. Ch 6-6g 6-4 a Page 2 - Hazard Mitigation Assistance Monies Request 11 S ecific Tasks Time Lines Products (continue on back of sheet if necessary a ; tt2>b ? 1.? • a 4k'. '? ? ' ? ? Ilk Y?1 P.5' WK, ? d 145 A+s " ` P ( C m?F i ? y ?t b?P?IF ?Gr SRU?? 1 -t } v y ti '. I e 'Y y t tih 7T_ ',I I t. 4 % yy?? 6 r.. t ' ? Jf 1 y?C J ? ? s? ? 4 i ' Page 3 - Hazard Mitigation Assistance Monies Request 1. What are the short and long term reductions in hazard vulnerability through this project? Explanation: i? - 2. Does this project address a serious or repetitive hazard vulnerability problem which could cause damage in the next 5-10 years? Yes No (If not, please identify why this project is special.) Explanation: {- 3. Is your community vulnerable to other hazards? Please attach a completed hazard vulnerability analysis or list these hazards. % A - Page 4 - Hazard Mitigation Assistance Monies Request k f 4. Is this project in compliance with requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program and st t u a e regulations? Yes No_ Explanation: - 4 5. Does this project involve the private sector and general public in its initiatives? Y *y es_ No If so, explain whom and how : m° R ' 6. Is your community committed to long-term mitigation and does i h r t ave previous active programs for risk reduction? Yes No Please briefly describe such programs: 7. Do you feel the issues, problems recommendations, and implementation measures of this ?? ll Y S + r project are of value to other communities? Yes N W o ould there be a problem with sharing your information with other communities? Yea No r l $' „ Explanation: - - ( u xnr?, r uest Re i - q es Page 5 - Hazard Mitigation Assistance Mon Costs: ??. Types of Workers Y Salaries S 4n Benefits S a Printing : Equipment (list type) s Supplies S Purchases Services (Define) S Travel S .'. ,, Indirect Costs r. 's " Total ti Nonfederal funds being spent on the project Please list amounts organization sources, and program sources. S S S Hazard Mitigation Assistance Monies will be of the total monies spent on this project. , ?a m?. Published by: Washington State Department of Ecology Olympia, Washington 98504 r,j* wcct Y { 1j1,LS `q'k9n +wS 1 p? sire ""'" .? g??4 ? i i 1t? 4 r 1 ?. ? I t h .. l? t t4 n 4?7r s?k .yyt _ ? , "`3FuA?d" rt C g } S,Ie TABLE OF CONTENTS Paragraphs Page No. CHAPTER 1. - GENERAL GRANTEE RESPONSIBILITIES 1 1. Efficient and Effective Management 1 2. Conformity With Agreements and Program Objectives 1 3. Organizational Management 1 4. Nonsupplanting of Grant Funds 1 5. Community Service 1 6. Nondiscrimination 2 7. Audit Requirements 2 8. Audit Evaluation Standards 2 9. Program Income 3 CHAPTER 2. - FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 4 10. General 4 11. Grantee Accounting Systems 4 12. Internal Control Requirements 5 13. Supervision and Monitoring Responsibility Over Contractors 6 CHAPTER 3. - ALI.OWABILITY OF COSTS 7 n w ? xIr 14. Purpose 7 15. Policy 7 16. Allowable Costs 7 17. Allowable Costs Only With State of 't Washington and/or Federal Agency Approval 15 18. Costs Generally Unallowable 17 CHAPTER 4. - PROCUREMENT, PROPERTY AND RECORDS MANAGEMENT 19 19. Procurement Standards and Procedures 19 `- 20. Records Management 22 S, 21. Property Management 23 CHAPTER 5. - SUBG RANTEF. CONTRIBUTIONS AND MATCHING SHARES 28 S y ': 22. General 28 23. Records of Contributions 28 try 24. Valuation of Volunteer Services 28 25. Valuation of Materials 29 26. Valuation of Other Charges 29 ' 27. Valuation of Donated Real and Personal Property 29 28. All.owabili.ty of. Matching Costs 29 29. Contributions Furnished by Subagrantees 30 f,Itii :.?awxla?s -xaGl i 13 S G ? i Page No. ?a CHAPTER 6. - REIMBURSEMENT REQUESTS AND REPORTS 31 30. Reimbursements 31 31. Progress Reports 31 - 32. Financial Reports 31 33. Audit Reports 32 { - Preparation of A19-1, Exhibits 1-5 33 CHAPTER 7. - REVISIONS, SUSPENSIONS, TERMINATIONS, AND CLOSEOUTS 41 34. Project Revisions 41 35. Suspensions or Termination for Cause 41 4 «.` 36. Special Termination Provision 37. Termination for Convenience 42 42 kd •': i. 38. Closeout Provisions for Grants 43 APPENDIX A Assurance of Compliance with Equal " Employment Opportunity Laws ?F APPENDIX B Glossary of Terms •'<+? `.'. :... APPENDIX C Grantee Self-Examination Checklist ii p; J jag a i ?, ? _ y q N4 1 1xc: b ' ry 5 ?ACf,?.9t1^e `? ?., V f i ??? TAn+ W114 qi Y I? d ?& 1"d r 1'i4 V, yy? 4 Cf?t h fl ?? ? ?1 ? 1 ty' h? r ? t • d A ?jFF l 5 1 ?' 4 r + 17??i? ki?4' a" p ? 7 Y C ? { ? 1 •y A ? blip", Nib- il W. REFERENCES - g I. "STANDARDS FOR AUDIT OF GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS, PROGRAMS , ACTIVITIES AND FUNCTIONS" - issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. 2. OMB Circular A 102 Revised: "Uniform administrative requirements for grants-in-aid to St t d l " , a e an ocal governments - issued by the > GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, OFFICE OF FEDERAL MANAGEMENT ; POLICY, Attachment "E" - "PROGRAM INCOME" ' Sit g? r 3. OMB Circular A 102 Revised Attachment "G" - "STANDARDS FOR GRANTEE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS" . 4. OMB Circular A 102, Revised i' Y? Attachment "A" - "CASH DEPOSITORIES" . t- 5. FMC 74-4: "Cost principles applicable to grants and contracts with l? F a State and local governments: - issued by the GENERAL SERVICES l ADMINISTRATION, OFFICE OF FEDERAL MANAGEMENT POLICY t . Attachment "A" - "PRINCIPLES FOR DETERMINING COSTS APPLICABLE TO GRANTS AND CONTRACTS WITH STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS" 6. FMC 74-4: 1xl ' Attachment "B" - "STANDARDS FOR SELECTED ITEMS OF COST" 19f f 7. OMB Circular A 102 Revised - '? {$ 8. OMB Circular A 102 Revised # tF Attachment "0" - "RETENTION AND CUSTODIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR RECORDS" Ll ., l 9. OMB Circular A 102 Revised n S ? Attachment "N" - "PROPERTY MANAGEMENT STANDARDS" i i 10. OMB Circular A 102 Revised Attachment "F" - "MATCHING SHARE" ru?. iii awr ? ? w e INTRODUCTION y GENERAL ? ?r "- This manual contains recommended procedures and guidelines for federal - - and state grants administered by the State of Washington. The primary . $ purpose of this guide is to define clearly the process by which grantees " . should administer grants received from the State of Washington. a p This manual is an attempt to bring together a wide range of federal and , state requirements, including those established by the Office of Manage- ment and Budget, the General Services Administration, the General Account- ' ing Office, the State Legislature, etc. This manual of recommended policies and procedures for grantees does not supersede specific federal or state policies and procedures which are directly related to state or federally funded programs. Under the afore- ^ mentioned programs, special regulations which are directly applicable to the specific grant will take precedence over provisions stipulated in this manual. This manual is primarily to set forth a general framework d oc dures d th t t l i i ?r pr em an e ng e managemen sys to assist grantees eve op n necessary to administer properly grant program resources. . The following federal reference documents have been utilized in the prep- arationof this manual: "STANDARDS FOR AUDIT OF GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS, PROGRAMS, ACTIVI- ?h TIES AND FUNCTIONS" - issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Circular A 102: "Uniform administrative requirements for grants-in- aid to State and local governments" - issued by the GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, OFFICE OF FEDERAL MANAGEMENT POLICY. FMC 74-4: "Cost principles applicable to grants and contracts with State and local governments" - issued by the GENERAL SERVICE ADMIN- ISTRATION, OFFICE OF FEDERAL MANAGEMENT POLICY. References footnoted in this manual refer to the above documents. (See "REFERENCES" on page iii.) NOTE: Where applicable, OMB Circular A-110, "Uniform administrative requirements for grants and other agreements with institutions of higher education, hospitals and other non-profit organiza- tions," shall be controlling instead of Circular A-102. iv - GENERAL GRANTEE RESPONSIBILITIES CHAPTER 1 . 1. Efficient and Effective Management Each grantee is responsible for the efficient and effective admini- stration of the grant program through the application of sound man- agement practices. a 2. Conformity With Agreements and Program Objectives The grantee assumes responsibility for seeing that program funds ,q have been expended and accounted for consistent with existing agree- " ments and program objectives. a. Standard Grant Conditions. All grants awarded by the State of Washington are subject to certain conditions specified by fed- 5 oral and state laws and regulations. Many of the standard N conditions will be discussed in this guide and will be incorporated into the grantee contract. b. Special Grant Conditions. Individual grants may contain cer- tain requirements tailored specifically for that federal or state grant. Such special conditions will be incorporated - into the grantee contract and carefully monitored for compliance. 3. Organizational Management. Each grantee, in recognition of its own unique combination of staff facilities and experience will have the primary responsibility for employing whatever form of organization and management techniques necessary to assure proper and efficient administration. 4. Nonsupplanting of Grant Funds '- Federal and state grant funds will be used to increase program acti- vity, not to supplant local or other funds. 5. Community Service The grantee must assure the state that all facilities, programs, ' and services supported in whole or in part with grant funds will be: a. Made available without discrimination on the grounds of sex, sN i creed, duration of residence, or ability or inability to pay y. , for services. b. So publicized as to be generally known to the population to be served. CC? C. Available and responsive to the needs of all members of the population to be served. -1- _'.`.V- ,S ; date of the contract. The state or its representative shall have the right to audit within a period of three years after close of grants. ' Scope of Audits. The scope of such audits shall consist of a sys- t ti i r ema c rev ew or appraisal of the grantee's records and activities to determineand ' report on whether: (1) Financial operations are properly conducted; (2) Financial reports are presented fairly; (3) Applicable laws and regulations have been complied with; (4) Resources are managed and used in an economical and efficient manner; and (5) Desired results and objectives are being achieved in an effec- tive manner. 9. Program Income _x 4 a. Grantees are required to account for program income related to proj- ects financed in whole or in part with grant funds awarded by a federal or state agency. (Ref. 2) ' s • b. Royalties. Royalties received from copyrights and patents during the grant period shall be retained by the grantee and, in accordance with the grant contract, either be added to the - funds already committed to the program or deducted from total project costs for the purpose of determining the net costs on which the state agency share of costs will be based. After termination or completion of the grant, the state share of royalties in excess of $200 received annually shall be returned . xc 5 ?. to the state agency. Where federal, state and local funds are involved, the distribution of royalties shall be com uted on q 7 . R? p ,the same ratio as the grant. (Ref. 2) #. _ -3- ?N a. Purpose. Grantees should follow their established financial procedures as long as these provide the means through which compliance with fiscal grant requirements of the State of Wash- ington and/or federal agencies can be achieved and verified. b. Requirements. It is essential that the grantee's accounting j system provide effective financial controls. Grantees should recognize that audits will be made and, unless commonly accepted standards of financial responsibility have been followed, these audits may result in the disallowance of expenditures for which the grantee will be liable. The grantee may be requested to return the funds to either the state or to the federal agencies. C. Criteria. Adequate accounting systems should meet the follow- ing criteria: (1) Accounting records should provide the information needed to adequately identify the receipt and expenditure of all funds. -4- r aq w.+i`v ?T ??a ?? ?r Aa' i4 a 6?µupa " r, ei 7f .'Cti D h ?? ' o ?; a l? r a u a ,' , t :¢ di 7 r. h 4 ?Y ? Z f ; v x 1 .:... s., ..... u,. .? .....-, .. a ?.. . .._,.. :Ji ,,. [ !'_•Af* x1rrz. .. <_.o._ arse 142 ,. r.iavn :A 1t,-.- - ?.. ?o ."+, ,:_?'. ('L) Entries in accounting records should refer to subsidiary " records and documentation which support the entry and , which can be readily located. (3) The accounting system should provide accurate and current r. financial reporting information. d. Books of Account and Records. Minimum requirements. The y accounts, the books of account, and records prescribed herein _ are the minimum required for uniform reporting of transactions y` relating to a specific state contract. E - -? (1) General Ledger. Ageneral ledger must be maintained in which to record a summarization of all accounting trans- actions relating to the grant contract and to classify transactions. ?• (2) Cash Receipts Register. A cash receipts register must be j r maintained for recording funds (cash, checks, money orders, etc.) received. -:" (3) Cash Disbursements Register. A cash disbursements regis- ter must be maintained for recording all expenditures. It must contain columns designating dates of payment, ?. warrant or voucher numbers, names of vendors, and a brief description of items purchased. x 5 ri dy. e. BARS Accounting System. The Budget and Reporting System (BARS) is the basic accounting system on which the various units of local government operate. A manual published by the State Auditor, Division of Municipal Corporations, which covers the BARS system is available upon request from the State Auditor, '•. - Olympia, Washington. 4 1'- In order that the various political subdivisions may all keep uniform accounting records, we suggest that the grantee secure a a copy of the above manual and follow basic account structure. 3 12. Internal Control Requirements a } a. General. State regulations require local government agencies to possess an adequate system of internal control. When it is deter- f. 4 ... t i mined that such a system is not in evidence, the local agency will be required to design and implement the proper controls. ? b. Basic Components of a Satisfactory System of Internal Control. r .1 The characteristics of a satisfactory system of internal + control would Include: f ?',aax? r (1) A plan of organization that provides segregation of u a f 1,r? ur duties appropriate for proper safeguarding of the entity's N { rr_' V ° m resources. -5- ? Y " "-??kna? 4 a t? ap f . ? eu r Y a ?v w ? (2) A system of authorization and record procedures adequate to provide effective accounting control over assets, `- liabilities, revenues, and expenses. (3) An established system of practices to be followed in performance of duties and functions of each of the y 2 a organizational departments. (4) Personnel of a quality commensurate with their responsi- bilities. a! (5) An effective system of internal review. -? These elements, as important as each is in its own right, are mutually reinforcing and all are so basic to adequate internal control that serious deficiencies in any one normally would _ i - ` preclude effective operation of the system. c. Securing Funds. Grantee funds should be held with a bank hi h 'f _ 5 w c is a member of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or in the case of local agencies, using the financial facili- ties of a city or state government as its fiscal agents in the depository fixed by law. In any case where advances of federal - funds are made, the bank shall be required to secure fully and ' continuously all federal funds deposited in excess of the a t i e moun nsured by a federal or state agency. (Ref. 4) - l - d. Bonding. For its own protection, it is suggested that the - Mgp- . grantee obtain a fidelity bond (position or blanket for each ?.,..f,., official or employee having access to project assets, account- records in h k ) Th b g , or c ec s . e ond should be in an amount at least equal to the total project assets which would be avail- able to the grantee at any one time. 13. Supervision and Monitoring Responsibility Over Contractors The grantee has primary responsibility for assuring proper admini- stration of funds awarded the grantee under a contract. This °5P includes responsibility for the proper conduct of the financial ? affairs of any subgrantee or contractor insofar as they relate to . programs or projects for which federal or state funds have been , p' ?f`i made available - and for default in which the local entity may be h ld yc e accountable for improper use of subgrant funds. But, in instances of the grantee contracting with another organization the (1 Y , following conditions apply: r Delegation of Responsibility. The performance of all activities i tom, ? * '. ' contemplated by this grant shall be accomplished personally by " the grantee and grantees' employees. The grantee shall not assign 1 n, y or subgrant performance to others unless specifically authorized k4, 1v ,a+ in writing by the grantor agency. In such cases, the contract 1 x r M1 between the grantee and its contractor should indicate the agreed ?g ? 'r ? as scope of work to be performed by the latter. The contract price 35°ZhG324ei"?,. must be based on an agreed budget and specify method of payment. -6- CHAPTER 3. - ALLOWABILITY OF COSTS a 14. Purpose This chapter establishes standards of determination for common cost " items. Failure to mention a particular item is not intended to ';?? - imply that it is either allowable or unallowable; rather determina- tion of allowability in each case should be based upon treatment of standards provided for similar or related items of cost. The allow- + $ ability of an item as a cost within these financial guidelines does i not guarantee or imply that the cost will be allowed as a matter of °t policy or program administration. 15. Policy ? To be allowable costs must meet the following general criteria: ?T (Ref. 5) - ,r a. Be necessary and reasonable for proper and efficient adminis- tration of the specific grant and not be a general expense '? - required to carry out the overall responsibilities of the - grantee. b. Be authorized or not prohibited by federal, state, or local + laws or regulations. > C. Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in the approved budget, federal, state, and local laws, or other gov- erning limitations as to types and amounts of cost items. d. Be consistent with policies, regulations, and procedures that 4d ?. apply uniformly to all activities of the unit of government <t - of which the grantee is a part. + r e. Be accorded consistent treatment through application of gener- ; ally accepted accounting principles appropriate to the circum- stances. {\ f. Not be allocable to or included as a cost of any other grant or program in either the present or a prior period. g. Be net of all applicable credits. (Ref. 5) 16. Allowable Costs { 1 ? The following costs may be charged against the grant, provided y , 27 }? 11 n lea + j .y' they are in conformance with the approved budget and are directly chargeable to the program. (Ref. 6) it w a. Accounting. The cost of establishing and maintaining account- f a^ r dw tt ing and other information systems required for the management t5Yn?n of grants is allowable to the extent identified as specific-?qky ?JG ally attributable to the grant project. This includes cost k, , la incurred by central service agencies for these purposes. The ?lp? 9 p r I . ? t, pf J ? r 1 ?q 4 1 + ?b W 1 11111 ,J aY?1` r 5 ?; I ,f ? 1 l 9 ?1 C6 ? y r;3Fan, Y?? F r cost of maintaining central accounting records required for overall state or local governmert purposes, such ac appropria- tion and fund accounts by the Treasurer, Comptroller, or similar officials is considered to be a general expense of government and is not allowable. b. AdvertisinA. Advertising media includes newspapers, maga- zines, radio and television programs, direct mail, trade papers, and the like. The advertising costs allowable are those which are solely for: (1) Recruitment of personnel required for the grant. (2) Solicitation of bids for the procurement of goods and services required. (3) Disposal of scrap or surplus materials acquired in the performance of the grant agreement; and (4) Other purposes specifically provided for in the grant agreement. C. Advisory Councils. Costs incurred by local or regional advisory councils or committees established to carry out pro- grams are allowable. The cost of like organizations is allowable when provided for in the grant agreement. Records and rates for voluntary services shall be consistent with. the policies and procedures established in Section 24, "Valuation of Volunteer Service." d. Audit Services. The cost of audits necessary for the admini- stration and management of functions related to grants is allowable when included in the grant agreement. e. Budgeting. Costs for services of a central budget office are generally not allowable since these are costs of general government. However, where employees of a central budget office or the implementing agency actively participate in the grant budget process, the cost of identifiable services is allowable. f. Central Stores. The cost of maintaining and operating a central stores organization for supplies, equipment, and materials used either directly or indirectly for grants is not allowable, although the cost of specific goods or ser- vices provided to the grant project is allowable. g. Communications. Communication costs incurred for telephone calls or service, telegraph, teletype service, wide area telephone service (WATS), centrex, telpak (tic lines), postage, messenger service and similar expenses are allowable. -g- r?r?irtya ? -' iL:• iP t h Ir 'Y 4 } }? ?1 ('yr?'r f ? ,, 1p ? ? .l I? V ' d 5 i •? I r S ?I! V I. ?4 i t? rah s. 4. Watt ? N k? sz ? r 5. a+ 9 ?a h. Comp ensation for Personal Services (1) General. Compensation for personal services includes all remuneration, paid currently or accrued, for services rendered during the period of performance under the grant _ contract, including but not limited to wages, salaries, • and supplementary compensation and benefits. The costs W of such compensation for individual employees: (a) Is reasonable for the services rendered. m (b) Follows an appointment made in accordance with state or local government laws and rules and which { meets federal merit system or other requirements, where applicable. ?,- (c) Is determined and supported as provided in (2) below. Compensation for employees engaged in federally - assisted activities will be considered reasonable to - the extent that it is consistent with that paid for similar work in other activities of the state or " " local government. In cases where the kinds of ' - employees required for the federally assisted acti- vities are not found in the other activities of the state or local government, compensation will be considered reasonable to the extent that it is - comparable to that paid for similar work in the labor market in which the employing government - - competes for the kind of employees involved. (2) Payroll and Distribution of Time. Amounts charged to grants for personal services, regardless of whether treated as direct or indirect costs, will be based on payrolls documented and approved in accordance with the generally accepted practice of the state or local agency. Payrolls must be supported by time and attendance or. - equivalent records for individual employees. Salaries ` and wages of employees chargeable to more than one grant ,. or other cost objective must be supported by appropriate F time distribution records. The method used should produce rva an equitable distribution of time and effort. Such time a t h records must be certified by the project director. Such certified records are the only allowable source document for charging and reporting personnel expenditures. (3) Extra Work _h (a) A state or local government employee may be employed fr i t by a grantee in addition to his full.-time job, pro- Tart vided the work is performed on the employee's own time and: x ?? 1t'{ 1) The compensation is reasonable and consistent with that paid for similar work in other acti- vities of state or local government. -9- P ? ? 7i ?r i i5_ .It ',ey 2) The employment arrangement is approved and t ' proper under state and local regulations. y 3) The time and/or services provided is supported by adequate documentation. (b) Such employment arrangements should normally be made by the grantee directly with the individual (to -? avoid problems arising from overtime, holiday pay, e night differential or regulated payroll regulations) unless there has been a transfer or loan of the wa:: employee for which his regular as well as overtime services provided are to be charged to or reimbursed by the grantee. Overtime and night differential payments are allowed only to the extent that payment for such services is in accordance with the policies " of the state agency or unit of local government. Payment of these premiums will be for work performed by grant or subgrant employees in excess of the - established work week (usually 40 hours). , (c) Grant Purposes and Dual Compensation. Charges of the time of state and local government employees assigned to grant programs may be reimbursed or recognized only to the extent they are directly o and exclusively related to grant purposes. In no case is dual compensation allowable (see note). That is an employee of a unit of government may not receive compensation from his unit or agency of government and from a grantee or subgrantee µ. I $ for work purportedly performed during a single period of time. "45 Note: Full-time university academic appointments j, do not preclude paid reimbursement for consultant services under the dual compensation ban where university arrangements specifically permit the faculty member to consult during specified number of days or portions of the work week or other employment period. r: l i. Consultant and Contractual Services: Costs incurred by a C grantee are allowable when contained in an approved budget, t and subject to the following provisions: F _,. (1) Grantee Procurement Systems (a) Where project work is accomplisher) through sub- ??' `?+kt agreements, such subagreements shall be governed. { a by all applicable requirements of federal, state, and local laws and regulatory provisions. -10- , v •i4?? x Ys ?.; ? ,t F (b) The grantee shall provide an adequate public notice' S" on solicitation for bids. Invitations for bids i M shall include a clear, accurate description of the 1,tx technical requirements for the material, product, or .>. source to be procured. Such description shall not .,M1 Sk contain features which unduly restrict competition. ' f Adequate public notice must be given, in accordance ?•? with applicable federal and state requirements for professional services, proposals, or procurement in , excess of $1,000. 1 (c) The grantee shall provide for bidding by sealed bids and safeguarding of bids until public opening. rx 1 i (d) Evaluation of proposals must be made solely on " the basis of the technical and other evaluation cri- teria announced in the request for proposals. (e) The compensation. is reasonable and consistent with ?nV'+ that paid for similar work in the local labor market ' of grantee, or established by Federal Grantor agency. (f) The employment arrangement is approved and proper under state and local regulations. (g) Time and/or services for which payment will be made 'r ".1 and rates of compensation will be supported by F - adequate documentation. r p' „ (h) Transportation and subsistence costs are at an identifiable rate consistent with grantee travel policy. (i) The individual is not an employee of the executive `•F k, branch of state or local government. (2) Other Governmental Unit. The work or services for which 1 reimbursement is claimed is directly and exclusively )1 y devoted Co rant r g purpose and charged at actual cost rates. (3) Non-Gower } nmental Organizations r `rl r (a) The contract is formal, proper, and consistent with 3 1j usual grantee practices and policies for obtaining such services. 14 R (b) Indirect costs or overhead charges in cost-type ?r f r arrangements are based on an audited or negotiated } r rate. N st ?1 r (c) Reasonable and consistent with the policies for k 'J grantee's procurement system established in item i(1) above. -`a n j. Conferences, Symposia, and Workshops. Subject to applicable program area guidelines, charges to a grant may include con- ..., -.?. ''- Terence or meeting arrangements, conference space, recording , 0" or translation services, postage and telephone charges, and travel expenses (including transportation and subsistence) for a = faculty, speakers, or participants. Each of these items, when - related to grant purposes, is otherwise an allowable cost. Grant funds may not be used for honoraria (i.e., payments to V participating individuals or guests other than for documented ' professional services actually rendered at reasonable compen- M - a sation rates), entertainment, sports, visas, passport charges, tips, bar charges, personal telephone calls or laundry charges _ of participants or guests. a k. Depreciation and Use Allowances (e.g., rent). (1) Grantees may be compensated for the use of buildings, capital improvements, and equipment through use allowance E or depreciation. Use allowances are the means of provid- ing compensation in lieu of depreciation or other equiva- x lent costs. However, a combination of the two methods ?'•- may not be used in connection with a single class of fixed assets. 6 (2) The computation of depreciation or use allowance will be 4 = based on acquisition cost. Where actual cost records " have not been maintained, a reasonable estimate of the original acquisition cost may be used in the computation. (3) Where the depreciation method is followed, adequate property records must be maintained and any generally ,t accepted method of computing depreciation may be used. However, the method of computing depreciation must be consistently applied for any specific asset or class of _ assets for all affected, federally sponsored programs and must result in equitable charges considering the ilM extent of the use of the assets for the benefit of such .. programs. ti (4) In lieu of depreciation, a use allowance for buildings and improvements may be computed at an annual rate not exceeding 2 percent of acquisition cost. The use allow- ance for equipment (excluding items properly capitalized as building cost) will be computed at an annual rate not exceeding 6-2/3 percent of acquisition cost of usable equipment. (5) Refer to paragraph 18-d for costs in this category which are not allowable. 1 1. Employee Fringe Benefits. Costs identified below are allow- able to the extent that total compensation for employees is reasonable as defined in paragraph 32-h. -12- paid to employees during periods of authorized absences .,? _ from the job, such as for annual leave, sick leave, court leave, military leave, and the like, if they are: (a) Provided pursuant to an approved leave system. ?,,- - (b) The cost thereof is equitably allocated to all - related activities, including grant programs. .?„ (c) Employee benefits in the form of employers' con- _ tribution or expenses for social security, employees' ' life and health insurance plans, unemployment insur- _ ance coverage, workmen's compensation insurance, pension plans, severance pay, and the like, provided such benefits are t granted under approved plans and are distributed equitably to grants and to other aS activities. A% " h M. Legal Expenses. The cost of legal expenses required in the administration of grants is allowable. Legal services fur- .. nished by the chief legal officer of the state or local govern- - - ment or his staff solely for the purpose of discharging his general responsibilities as legal officer are unallowable. 7+ Legal expenses for the prosecution or defense of claims against or by the federal or state government are unallowable. _ _ n. Maintenance and Repair. Costs incurred for necessary mainten- ance, repair, or upkeep of property which neither add to the permanent value of the property nor appreciably prolong its intended life, but keep it in an efficient operating condi- tion, are allowable. o. Materials and Supplies. The cost of materials and supplies necessary to carry out the grants is allowable. Purchases made specifically for the grants should be charged thereto 77 at their actual prices after deducting all cash discounts, a n trade discounts, rebates, and allowances received by the grantee. Withdrawals from general stores or stockrooms should a be charged at cost under any recognized method of pricing consistently applied. Incoming transportation charges are a proper part of material cost. 4 p. Memberships, Subscriptions and Professional Activities 0 (I) Memberships. The cost of membership in civic, business, c €' 6 technical, and professional organizations is allowable, t h; t provided: (a) The benefit from the membership is related Ftk,Ra to the grant; (b) The expenditure is for agency member- fj nz ship; (c) The cost of the membership is reasonably related ^k, to the value of the services or benefits received; 1 ?. (d) The expenditure is not for membership in an organi- °hY, t zation which devotes a substantial part of its activi- ties to influencing legislation. ?rtC -13- (3) Meetings and Conferences. Costs are allowable when the primary purpose of the meeting is the dissemination of technical information relating to the grant and they are consistent with regular practices followed for other activities of the grantee. q. Motor Pools. Direct charges from a service organization which provided automobiles to user grantee agencies at a mileage or fixed rate and/or provides vehicle maintenance, inspection, and repair services are allowable. r. Payroll Preparation. The cost of preparing payrolls and maintaining necessary related wage records is allowable. S. Personnel Administration. Costs for the recruitment, examina- tion, certification, classification, training, establishment of pay standards, and related activities for grants are allowable. t. Printing and Reproduction. Costs for printing and reproduc- tion services necessary for grant administration, including but not limited to forms, reports, manuals, and informational literature, are allowable. Publication costs of reports or other media relating to grant accomplishments or results are allowable when provided for in the approved application. U. Procurement Service. The cost of purchasing services, includ- ing solicitation of bids, preparation and award of contracts, and all phases of contract administration in providing goods, facilities, and services for grant, is allowable. fM v. Training and Education. The cost of in-service training, F customarily provided for employee development, which directly or indirectly benefits the grant is allowable. Out-of-service training involving extended periods of time is allowable only when specifically authorized in the approved application. W. Transportation. Costs incurred for freight, cartage, express, postage, and other transportation costs relating either to goods purchased, delivered, or moved from one location to another are allowable. X. Travel. Travel costs are allowable for expenses for trans- portation, lodging, subsistence, and related items included in the approved application. Such costs may be charged on an actual basis, on a per diem or mileage basis in lieu of actual costs incurred, or in a combination of the two, pro- vided the method used is applied to an entire trip and results in charges consistent with those normally allowed by grantee travel. policies. Meals and/or lodging are not allowed when within the home or official work station metropolitan area, -14- i c r*? • „( ?, trlX r + {u ti M f y } w 5N% fa m v- t?l {7 `r r tl! 1?" ?k y? 1 3 k, i v E yw p i1?' `r ?} b 1 A} h f 1 - i i r i ?l { T 1 4 4 fY? ? { 1 1 yr?it , ,? I ?•? ? ? > v ? '1 ? J M i Y4 M ? la 1 { I. ? F '?? r .. ., '?I r Y9 C l x xP"?en ? j ?y`.k - ? _?. {?• ??_.L .?..rflivrailtidl4s? fi except in attending conferences or meetings specified in the approved application. For air travel, the difference in cost between first class air accommodations and less than first class is unallowable except when less than first class accommo- dations are not reasonably available. 17. Allowable Costs Only With State of Washington and/or Federal w + r. Agency Approval a. Indirect Costs (1) Definition. Indirect costs are incurred for (a) common - - or joint purpose benefiting more than one cost objective ' and (b) not readily assignable to the cost objectives . • specifically benefited, without effort disproportionate `. .,,. _ :n , to the results achieved. (Ref. 5) " ?,- (2) Establishment of Indirect Cost Base When Approved on s State Contracts. The following methods may be used in computing an indirect cost base by which local agencies - may claim a portion of costs expended on overhead items such as accounting costs, heat, utilities, etc., where _ 'd these items are not clearly delineated or available y from records normally used for audit. All such rates, " A .Aa, ? when allowed, shall be approved and included in the e " . initial grant agreement. When federal funds are included in the grant agreement, the requirements contained in FMC 74-4 shall be met. (Ref. 5) b - When indirect costs are allowed under state grant agree- ments, all such costs shall be authorized by the appro- ' priate state funding agency. x ? The indirect cost rate may be established under one of ' the following procedures: ? (a) Standard Indirect Cost. An amount equal to 10 per- cent of direct labor cost in providing the above s- services may be used. q ? • (b) A predetermined fixed rate for computing indirect costs applicable to a grant can be negotiated F ? ?t k annually in situations where the cost experience - s? Ci 1 rn and other pertinent facts available are deemed arties to sufficient to enable the contractin 'd e ( J g p a 2 f + f m? reach an informed judgment. The method to be used i ? l a 1 • rnh ti in determining an indirect cost percentage is to k ' .? j +i divide the total indirect costs of the agency by } ? d ? the total direct coats of the agency. The resulting fi k . 1? }? percentage may then be multiplied against the total ?,h d{,?q,'Y?A.11h direct costs (see exclusions below) to arrive at an Jykt?'M1?J{l?i erw'fr1 amount of indirect costs allowable for the contract period. Items of commonality which can be included -15- X. , 1 ? s 9I ' in arriving at an indirect cost are; light, heat, telephone, janitorial services, records storage, and such services as are furnished to a unit of government such as by the county auditor and treasurer. Items of direct cost which may NOT be included in computing an indirect cost base are those costs directly applicable to the program contained in the grant agreement; such as, wages, travel of employees, and goods and services purchased specific- 1 ally for the individual program in order to carry out the grant agreement. (c) A negotiated lump sum for overhead in lieu of indirect costs may be used where the grantee's indirect costs cannot be readily determined. When this method is used, a determination should be made that the amount negotiated will be approximately the same as the actual indirect cost that may be incurred. (d) Implementation. The indirect cost base can only be _ adopted by grantee after approval of the State of Washington. (Questions concerning the indirect cost plans should be directed to the agency responsible - for such approvals.) -!: b. Purchase of Automatic Data Processing Equipment. Prior approval _ is required only for the actual acquisition of equipment, not services, in accordance with FMC-74-4, attachment "B." (Ref. 6) c. Building Space and Related Facilities. The cost of space in privately or publicly owned buildings used for the benefit of i the grant program may not exceed the rental cost of comparable _ ..s"..-., facilities in a privately owned building in the same locality. Such cost is allowable subject to the following conditions: (1) Rearrangements and Alterations. Prior written approval is required for any estimated outlay for rearrangement or alteration. (2) Rental Costs. Prior written approval is required where: (a) The total rental space requirement including space for filing, conference, mail, supply, reproduction, as and storage is in excess of 150 square feet per p1t y.: Jr = employee. ?i?ttx c , ? (b) The rental cost exceeds $7 annually per square foot. (3) Rental Purchase or Lease With option to Purchase Agreements. Prior written approval is required. -16- i 7 t b. Contingencies. Contributions to a contingency reserve or any similar provision for unforeseen events. C. Contributions and Donations. d. Depreciation. Unallowable are costs or any portion of the costs for the depreciation or use of buildings and donated equipment. In addition, charges to federal grant programs, i rrespective of where title was originally vested or where it presently resides, are unallowable. Cost of land cannot be considered in computing depreciation and depreciation on idle excess facilities is not allowable except where specifically authorized. No depreciation or use charge may be allowed on i any assets that would be considered as fully depreciated; PRO- VIDED, HOWEVER, that reasonable use charges may be negotiated for any such assets, if warranted, after taking into considera- tion the cost of the facility or item involved, the estimated f use ul life remaining at time of negotiation, the effect of f, ! any increased maintenance charges or decreased efficiency due t +r; ty o age, and any other factors pertinent to the utilization of the facility or item for the purpose contemplated. -17 - v+v1 s" is "tlPnfv ?...mu?-.TM^ y y ..?, r? r4.? .. 4 y ,., r? ?j A( 4 1, ?. .v ?° lw e. Entertainment. Costs of amusements, social activities, and ..?D M incidental costs relating thereto, such as meals, beverages, lodging rentals transportation and ratuities ,, , , , g . N f. Fines and Penalties. Costs resulting from violation of, or failure to comply with, federal, state, and local laws and msg. regulations. .I g. Chief Executives' Expenses. The salaries and expenses of K elected officials of a political subdivision are considered a cost of general government. ?'- s _ h. Interest and Other Financial Costs. Interest on borrowings (however represented) bond discounts cost of financing and n , , ' `- _, ? • refinancing operations, and legal and professional fees paid in connection therewith, are unallowable except when authorized t ,' , ",'? by federal legislation. rp i. Legislative Expenses. Salaries and other expenses of the state at legislature or similar local governmental bodies such as. county supervisors, city councils, school boards, etc., whether incur- ' - redfor purposes of legislation or executive direction, are unallowable. j. Underrecovery of Costs Under Grant Agreements. Any excess of cost over contribution allowed under one grant agreement by a ,t federal or state agency is unallowable under other grant agree- ments. _18_ p 8 rlrr 1' ti i - ? ? ? , - ? 1 I 7 1 1 r tJ U? a 1 '1 y I [. H. ` I j 11 X544 ,\ ltl i},' ?. "i 2 f 7l iq 2 q?i CHAPTER 4. - PROCUREMENT, PROPERTY AND RECORDS MANAGEMENT 19. Procurement Standards and Procedures s a. Purpose. Grantees may use their own procurement regulations which reflect applicable state and local laws, rules, and regu- lations provided those regulations adhere to the standards set forth in this section. _ b. Standards of Conduct. The grantee shall maintain a code or standard of conduct which shall govern the performance of its officers, employees, or agencies in contracting with and expending grant funds. C. Adequate Competition. All procurement transactions regardless of whether negotiated or advertised and without regard to dollar'. value shall be conducted in a manner as to provide maximum open and free competition. d. Procurement Procedures. The grantee shall establish procure- ment procedures which provide for, as a minimum, the following '.?. procedural requirements: (Ref. 7) (1) Proposed Procurement Actions - shall be reviewed to avoid purchasing unnecessary or duplicative items. Where appro- priate, an analysis shall be made of lease and purchase alternatives to determine which would be the most econo- mical, practical procurement. (2) Invitation for Bids or Requests for Proposals - shall be based on a clear and accurate description of the technical requirements for the material, product, or service to be procured. Such description shall not contain features which unduly restrict competition. (3) Positive Efforts - shall be made,by the grantees to uti- lize small business and minority-owned business sources of supplies and services. Such efforts should allow these sources to maximum feasible opportunity to compete for contracts to be performed utilizing grant funds. rj. (4) The Type of Procuring Instruments - used (i.e., fixed price contracts, cost reimbursable contracts, purchase order, inventive contracts, etc.) shall be appropriate for the particular procurement and for promoting the best w interest of the grant program involved. The "cost-plus- a-percent-of-cost" method of contracting shall not be Q %x:b L ro used. a (5) Pormal Advertising. With adequate purchase description, r;?^ q scaled bids public openings shall. be the required A method of procurement unless negotiation pursuant to pars- graph (6), below, is necessary to accomplish sound pro- -19- iP is, t curement. However, procurements of $2,500 or less need not be so advertised unless otherwise required by state (RCW 43.19.1906) or local law or regulation or special condition. Where such advertised bids are obtained, the awards shall be made to the responsible bidder whose bid is responsive to the invitation and is most advantageous to the grantee, price, and other factors considered. (Factors such as discounts, transportation costs, and taxes, may be considered in determining the lowest bid.) Invitations for bids shall clearly set forth all require- ments which the bidder must fulfill in order for his bid to be evaluated by the grantee. Any or all bids may be rejected when it is in the grantee's interest to do so, and such rejections are in accordance with applicable state and local law, rules, and regulations. (6) Procurements May Be Negotiated - if it is impracticable and unfeasible to use formal advertising. Generally, procurements may be negotiated by the grantee if: (a) The public need will not permit the delay incident to advertising. (b) The material or service to be procured is available from only one person or firm: (all contemplated sole source procurements where the aggregate expenditure is expected to exceed $5,000 shall be referred to the grantor agency for prior approval.) (c) The aggregate amount involved does not exceed $10,000. (d) The contract is for personal or professional services including architects, physicians, and lawyers, or for any service to be rendered by a university, college, or other educational institution. (e) No acceptable bids have been received after formal advertising. (f) The purchases arc for highly perishable materials or medical supplies, for material or services where the prices are established by law, for technical items or equipment requiring standardization and inter- changeability of parts with existing equipment, for experimental, developmental, or research work, for supplies purchased for authorized resale, and for technical or specialized supplies requiring substan- tial initial investment for manufacture. (g) Otherwise authorized by law, rules, or regulations. e. Contracts. Contracts shall be made only with responsible con- tractors who possess the potential ability to perform success- fully the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration shall be given to such matters as contractor -20- ?r J integrity, record of past performance, financial and technical resources, or accessibility to other necessary resources. (Ref. 7) f. Procurement Records. Procurement records or files for purchases in'amounts in excess of $2,500 shall provide at least the fol- lowing information: justification of the use of negotiation in lieu of advertising, contractor selection, and the basis for the list or price negotiated. These records must be main- tained by the grantee. (Ref. 7) g. Contract Administration. A system for contract administration shall be maintained to assure contractor conformance with terms, conditions, and specifications of the contract or order and to assure adequate and timely follow-up of all purchases. (Ref. 7) h. Provisions for Contracts and Subgrants. The grantee shall include, in addition to provisions to define a sound and com- plete agreement, the following provisions in all contracts and subgrants: (Ref. 7) (1) Contracts Shall Contain - such contractual provisions or conditions which will allow for administrative, contrac- tual, or legal remedies in instances where contractors violate or breach contract's terms, and provide for such sanctions and penalties as may be appropriate. (2) All Contracts, Amounts for Which are in Excess of $10,000 - shall contain suitable provisions for termination by the State of Washington or grantee, including the manner by which it will be effected and the basis for settlement. In addition, such contracts shall describe conditions under which the contract may be terminated for default. (3) All Contracts and Subgrants in Excess of $10,000 - shall include provisions for compliance with Executive Order No. 11246, entitled, "Equal Employment Opportunity," as supplemented in Department of Labor Regulations (41 CFR, Part 60). Each contractor shall be required to have an affirmative action plan which declares that it does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, creed, national origin, sex, or age and which specifies goals and target dates to assure the implementation of that plan. The grantee shall establish procedures to assure compliance with this requirement by contractors and to assure that suspected or reported violations are promptly investigated. (4) All Contracts and Subgrants for Construction or Repair - shall include a provision for compliance with the Copeland "Anti.-Kink Back" Act (18 U.S.C. 874) as supplemented in Department of Labor Regulations (29 CFR, Part 3). This Act provides that each contractor or subgrantee shall be prohibited from inducing, by any means, any person employed in the construction, completion, or repair of public work, to give up any part of the compensation to which he is otherwise entitled. -21- -NdMIL '?• '? ` `?" . (5) Where APPlicable - all contracts awarded by grantees in tracts and in excess i fig: .r on con excess of $2,000 for construct of $2,500 for other contracts which involve the employ- - , ment of mechanics or laborers shall include a provision for compliance with sections 103 and 107 of the Contract r Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 327-330) as supplemented by Department of Labor Regulations k .. (29 CfiR, Part 5). Under Section 103 of the Act, each contractor shall be required to compute the wages of f a stand- i E> s ". s o every mechanic and laborer on the bas ard workday of eight hours and a standard workweek of 40 hours. Work in excess of the standard workday or a workweek is permissible, provided that the worker is _ ' compensated at a rate of not less than 1-1/2 times the r a ,R7r basic rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of ' ? eight hours in any calendar day or 40 hours in the work- • i? week. Section 107 of the Act is applicable to construe- i _ tion work and provides that no laborer or mechanic shall r be required to work in surroundings or under working. d -; - angerous conditions which are unsanitary, hazardous, or to his health and safety as determined under construe- ` safety, and health standards promulgated by the tion , Secretary of Labor. These requirements do not apply - to the purchases of supplies or materials or articles ordinarily available on the open market, or coutracts for transportation or transmission of intelligence. (6) Contracts or Agreements. The principal purpose of which ?5- is create, develop, or improve products, processes, or ? methods; or for exploration into fields which directly - ; concern public health, safety, or welfare; or contracts ` r:? q ,? in the field of science or technology in which there has - • , d l been little significant experience outside of work funded by federal assistance, shall contain a notice of the f t? effect that matters regarding rights to inventions, and materials generated under the contract or agreement are X . subject to the regulations issued by this agency and ? ?.;• federal agencies if applicable. s b (7) All Contracts - awarded by grantee shall include a •"? , provision to the effect that the state funding agency, f? ?r r Washington State Auditor, applicable federal funding agencies (including Comptroller General of the U.S.) shall resentatives ized re th n , p or or any of their duly au have access for purpose of audit and examination to con- f th ? e any books, documents, papers, and records o d f . tractor that are pertinent to the grants receive On all. negotiated contracts, pertinent records are and actual cost tin ti g ma deemed to include all cost es data. 20. Records Management Retention Periods. Grantees shall observe legal record reten- tion requirements of their own jurisdiction with the exception _22- that all financial records, supporting documents, and statis- tical data for negotiated contracts exceeding $2,500, there- y under, shall be retained for a period of at least three years with the followin lifi i 5 g qua cat ons: (Ref. 8) (1) If audit by or on behalf of the State of Washington has begun but is not completed at the end of the three-year - period, or if the audit findings have not been resolved - , the records shall be retained until resolution of the -' audit findings. - • (2) If the three-year period has passed and no audit has been initiated, the records will be retained accordin to - g applicable state or local laws. If such state or local . laws require a longer period of retention, access to the rfiy+e records will be allowed for purposes of an audit. vN (3) Records for nonexpendable property acquired by grant fund s ... shall be retained for three years after its final disposi- tion. (4) The retention period for each year's records starts with :• the submission of the final expenditure reports for that t c? r ' v _ year o this agency. . b. Access to Records. The state agency or any of its duly autho- rized representatives shall have access to any books, documents, papers, or records of the grantee pertinent to a grant awarded ? _ by it. Such access will be only for purposes of making an { - audit or examination. In case of a subgrant (or contract) exceeding $2,500, the agency or any of its duly authorized „ representatives shall have access to any books, documents, papers, or records of the subgrantee or contractor determined ' pertinent to the grant. Representatives by definition shall ' include staff of the agency, the Washington.State Auditor or hi d i I, i7l s es gnee and federal general accounting and agency officials ., ^ { for all grants having federal and/or state fund sources. q ' c. Maintenance. Records should be maintained in a central loca- •, tion and in an orderly manner available for audit or inspec- tion purposes. Grantees shall insure that records of different fis l i d ca per o s are separately identifiable and so maintained ` that information can be readily located. When records are d? r ; t stored away from the grantee's principal office, a written ! , d 77 index of the location of records stored shall be on hand and qzi! r access to storage assured. N i ?}1 d. Public Access to Records. Unless otherwise stipulated in the ? s contract, access shall be in accordance with Chapter 42.17 of ;t the Revised Code of Washington. I j 7 at ?? Gr r 21. Property Management i j a. Purpose. The following paragraphs ra hs g p g p prescribe uniform standards ?D3??nwL c ,?, + ;i governing the utilization and disposition of property purchased -23- ,tax "i: ?' - z 1 '}1 ( A '? ? + 4? 4 r v ?'' t t 1 ZV, k ! r i r r ` R `l f'' ? ? r f 3 i ?', l?l f 1 t1._ u tl`'•1 ?5 it { ` 1 I ?? 11 "a ? ` ? AV r t: wholly or in part with State of Washington grant funds, whether t .3 of state or federal source. (Ref. 9)` b. Definitions. The following definitions apply for the purpose of this guideline: ' y (1) Real Property. Real property means land, land improve- merits, structures, and appurtenances thereto, excluding - movable machinery and equipment. e ' (2) Personal Property. Personal property means property of any kind except real property. It may be tangible (having physical existence) or intangible (having no physical existence), such as patents, inventions, and copyrights. (3) Nonexpendable Personal Property. Nonexpendable personal tFl;, property means tangible personal property having a useful life of more than one year and an acquisition cost of $300 or more per unit. A grantee may use his own defini- tion of nonexpendable personal property provided that such definition would at least include all tangible per- ' sonal property as defined above. (4) Expendable Personal Property. Expendable personal prop- = erty refers to all tangible personal property other than nonexpendable property. _ (S) Excess Federal or State Property. Excess property means property owned by the federal or state government under the control of any federal or state agency which, as determined by the head thereof, is no longer required for its needs or discharge of its responsibilities. C. Nonexpendable Personal Property (1) Title. Title to nonexpendable personal property whose acquisition cost is borne wholly or in part by a State of Washington grant shall rest in the grantee upon acquisi- tion and shall be subject to the restrictions on use and disposition following. (2) Use. (a) The grantee shall use the property in the original grant project as long as there is a need for the property to nccomplish the purpose of the project, whether or not the project continues to be supported by agency funds. (b) When there is no longer a need for the property to accomplish the purpose of the original project and where the original grant funds came from identifiable federal or state sources the grantee shall use the property in connection with other grantee programs in the following, order of'priority: -24- ^u+d' K ti 11N?. . AMU,! , x t G. I , ? I ,i k IYf?1,5? r I f W5! owl 1) In program areas funded by the same federal or state agency. (c) When the grantee no longer has need for such pro- perty in any of its federally or state financed activities or the grant funds were not of identi- fiable, federal or state origin the property may be used for the grantee's own official activities • in accordance with the following standards: 1) If the property had an acquisition cost of less w: than $500 per unit and has been used for four years or more, the grantee may use the property without reimbursement to the agency or sell the property and retain the proceeds; or 2) For all such property not covered under sub- division (a) above of this subparagraph, the grantee may retain the property for its own use provided a fair compensation is made to the agency for its share of the property. The amount of such compensation shall be computed by applying the percentage of state partici- pation in the project to the current fair market value of the property. (3) Disposition. If the grantee has no need for the property y disposition shall be made as follows: 7?? (a) If the property had an acquisition cost of $1,000 or - less per unit (except for property covered under m paragraph c(2)(c)1), the grantee shall sell the property and reimburse the state agency in accord- ' ante with paragraph c(2)(c)2). (b) If the property had an acquisition cost of over $1,000 per unit, the grantee shall request disposi.- tion instructions from the state agency who shall respond within 120 days. (Ref. 9) l (4) Property Management for Nonexpendable Property. Grantee property management shall include: (a) Property records providing for: 1) A description of the property. 2) Manufacturer's serial number or other identifi- cation number. 3) Acquisition date and cost. i?'F?•Y•,. 4) Source of property, including items provided by the federal government. -25- 5,n !,? ^'R7 J p??y _ S'f A'7XCitrATHM .?J?YId ty?i 4 ??'',, wly( yv? ? 1?+?r }a I yr f_ - ? Ir 1. ? )xJ t 1 ?: f ) 4 r I'l ?? L I , ti - ??.- v 7 c rc ? 1 l: I I?`?r`1 ' 0 4 q" 1 A 5) Percentage of state funds and federal funds £ used in the acquisition of the property. ,. 6) Location, use, and condition of the property. , e > "- 7) Ultimate disposition data including sales price or the method used to calculate current fair { market value. . " (b) A physical inventory taken and reconciled with the r property records at least annually to verify the existence, current utilization, and continued need for the property. (c) A control system in effect to insure adequate safe- 9 uards to prevent loss, damage, or theft to the pro- perty. Any loss, damage, or theft of nonexpendable personal property shall be investigated and fully documented. (d) Adequate maintenance procedures implemented to keep ?.,. property in good condition. ?b - e .t (e) Proper sales procedures established for unneeded property which would provide for competition to the i maximum extent practical and result in the highest _ a possible return. (5) Intangible Personal Property (a) Patents, Patent Rights and Inventions. If any pro- - r gram produces patents, patent rights, or inventions r ; in the course of. work aided by a state agency grant, such fact shall be promptly and fully reported to r t the state agency. The state agency shall arrange " for a determination of whether protection on such inventions or discovery shall be sought and how the 9t rights in the invention or discovery (including rights 9 ? under any patent issued thereon) shall be disposed of = and administered in order to protect the public t t; interest. (b) Copyrights and Ownership of Tangible and Intangible Property. When contractors supported and Eunded by state funds produce original books, manuals, films, tlae contractor may copyright this material, or other copyrightable materials, but the state retains a royalty-free, nonexclusive and irrevocable license to produce, publish, recover, or otherwise use the material and to authorize others to use, or repro- duce the material for federal, state, or local govern- ment purposes. -26- ?,,a ,rig r?r,r Sr ??x ! x'%u s nnx ja6 F t n ?li r M.m ? b' 7 It ` ? 1? l r 0. 1 4r f 1±( i All tangible property having an acquisition cost jF over $100.00 and a useful life of more than one year that has been furnished to the grantee by the state for use in performance of the project herein des- cribed, shall be returned to the state prior to final payment. Grantee shall make payment in cash _ s : .. or by setoff to the state for use of said. property. - Should said property be lost, stolen, or damaged while in grantee's possession, the department shall G ' be reimbursed in cash or be setoff by the grantee for the fair market value of said property. (c) Real Property Funded Wholly or Partly with Grantee Funds. Where real property. is purchased by the grantee wholly or partly with funds furnished by the grantee, the following guidelines shall. be control- ling unless otherwise provided by federal/state laws, policies, or by agreement: 1) The grantee must use such property only for the _;_.. purpose authorized in the original grant. gg _ 2) The grantee shall obtain approval by the grantor F - agency for the use of the real property in other - r projects when the grantee determines that the - property is no longer needed for the original grant purposes. -27- 7 22. General +x ' This section sets forth instructions and principles for determining d' the amount of state and local contributions required as matching shares and for determining the value and appropriateness of local contributions actually made. Guidance as to specific items and relevant accounting rules is included. - s 23. Records of Contributions Since the requirement for federal grants and, in most cases, state grants are statutory, records must be maintained which show the time and amount of the contributions. These records are subject to audit and should reflect only the actual time spent in the C ;.•, performance of work stipulated in the contractual agreement. , The period for which contributed services are claimed must be - within the period stipulated by the contract. - 24. Valuation of Volunteer Services}) Volunteer services may be furnished by professional and technical personnel, consultants (when approved), and other skilled and unskilled labor. Each hour of volunteered services may be counted' as a matching share if adequate records are maintained and the serv- ice is an integral and necessary part of an approved grant program. a. Rates for Volunteer Services. Rates for volunteers should be JU consistent with those regular rates paid for similar work in other activities of the state or local government. In no case, however, shall volunteer services exceed the salaries ' of the project planner. In cases where the kinds of skills 1 required for the state or federally assisted activities are not found in the other activities of the grantee, the rates used should be consistent with those paid for similar work in +• 2 ( the local labor market in which the grantee competes for the kind of services involved. Rates for services claimed must i be reasonable and must be documented and auditable. Such ser- vices to be claimed for an individual must be officially ak.? h hired or appointed, a record must be maintained including: (Ref. 10) tt (1) The name of the individual performing the service. t (2) The person's title and type of service performed. ?r r}x , `?t' + + (3) The time and dates such services were performed to substan- tiate contributed services claimed. Y ?" f b. Volunteers Employed by Other Organizations. When an employer i` x;h other than the grantee furnishes the services of an employee, these services shall be valued at the employee's regular rate 1 i 3 of pay (exclusive of overhead costs) provided these services 17 f > are the same skill for which the employee is normally paid. a vy'. ' -28- ;iS9?sSr,,? 25. Valuation of Materials t??•- +? Contributed materials, including office supplies, maintenance sup- i• ?x plies, or workshop and classroom supplies, are allowable, provided a' they are directly related to the program and do not exceed the cost of the materials to the donor or current market prices, whichever is less, at the time they are charged to the project. Sk e 26. Valuation of Other Charges ' Other necessary charges incurred specifically for and in direct ?- benefit to the grant program in behalf of the grantee may be accepted as matching share provided that they are adequately supported and are permissible under the terms and conditions of the grant. The following requirements pertain to the grantee's supporting records for in-kind contribution from private organizations and individuals: TY, The number of+hours of voluntary services must be supported ade- quate records and minutes of meetings and shall not exceed more than 50 percent of the local matching share without written permis- sion. 27. Valuation of Donated Real and Personal Pro ert Valuation of donated real and personal property shall be based on current fair market value. 28. Allowability of Matching Costs a. Matching or Cost Sharing May Consist of: (1) Charges.incurred by the grantee as project costs. Not all charges require cash outlays during the grant period by the grantee; examples are depreciation and use allow- ances for buildings and equipment. (2) Project costs financed with cash contributed or donated to the grantee by third parties. (3) Project costs represented by in-kind contributions made by grantee and nonfederal third parties, b. All contributions whether cash or in-kind shall be accepted as part of the grantee's matching or cost sharing when such con- tributions: (1) Are identifiable from the grantee's records. (2) Are not included as contributions for any other federally assisted program or any federal contract. 4 -29- L i +. Irs, q, (3) Are necessary and reasonable for proper and efficient y accomplishment of project objectives as defined in the t ` +? .?. grantee contract. (4) Are not borne by the federal government directly or indi- rectly under any federal grant or contract. 29. Contributions Furnished by Subgrantees _ Local government grantees may require parallel matchin sha f l t o g res rom other unitsof localgovernment or other sub- grantees. A parallel contributio i ' n s one made at the same rate as the grantee's applicable statutory contribution for the s program under which the subgrant or other allocation was made. Whenever a - :. .. E. contribution is required from a subgrantee or other recipient of grant funds: a. The grantee should not require that the contribution be made "?•.' "?¢ all in cash unless the grantee has, with respect to its own ? ` contribution responsibilities, proceeded on a similar basis in _. comparable situations. :- b. The subgrantee should be permitted to value in-kind contribu- tions in the same manner as the grantee agency values similar = N-. items. C. Items which constitute acceptable contributions as to the +'' ?rky grantee agency should normally be considered acceptable as to subgrantees. -30- u p 1} P .fix kf -- arr-..... .rw?an(F + aeon r,c+n •nvt, N wv¢''i ? wi r': Y r t.%?, 6 I Y11 iQ, 7 { ?' + PIN CHAPTER 6. - REIMBURSEMENT REQUESTS AND REPORTS 30. Reimbursement will be made by state agency upon submission of the following: a. State of Washington Invoice Voucher (A19-1): This voucher serves as the legal document to claim reimbursements of project expenditures pursuant to grant award contract. Data entered on voucher should include statement of services rendered, indi- cating time period covered or the identifiable work element completed, as applicable. See following page for instruction on completion, along with attached form (see Exhibit No. 1). b. Detailed Statement of Costs and Financial Summar : Contracts generally require additional material to be submitted with voucher to justify or clarify costs incurred. This report shows items by cost categories along with financial status of the grant project (see Exhibit No. 2). c. Matching Share Certification: When match is required by con- tract, a signed report must be submitted listing the in-kind contributed services and/or contributed cash in a ratio not less than that requested in the voucher above to the total contract. The two categories are as follows: (1) Contributed Services Report: Summary Report is self- explanatory (see Exhibit No. 3). Note: A Contributed Service Report or similar records must be kept weekly as documentation for the above sum- mary. This report is retained by contractor for audit purposes (see Exhibit No. 4). (2) Cash Contributions: A statement showing the amount con- tributed must be submitted to the agency either by state- ment or on a reimbursement voucher, or by separate document, If a cash contribution is received in the form of a check payable to the State of Washington, the grantee should forward such check to the state agency for deposit with the State Treasurer. A corresponding entry reflecting the transfer will be made in the grantee's account by the state agency. 31. Progress Reports Grantee's general evaluation of progress in meeting element or over- all program objective is to be submitted as required by contract. Reimbursement may be withheld until such requirements are complied with. 32. Financial Reports Grantee will. submit in manner and date as required by contract. -31- s, MoG...M io?rli TOTAL "la ^`ti , tr r yyS 4? ?Clt ^" "°^ 7' ` r,m'rK tA? <e?a ?'? e f t ti i ' ? ? 7 fi' ? 1+ ? 1?y?. I ' ?'?1 r r'. 1 " ?I Sri 111.01"t TT ,ST??Y I 1 µ}.4d, ?ry S ?IPJI 1. I ? i ? ?1 rf } STATE OF WASHINGTON INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARATION OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON INVOICE VOUCHERS AND ALLIED DOCUMENTS Th e attached sample invoice voucher has item numbers circled to E '- identify the following instructions: 1) Self-explanatory. Use address as shown. r., .? 2) Insert your contract number for identification purposes. ' ' 3) Date of voucher preparation and voucher number, re: 1st, 2nd, etc. 4) Original signature by authorized individual. _. i , 5) Enter the exact name and address of the payee of the state warrant to be issued for this voucher. _ , 6) Enter the date of completion of the work element or time period. ` - 7) Enter the reason for the reimbursement of costs, such as "com- - $ pletion of work element 1.01"; "reimbursement for period 5/1/75 " ' through 5/30/75, etc. _- - 8) Enter the amount of cost incurred for the work element com- pleted or for time period, whichever method is specified by contract. If in-kind costs are included in the total, the a n amount requested for reimbursement should be clearly identified. _ 9) If required by contract, enter amount of retainage to be deducted. 10) Deduct retainer and enter total reimbursement for this payment. This will be the amount of the warrant issued. :i a 11) When contract requires support documents, enter the number and a title of attachments. Examples of required documents are as i s4r t= follows: w 7 a. Grantee Detailed Statement of Costs and Financial Summary. Pk?' t N b. Copy of "Work Element Completion Report." R b `? -,u r c. Contributed Services Report Summary. a ry yi. d. Contributed Cash Certification. w^?j -34- INK: N!1 r ; 1 e i i ti r C e d w „ ?qY ? 0", ? ., Grantee's Name G Address Contract Number Cost Period G Element Completed Element Budget: Federal $ 1 certify that costs listed below State have been incurred in conformance with this contract. Local Total Budget: $ Signature of Project Official Element N Cost Categories Costs for Report Period Total Cost (as approved in grant budget) Federal State Local Per Category 1. Salaries and Wages 2. Employee Benefits 3. Consultant b Contract Services 4. Consumable Supplies 5. Copying Service 6. Travel 7. Equipment 8. Indirect Costs A ency Use Totals this report Total of Prior Claims Accumulated Project Totals ECY 030-1-15(a) Rev. 3/79 -35- Pal L11 , r v y a w Exhibit 113 v AI ?i:, y,.tr? i O H v N '. v h ? d ro C7 ? v o. u H O W C u w O a a v r. g7 v6l w-r 7E;' _ ? i W u O m 6 .1 6 ro .. ? ? r ? ; N v t c r O ' 5 1IX?y _ L ?i A u ? ? ? hl c U d i pa u r-1 N M1 q d ! ?h? ??A Y jVj -36- 1 C}{ 4 "IC 1 a M? I r S; V. F s ? M 4 11J f, - 1. Instructions for A19-1 Voucher Support Form and Example Form: - ? '- (1) Enter nine (9) digit number from grant. ' S (2) Enter name of grantee with whom the grant was made. "c w (3) Enter total grant amount. (4) Enter budget object for which cost is being claimed. Also . - enter the quantity used. 6 I (5) Enter voucher number from official county document by which - -7 vendor was paid. _ / (6) Enter date of vendor's invoice to the county, city, or other. - (7) Enter total amount paid vendor. Where only a part of the total - - - paid is eligible, show only the eligible total and indicate by an asterisk (*). - (8) Enter the full business name of vendor. (9) Enter brief description of item. (10) Enter number of warrant which paid vendor claim. '. (11) Enter date warrant was paid. - If the GRANTEE can provide a system acceptable to the DEPARTMENT which furnishes the above information in a format similar to the example herein, such system may be used as a substitute for the A19-1 voucher support form. -37•- 1 aY D , V? "1'°% k,?35?'"I. fti F' ' ° r ? `f I S ?? t iiw"„ ` .pltiPa G t* 04 GG 3?? m `" l t 1 X 1} I t1 "Irlrr/ q EfN lA t I N U V, 1 All L^ ',} I I F, n'y ' t t I 4 . 6 4 ?F '? v ??t ? IQ . 77 -V ? p1 ?? ? tr t i f 1 % ie P9 , " a r Exhibit 1l4 x - s s?rr CONTRIBUTED SERVICES REPORT FOR PERIOD YU % , 19 to 19 CONTRACT NO. ' CONTRACTOR PROJECT This is a summary of contributed services performed under the above project. a - The amount is equal to the actual documented costs of such services performed ;,. by an organization or persons participating in project and are available for audit. Categories Salaries & Wages (1) (Including Fringes) Material & Supplies Travel Equipment Other (2) IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS Value SUBTOTAL (1) Based on individual time sheets. (2) If other exceeds $500, please identify. Name of Organization/Person CASH CONTRIBUTIONS Amount SUBTOTAL TOTAL I certify that the above listed contributed services have been made. Signature Title Date -38- r. M' Nt q q :9 Yk f _ M` si „V'? °tr"'? r w 't. rl .4. S? NYnY ;? ' try q iii M1 ale u?{ e9Mtl 7 Na 6Ww ' ?'%If}s t ti V KR, "Al % N ? % S R ; ? j ? y °L1 "7 l r ? - } ,, . ? ni d -rt u rl M ..k 5'fF .. ? a... v ZJ W k ? ? 7 3 _ O H CJ O W H sr s o x H y N ?t a O ?-1 4O1 H a e z N U a +"t w W a o W a N F ti u F O a u a d a u ro Enn z -39- 1.1 v O H a a '-I u 00 ro FT U u .a a ati FL tl T v 6 o o ? ? 9 N ro o y w 3 d A N .F m u r W a O a u a w U ? ? tl V u M > w u ro a a F .5 f? a H O 7 Y? tl V ro N M> ? U vEw roFo D u b N p o H a yuy up u w N N M ? G N p W a H Ip I H F H ON 8 N U a ro 4Tw'1 E 4 x E +?2 5 t 1? es? f E mss'. ? 1 CHAPTER 7. -- REVISIONS, SUSPENSIONS, TERMINATIONS, AND CLOSEOUTS a 34. Project Revisions. ?a s Grantees shall request prior approval for revisions in cases noted below: t, a a. A change in approved objectives. `a b. Change in work elements. Any change in work elements which _#r would result in change of objectives. C. Change in budgetary data. - (1) Revision requires additional funding. .5 (2) Change in project period. 4 (3) The grant budget is over $100,000 and the cumulative amount of transfers among direct cost object class 3. budget categories exceeds or is expected to exceed R $10,000, or 5 percent of the grant budget, whichever is greater. r ? (4) The grant budget is $100,000, or less, and the cumula- tive amount of transfers among direct cost object class budget categories exceeds or is expected to exceed ' five percent of the grant budget. Y Note: Supporting documents necessary to fully explain the iT nature and purpose of the revision should accompany each request for change. e 35. Suspensions or Termination for Cause a. All obligations of the State of Washington may be suspended or canceled, without recourse, at the option of the State of Wash- ington, if any of the following conditions occur. (1) Grantee fails to make satisfactory progress to complete the project, or can be shown to be unable to complete the „ project, or any portion thereof, within the project period, t r r (2) Grantee fails to make satisfactory progress to complete ° ?'S+ any other project assisted with funds administered by the } t state agency, or can be shown to be unable to complete lr1 any other such assisted project, or any portion thereof, Xr )1?4 within the project period. Y; y , t (3) Grantee makes any misrepresentation in its application or in any other information furnished to the agency in con- nect ion i i with their application for financial assistance. f l ? `' e o 1 f: `r?? -40-ar Y 1 ? rr ?? ` ? 1 1 1rY h???i 1 ,?y n1?`y kilts ' AyFt r - i ?• b. Suspensions. When a grantee has materially failed to comply ..; with terms and conditions of a grant, the State of Washington may, after reasonable notice, suspend the grant. No new expenditures or obligations made or incurred in connection with the grant or contract during the '? - period of suspension will be recognized by the state in the event that assistance is ultimately terminated. A 157+ c. Terminations. In the event assistance is terminated under the aforementioned provisions, the financial obligations incurred by the grantee prior to the effective date of such termination will be allowable to the extent they would have been allowable d had such assistance not been terminated, except that: (1) No obligations incurred during the period in which such assistance was suspended and no obligations incurred in anticipation of suspension or termination will be allowed. e (2) The recipient shall cancel as many outstanding obligations 3>, as possible. airy. (3) All finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, sur- veys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, and reports or other materials prepared by the grantee under the grant agreement shall, at the option of the state, become its property, and the grantee shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials. - r (4) Notwithstanding the above, the grantee shall not be relieved of liability to the state for damages sustained .._.?4 by the state agency by virtue of any breach of the con- tract, and the state agency may withhold any payments to ' it for the purpose of setoff until such time as the exact "t amount of damage due the state agency is determined. ' 36. Special Termination Provision P` The State of Washington may terminate a contract without recourse if any of the following conditions occur: (1) State or federal funds are not allocated for the purpose of meeting the state agencies' obligations. (2) The authorization to spend such funds is rescinded or revoked, I? or such funds are otherwise made unavailable. 37. Termination for Convenience a. Grants and contracts may be terminated in whole or in part as follows: -41- ? ;C S! ! 1 4 N J I 1. h`? R i I ? . :' I D kLf ' i x 1 ? ri a ? ? y EY V t 1 t ? `?j. ? ' 1 If tl 1 ? + n i (1) By the state agency with the consent of the recipient, in which case the two parties shall agree upon the termina- tion including the effective date and, in the _r case of partial termination, the portion to be terminated. awl" ? (2) By the recipient, upon written notification to the State _ of Washington setting forth the reasons for the termina- tion, the effective date, and, in the case of partial terminations, the State of Washington must concur with request to effect termination. (3) When a grant is terminated pursuant to the aforementioned provisions, the recipient shall not incur obligations for the terminated portion after the effective date, and shall - cancel as many outstanding obligations as possible. The state will allow full credit to the recipient for the state share of the noncancellable obligations properly incurred by the reci ient rio t t i ti p p r o erm na on. 38. Closeout Provisions for Grants a. Within 60 days of the "Date of Completion" of a contract, the grantee shall furnish the state with all re i d fi i l _ qu re nanc a , performance, or other reports required as a condition of the . , grant. The "Date of Completion," means the date when all work under the grant is completed or the date so specified in the grant as awarded. b. Within 60 days after completion of a grant, the grantee shall immediately refund to the state or otherwise dispose, in accordance with instructions from the state any unencumbered balance of cash advanced to the grantee. c. Final disposition of inventory and property must be conducted in accordance with the property management requirements within 60 days of the date of completion of a grant. d. The grantee must submit the final request for compensation within 60 days from the date of completion of the grant/contract, and within 20 days after the end of the fiscal biennium when the grant/contract is completed at or near the end of such biennium. Upon receipt of final financial reports, the state will make a settlement reflecting any necessary upward or downward adjust- ments of costs called for by the terms and conditions of the grant. e. In the event a final audit had not been performed prior to the .?.»? closeout of the grant, the granting agency shall retain the right to recover an a i t ppropr a e amount after fully considering the recommendations or disallowed costs resulting from the final audit. -42- R F - ii a J S ®r;, ASSURANCE OF COMPLIANCE WITH EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY LAWS APPENDIX A Requirements: The (Contractor) (Grantee) (Subgrantee) (Unit of Local Government) (Consultant) called the contracting party hereafter will comply with Executive Order 1114, Executive Order 11246, and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (as amended) and all other federal and state Equal Employment Opportunity regulations where relevant or applicable, to the end that no person shall on the grounds of race, color, creed, age, sex, or marital status, sensory, mental or physical handicap or national origin, be excluded from participation in; be deprived of the benefits of; or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity for which the contracting party receives financial assistance from or service through federal or state funds in whole or part from an agency of the State of Washington. Certification of Equal Employment Program: 1. I certify that the (individual signing for contracting party) has formulated an (contracting party) # Equal Employment Opportunity Program in accordance with the applicable federal and state laws and that it is on file in the office of: NAME: ,F ADDRESS: TITLE: for review or audit by officials of the state funding agency or T federal program administration as required by relevant laws and , regulations, or; 2. 1 certify that the { person signing the gran[ application) S. will formulate an (contracting party) -43- i NAME: ADDRESS: TITLE: for review or audit by officials of the state funding agency or federal program administrator as required by relevant laws and regulations. Noncompliance: Whenever it is determined by the funding agency that a contracting party has failed to comply with an applicable regulation, the funding agency shall notify the contracting party of the noncompliance and shall request the contracting party to secure compliance. If, within a reasonable period of time, not to exceed sixty (60) days, the contracting party fails or refuses to secure compliance, the funding agency will exercise its power and functions to terminate financial assistance with the contracting party under the appropriate federal and state laws. In addition, the funding agency may recommend to the appropriate federal or state initiated funding agency, that a debarring action be initiated against the contracting party found to be out of compliance. -44- I??F •?Y? Jt4?1NC?? * F kF ? i t?11) i? Q f, A s y ? t r : ?4 ? ? 1 F 1r `??; 1 y ? 1 a ... ?{' ' u '- , , ?i f yA ? "', YY Accrual Accounting - An accounting system that recognizes revenues in the period in which they are earned and deducts the expenses incurred in generating those revenues. Affirmative Action - A plan to insure that nondiscrimination is in compliance with all federal regulations. Audit - The term "Audit" is used to describe not only work by accountants in examining financial :f. reports, but also performance associated with: a. Compliance with applicable laws and regu- lations, b. Efficiency and economy of operations, and • c. Effectiveness in achieving program results. Budget - An estimated cost of performance of the project as set forth in the notification of grant award. Cash Basis - An accounting system in which revenues are not recorded until received and expenses are assigned to the period in which payment is made. Cash Contributions - A cash contribution represents the grantee's cash outlay, including outlay of money contrib- uted to the grantee by other public agencies and institutions, private organizations, and - r individuals. Contract - An agreement between two or more parties to do something for consideration which may take the form of a grant, contract, subagreement, loan agreement, memorandum of agreement, etc. n Fiscal Biennium - The state budget period commencing on the first day of July in each odd-numbered year and ending on the thirtieth day of June of the next suc- ceeding odd-numbered year. ' Force Account - Labor, materials, or equipment provided from '`,Ii:LF?bSA grantee accounts. r -45- :. _ •y '.! C WY µ ? t Grant - An agreement between federal government/state ?r - and local governments whereby the federal and/or . ` state government provide funds or aid in-kind to carry out a specified program, service, or activity. Grantee - Recipient of grant award funds. Grantor - An agency, institution, or organization issuing 4^ •r:, ',, an award for disbursement of funds, Grant Period - A period specified in the notification of a _ grant award during which costs may be charged r, against the grant. Guideline - A standard by which to make judgment or deter- mine policy or course of action. h In-kind Contributions - In-kind contributions represent the value of `4( noncash contributions provided by: (1) the y --??+! grantee, (2) other public agencies and institu- tions, and (3) private organizations and indi- viduals. In-kind contributions may consist of ,t charges for real property and equipment, and value of goods specifically identifiable to the rant 8 Program. Internal Control - Measures taken by an organization to protect resources and insure accuracy and reliability +l"' in accounting and operating data. _ Non-Federal Non-Federal matching share represents that Matching Share portion of cost not borne by the federal govern- Y { - ment. o- ;...,'. + Nonsupplanting - An obligation to insure that federal funds "are I. " + so used as not to supplant state or local funds, but to increase the amount of such funds that ! would, in the absence of federal funds, be made avai.lable." y Objectives - Goals of the project as set forth in proposal. Procedures - Set of rules for accomplishing assigned task. q " `a tt s `- x z; ;.. Program Income - Gross income earned b a a by grant-supported acti- vity. M, Progress Report - A narrative evaluation of progress in meeting yy Fj } overall program design objectives. ?,- + z j+ a' Project - Activity of a program defined in the proposal •?et? approved for funding, a4 °y :A.q'?MM V 'iM:NV4M..?iS+fN[ifh 1. .. 'Gd .. K .- ' V!MA1?C4Y.?4'li ?tiNiY[INa"'. -46- Project Costs - Project costs are all necessary charges made by grantee in accomplishing the objectives of a grant during the grant period. r f G E rs tic ? +i Retainage - An amount withheld to insure compliance with the terms of a contract. Usually stated in percentage withheld from each payment. Subgrantee - A unit receiving a secondary award from a grantee. Subagreement - A written agreement between a grantee and a third party and any tier of government thereunder for the furnishing of services, supplies, or equipment necessary to complete the project for which a grant was awarded, including contracts for personal and professional services and purchase orders. -47- t x r3 e' 4 i ?,In Yd n R WYrm. a? .p'...rpgFw.w' aka qq// G . ? i , t , J trt ;y? 'yw7 1 ? N ? ` T ? 4 ? ti # f 5 11 E F 111J ?i at ? r>K ' a _' ? Y e S J. t L,,y? N ? ay ; r Ell; N ? k-tihh 1''fAU° _ APPENDIX C + GRANTEE SELF-EXAMINATIGN CHECKLIST P „ I. Purpose r i The following list of questions is intended to serve as a genera l review device for grantees. II. General Management - ?r A. Are organization policies, procedures, and charts established h d fi li f ibilit d h ? nes o t at e ne respons y an aut ority? t . ^ >s B. Has a system of authorization and approval been established to 1 ? y -'_ require appropriate managerial approval for all significant ? actions or financial transactions? . . r $ , C. Are general conditions of the grant such as affirmative action, •` conflict of interest, anti-kickback, etc., being complied with, if applicable? Are the latest manuals and fiscal guidelines available? D . - E. Are employees handling or authorized to disburse grantee funds appropriately bonded? F. Are project records readily available, appropriately maintained, + reasonably secure, and regularly audited? G. Is an original, signed copy of the budget on file? Does it include a copy of the approved budget and signature forms, if required? ' If. Are formal minutes kept on meetings of policy-making bodies? Are such minutes being used to document contributed services of board members? III. Fiscal Management } ?y A. Accounting .. 1. Is a double-entry bookkeeping system being utilized? 1 2. Are written procedures established to describe the account- 7 system? Is a chart of accounts established? ! „r t ' O 3. Does the accounting system adequately identify the receipts t f y ; and expenditure of grant funds (see Chapter 2, pars- ,- graph 11.)? Do entries in accounting records refer to 3 r R j ! a f H iF ??,i f xc?t r subsidiary records and/or documentation which supports the entry and can be readily located? ?s,? ,ba i ?v? t Y ,. l,`y,•i» i ?e ''-R -48- _? MM A •-: ..,? 4. If a separate bank account is not being utilized, are ..? ,, • ,,,, :.,. accounting procedures adequate to insure that grant funds • are notcomingled? 5. Are there adequately trained accounting personnel or are services of such employed? - 6. Are supporting documents marked "paid" and the check ' number and date of payment indicated to prevent duplicate "" , payment? _ 7. Are accounts balanced and reconciled at least monthly? - , 8. Is there a distinct division of duties between authorize- tion and d k i . j recor eep ng so that activities of one employee 1 ?.«r act as a check on those of another? •? • 9. Are cash receipts deposited daily? - ._:•.? w B. Budgeting 1. Are there budgeting controls to prevent incurring obliga- tions in excess of the approved budget? 2. Is there proper authorization for all budget revisions? 3. Are funds being expended at projected rates? C. Contributed Services - 1. Do records document reported amount of in-kind contribu- tions, including basis for determining value as well as - accumulation of such contributions? 2. Do accounting records provide adequate identification of cash match reported? r IV. Personnel A. Are personnel policies established in writing? '! ftc? ? '? S ° B. Are all personnel costs supported by time and attendance records r x k s with costs distributed according to actual time spent by all asp - individuals? ? ??QQ N g 5 C. Are fringe benefits being paid consistent with local or state a^ Wi policies? ra , ; D. Are sufficient internal controls present to prevent dual cam- pensation? 1 3 ` P '' a?A ? °,?, , ?"?• V. Consultants and Contract Services ` dt k b, A. Do procedures provide for consideration of in-house capabili- ties to accomplish services before contracting for them? t N, 1 -49- ,F.,?''?+? t ?w °R?? ?i?ar x,.a,= J ??" y ?.?1V+z`?r M.Y h)r ixFF?1,h?d ? ?? r ^? I t"i ? ? a 1 ?r f k '11K ? ' r { , Q ? ? ? 1 I N l `-? r r ?9 a y „ ^+ jNi ?' . Y B. Do procedures provide for the solicitation of proposals on bids prior to contract award? C. Is the compensation reasonable and consistent with that paid in the local area or required by local, state, or federal policies or law? VI. Travel x - A. Are travel policies and procedures established in writing? B. Do the travel procedures include: 1. Issuance of travel authorization? - 2. Approval of reimbursement voucher by the traveler's super- - visor before payment? C. If grantee's reimbursement rates exceed State of Washington r; 1 rates, has prior written approval been granted for deviation? D. Are travel. costs properly receipted, including lodging, air .?. travel, car rentals, etc.? VII. Equipment Purchase and Control } A. Is the equipment purchased suitable for grant project objec- tives? B. Are procedures established that require lowest reasonable price be sought and used? - C. Is there an inventory control maintained for all equipment whose purchase cost is $300 or more, that includes at least: 1. Source or vendor 2. Item description 3. Inventory control number S 4. Manufacturer's serial number, if available 5. Acquisition date and cost `c 6. Location 7. Ultimate disposition -5o- r? Q rdm^xc ,. i+^rxs ,p -Q i ,r re?C>A?"wl t wrrr $ .,?I" ??? v.I i fill 1 t f 1 ,4 Z t , ? V .a I '?Y tFt?' ? } 7 p ?t rr i_ ,? 1 .rT L r 7 { ft t M r ? r i r SERVING - - 11 WESTERN STATES PLUS TEXAS AND BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION COMPANY . "SERVICE - SAFETY - DEPENDABILITY" - - SEATTLE: LOCAL TOLLFREE Gonoml Ot6co (206) 764-1186 Pmrolarm OisPatch (206) 767-3607 800-552.0720 Chomical Dispatch (206( 767.3605 800.562.8256 PASCO: (509) 5479759 800.572.9642 VANCOUVER, B.C.: 16041 294.3511 PORTLAND: .5031286.3661 800-547.6799 KLOHN LEONOFF CONSULTING ENGINEERS March 22, 1988 Robert Nesbitt, P.E. Jefferson County Public Works Department P.0. Box 1220 Port Townsend, 41A 98368 Dear Mr. Nesbitt: I had talked with you earlier this month about flood control studies on the Dosewallips and Big Quilcene Rivers. I would like to take this opportunity to introduce Klohn Leonoff Consultants to you and briefly describe our capabilities. Klohn Leonoff provides services in river engineering and water resources, including flood and sediment transport studies. We also perform q? geotechnical, heavy civil and mining engineering. A brochure is enclosed } which illustrates the type of work that Klohn Leonoff has performed. We are very interested in the flood control planning efforts for the Doeswallips and Big Quilcene Rivers, and will certainly respond to your upcoming Request for Proposals. w Very truly yours, KLOHN LEONOFF CONSULTANTS, INC. Robert A. Montgomery P.E. Senior Water Resources Engineer RAM/,ids Kbnn L--11 Co111U' nlx, In[ SO- 102. 12006 1 98 Ave N r... KAI-d, W.mnglon 08034 • T,Wpnonx (206) 8236528 • F.+ (2061 823 6152 1 1 1 i r 1 T1 YY P! r 1 f l 1 S? y?y"" { ?1 e?? ? ? 4 , 1 111 .?? T??' i I s 1{? 1 t r? i 1. I r L. 4 ? 1 1 1 t??fi 1 II r F- L J --I --i J y ??rv Yw `m? -e a F ? v o .5 ? .6 LL N Y o I LL w " S 1 Y ?? m` u - ?Nx gg1 ?.a kp i S' ,.:rte r -? r ? J L J L J Ul 3 o en Alp 'x?4r J - ? r n ?- ' ma c 1 F f? x ? 4 1 n; 71, 4,L ??1 y??ay?, ? - t d 1 r y q _ ? I a ? 17 fir- r f 1 5? 6'' ? •"r - j Ice?. M?? ?y'. f?? kt ? '?I L ` ^ rF ? ? ? I 1 1 •,p(r `j .,l„ 4 „mom,. °At lu ?`tiAte a yo 6°n O N o? 0 oC y } i 32 A CO ? i o y W O p q ?c6i C o& Q U c U yC .." 0 U C A L7 .n o d ?Ed'C 2' g c v c ?v%noynv ka&a0C 0daE E Ev?•?C cvc,yd o3Scn°ro °voSc 5A-' o " " nn'FC CS o n c E ,•, v E `?.c ?.6' a°Ji ? - 5en•??a`a?2Q, caa.c?y v v ?+ G ouc O o a'6 l V, } W I F u V ro H OU `? NO c w v c I : H .?- H Eel iz.? ?5?bv u4Y7 5?,?co?? o?c?ooEc° ryC? C, V 'CJ y „' y °? .d •uJ fit 6? vj a ?i y .a 'C is p ^ 'CL 'y 0..? N .? F°'S.3?u.3c?'c? vJ'S c°0 F .-5 Iu o.4U ?;4'thF.i 4 'C .- a 52 °- E ?W xp'Id v ?j CC ?? b y O „ ¢n v [ E o , . r o a.$'i k 'F S ? 5 r1 • ? C ? ??r ? ?x p? 0 aa ??rr b0'V 2? b ? ?n F° tia'?.6 `?•? ?? ? av? N Cl V? .§ N N? C ._. °bq Ql fp ? ? '? y ? C '? O '•5v?'SE.EcG v•A ??cv'inoo?N •`''v EC •? YI oq,. d N •`9 c {5? m' ? ° -' ?nL a E c c °- v O C C y is OL C u c al o •c c ?? aivy co'?E't? n `°'.92 .5?,cgc .i6 bn-°dE o E E o c a???cuE?d•?? d v? S 5 IE co` E o A. L2_ cc u E c 61 o t •° c °b u ?tQO G C v u't o'o by 2 N. aC. u C c0 H •?j? Ov y ? W •v ,d d L v C 0 C ?, bq ro v c O NN p,C v,? ? bn a? E C ,? C oo?° u C"pU Cn CO ti C ro ? d b.EOro N C •p V .o?c 0 cro ns •oo IL ? p ? (i bD C c w c. y Zj C ? ,C ro O p K v •? 0 ° o d 0 m b o to R ca s? ?y o Ea C G O N Ell, ° V'C 'O n oow 0 .5 N C G y O O N v EE°2 ro o? a O No C O .C (O rd o, u v 'C s d ro v o 'E ? E 0 0 2 ? ° ? bq u ? C G ? C v g '6q 'G 2:p b c o E ti.?:sp ?w?aS 5'? S -..v J?r• lit 1f lwn T lam `? t i ? ail 1. ? ?7 ce w .7 7 y w 0?v ,CS, C, C ''0 0 •? W. ? a C ? Cam. ' ?' `- a :,, s s I I :: r. F 3 73 L n r - is •C U •C ? rr c ? f L? J ?• rF ?.` h NG O.- y Cf,•? .? i ? j L ,C ra 4 4 c r i r ? ? fr !*npIE11? C C G "( J rf? rJ ? ? C rYC CCE J? ?C y 7a '.l ?, G• C Y J C 4 r3 n- ? 'wf r n ? y cL c C 7' c: ?a ?.y G cam=o'=y ?.C •-v? ti y 06?ov C,?hC ?'? y COG C? y N C J 5 y a tl 5i'•Cpn$? G. V) s a a ? '? u7 ? u w ??r h ,J G ? ? ? C ?''V h 5. 11, - ? ' C ' I : ? p F o y ? •7 ? ' ? C"yOa.NV ?C I i. O •? C ? ? c'i ?• ? ? t7 ' ?' J= ? rj 4 0 C ?? ;? C b yo ? / C r C ¢ I, 7 0 .C ? p: • . C . C w C ?,?• ,? c c : k c 4 Ja C can= n c v vK"FC??.w:.2$ }'? U ????y777 S? O? u a E[3 x O / m (.D 0 ? ? l?2[ µdj tL ? OR' cG wpo .[ 7 ? m w W a t7 c? V n. Vl W?? a. r r ? U r r ? c: r: r s4=i ' ,L C? .l i .Irrkre,. mirh Ill,, nm,llirnni r-? G - y -J P { z 0 0 w o ? w 2 ? o E 5 ?f: C. ? C 4 C ? .L y r J, y .f _ _ C r il f a - fffA , 1'?fv .. r . s G?? puliru r.. .irr iu;/wvuwP'I 71.0 4 41 f, V? 1 p 'L 7 ' Y• . fr f' k' 1) is fd NW, r? C?• r, i fi f^ " MN k , ,lr I L Y _ ^f7J Jl ,y r 1, • ? n J .. C ' , j • 7 l I .L=! ^. 3L C a C?+ r J C C C - - .J ? 72 l -- • ? r J ? J ? C.. J ?`? ? ? r ? J ? ? t ?„ : rroq?ri?u,r, ?.? iun ?: ^llvnr/ inve'v; al N ? u-i ; It) 7 o w ^_ q r 1 , N ? 00 00 1 N N Tpo t7NM iAN y 3 P P-wA C v 13 N S. g ? w o WW o U y N l NNq M r^,• b ??? CO --n M In ?? Mlit q p s ? N Q L ?W Si O• ..Ax .c r v ?rvS ti A O C ' N ? o CJ •O .G N t7 ? C... ? CS g ro? '? C .. . W rI iU q O LT ?w 2 ?a ? i V l ?? 2 x ? OF tt4-/, Ivy 296 ,,, P?aa C ?c i? ??uti(L7cc p R E C E 0 V E E xY. }??" ?4/l 1%',(77v JEr ! ERSCN COUNTY ENGINEERS OFrtCE Cl `vleiiu+ n?P Cuetif2lj od "?? Giwrd ?( ?O?(JR i ` p ' (,??, an ?a9? L?uc?l?ip ('tcocrl- ??? ????uauJ ? ? ?c?DC?? Fx? a t ; ?'cp ?Coci<.1 rl vw? n ?7vu? 2!,ul -P.a-?cco?a X?o . -AL ra , ow Q l Li dx ? Cu.C? e 7` v Oa.\,oUQct C?Yl yr?ra c+. tu,, ' ail t ?J F7 . /e Al-&r( lf?y coy cal C?ilvl?/ tlzt? A , ?s?ws?, iii 7 i!d , 1 n r ice„ r o a0.° ° oo'mm' 'fit ' re i J f V ri$ F C S - ?/ 'Cl) uG,? w ' Q cw7 (2i k a K ?i v i 7,1777; R, 11191 71-7-illp'"71, ?. T If you have any questions or If you would like to have US review the Possibilities of Improving or protecting your county's waterfront property, please call or write and I will promptly respond. Sincerely, r ?, z is LEE JOHNSO CONSULTANTS, INC. { 3 "? F w r OC% o r„ ', 9 Levon P. Johnson .,S• t ? President LPJeler ? a r r „ ?r'r Erp/noerinyArenrtature l Salk 10700 Mordian Avonue North, Sude 401. Soattle, Weshlrpton 98133, (206) 362-60801Erorett 2590071 r?r, ??r t r 5;';; t 1 di l L ' ? 1 J -'? t r r? Y A k 1 ? ?;.iA tr 1'.s ? n 1 t' Ai F i' t A t4 Y ` ?l iy vit LP 1? ?hl? .} ?I?A ? ? AV A? 1 Sr??? .D? r ? r r F)vfra f l ?ti t1 q4M 11 Reprinted from "Coastal7one '87" WIV DAVASCE, Seattle IVA/play 1629, 1987 BEACH STABILIZATION DESIGN Lee Johnson/Wolf Bauer- Introduction There is a need for aesthetically pleasing and environmentally satisfactory solutions for protecting, renovating and restoring eroding semi-protected coastal beaches such as those found in Puget Sound. - By using geohydraulic design principles, many semi-pr otet [ed eroding coastal beaches can be stabilized. In applicable cases, the .. solution is based on natural beach systems using coarse granular materials to create an artificial porous beach within a confined area. This solution; however, is not generally applicable to open ocean coastal beaches. Shore Resources Recreational shoreline experience on Puget Sound has many facets, - some of which are basic to all waterfront activities, while others are peculiar to certain shoreforms and local conditions. Recreational shore use and activities also change with the weather, the tide level, - and the season. Shore appreciation is further tied [o individual tastes, interests, and sense of values. As more development takes " place, there is an increasing need for shoreline preservation and enhancement of valuable waterfront properties bordering lakes, rivers and coastal waters. The limited available locations for water oriented recreation beaches creates heavy public impact on shorelines and beaches which can save rly erode fore shore and backshore areas. Further erasion - problems are caused by hard surface vertical bulkheads, retaining walls, and rip rap rock revetments located in the mid foreshore areas. Improperly designed and installed bulkheads and rip rap rock protection - systems failing due to loss of beach and fill material, should be replaced wi [h other more aesthetic and environmentally pleasing 4 s0lu ti ons which are compatible with geohydraulic shore mechanics, ti Natural Systems In many locations the use of natural beach systems utilizing drift sills (low level rock groins) and properly sized beach aggregates whic h are oriented for wave tlir0ction and magnitude, can attenuate beach and banl. erosion. Natural materials for beach protective systems provide a desirable aesthetic alternative to hard surface bulkheads and rip rap ' President, Lee Johnson Consultants, Inc., 10700 Heri than Ave. N „ Suite 401, Seattle, WA 98173/Shore Resource Consultant, SG22 SeavlOw Ave. NW, Seattle. WA 98107 1432 A f iy •' C? z N . c. w A v T ? ° 6 ` Z O ? I u V Q ? I m M Laq@^u °'mg9d a C i^ . L?AA L U L M V NTNm 2'T G Vj «oq.=2L w6W 009 L Tgv4 «L aT+??? ? 8 6 •? ? d 1a .a C u q d 6 lei @ U ` ° ° s q °e H' ?' > u Aoo«" «o8?d°° A LLQ r? t u .1 lo Iv; 1. L, .1 B?Ev ? A1. y4 _o App $° oaao ..Tq. op I- ul o z;" s`eg? ?yo ooe X0.'8'.: $`oamo° s?«g gW o«??o& ° AE9 YF r w. 5 ?dk. .. - ywn".S.k` ":Rte ?Nwrs- 'Tli .-.:ff. 2 h O 1 :, 1 I 3f' O I I'ti. ? I? 0114 w ( I ,? . K I ..,• IX ??? zl I 1:`. d • tp %1°.• ?„d is ?d ? ?? d'? Je I? e ? a d Gew ? °00ya a1 o {\,, ?, yn "` v O ?J ? +7 - f ARM> TA O Auk f :70u ? Ir.d YY? fY'd:,1 u rlvlr1155v1] 18011S 117V30 711nVHOAH-037 Z 3MON x U O O 401 a m r •.1y • ?` Ill SStllO 110I10113 - = _- 111-SStll7 IIGISOa3 MIN - '"S - - MHH14 1N31NO3 o , a7 ::v7d1Nn 11 SSV13 1VN17aVW 11 SSV13 1Vt117UV:: _ -jr- - -Mlla ?' _? - MllVl "t' U0 , 14030 i SSVl3 IIOI17a77V SSVI7 110113833V •• ? "'? =`'•'• a MOl a7M01 0314 •• F30i1 MOl Mal NV r 4 ?A , 3 -•°- 3011 117111 73117!11 !1111 '• 3011 H7111 a3117111 IItl7W:•. ; , Na3n O ^ ? (7Nn1•>'sla) 3 0 0115-17V0 ]OI1-:la015 - ]00115•NOVA 301 LAOIS (03I VVWI.37an0S3a 7 SS33011J 321K)•O30nuitii (%50•!11 I%09.11 !%G-I) S3a011S•lVan1VN y$ f? ? DwriM? _ ? 1 f 1 .....y!? Y V' L yd? Y 3 I f l { ? ?r ?? '1' 77 W4 ?MY0.i?Sy t I f 1 1 ' ? 1'A ? ??y J f L / - it ( ? ' N' f + 3 A i ., 1 1) h f r Y ? t ?f 7 ,• 1 .I 1 4k?a i FIGURE 2 GEO-HYDRAULIC BEACH SHORE CLASSIFICATION INTRUDED-(SHORE PROCESS L RESOURCE-IMPAIRED) NATURAL-SHORES (I=5%; 11.60%; III.35%) STORM-TIDE BACK-SHORE (RISK-ZONE) STORY-TIDE BACK-SHORE ? J BErAH ° BER11 ,,, .{ MEAN HIGt{EA HIGH TIDE TIDE .? 1fEt: HIGHER HIGH • .,•,>.rti-? - tICAN LOWER LOW TIDE EAN LOWER LOW TIDEp 7-%•:= :,•; •n ••-_ " •' ,,, , ?- AC " ??i• .. CLASS `I CRETIOt ACCRETION CLASS I, '%- BERM L1T W rHw hLIW CLAY '• MARGINAL CLASS II ?•?," CLASS ;;ARGINAL UNIFORM-DIN>. ° HIGH CLAY ,r; NHHW MHHW CONTENT - - - - - - ML LW _'?`` v,Y• - " EROSION CLASS III -•q'? •? _ I1I " EROSION CLASS 4 s r n R Y r; a m ??r? rrrr»nww+'n"ri?nr -?, m'a ? r ?r,? +P? m '4nu0wg?uvwara*anAnn;??rkf?t,? 'k by ?r Tt 7130 .? ? 7'd u ? {?4 ' ' I 1 It`^'T4?* C + r )F alb f?4 4't 'i dy t xY 711, H llM1? .f,??4?? 1 I ) .. it f 1? Y "l 1 {? ' ? I 1 lh y Y?. 2 N t~/1 z U O O m T uaipa i w u ? c 4? T u a w ?? r v y T L S w u 42 c o _ c a iL ?? c m4 fV p - rno n He rH f0 3A OTa ?u ?o ? _ ? f q u m u L ? ? «_ cE? ?owN .?? % [ do s oc o Num•s ° y o' ?s ?'ol o w s t L a E c 4 i g o o V n N .12 1 E?m€i HSes d^E?? ^ e E ?. _ J? o RE D C o a L N N n ' •, ^o o h O y a T a 1 L E e '?. n.: LL L u a d o f ^ o m u •S f c L E H - E a E u ^ C 01 .01 o€ w N o F u .v N L o Y N ^ 2 3 v o d .!2 a m :2 -0 t: p E aE w e V o u C p= d V o u o @ d E' L €.? ui o 3 q E .. -- ol 11 n a= L° E E. n u^ L u o2 0 A i a c N 3 i ? c E ? .`v E A m « aig0-0- to Xl NE q=6uu m d am..ca •? f ? gA ` 3G =a NA • a e N?a e s' am T ' ' -X A At c fi 6 H ? o N rn °aa N w d@ g ??A?L a Hi`o a wa ° cTar N??fi? a 6/ L W u of L y bA »'« ,??:?N d'S a v8q V per( m : ,= rn ?' r s s o d 4 7 4 w P? =go .°. N'N N?.an A a ? q3 qE° ° ei ae°a- ?-E o2 ? o L .?L - a? ztf °x5 ??rN?r.4dza 6a tf va r`ve _ _ s ?? aN'°tv~d°°a'o a E° ?a N?"g8'og'rn ?`sa LEd'v?o .4 v ? t I C ? j wq> •u jC Lv ?n V c T x^ V Y .o a i E u . •+ Nq r?YyN? a€^ o.?.«-barn i. kv ?. _ « E w m € a o T E v .G E c s^ m a Y n E o L E a V m E «^ T E n m 3 m N L m a w y- w" ? E m s: o N € c i ? w o c T V Y i f W d v i €" c ?n o ? o? c o w s E w E ? Z ad 9 Vv?i oaLL€^ c ?1 a c 3 b u m 2 v T E u « q T I ` E rn -Z ?2 N N mE o ^r ? AoN° @ oao aN" h `m a ol -o o- r ?t.tei?N'...._,. °+,.??.. .. t 'z .. , tkrn' F. . ,T ?,tuu.. ,a u.?w.w?•c mc:Can?.mYraamz?w:n.?.:.:m...? u I c 7. s ? 1 NOf50 3 `I ?= I - I III, ro 6 SO J C a s ?H 9eA? ?? 1?? .h u d i T ? i c a U ? w A N w u ? E°E T a L p T? w E N ? r. H E 9 ° S ? m L i° w o ? o. mEgi E N p ? i o i ^ O I n E«° H C L i^ C a?E u c u o 9^ o A = ? T p i H ? L 9 a a a E L 0,? 49 ^ > N .? m 3 E i o E c va! t. .1 1 N N E ? g L N u ? Lo C '° ? A? V ?? ? ^ A p? °o ?, ? E w rna v «c" r o«T pia a i ?E Q ? ? p C P io VVVO ^ N E ? q ? "i L C i F E u a 3? ° m o a r "? V ^ " T T > ? u°i u ° CL ?df ?LNm a i m€ L n a 5 -X Z! v q T h r 2 ll ! = o C rn i w E ? m `- o i u V u c U ,- u a S 6 N u u.. ^ L= a .-. c T E 10 ? ?i N u 0. V .^ T ?n ie L n p ? 0.T... i .c H of E au o N I4 ?. . } }?r sit: { ? a _ O T 0 10 1. e q ? ? u i a a moor.. U Srnc Ta "uuCvG ?a q ?tlN N o A qq « 6L gY a .. M m N w ^= P n L v T o S o ^ «? q?q . . gold . 0 gA ?m `? - «g? o u 14 Z un. j,:o d? aqq as =A4" ° v _ Ada O K Y« a>9A? v =? 10 g?° .,ga A? 4 Y- v ?? :: ° ?i V ?gv CH « u « u < q yy °? u u 4 M i c' ? o c i a N W? s 3 r: °m&? 8 «&I. `g? 2'.;i pia ?•o« 48 a ±? u Xoa ` O v2L w Y ar NgvBo ? a " C ?BT o? . u, a r VXF r N?Y.L P c `u , ?gqw8? m ^ u?or er? IN- $ t d r ?? JF 1 ? @ d ? u u r? ? Alit lsi 7 O `- c '9 ?dv° ? ? j y 5 J{ ?J F ? y u`? u? i:l 1' ? eat ? m o . -?^ ? wr+ x z6 Ho u .?vu ..ame? f It ? 7 ?? - ? J h I fa. T + C ? yTpp t "" ?1V,? h J . kt g 1 ?1 t+f ' J k t,.. 1 l ? J i 3 ,r? y ? oC 2a °o f", r ' Jefferson County Comprehensive Flood Control Management Plan The consultant will develop a comprehensive flood control management plan for Jefferson County's Big Quilcene River and the ` Dosewallips River. The following outline summarizes the major elements: t 1. Collection and review of existing information . 1.1 Collect and evaluate currently available information in Sys, terms of WAC 173-145-040 plan elements. - 1.2 Collect existing information of flood control systems that may apply. ' 1.3 Identify and compile existing and known flood problems for each watershed. 1.4 Prepare a glossary of common drainage terms to be used in plan. 1.5 Compile historical date on recorded flood damage for each drainage. Interview local citizens, review t existing records, and review historical reports and studies. f S 1.6 Project potential future flood problems, based on t <: r ar a " observation and historical information. 1.7 Establish goals and objectives for each drainage to ' .;{ determine drainage prioritized needs for flood control work. 1.8 Prepare an inventory and summary report of the most 1 ' significant and common flooding and flood-related v ? issues. ' 2, Evaluate Alternative Flood Control Work 2.1 Review the present state of in-stream structural " t m"+ technology to control and prevent flood damage to ' existing structures. 2.2 Analyze and compile appropriate structural and non- y` t " u u structural alternatives to in-stream flood control 7 ? work. { ? 2.2.1 purchasing and relocation p ti, µ T? SdY4?b X.._...:631ar" -..'S* _',- ST.AA iIf Ty'S.`„+4'n'ti ^TN_ 63u.§Ua '??r aY '? •` .. _ A 2A { _ 2.2.2 flood proofing S5, 2.2.3 structural work landward at high water line, i? 3. Evaluate Potential Impacts of Alternative Flood Control - Measures. 3.1 Evaluate feasible alternatives and the impacts to. 3.1.1 Fisheries and shellfish impacts; , • 3.1.2 Wildlife and game impacts; .; 3.1.3 Aesthetic impacts; 3.1.4 Water quality impacts. : v 3.2 Evaluate flood impacts of erosion, sedimentation, and % gravel transport. 3.3 Prepare a section on potential impacts of in-stream flood control work. 4. Draft Plan Review 4.1 Coordinate county, agency, and public reviews " throughout the inventory and plan development phases. 4.2 Conduct necessary meetings and workshops. 4 E 4.3 Prepare summaries of comments and written input. 4.4 Evaluate responses and integrate into plan recommendations. e " 4.5 Produce documentation of agency and community involvement. q 4.6 Consolidate analysis and recommendations from plan E 2 development phase and prepare draft plan. 5. Prepare Recommended Plane. lan to be writt il Riv r and A t f th Bi ? e p en cene e separa or e g Qu r the Dosewallips River and each plan shall include the f following items: 5.1 Alternative solutions and corrective actions for each drainage with the least possible environmental impact. 5.2 Recommend corrective actions that will have the least impact on items discussed in 3.1. {Y, s 5.3 A short-range plan and a long-range plan for each river. Each plan should have a priority list of corrective actions. 5.4 Listing of possible funding methods to accomplish both } ?is?? , % H?{?H ?? } f.???yfFl} ? I i t ?I r I? 1 Y? r I it f ? r° ?? t 1_ 1 \ r ?y}mti ? f ? 1 ? WWII F 5 ? 5 M1 7? 7 , } } yi t ? I ` t rl. >lr ,7y'? YiC ? i l f? ?F?? "f ' „ 'k 1r. a. U.. short and long range plans. 6. SEPA Review 6.1 Prepare state environmental Policy Act documentation on proposed plans. 6.2 Collect SEPA review comments and make necessary modifications to the plans. r log ii admin/floodbob ;- ,'4NDREA BEA7TY RINIKER Director x. ^ ? ? .W . ..+.r.:, 5ait. . RECOVED STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY JEFFERSON C0UNTY Mail Stop PV-11 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8711 . (206) ?Q%[PEERS OFFICE May 5, 1988 Robert G. Nesbitt, P.E. County Engineer Jefferson County Department of Public Works 1820 Jefferson Street s P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Re: Flood Control Assistance Account Program (FCAAP) Grant Proposal ) Dear Mr. Nesbitt: The Department of Ecology has reviewed and considered Jefferson Count 's ro d k t i y p pose wor ou l ne for a comprehensive flood control e' r - management plan for the Big Quilcene and Dosewallips River basins. Following are my suggestions for an estimated budget by major T.„ project element: i 1. Collection & Review of Existing information $15,000 2. Evaluate Alternative In-Stream Flood Control Measures $30,000 3. Evaluate Potential Impacts of Alternative In-Stream Flood Control Measures $15,000 4. Prepare Recommended Plan $20,000 $80,000 I understand that Jefferson County will be retaining a consultant firm to accomplish the plan. Do you intend to advertise a request for proposals or a request for qualifications? If a request for proposals is used to obtain a consultant, the grant budget and scope of work may be expanded or revised, if necessary, through a grant amendment process once a consultant is hired. I would ap- preciate the opportunity to attend the consultant interviews. Following are some preliminary suggestions or questions on the proposed work outline: Task One Subsection 1.1 should read: WAC 173-145-040 Subsection 1.3 refers to identifying and compiling flood problem information. What mapping needs or requirements are anticipated for the planning process? Malfunctioning drainfields and damage Robert G. Nesbitt, P.E. r L May 5, 1988 n ? Page Two to drinking wells have been identified as problems to be s .y k _ addressed in Jefferson County's Shellfish Protection Program . Grant. Please coordinate on the evaluation of these problems. Subsection 1.7 Goals and objectives of the comprehensive flood control management plan should be coordinated with efforts of ' the Jefferson County Planning and Building Department. Where applicable, advisory committees and ubli p c workshops can be coordinated to address the similar co ncerns of sedimentation, flood damages resulting in water quality degradation etc. , Results of the Jefferson County Watershed Management Action Plan, once completed, should be considered and addressed as applicable. Task Two a Non-Instream structural measures should also be addressed . Task Four SEPA review should be part of the plan preparation. Additional subsections could read as follows: Prepare State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation on proposed plans. * Circulate documentation for review. * conduct public meetings on proposed plans. * Collect review comments and make necessary modifications to the plans. B thi l q y s etter, the current Department of Ecology offer to Jefferson County for the plan of $24,000 is amended and increased to $60 000 with a twent -fi 25 , y ve ( ) percent local match. ; I look forward to meeting with you and Gary Rowe at your office on t Wednesday' May 11' 1988 at 1:00 P.M. If you have an Y any questions, please contact me in Olym ia at 206 R' p ( ) 459-6792 or SCAN 585-6792. Sincerely r 4"A & / iseR.,n dlette Flood Plain Management Section Shorelands and coastal Zone Management Program • n cc: Ed Hammersmith fir, , ^'m°°' ??-Art' cl ?i?ah '?9?gft•M1ia ?? ? 1?} g ?? I { ? I.:, 1 ???1', ? [? , .r t Lisa Randlette Department of Ecology Mail Stop PV-11 Ol i " ymp a, WA 98504 Dear Lisa, .ir I am sending for your review my planned work outline for consultant work on Jefferson County's Flood Control Management Plan. Please read it over and make any changes you think are needed. After you have reviewed the outline lea t p se con act me and at that time we can set a date for formulate the next step. e ., I now have four names of consultants that do this type of work. If you need any further information please feel free to contact ?`- me. Sincerely, Robert G. Nesbitt, P. E. d f f d County Engineer I xc: PWA 02 f 100% RecyOod Paper 9 y, 7. . Dosewallips River. The following outline summarizes the major elements: 1. Collection and review of existing information 1.1 Collect and evaluate currently available information in terms of WAC 1145-040 plan elements. p `F,-` 1.2 Collect existing information of flood control systems that may apply. 1.3 Identify and compile existing and known flood problems =3d ,... for each watershed. 1.4 Prepare a glossary of common drainage terms to be used in plan. 1.5 Compile historical data on recorded flood damage for each drainage. Review historical reports and studies. 1.6 Project potential future flood problems, based on observation and historical information. 1.7 Establish goals and objectives for each drainage to determine drainage prioritized needs for flood control work. 1.8 Prepare an inventory and summary report of the most significant and common flooding and flood-related issues. 2. Evaluate Alternative In-stream Flood Control Work 2.1 Review the present state of in-stream structural technology to control and prevent flood damage to existing structures. 2.2 Analyze and compile appropriate non-structural alternatives to in-stream flood control work. 3. Evaluate Potential Impacts of Alternative-In-slorean•Flood Control Measures. i . J'LI x ? sg ' 1 8FdP'? ?',? M __ •?a '{p 'Sf""' . 4 uk ?' t 1 ' ,? ? . i. . ?.? . a .. y? gg? (As n +??TT?d 4V ?."?F? "Cfi? .BbYliit? F Olt 3.1 Evaluate feasible alternztives and the impacts . 3.1.1 Fisheries and shellfish impacts; 3.1.2 Wildlife and game impacts; 3.1.3 Aesthetic impacts; F 3.1.4 Water quality im t pac s. 3.2 Evaluate flood impacts of erosion, sedimentation, and gravel transport. 3.3 Prepare a section on potential impacts of in-stream flood control work. 4. Prepare Recommended Plans. A separate plan to be written for the Big Quilcene River and the Dosewallips River and each plan shall include the following items: 4.1 Alternative solutions and corrective actions for each drainage. 4.2 Recommend corrective actions that will have the least impact on items discussed in 3.1. 4.3 A short-range plan and a long-range plan for each river. Each plan should have a priority list of corrective actions. admin/floodbob t i APPENDIX A ? Fl d `?-• 00 Control Assistance Account Program Grant Agreement PROJECT DESCRIPTION MUNICIPAL CORPORATION (Applicant): Whatcom Count r y GRANTEE: Whatcom County ?w W Project Title: Whatcom County Comprehensive Flood Control Management Plan for the Nooksack River, the Sumas River, and Lake Whatcom Drainage Basins Project Description: Whatcom County will develop a comprehensive flood control management plan for the one-hundred year flood plain of the Nooksack River and its three main tributaries, the Sumas River watershed, the Lake Whatcom watershed, and the defined and established limits of the drainage improvement districts, flood control zone districts, diking districts, and incorporated mu- nicipalities. A bedload study of the Nooksack River will assist the county in evaluating the rate of aggradation and in developing appropriate sediment removal practices. .P The Nooksack River, Sumas River, and Lake Whatcom Comprehensive Plan will be considered a component of Whatco C t ' m oun y s comprehen- sive flood control management plan. Any future grant agreements will require similar planning efforts fo d i r ra nage basins where Flood Control Assistance Account Program funds for maintenance projects are proposed. The following outline summarizes the major project elements: 1 - NEEDS DETERMINATION 1.1 Compile complete descriptions of the Nooksack, Sumas and , Lake Whatcom watersheds that will be addressed in the plan. Identify the one-hundred-year frequency flood plains and floodways or meander belts. Describe all Flood Control Assistance Account Program (FCAAP) recipient districts and municipalities and their relationship to watersheds. 1.2 Identify and compile existing and known flood problems for each watershed, district, and municipality. 1.3 Locate and map or procure existing maps of all previous fl d oo control work, depicting the extent and type of flood {j control work. A-1 ? a s. h 41 7-7.4 Compile historical data on recorded flood damage for each basin and subbasin or plan are a. Review historical reports and studies. 7 1.5 Project potential future flood s bas :d an observation and historical infor ti IS 1.6 ma on Identify and review statutes and regulations on flood control and flood plain management in What 1.7 com County. Establish goals and objectives for each plan area to r determine area prioritized needs for flood control work. ' X 1.8 Prepare an inventory and summary report of the most significant and common floodi ng and flood-related issues. 2 - ALTERNATIVE FLOOD CONTROL WORK 1.t ,. 42.1 ogy Research the present state of in-stream structural technol- S to control flood damage from liverse storm events. 2 t 11 Biotechnical engineering 2. L:2 Diversion and spur dikes 2.1.3 Alternative technologies y_ 2.2 Analyze and compile appropriate non-structural alternatives to in-stream flood control work i ` , ncluding flood proofing, flood preparedness and warning, and regulations . 2.2.1 Research existing local, state, and federal statutes applicable to development withi n the flood plain. 2.3 Prepare Alternative Flood control Work chapter. ?3 - ASSESS POLICY DECISION IMPACTS t3.1 Fisheries Impacts: 3.1.1 Examine various impacts of plan recommendations on fisheries resources. 3.1.2 Consult with the Washington Departments of Fisheries and wildlife durin the l g p anning process. 3.1.3 Establish policies which will maintain the 7 watersheds' fisheries resources, f" .2 Wildlife Impacts: 3.2.1 Assess any potential impacts of the Plan on wildlife and g k game resources. 3.2.2 Establish policies sensitive to the diverse wildlife within the various wat h ers ed environments. A-2 t J Implement policies which consider the natural aesthetics of riverine and riparian environments so that structural works , when necessary, fit into the landscape as appropriately as a possible. ,- x 3.4 Navigation: ' Develop policies which address adverse or positive impacts on river or-stream navigability: -.- R 4 /-3.5 Water Quality: Apply new and existing water quality standards to instream flood control works. Review and coordinate with Puget Sound Water Quality findings and needs. 7-3.6 Hydrology: Assess flood impacts of erosion, sedimentation, and gravel transport in the various watersh d d e s. Con uct a bedload study on the Nooksack Rivera 3.7 Recreation: 3.7.1 Design flood control works to enhance and contribute to recreational opportunities. 3.7.2 Consider policies which will assist in the procure- ment of flood prone lands for development of recre- ational activities. 3.8 Prepare chapter on potential impacts of instream flood control work. 4 - BEDLOAD STUDY OF THE NOOKSACK RIVER 4.1 Determine method of conducting bedload study. 4.2 Develop a request for qualifications or proposals. 4.3 Choose and hire a consultant to conduct bedload study. 4.4 Determine role of public works department staff in conducting bedload study. 4.5 Conduct bedload study and produce recommendations. 4.6 Prepare Bedload Study chapter. >15 - CONCLUSIONS AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS X-5.1 Prepare alternative solutions and corrective actions. A-3 on ,, il? ? i r r k5.2 Recommend corrective actions with proposed impact resolution measures mitigating the loss of economic and natural resources. *? X-5.3 Establish a priority list of corrective actions for each of L' the identified Plan areas. X5.4 Prepare short-term and long-range funding and implementatio n plan. V 5.5 Prepare Conclusions and Proposed Solutions chapter. ' s 6 - DRAFT PLAN 6.1 Staff and coordinate city, agency, and public reviews „rt throughout the inventory and plan development phases. 6.2 Conduct necessary meetings and workshops. 6.3 Prepare summaries of comments and written input. 6.4 Evaluate responses and integrate into plan recommendations. 6.5 Produce documentation of agency and community involvement. 's 6.6 Consolidate analysis and recommendations from plan develop- ment phasey and prepare draft plan. r -- 6.7 Develop recommended program into two categories: (1) early actions, and (2) long-range implementation program. 6.8 Prepare cost estimates for (1) and (2) above. t r k ' y 6.9 Print copies of the draft comprehensive flood control management plan. Project Completion Date: June 30, 1989 A-4 t. MAJOR PROJECT ELEMENTS 1. Needs Determination 2. Alternative Flood Control Work 3. Assess Policy Decision impacts 4. Bedload Study on the Nooksack 5. Conclusions and Proposed Solutions 6. Draft Plan ESTIMATED ELIGIBLE COST $11,500.00 $6,200.00 $4,400.00 $60,000.00 $9,600.00 $6,400.00 Total Estimated Eligible Project Cost $98,100.00 ?c Elm A-5 Sir ? ` ' } +. If l" a t+ 1 '? t ` ?'? IF ? H k7 ' `P , r i B •. 1? y % 4Y 'C c 4 ? I`? 1 1 w L.J APPENDIX A 0 Flood Control Assistance Account Program Grant Agreement PROJECT DESCRIPTION Y r?' 'r MUNICIPAL CORPORATION (Applicant): Snohomish County k GRANTEE: Snohomish County Project Title: Snohomish County Comprehensive Flood Control Management Plan for the Lower Snohomish River ,j Project Description: Snohomish County will develop a comprehen- sive flood control management plan for the Lower Snohomish River. The plan will evaluate the need for consistent levee heights and includes the area from the mouth of the Snohomish River to just downstream of the confluence of the Skykomish and Snoqualmie Riv- ers. The following outline summarizes the major project elements: 1 - COLLECTION AND REVIEW OF EXISTING INFORMATION Objective: To collect and evaluate currently available informa- s n tion in terms of WAC 173-145-040 plan elements and coordinate plans and information with other departments and agencies to minimize duplication of effort and focus on the most important items. e 1.1 Determine the need for flood control work in accordance with WAC 174-145-040 requirements. ? by r 1.2 Collect and review previously completed reports and studies p on the Snohomish River. V 1.3 Coordinate with other government agencies and departments to share resources and establish communication channels during r the course of the study. i Products: Problem identification and description for CFCMP, es- t lr tablish an archives for information pertaining to the Snohomish r River and the CFCMP, and intra-agency communication channel for k, collecting and disseminating information. 2 - PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM Objective: To solicit public and agency input for the comprehen- sive flood control management plan, educate the public on major issue addressed in the plan, and facilitate a consensus in support of the final document. A-1 ? r. a u, , 2.3 Coordinate the public involvement process with the Department of Planning and Community Development to meet goals outlined in Element Two of the Coastal Zone Management grant. t e o? q w. Products: Establishment of a public involvement committee that a will provide input to and review of the final comprehensive flood control management plan. ' 3 - RIVER CHANNEL, LEVEE, AND RIVER VALLEY FIELD SURVEY i Objective: To establish current levee heights and river channel ? cross-sections along the Lower Snohomish River for use in computer modeling of the river (Task 4) and to identify levee maintenance needs. Determine river valley elevations across the flood plain. 3.1 Establish permanent benchmarks on or near the levees to pro- vide constant reference elevations in relations to mean sea level. 3.2 Survey the top of the levees from the river mouth to river mile 20.5, the confluence of the Snoqualmie and Skykomish Rivers. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle Office, r will be task leader on this element. 3.3 Make soundings across the river to determine channel depth at selected locations along the river for use in Task 4. 3.4 Inventory levee conditions to identify maintenance needs and potential problem areas. 3.5 Using topographic maps produced by the Corps of Engineers in Task 3.2, draw river valley cross-sections perpendicular to the direction on flow in the flood plain. 3.6 Add channel sounding information to the river valley cross-sections to complete the cross-section profiles for use in the computer modeling of flood heights. NEW ?l a uP '? ! -? Y c e' 3.7 Compare current cross-section information and previously developed cross-sections used in the 1983 Snohomish River National Flood Insurance Study. River sediment aggregation and erosion locations will be identified, based on changes in channel profiles. Trend analysis will determine rates of change in river bottom sediments. Implications for future flood events will be evaluated. Products: Topographic maps of the river and surrounding flood plain, permanent benchmarks along the river, channel cross-section information, and a levee needs inventory. Coded river , cross-sections for use in Task 4, and aggregation and erosion lo- cations identified and evaluated for impact on future flood events. „ 4 - RIVER FLOW ROUTING,.TIDE ANALYSIS, AND FLOOD HEIGHT ANALYSIS objective: Route river flows from the upstream study limit (river mile 20.5) to the mouth and evaluate the effect of the tides on flood flows. Calculate flood heights along the river between the d ra mouth and river mile 20.5 for a specific level of protection, us- q ing current levee information. n 4.1 Calculate the Snohomish River flow rate (cubic feet per sec- ond) for the level of protection to be provided by the levees selected through the public involvement process and using the USGS streamflow data collected at the Monroe gaging station. 4.2 Route river flow down the river to the mouth with tributary flows added to the main river flow where they join to estab- lish the flow rate at various locations between the mouth and river mile 20.5. The Snohomish County Department of Public Works, with assistance from a consultant, will be task leader } on this element. _ 4.3 Evaluate the tidal influence of flood flows for a range of tide heights to determine the sensitivity of the river flows to tidal effects. The. Snohomish County Department of Public works, with assistance from a consultant, will be task leader on this element. 4.4 Select an appropriate computer model for use in calculating river flood heights. The Snohomish County Department of Pub- lic works, with assistance from a consultant, will be task leader on this element. 4.5 Input river valley cross-section information and flood flow data to computer model. The Snohomish County Department of Public works, with assistance from a consultant, will be task leader on this element. A-3 q 4.6 Run computer model and evaluate results. The Snohomish County Department of Public Works, with assistance from a consultant, will be task leader on this element. 4.7 Compare flood heights with levee elevations and identify levee reaches that do not provide the selected level of protection. Products: River flood flows at selected locations along the river between the mouth and river mile 20.5 for a specific level of protection. Computer output listing flood heights from the river mouth to river mile 20.5 and maps locating over and under pro- tected areas. s? 5 - IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATE ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS Objective: Create a listing of alternative solutions in terms of their effects on flood control in the Lower Snohomish River. Evaluate the flood control alternatives in terms of their instream and overbank effects and relative costs and benefits associated with each alternative selected for further analysis. 5.1 Solicit flood control solution ideas and suggestions from the group(s) established in the public participation process. 5.2 Collect flood control solution plans and recommendations from other government agencies. 5.3 Brainstorm flood control solution schemes in-house, working with staff and computer modeling consultant. 5.4 Assemble a composite listing of'all alternative solutions gathered from above mentioned sources. 5.5 Conduct a first cut evaluation of the alternatives to those judged to be most feasible in terms of engineering, political, and economic constraints. 5.6 Separate remaining alternatives into those that involve instream flood control work and overbank measures. 5.7 Evaluate all selected alternatives using the computer model of the river and previously selected river flows. 5.8 Evaluate instream flood control alternatives in terms of environmental impacts. 5.9 Determine the relative costs and benefits associated with the selected alternatives. A-4 ,i uc ?+ } A `F p r dTl' y Products: Listing of possible flood control alternatives A r ` '.' . written evaluation of each alternative selected as most feasible to implement. 6 - SELECT LEVEE DESIGN AND MAINTENANCE STANDARDS Objective: Produce acceptable and useful levee design and mainte- nance standards to be used by local diking and drainage districts in the building and repair of their l evee systems. 6.1 Assemble existing levee design(s) and maintenance procedures used on the Lower Snohomish River. 6.2 Collect levee design and maintenance standards information from other locales and agencies. 6.3 Evaluate levee designs and maintenance standards in terms of their political economic i , , env ronmental, and engineering impacts. 6.4 Select a levee design and maintenance standards to recommend to landowners and local agencies for future use. Y Products: A recommended standard design for levee construction and repair and maintenance standards for existing levees. 7 - DEVELOP RECOMMENDATIONS, CORRECTIVE ACTION PRIORITIES, AND FINAL COMPREHENSIVE FLOOD CONTROL MAN AGEMENT PLAN Objective: Develop a set of recommendations for the plan , prioritize recommended solutions, and produce a final comprehen- sive flood control management plan. 7.1 Assemble study results upon which a set of recommendations will be based. 7.2 Prioritize recommended solutions in terms of the need for corrective action, cost, and other constraints. 7.3 Write a report that will serve as the document upon which the r final comprehensive flood control management plan is based. ; Products: A finalized document that will be the basis for imple- mentation of the comprehensive flood control management plan. 8 - SEPA REVIEW + objective: Review the comprehensive flood control management plan in accordance with SEPA requirements. 8.1 Prepare State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation } A-5 wYw -: ?. 8.4 Collect review comments and implement necessa to the plan in accordance with S nt modifications EPA re environmental impact statement, quirements for a final ! Products: A comprehensive flood control management plan document that incorporates SEPA review c omments and actions. 9 - CFCMP ADOPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION Objective: Present the comprehensive flood control management plan to the effected political jurisdicti d a ons for consideration for option and implementation. 4 7 9.1 Present the CFCMP to the Snohomish County Council for formal hearings and the County's considerati . k on for adoption and implementation. 9.2 Present the CFCMP to other governmental or jurisdictional bodies for their considerati t,. on for adoption and implementation . •` 9.3 Present the CFCMP to the local diking and drainage districts responsible for the levee s along the Lower Snohomish River and monitor their consideration fo i r mplementation. P formall roducts: Consideration of an ordinance by the County Council plan o n the plan by the county local entities s e t o responsible rent levee system. for the cur- Project Completion Date: December 31, 1989 A-6 c' a b ANDREA REATTY RINIKER IM Director 9 t _ STALE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY A Mil Stop PV-i 1 • Olympia, lh:uhm9lon 98501-8711 • (?(b) 459-6070 November 17, 1987=? Robert G. Nesbitt, Director Jefferson County Department of Public Works / 1820 Jefferson Street P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Dear Mr. Nesbitt: I am writing to follow up my July 15, 1987 correspondence in which the Department of Ecology offered Jefferson Count fundin f d ,x y g or e- velopment of comprehensive flood control management plans for the Big Quilcene and Dosewallips River Basins. Since our meeting Au- gust 21st, I have not been contacted further regarding whether Jefferson County will accept the grant as offered or will be re- vising the grant proposal. As funds from the Flood Control Assistance Account Program are be- ing allocated for maintenance of flood control structures and com- prehensive flood control management planning, it is important that the Department of Ecology reallocate those grant funds which ap- plicants do not intend to execute. Please contact me by December 30, 1987 if Jefferson County intends to accept the Department of ` Ecology's grant offer of July 15, 1987. The offered funds will be - reallocated after December 30, 1987 if Jefferson County chooses 4 not to accept the grant or to submit a revised scope of work. s" w Please let me know if you have any questions concerning this mat- ter. My phone number in Olympia is (206 459-6792 or SCAN 585-6792. Sincerely, & eO? iRa Flood Plain Management Section Shorelands and Coastal Zone Management Program IS - m .w1 '?': _ tas e 3 I s y h ANDREA OEATTY RINIK[R ? ,., • + Di?eda _ STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Alai] Stop PV-11 • Olympia, Washington 98504-871I • (206) 459-6(N)O Ip? February 16, 1988 r'? .vc ?zV E- - Z !i jn n? Robert G. Nesbitt, Director - Jefferson County Department of Public Works J^^ 1820 Jefferson Street c lV?'l L" ter;=tCf P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 t r Re: Flood Control Assistance Account Program (FCAAP) >de Comprehensive Flood Control Management Plans Dear Mr. Nesbitt: Enclosed are examples of project outlines for the development of comprehensive flood control management plans. Represented are the jurisdictions of Whatcom County, Skagit County, and Snohomish County. This information may be of assistance to you as you de- s velop a detailed scope of work and budget for Jefferson county's comprehensive flood control management plan. Please contact me once you have had the opportunity to review these project outlines. I look forward to discussing your pro- posal and assisting you in determining a final scope of work and i ng budget. Please let me know if you have any questions concern this matter. My phone number in Olympia is 459-6792 or SCAN 585-6792. c iq sincerely, t o ) ?r ! ish'Randlette -`! Floodplain Management Section !' Shorelands and Coastal Zone i ^ h Management Program enclosure ) i a? .3r7 T M 7 ' G E Y ANDREA BEATTY RMER 'xi r? 'n DvMw f r F` ( ? f ? ' STATE OF WASHINGTON [jV I -. , , t L •? t ?- , ?,j DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mail Stop PV-11 • Olympia, Washington 98504.8711 • (206) 4596000 ' December 11, 1987 L.•v3; .,+_c _.<?, +. c mac ' _ ?, s ?sC4 Dear Potential Grantee Applicant: „S a' Re: Availability of Flood Control Assistance Account Program (FCAAP) Emergency Funds The Department of Ecology wishes to remind you of the availability of financial assistance for emergency flood control projects which may become necessary during the forthcoming flood season. The funds are available through Ecology to counties and other municipal corporations for flood control maintenance work. The information that follows summarizes the emergency portion of the flood control program. Criteria: The applicant must be a county or other municipal corporation responsible for flood control maintenance work. The project must provide a benefit to important and essential public property or facilities. The project must be done immediately to preserve life or property threatened as a direct result of unusual, unforeseeable, and emergent flood conditions. The work must be necessary to preserve or restore natural or man-made flood control facilities to their former nature. The work must be of an emergency nature necessary for reasons formally declared by the appropriate local authority. Administration: The FCAAP contribution shall not exceed eighty (80) percent of the eligible cost. Monies shall be made available on a first-come first-serve basis. Monies are paid on a reimbursable basis following construction. Procedure: It y Emergency funds will be made available for projects which have been given approval for funds by the appropriate representative of Ecology prior. to beginning construction. In the event of an „; &aad+y g, z;:;` emergency, the applicant should contact one of the individuals .4p.. Q'fAI?' i t?1Y?, 1`' 'f? ?- fio15ti5bwq .., r?r .,?.., LY wp+ )`ttSC+t r ;. 914 y?1 i"s' l ry + ? r I ?y R""4 t ,: k 1 r f ?? ftf L I ? qQ?4 f , tJ `. ? • .. -ilWV .. .._ _,;3 SYr ?I&L.whui. _'nwJ3 _.. ._ ^""J. IDn.°i:3?ti:, .ly?n, f•Y / `A H December 11, 1987 y Page 2 indicated at the end of this letter. If necessary, verbal ' approval may be given to the applicant by phone that emergency T funds will be available. The applicant will still be required to " La gym„ obtain the appropriate permits and authorization prior to construction. n' An application must be submitted through the County Engineer to z Ecology. The application must include the following information: Project Description' Detailed Cost Estimate Construction Plans and Schedules fh, ...p.; - Description of Public Benefits Copy of Emergency Declaration Approval of County Engineer ' Upon receipt of the application, Ecology will execute a written a t grant agreement with the County. Upon completion of the work, a .u final detailed inspection shall be made by the County Engineer along with representatives of the applicant and Ecology. Following final inspection, a voucher must be submitted through the County Engineer to Ecology for reimbursement. ' Should an emergency arise which is caused by flooding, or if you ' have any other questions regarding the Flood Control'ASSistance Account Program, please contact one of the following: DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY EMERGENCY CONTACTS; +?. Carl Glatze (206) 459-6776 (Office) and 352-5213 (Home) } Jerry Louthain (206) 459-6791 (Office) and 491-4678 (Home) Singe Carl Glatze, P.; Floodplain Management Section ?( g C; Shorelands and Coastal Zone M' Management Section CG:la ? .. N `M fie 3~ _ b ANDREA BEATTY RINIKER i Dirxlor '+Ve.+e'OY STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mail Stop PV-11 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8771 • (206) 459-6000 Lid July 15, 1987 Robert G. Nesbitt, Director Jefferson County Department of Public Works 1820 Jefferson Street P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Dear Mr. Nesbitt: The Department of Ecology has reviewed and considered Jefferson County's request for Flood Control Assistance Account Program funding for development a comprehensive flood control management plan for the Big Quilcene River and Dosewallips River basins. We are pleased to offer Jefferson County $24,000.00 in funding for the 1987-1989 biennium for the development of this plan. We recognize that the grant funds offered are less than requested r °-- by Jefferson County. You may wish to develop the scope of your proposal accordingly, taking into account the plan elements estab- lished in WAC 173-145-040. Please contact me at your convenience as to whether Jefferson County will accept the grant funding as offered. A detailed scope of work or request for proposals and budget must be submitted to the Department of Ecology. A grant agreement will then be prepared for signature, based on the scope of work and budget. Please let me know if you have any questions concerning this matter. My phone number is 459-6792 or SCAN 585-6792. Sincerely, e Li n lette Shorelands and CZM Program RE,CP Ll ?:I zh .JUL 1 G 1987 LPJGIiJcL•'r2a? Ul-1=lCE. .eia.. , 0 a K I .; t y' >, y 173-145-020 Flood Control Assistance (13) 'Meander belt ' . at portion of the flood plain, i that can be identified by the evidence of present and previous meanders. This shall includ th ?t e e present stream channel. Where there is no identified floodway, that area which is floodprone and has similar topographic charac- teristics to present and historic stream channels shall be considered as a meander bell. - (14) 'Public benefit." Benefit to the health, safely, or general welfare of the citizens of the state or community ?,. at large which results from a flood control project or 9y plan, or some benefit by which their rights or liabilities are affected such as an effect on public propert or f - Yr' 3 y a cilitics owned or maintained by an eligible municipal corporation. (15) Special district.' A district as defined in chap- ter 85.38 RCW which is either a diking district; a drainage district; a diking, drainage, and/or sewerage sY improvement district; an intercounty diking and drain. age district; a consolidated diking district. drainage dis- trict, diking improvement district and/o d i , , r ra nage improvement district; or a flood control district. (Statu- •Ya?." tory Authority: Chapter 86.26 RCW. 87-04-022 (Order 86-36) § 173-145-020 f l d 1 28 87 a ?r s , , i e / / ; 85-14-002 (Or- der DE 85-10) § 173 14 .. , - 5-020, filed 6/21/85.) WAC 173-145-030 Eligibility criteria for FCAAP funds. Criteria to be used in determining eligibility for FCAAP funds arc as follows: (1) Eligible municipal corporation. The applicant must be an eligible municipal corporation as defined in WAC 173-145-020(6). (2) Public benefit. The applicant must demonstrate that their comprehensive flood control management plans and flood control maintenance projects shall fur- ther the general public and state interest as differenti- ated from a private interest and that they shall bring about public benefits commensurate with FCAAP funds provided. (3) Comprehensive flood control management plan. The requirements of WAC 173-145-040 must be com- plied with by the appropriate local authority with flood control jurisdiction over the area where the proposed project is located. (4) Flood plain management activities. The appropri- ate local authority within whose jurisdiction projects arc located shall be engaging in approved flood plain man- agement activities as described in WAC 173-145-050. (5) Budget report. Any eligible municipal corporation seeking FCAAP funds shall submit its annual budget for flood control purposes to the county engineer within thirty calendar days after its final adoption.. The county engineer shall then forward the budget report for eligible municipal corporations and for the county to ecology. The information will provide the basis for preparation of a preliminary plan for the most beneficial and orderly allocation of FCAAP fund,. Sail conservation districts shall be exempt from the provisions of this section. (Statutory Authority: Chapter 86.26 RCW. 87-04-022 (Order 86-36), § 173-145-030, filed 1/28/87; 85-14- 002 (Order DE 85-10), § 173-145-030, filed 6/21/85.1 ICI. 173.145 WAC-y zl (a/ax/x7) I'•l ? r ta'? c _ i r ? of ?. i s; yeses ' a - - {itl f1.r? '. - }{ rt ? fill a t r .? N WAC 173-145-040 Comprehensive flood control management plan (CFCMP). The county engineer of the county within which the maintenance project is located must certify that the CFCMP has been completed and adopted by the appropriate local authority or is being prepared. Comprehensive flood control management plans, and any revisions to the plans, must be approved by ecology, in consultation with the department of fish. cries and game. The (CFCMP) must be completed and adopted within three years of the date that it is certified as being prepared. If, after the three-year period has elapsed, such a plan has not been completed and adopted, grants for flood control maintenance projects shall not be made to the county for projects by the ap. propriate local authority until the CFCMP is completed and adopted by the appropriate local authority. During the three-year period, projects within a drainage area, designated as the CFCMP study area, may be funded as part of a phased project plan, provided preliminary studies for the CFCMP have been conducted to identify the one-hundred-year frequency flood plain problem ar- eas, and factors contributing to flooding; and provided that the proposed projects have been prioritized to achieve the greatest efficiency in flood control for the overall CFCMP study area. These limitations on grants shall not preclude allocations for emergency purposes made pursuant to RCW 86.26.060. The appropriate lo- cal authority may require the applicant to fully or par. tially fund the preparation of the CFCMP. The plan must include: (I ) Determination of the need for flood control work. (a) Description of the watershed. (b) Identification of types of watershed flood problems. (c) Location and identification of specific problem areas. (d) Description of flood damage history. (e) Description of potential flood damages. (r) Short-term and long-term goals and objectives for the planning area. (g) Description of regulations which apply within the watershed, including but not limited to local shoreline management master programs, and zoning, subdivision, and flood hazard ordinances. (h) Determination of instrcam flood control work be. ing consistent with applicable policies and regulations. (2) Alternative flood control work, (a) Description of potential measures of instrcam flood control work. (b) Description of alternatives to instrcam flood con- trol work. (3) Identification and consideration of potential im. pacts of instrcam flood control work on the following in. stream uses and resources. (a) Fish resources. (b) 'r ddlife resources. (c) Scenic, aesthetic, and historic resources. (d) Navigation. (e) Water quality, (f) Hydrology. (e) Existine recreminn. >:1 Flood Control Assistance 173-145-070 ?'a (h) Other. (4) Area of coverage for the comprehensive plan shall include, as a minimum, the area of the one-hundred- year frequency flood plain within a reach of the water- shed of sufficient length to ensure that a comprehensive evaluation can be made of the flood problems for a spe- cific reach of the watershed. The plan may or may not include an entire watershed. Comprehensive plans shall also include flood hazard areas not subject to riverine flooding such as areas subject to coastal flooding, flash flooding, or flooding from inadequate drainage. Either the meander belt or floodway shall be identified on aer. ial photographs or maps which will be included with the plan. (5) Conclusion and proposed solution(s). The CFCMP shall be finalized by the following action from the ap. propriate local authority: (a) Evaluation of problems and needs; (b) Evaluation of alternative solutions; (c) Recommended corrective action(s) with proposed impact resolution measures for resource losses; and (d) Corrective action priority. (6) A certification from the state department of com- munity development that the local emergency manage- ment organization is administering an acceptable comprehensive emergency operations plan. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 86.26 RCW. 87-04-022 (Order 86- 36), § 173-145-040, riled 1/28/87; 85-14-002 (Order DE 85-10), § 173-145-040, riled 6/21/85.1 WAC 173-145-050 Flood plain management activi- ties. Local jurisdictions within which flood control maintenance projects are located, must be engaging in flood plain management activities. Pursuant to chapter 86.26 RCW the director of the department or ecology must approve the flood plain management activities of the county, city, or town having jurisdiction over the area where the project will be located. To be eligible for FCAAP funding the local jurisdiction shall be required to: (1) Participate in the National Flood Insurance Pro. gram (NFIP) and meet all of the NFIP requirements. (2) Restrict land uses within the meander belt or floodway of rivers to only flood compatible uses. Where applicable, adopted shoreline management master pro- grams will be considered a minimum land use measure. (Statutory Authority: Chapter 86.26 RCW. 87-04-022 (Order 86-36), § 173-145-050, riled 1/28/87; 85-14- 002 (Order DE 85-10), § 173-145-050, riled 6/21/85,1 WAC 173-145-060 FCAAP project application process. The project application process for the eligible municipal corporations' applications shall include the following in the general sequence given. (1) The applicant shall prepare the project application to comply with the provisions of chapter 86.26 R C W and this chapter. The application shall be made on a form furnished by ecology. A complete application shall include the following: (a) A written description or the project containing the following as a minimum: Name or applicant, name of p/a/ail affected water body, project summary, location, amount of local match, and proposed local funding source; (b) A detailed cost estimate identifying major project elements; (c) A map to identify water body names, stream river mile, section-township-range; (d) Construction plans; and (e) A description of the project benefits which de- scribe how the project will mitigate flood damages and describe development which exists on adjacent and nearby lands which are protected by the facility. (2) The applicant shall review the preliminary project proposal with the county engineer, the Washington de. partments of fisheries or game and the department of natural resources and any affected Indian tribes. (3) The applicant shall submit a prioritized list of project applications to the county engineer. (4) The county engineer shall submit a prioritized list of all project applications within the county to ecology. (5) The county engineer shall furnish evidence to ecology that the comprehensive flood control manage- ment plan described in WAC 173-145-040 is being pre. pared or is completed and adopted by the appropriate local authority or and the flood plain management ac- tivities described in WAC 173-145-050 are being im- plemented. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 86.26 RCW. 87-04-022 (Order 86-36), § 173-145-060, filed 1/28/87; 85-14-002 (Order DE 85-10), § 173-145- 060, riled 6/21/85.1 WAC 173-145-070 FCAAP project approval pro. cess. The project approval process for the eligible mu. nicipal corporations' applications shall include the following in the general sequence given. (1) Ecology will review all projects for compliance with the requirements pursuant to this chapter and chapter 86.26 RCW. (2) Ecology shall consult with the stale departments of fisheries and game in the development of a project priority list. The state department of natural resources, affected Indian tribes, and other affected parties may review and comment on the proposed project plans prior to approval. (3) Thirty days public notice shall be given that the project priority list will be the subject of a public hear- ing. Notice of this hearing shall appear in the state reg- ister pursuant to chapter 34.08 RCW. (4) The project priority list will be available at the flood plain management section of the department or ecology, at least fifteen days prior to the public hearing. (5) The public comments will be reviewed and ecology shall approve the project priority list as proposed or as revised in accordance with public comments. (6) Ecology shall prepare and finalize the written agreements with the counties. (7) The counties shall prepare and finalize the written agreements with the involved eligible municipal corpora. tions within the county. (8) The construction plans and specifications shall be prepared by the applicant for approval by the county engineer prior to submission to ecology for review and (Ch. 173-145 WAC-o 31 M 4 t ?N I 4 y y' irc &PJ a ?! 7 ? ? ?i1 t + Ji 1 ? } ?,81,7 L,1 ' h W' tN'?Nfi4'IL?'?Y?, '74 "'b`?.Iti?M4w,?hvµY\gYd't'L14 ' ! ti r, ? -y ? a 1 ? r < t ti t i it i? ,Ib ': ?;i',?t4 dty 4 - v titiiolf Y l ?f s T 1 It 11 C7 APPENDIX A U Flood Control Assistance Account Program Grant Agreement PROJECT DESCRIPTION MUNICIPAL CORPORATION (Applicant): Skagit County GRANTEE: Skagit County Project Title: Skagit County Comprehensive Flood Control Management Plan et Project Description: Skagit County will develop a comprehensive flood control management plan for Skagit County, including the in- corporated areas of Mount Vernon and Anacortes. The following outline summarizes the major project elements: k 1 - INITIATE DEVELOPMENT OF PLAN x1.1 Collect existing information on flood control and drainage systems. 1.2 Establish base mapping requirements. 1.3 Establish report graphics format. v1.4 Prepare a glossary of common drainage terms to be used in ' plan. A 2 - EVALUATE PROBLEMS AND CURRENT LEGISLATIVE RESPONSES 2.1 Identify regional drainage basins, subbasins, existing floodplain, and jurisdictional boundaries; including the meander belts or floodways of the Skagit and Samish Rivers, areas of coastal flooding, flash flooding, and flooding due to inadequate storm water drainage. .e. 2.2 Identify and summarize historical and potential flooding problems. -A2.3 Develop and prioritize goals and objectives. x2.4 Identify and describe existing flood control-related regulations. x2.5 Evaluate consistency of in-stream flood control work with applicable policies and regulations. 3 - EVALUATE ALTERNATIVE IN-STREAM FLOOD CONTROL MEASURES 3.1 Describe potential in-stream flood control measures, considering storm drainage policies, design criteria, and level of flood protection desired. A-1 3.2 Describe alternatives to in-stream flood control measures, ' considering existing and planned land use patterns, general siting, maintenance procedures, and sizing options. 4 - EVALUATE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE IN-STREAM FLOODF CONTROL MEASURES X4.1 Evaluate feasible alternatives in terms of environmental impacts (fish and wildlife resources; scenic, aesthetic, and histori ? c resources; water quality; future land use; . recreation and navigation). y 5 - EVALUATE AND PRIORITIZE PROPOSED STRUCTURAL AND NON-STRUCTURAL PZK . FLOOD CONTROL MEASURES L A5.1 Evaluate problems and needs. /-5.2 Evaluate alternative solutions. z5.3 Develop options with proposed impact resolution measures for ^ (S..4 resource losses. Prioritize alternative solutions 6 - . o PREPARE RECOMMENDED PLAN 4 X6.1 ? Prepare recommended solutions for each drainage basin.asd- d' subbas#n, considering the goals and objectives developed in 46.2 Task 2.3. c Prepare technical memorandum summarizing feasible alterna- tives s l t d A 6 3 e ec e for further evaluation. P ?o- . repare recommended policies for successful plan implementation. 6.4 Prepare recommendations for specific project funding. ?r r 6.6 Prepare an implementation schedule. Develop presentation material d an make public meeting presentations. Y6.7 Prepare a draft plan report for county commissioners s ' ,., -'e6.8 evaluation. Prepare final plan report incorporating county commissioner H;.'xr approved recommendations formal `-policies, ' ordinances, and development standards as the conclusion. 7 - ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS 7.1 Administrative costs include: salaries and benefits, supplies, travel, printing/copying, telephone, contractual services preparation, and indirect expenses. Project Completion Date: June 30, 1989 A-2 MAJOR PROJECT ELEMENTS 1. Initiate Development of Plan 2. Evaluate Problems and Current Legislative Responses 3. Evaluate Alternative In-Stream Flood Control Measures ESTIMATED ELIGIBLE COST $2,365.00 4. Evaluate Potential Impacts of Alternative In-Stream Flood Control Measures 5. Evaluate and Prioritize Proposed Structural and Non-structural Flood Control Measures 6. Prepare Recommended Plan 7. Administrative Costs, including Field Work Total Estimated Eligible Project Cost A-3 $7,495.00 $3,909.00 $4,684.00 $5,275.00 $5,586.00 $7,000.00 $36,314.00 ti. ` w fiyy? a. V ?, ,a h 4ta, Wr 14 _qp ;9?E? r r r r4 ¢ ? o t »` r '? i A tt 1 t ?k , y n "' J ?? 4 } r t4 'r REATTY RINIAER Dire, tor 7 O r j,? f t I-! i - STATE OF WASHINGTON, J` r, r1 r . DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mad S)op PI -11 • (lll rnpia E1 Nshinyl .n S(8i(4.1r 11 • (?(w,l b'r Gfrt pr June 15, 1987 Jefferson County 1820 Jefferson Street P. O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Dear Applicant: Enclosed is the 1987 - 1989 proposed priority list for flood con- trol maintenance projects for the Flood Control Assistance Account Program (FCAAP). Also enclosed is our proposed priority list for comprehensive flood control management plans. These lists will be finalized following a public hearing to be held at the Department of Ecology Headquarters, Headquarter's Office, Room 273 at 2:00 p.m. on June 23, 1987. If you have questions, please call me at 459-6776 or Lisa Randlette at 459-6792. Si/ry?Je?ely,/? Carl M. Glatze Grant Contras Officer Floodplain Management Section Shorelands & Coastal Zone Management Program CMG: la Enclosures 'r R J Jefferson County Big Quilcene and Dosewallips Rivers CFCMP Mason County Goldsborough - Shelton Creek CFCMP Benton County Kennewick Comprehensive Storm sewer Study (City of Kennewick) 473,785. /355,339./106,602. (G3%) 717,800. /500,000./150,000. (21%) 67,500. / 50,625./ 40,500. (60%) 170,985. /128,239./ 38,472. (23%) 50,000. / 37,500./ 37,500. (75%) 80,000. / 60,000./ 24,000. (30%) 40,000. / 30,000./ 12,000. (30%) 140,000. /105,000./ 21,000. (15%) 2 0 0 FCAAP 1987-1989 PROPOSED PRIORITIZED LIST FOR PLANNING PROPOSALS Co./project total/amt. requested/amt. awarded/% of project total Cowlitz County Lower Cowlitz Stormwater Drainage Plan 927,800. /695,850./200,000. (21%) (500,000.) Snohomish County Snohomish River CFCMP 308,800. /231,600./ 92,640. (30%) Skagit County County-wide CFCMP 36,314. / 27,235./ 27,235. (75%) Clallam County Sol Duc River CFCMP 60,000. / 45,000./ Bogachial River CFCMP 40,000. / 30,000./ Clallam River CFCMP 20,000. / 15,000. Quillayute River CFCMP 16,000. / 12,000./ Hoko River CFCMP 40,000. / 30,000./ Bell Creek CFCMP 10,000. / 7,500./ (186,000.)/139,500./ 55,735. (40%) Clark County Salmon Creek Area CFCMP Thurston County North County and Woodland and Percival Creeks CFCMP Grays Harbor County County-wide CFCMP Klickitat County County-wide CFCMP Mason County Skokomish River CFCMP 7 r ,y. jo' ?r r 159'x. FCAAP 1987-1989 PROPOSED PRIORITIZED LIST FOR PLANNING PROPOSALS Clallam County Dungeness River CFCMP. 60,000. / 45,000./ 9,000. (15%) Island County Deer Lagoon CFCMP 64,210. / 48,158./ -0- (-0-) Clallam County Port Angeles CFCMP (City of Port Angeles) 40,000. / 20,000./ -0- (-0-) 3 ?"- ? ?yy k }X^ f0 a t-:? ?^v?"?h t?r?A'?11?3 ???` ?i?y'" ? ?? a} .4'9?'91?i41 k?i',RN?'Zr (?iWW? ?4?k??d . rv.?,f'd?1 d 1a efq r'u,E1 M1tn ? n y,C?t'1: f°? ye ? ? A A}3 ?n i .S F .i. ,r ? r n T2 s d Z M N o V E .- o b ,: N Y M b W M Y N o A a v? » ? ? ? ? Y 3 8 8 M b ^ .- N V v? ? gg 9 U » » CC mGm » ! Yi m U e Yi 6 A U L ? L ? q L 2 p U u a 6 6 6 ? ^ N M V N b A b P ^ ^ ^ ^ .- .. ^ ^ b ® 0 k t I ,.fin r a M I P 6 !f j ^ tpO N i{ O r F eu C r u X N ? E O C t ig 1 q a M1 W ? ? K A v p p, } ^ ' a g aNi a B a c ° , " a u 'E Q ? l i r.?' ?--- u $ o S o a a m u Z m o ? ? r K N i m ?. m $ , o 8 i i c ? ?t n D ^ r M m ' d V .t N P ^ ? N n Y V N r A M t r i N i r ? ?? t 11 ?fi?' ? :, '}. N N N N XI N N N N I"1 M M ? M ? n M M 0 ® - 1 _h H ei: c L ? c $ $ .F S o 8 8 ® ? r + Py _t x t .. ? r ?h b: . vh- y3 c ? T ANDREA BEATTY RINIKER y, - ryC ' Director u _ STATE OF WASHINGTON ?1, DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mail Stop PV-11 • Olympia, Washington 98567-8711 • (206) 459-6000 May 22, 1987 Mr. Gary Rowe, Director 1987 Jefferson County Public Works ?., Courthouse JEFFERSC,N COUNTY 1820 Jefferson Street EPdGINE"EiiS OFFICE J Port Townsend, WA 98368 Re: Flood Control Assistance Account Program - Application submittal t Dear Mr. Rowe: a Thank you for your response to our re quest for submittal of ap- plications under the Flood Control Assistance Account Program (FCAAP). We have received an impressive number of proposals and other counties have indicated they will be submitting their ;z applications soon. Requests for over $5 million in state funds r have been received for flood control maintenance projects and com- prehensive flood control management plans. We are also anticipat- ing that additional applications will be submitted throughout the next biennium for work not intended to start on July 1, 1987 as was indicated in the enclosed February 20, 1987 letter regarding the FCAAP process for the next biennium. Because the applications for state funds greatly exceed the amount of funds we can allocate at the beginning of the biennium, it will be necessary to do a very thorough evaluation process to determine the relative priorities of the applications. Therefore, we have had to revise our schedule for review of these applications and p? have postponed the public hearings that were scheduled for May 28 and 29. The following is a revised schedule for applications to be consid- ered for funding at the beginning of next biennium. June 8, 1987 - Priority list available for review. June 23, 1987 - Public Hearing on priority list for fund- 4 ing, 2:00 p.m. in Lacey, Department of Ecology, faiti? Headquarter's Office, Room 273, Abbot Raphael Hall, St. ..........' , Martin's College Campus. .r -9.. , J > 0 Mr. Gary A. Rowe May 22, 1987 Page 2 2 . June 30, 1987 - Deadline for receiving comments. July 6, 1987 - Ecology sends grant agreements to counties for signature. During the time period between now and June 8 we will be continu- ing to evaluate the applications for eligibility, consulting with the departments of fisheries and game and contacting applicants for any additional information needed to develop our proposed project priority list. The priority list will include our pro- posed funding amounts for projects and comprehensive plans and will be available by June S. At the public hearing on June 23, we will explain the basis for our proposed funding levels and oppor- tunity will be provided for applicants to supply any additional documentation on their applications. Please contact Carl Glatze regarding applications for projects or Lisa Randlette regarding applications for comprehensive plans if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jerry L. Louthain, Supervisor Floodplain Management Section Shorelands & Coastal Zone Management Program JLL:la FCAPAPPL Enclosure: February 20, 1987 letter Vii:' i r -P r a ? ANDREA BEATTY R"KER WIN r° Di w. STATE OF WASWNGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mad Stop PV-11 • Olympia, Washington 96564-8711 • (106) 459.6000 February 20, 1987 Dear Potential Grant Applicant: Enclosed is one copy of each of the following for your information and use in filing applications under the Flood Control Assistance Account Program: - Program Guidelines - Fact Sheet - Chapter 173-145 WAC - Application Form - Certification Checklist kr2' - Budget Information (Sample) The enclosed copy of Chapter 173-145 WAC is the final version which was adopted January 27, 1987. Please discard any previous editions of this regulation. The following is the schedule for applications to be considered for funding by the beginning of next biennium: * March 31, 1987 - Deadline for submittal of prioritized applications by counties to Ecology. • April 13, 1987 - Ecology review of applications for eligibility. * May 13, 1987 - Priority list developed by Ecology and available for review. * May 28, 1987 - Public Hearing, 2:00 P.M. in Yakima, Department of Ecology Regional office, 3601 W. Washington, Conference Room 1 * May 29, 1987 - Public Hearing, 2:00 P.M. in Lacey, Department of Ecology Headquarter's Office, Room 273, Abbot Raphael Hall, St. Martin's College Campus * June 15, 1987 - Ecology sends grant agreements to counties for signature. + July 1, 1987 - Earliest date Ecology signs grant agreements. Applications will be accepted throughout the biennium for grants not intended to start on July 1, 1987. The application form should be reproduced and a separate application form submitted for each application for a non-emsrgeney project or an emergency project. The application form may also be used to apply for grant assistance to develop a comprehensive flood control management plan. All applications must be submitted through the appropriate county official. ,a}.. lbi: page two February 17, 1987 A condition of all grant agreements during the 1987-1989 biennium, tification relating except those for emergency projects, will be a cer to the development of a comprehensive flood control management plan within three years from the date of signature of the grant agreement by Ecology. The enclosed certification checklist is to be used for s this process. The scope of the plan and the time schedule for the local authority ed b lo b d i y eve p e ll completion of the plan w responsible for preparation of the plan. Department of Ecology staff will be available to assist in this process so that agreement can be reached prior to certification by Ecology. Once a completed checklist is received and approved by Ecology, conditions related to the comprehensive flood control management plan will be incorporated into the grant agreement. The date of certification will be the date . r, of final grant execution by Ecology. No grant agreements, except for emergency projects, will be signed by Ecology for the 1987-1989 biennium until the certification process is complete. Since funds from this account can now be used to assist local governments in the preparation of comprehensive flood control management plans, and development of these by counties, cities, and towns is a condition of receipt of state funds for non-emergency projects, the Department of Ecology is placing high priority this biennium on providing funding assistance to local governments for development of their comprehensive flood control management plans. You are therefore encouraged to assign a high priority to development of your comprehensive plan during the next biennium which ends on June 30, 1989. If you need state financial assistance in the development of this plan, please include this as one of your applications for the next biennium. Please contact Carl Glatze at (206) 459-6776 or SCAN 585-6776 or Lisa Randlette at (206) 459-6792 or SCAN 585-6792 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jerry Louthain 4'.. x Flood Plain Management Section y Shorolands and Coastal Zone Management Program Enclosures -3, k,- •a ?n ? - % tJ))J ANDREA 6EATTY ttWIKER DirMOr '+'..,n+o ??d7 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY ;, y..,....' Mail Stop PV- II • Olympia, Washingron 985(4.8771 • (206) 459.6000 . NOTICE A - Drafts of detailed program documents and a second draft Executive Summar ' ' - y of the State/Environmental Protection Agency Agreement (SEA) will soon be y available for your review. To get a copy of the summary or the program document for your area of •F 'A. interest (air, drinking water, dangerous waste, or water quality ) , con tact 5 ?. ? y co ? o'" l +? Linda Vinson D f E l aU epartment o co ogy telephone 206/459-6145.Y?Adu>7 (t)/? •VNt.L6a? - You are invited to comment on the proposed agreement at a public hearing June 2, 7:00 p.m. Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council Hearing Room . ?;;?;:,• 4224 6th Avenue SE, Building 1 Lacey. 1 k '£ , _ If you are unable to attend the hearing, please consider sending your written comments for the record. Written comments will receive the same consideration as testimon r t d t th h i Y t y p esen e a e ear ng. our comments should be addressed to - u Karen Johnson n E r Er;I V E D .; r Department of Ecology Mail Stop PV-11 [U'f 5 1997 Olympia, Washington 98504-8711. ,. JEF7i-:'..^:0i! G4 tJT?ITY : ` ?A Nv Written comments will be accepted until June 5. GiVGiP<'=i%t'1 UF:'lCt: A final version of the agreement will be prepared following the public comment period. The agreement should be signed and in place by early July. Questions on the SEA process should be addressed to Karen Johnson, telephone 206/459-6148. .rq. c r n' ?; f LL: •' >i 31L: IF ?f•ta 1 919 I ? I .4 ! ? j 1r i xj u A n - [ Grnyarc P.G.-x944 REPLY MESSAGE Re01dE, CT 08104 Fold A1(1) To Fit G-all W In00W EnvoloPO X EW10P CALL TOLL FREE:1.800-2 5]50 REORDEN ITEM X F72 FROM JEFFERSON COUNTY - " " Department of Public Works TO Courthouse PORT TOWNSEND, WA 95368 (206) 385-3505 SUBJECT. DATE: --- ? FOL 4--CWLPS-.... _.L?i?C,ING?ILS.-.__.frYGG _?E / L?-` - --- GtJE1? ._? 3 df•in. - " ltJ?..r/dEp,.-?°-__,G?.llo?J_. f?/..1tA,ly?._.S?i?o-??s u,?-/J?!?E -4[!fliG- --- " F?-9o0 __ F+Gr?T A?LE? - - ---- PLEASE REPLY TO -?+ SIGNED Q S s a.JL Q REPLY. 9QO7 / ? // H " `n :t, ISr yt a A a wy DATE: 9? SIGNED , C+ - r' 2 11dn• Fla V Wnaelp G1.F lnc. 1918 THIS COPY FOR PERSON ADDRESSED DETACH THIS COPY-RETAIN FOR ANSWER. SEND WHITE AND PINK COPIES INTACT. 1 1 w1 > r VI r r'•.Yt???Y ?l+ .?''J..h ?Lf=1'1:94 It'.:+LU'-...?D'Y??1?u'SAM4.$'v'`??'.'C.o.?????? . M v / F / y t 4.. 4 rrn M Nm m V ri M a N nrn n r m .in m an w co o am o in m f 7 1 .o-I rn c c c, In oo h r m Ln r m v lo W n In H N M ri co co m M O 1 ? ?: 61 ",? I I I I 1 1 I 1 I I I 1 I I I a1 01 W w w r N M w r n M N r N C .•i w, ) = lo to r, w co Ln co co V. w w w sn ui co n w w n In r sn In n m m rn w v v co ui a) ? x lo Lo w m o 0 0 00 0 o o o of o am o w i O O O O O O O O O O C. O O O O O g m to to Ifl to N Ifl N an to V•1 u'1 V N N N .?1 O O V' M m .-I H .1 -1 H N yy . Ol of n n M M O O O w w ri t!•1 r-I ri Ifl to I df?? O O r-i r I (N N H H r-1 r-1 M '? M N r n i-7 O O V' V' m co r- M M N N c V' v o) m m W M n n h N N E 1 1 1 I I 1 1 !b I r-I I r I tT I M I I I w l I I XI m Ol M M t1.1 lfl w V' w in w r•1 M ri M w r V' N H .--I N N 01 rn 4 in in V' V V V' CO NCO NCO M V'w V'N w w N MInM MM 30 ww NN vi in In xIn xui x m xai x rn w ?r %c x ww # oo clo rnrn o o o a c 0 w oo - - 0O 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 ?,, In 1fl to In 111 l/7 l11 In In I!'1 Ifl lfl Il'1 N N N N f 4 U1 44 X h4 44 X W N N X .4 N V4 X 4 V4 X X VI 4 X Z X X X X X 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 N 4 4 H 4 4 4 4 ? pq, U 33 33 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 33 p s? O C O U U U v a) U U U U U U U O U U U F U N •H -,I •r1 -r1 G ..i -ri •ri •.i H ..{ .ri •H _4 .ri •rl & rl ri ri '•i •.1 •rl r-1 r-i ri r•i .-{ .-i ,.G-1 .-i rl ri r-I a 7 G C 7 PI V, ? 7 y 7 7 7 7 ' 0 i 4 as W43 w a V, w a w a w w 134 P4 U b n Vl U1 y O Id r,II 4 C W v 0 ) w °n >4 4 rI N 4j r-I m .X U Ili Iy •r1 •.i v .L.) rd 4 (L) di -•i r w 4 N d+ bi X r-I 4 ,C 4 A O = 4 'd •ri t) O N 0 4 ro (4 U N 1) U r-i O (a a) v 4 N E `. a •4 IU x Q b ro ro •.i E E w rt 3 •? i v) E G) V) O N E [A U •r(n i £ W TO., 4 U' 4 a ai C -,1 H C E > I-1 N H 14 H b a O > q O w z G) 4 C) V •rl 4 0 G) •4 It L? N b ri ro rd a) 3 ?C W£ q h W E E Id z a r.7 A R'. 0 q e•;; i as wa as a a a a Q a a a a as 3 ro U > 41 4 tix 1 ,, >? 4J aJ C .C C 91 i s 4, G 7 7 v .i CI O a oo 1 &+.7 U W W W U E U } O 0 0 O C id .-1 '4y%99itt °?7 f 4j 4j ?4 ro ~ X x 0 4j 4j U DC Q ) V U ?.I r%1 :° U U U U r1 z ?t - %D N r-I w ID V' co r O D1 0% O •-i W •-1 O Ill r In r1 Dl •-i •-i co W Dl ID V' m V' N lD l0 W O V' V 111 W N m ID V' to .--I (n N +1 V' O 1-1 ll-1 M M •--1 N O lD V' W M V r N -W CO M M M .•i ri In N V• V' Ill v W O I 1 N N I I In h I I V' In 1 n 1 m I in I 1 r r I I M M 1 to I I V' 1 In 1 I ( 1 e-1 N co W IN N r W V v ' r- h r V' t0 m to n -W r N W M M c!' In o r r r r In 111 lfl o o co W r h r r, N N l0 N W I - I O .T. O1 O1 lD ID OI O1 01 Ol O1 D1 O1 01 01 O1 D1 O1 O1 ?D 1D 10 Id W £ - + O O 0 0 O O O O O 0 0 O O O 0 0 O O O O _ lfl 1l1 N N 2i U2 111 Ifl i2 n N 2 l11 !2n i N N N yq P V' N O O O •-i ••-I N V' V' i --I •--I m Ol O H 1-1 IN 1-•1 N H N N I 1-4 -1 In M W 1 7 m 111 m M 0 0 M M In 1l1 V' w •--I H m •-i •- • 11'1 I V' M 0 O CD .--I O CD O N n M M M i- W - N cq N N M m 1-4 In M M M n M M M 1-1 N N N 'V' h r ['1 1 1 I I I I I N I ll•1 I I I I I I In •• 1 In 1 tD I I •--I I ?G N N r h a V' in N In In In In 111 M M V V V ' H V' r i V' •-- H I 01 OI M OI M M _ - 1-I O W W M m r r In In W W co co r N r N h r x r x r M tf1 Ill co co I- M p) 11l V' 111 V• x ror x r x N N r M r m lD M \D x y 00 to ti 1 ID 10 00 N N 00 1f1 Ill 0 U'1 0 III 0 l1l 00 tf1 I/1 00 1f1 1f1 o 1(1 a•o V' Ifl 0 U•1 0 N 0 N 0 N -q ? .... .... .-...? r. ... .-. ... .... In ._. .-. -ipr ? i .: 1 to O LW to O H > a H N Q i -1 E 1-1 ` fa u 3 I.i N 3 N p k L13 u S $ 3 w w w u W W W w W aJ w W a) a) a) W a) C W W U (D 440 a) x W a) W a) U U a) a) a) - ?a C C •.I •rl •i • C '-I •.? •'I •.I r i YI r- W •'1 w C C .1 ••i • 14 •'1 1 LI b4 YI (u •.-I ri 0 •'i ri -1 •-1 C •'i C •.i - Q C C 7 C ,, qq 7 C O J: C C E C E . 7 O C C C _ W W 01 W W a w v rn w w W w a a w w w ?< I h 1:. En W C 0 c (d H x U N C - ro N >r b rd i •• i •• a) of >I Id ?- :i 3 .-i >a •.I 01 tia .? 3 x w it c N ro E } v ro W W In m O U M rl 01 r•I.,i a) •-1 N a) b -I r'1 O H W N N 4J E C W 7.1 LI '•i •.1 •.i C C W ro 3 - (d r- a) .I CO aJ 0) rd 0 0 •i >1 H 7 a) Ia 1-4 D4 $, ? E C7 W pa >a C $4 •.i 0 1J 3 W •-1 C 7 co ro w W ?C W W u rl W o-7 x x O a a) S (D C1 a) H R > >I N N 7? a f w E H A ° rl ro C C U 0 41 w d) C U F?. J4 > "4 + z C%7p mm mA w Q Q w an m E a a a as as aQ a a a as as a Q a a ?a a '' 4J >I > C J 41 0 :j r C: U 41 O Y U O 0 U U C 7 co i U U 7 7 A O \ roi N N U ••i ri U x U \ 41 ro X W 14 t1 H i >1 m •• i w 11 ro N ro r H i • 7 3 CC w W H U 8 U !] C. 0 v 0 q m00 mmN N 1D n m N U) mVO In N Nr co mr-U'1 m m O •-i Ol ID d' N N O VD 1-4 r- co O r m O •-1 Ol I? 1-1 C C O •-i m 00 N (7) m m N C m -4 r- 171 M 1` ON M w O [? 1- IA N -i C V' N m 1, N m \D N 'r N Ul N M ri O 1 I ,n 1n 1 1 1 171 c m I - 1 N 1 to I Ol 1 I I m 1 I VD m I m rn 1 I N I 1 tD N I N I I r- I!'1 M m co 00 m m N Vr N V' r. C - (" 1 N w m m N V v V' m m co r- m m m m m 1` 1. 1` 1` 1` N C O) v m v v 0) ? O ^ ro x 3Z3 m CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m 0 m m 0 0 CD 0 C a 0 00 N N 000 N N N 0 N 0 N 0 2 0 11"1 0 V1 0 N 00 N N 0 11l 00 N N 00 1I1 N 0 N 0 2 171 N O .-i Ln co O O •--1 -4 N .-i v m 1-1 O O O O 1-1 1-1 ri O m N m Ln w ID rl rl N N m 1` C I, n U) u c m m U) 00 tf1 171 O M O co co O ••-1 N r O ? \O M rn m r r t•l O N N N Ul I. w v m co C• I- m a, m m LD M M ,]4 I I U) Ul I I 1 U'1 V' t') I Ul 1 VD 1!) I I o N O N O I M O I m t"1 1 I 1D m I 1n 1 1 t` h 1 1 N N I U7 uS I? I I m !` r I w m m nC m N lONmN [? C.i IN N NN NN [? CCa 1 O m m N m V w m m DC m x r- r x r? l? v 'C C' v co Y. C V' H 3 O m co m et m 0 CD CD 0 m m m 0 m m 0 0 CD C)0) 00 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 00 00 0 00 N N N N N N N m V Ul N v N U1 N N V U1 ?. N U) w N w N to to w w w • •ri U1 w •ri w w w •H •.i w w w •.I 9.54 ?S X 41 > X ?G > ?G A4 ?V > > X X .1: > w w w w E w w w w w w w w w w w w w 0 0 0 0 0) 0 O O v O 0 0 N U 0 0 O N 3 3 3 3£ N w 3 3 In 3 3 3 14 17 w 3 3 3 m? ti C U U U U U) U U U U U (1) U U U Q) O •.I ••i ••i •.I U1 bV C •'I •'i O •ri •.i •.I C CI M •'i •.I •.i d1 C ri •i ri ri w w •'I r-I ri w 14 r•I r-i •.i w H 1 r-I . ri w •.i Q 7 7 7 E O G ? 7 OJ ? 7 G N U q 17 7 F W as a0.1w r w a a s DI Di w r as a ? C. w O 0) w 41 u 4 0 4 h •a r. x-1 1 O) A .14 .C w a) w H 0, w •,I w w ri w w w a) w .1r 0) IT C C V 44 r N U W N G) CT 'd I U .-1 0) (1) U C ro ro ro ri r-1 •.1 > z O ri in T 0 z ri w E 0 0 w •d + ro ro ?i •.i U a 1-i >I o d m N U ro •u 7 U w >I H 3 r1 2 1 (d b r F lJ 3 w Ul 0) rd m 0 O .I. 3 w ro m - C 0) E w U .•i >1 Y4 w rl W N >1 w m Ea .1G w U >1 x w C 71 w ri U ri ,C C C rt1 A w w E .-1 .i C C A w E w O (t) w r C U .4+ a Q Z 0 M A M co F ID £ W N r4 h h 5 w 0. h h CQ U 14 7 1 U as as ¢ a a a a w a wQ a a,a as w as 4J ro 0 > i 41 41 0 y U ? JJ >1 G 7 p C C .0 O L a.l 7 0 >1 41 C >1 C O 1 .. U >1 ro C O U 11 C C A O 7 1 1 -1 co a? ••i C y C w N C O U A C 7 U u O u C 0 U O u r .i \ U O 7 U w rd 0 O C O) .-1 w 0 w ro 1J U w C U ro u w \ w u 0 a +? H 0 r, T •11 0 ri " c U w 17V >1 ro w •.1 4J .14 U w • 4 >1 O U G, 0 O C w H •-i ro y W C .u 4 4J ••i 3 41 C w ro U C r? 0 U .1 .i .1 .1 •-i 0) .i •11 it ?C ro N W u n a4 x x a la 2. 0 a a Q ? 1. ?a 1 - t R i ) 1 fRI 1 1? L I r 1 ? ti r 1 44 ? 1 It •l I •1 i k 1 }? V ')''r r j a .?. ?.? r . ' ' 1__ __ .• . 'A J 331st ,m..e II l0 m 4 co ri 03 •-i N W W e H W 01 ID r ID 10 0 In Ol rn rn Ln Ln - m m U N o r m m m -Cl. In C w V' o V' to o o N o W \O ' i •--I W 4J m N V m r 4 10 ri N -1 m ri V' V' 00 m 1n o W r ID ro Ln ID O w N . MV' m m m m m co V MOO of 00 m O I 1 a I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - N N 1 A N N co o C r- 1 V' Ol In 00 r V' V' In m m N fV m m r N m m m m N N N N r ' m 111 m m 01 W N N N co ' V' Q) l co co 0l p Q co co O r m V' m r m V' m V' m V' V m m m m V Nrn . x o l \ ? Omm om cm m m p c mmm a ? ',.. Lo 0 LD L) o-11 0 I 0 D 0 0 D 0 I s s 00000000 0 0 l 00 000 si N N ri N N N N N N N N N N N N N I!1 1I1 N N 1f1 Ifl Ifl 04 co 1n m •--I ID .--I • co V' o o m o mom ri r-I ' V' V' V' V' V' 000 I - ' O r-I m ID N m 1D to I! 1 r CO m ri ra O 0 0 0 0 0 0 V V' V' V' V' V' V' V •-I V r-i m m V' V' N N N W m . l0 V' lD In In N m rn rn rn rn rn rn Ln In rn rn N N N E 1 I i ri I I 1 1 1 I I I I 1 1 1 i co I m 1 I 1 l l I I I ''4 • m N of N N m r? . W l0 l0 . . lD V' V' 1 r of I' l I' l l0 l0 lD 1 w 0 of to N of co 00 w 00 m In r m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m N N N N V' 'K V' 'f. Ifl m N N Ln In 111 V' V' V' - 3 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 0 CD 000000 0 000000 m 0 m 0 0C 00 mmm 000 N N N 0 N N N N N NNNNNN In tf1 N N stn lfl ,' 1, - .... `. ?.. ._. ._. .? `. ._. ........._.... ?.. ... .... v ... ? v v v /.' v a a uou U - > ••-I E E U) U) N N N Vl N .11 •1-1 •.i ; O H L a > 14 it H L H X H X H X L L J-1 H E E E x H x H X X 11 14 >>> w H w i . ? 5 a H N q a) In b ro 0 3 0 3 0 01 01 b x £ o 3 0 3 0 o 3 3 u 1v Q) m Ul In ,. U C O q q U U U U 0 U U 0) H U OI •.i •rl •'i m t OI •rl •rt •ri •rl bI m b A V F. a N •rl H O O/ .i .i 1-1 H w H cu 0) 0) ri H r-I ri 4 Q :3 H H H (D a) 0) 5 _ a 0 a r w w Al a a r r a a PI 04 w o 0 f o tr m v o U " ` V) Qi G' x C H C1 H C a G ro C w 4 10 0 W4 1n G' p ?. •r1 H ro r w N 0 A ro ro U (D U) 3 () 3 v w >+ O 3 U) Id z > (a X U) W 3 r•1 .i O> N w W 7 Y CJ F. 3 fzr O N ri GI •'i , - Q) N >r U 'fir 14 Z N u O b ri U) •r1 ; E td I U > m E H H r-I w d 10 H H Z w C E C ro 11 w •rl > ro x H U H E H L Z F A U m ) h P R ,I Q n a £ 3 H W. A N C I r4 a a a a a a a a a Q a a a wa aaa rd a / J .y; }? , ?L 1 a >I a a >1 L ` k ya, 7 ' L N r-1 co G) G E o r 0 >I u L q 7 o L q - ` 5 L G• w >r u o C. o u U 0 o r m k H :3 0 H 7 P? y ro E u o o Om u •'P? u b U ro u f W W W W P .r1 C nH E (U c H j • O O O O O O L ro o ro i y ? 1? I C u H >r >? ',+? >I h r, OIL E F.' X { u rwpu,C r 4 a Y 7 o u U H CL. L • 4 u L r u L 4 u L H C ro In ro W x ro Lo - tdd x In O r m O a rn A . . 1l I k: a 4 ' W N0O w1n C N tD hm v hm m 1-1 o mC•v in m m co CO In m 01-4 .-I tD r o m m o N co r1 O m N c0 w n O v o ,-I N In oo Er to m c v O m . a) 44 44 tD tD tD 1 1 1 h co I I m tD 1 m m.-1 ID 1 1 1 1 m m 1 1 N I N I m mIn?q I I 1 1 U En 09 C 3 0 r Ea v c m In m •a m •--i ?o h m N N m h m m rtl d O J-I In co m m L n C m r4 m m h h m C m m L n 1 n L n v a a >, C+' to h tD h m h In m h to W M In m m V C V N to W U E Q) -4 M 0 _, _? r 0 0 o r l q 34 a) 4J w ro o o 0 o 0 o o Cl 0 o o 0 0 0 o o w as w tnlnul N N .N.. v N N Nv v` v ???? 0 44 O W Q + U co co a O In 1-1 -4 o m '•i -4 N N to .-i -4 m ri '-I a) O C m vroo m m o m In Co o NN to N Inm Into En E 4J to If) m • r a to c c to ut m m N m r h W a lD tD lD tD ID 'C - N C' In N 4 r-1 '•i '-I •C v v C W m C 044 C•. I I I I I I I I 1 1 1-I 1 1 i N 1 1 I 1 I 44 44 •r1 O -H En X v C C w ID In h . tD to v h h r N N In In to u•1 .r1 O In 4j 1 w co cc) co 03 co m N hhh m mm mNm r- r- r- r- li •H N 11 o o w Cn tD h h h In tD to t0 ro m m m X m In m Ln In O a) > 1:1 Ill W 3 w N :A o £ H m m m ID ID t0 m w ID w m m am m m m am m g 0o0 In to Ln 00 N 0 V 0 y ooCD N N N 0o Inv 0 lf) o Ifl ocoo Ifl to to In II m EW ... * 4J O, N o N N O O w C a) (1) 44 U H NN V)N U •.i Y4 N L) •H Mw En to a) bWH4 XX XX > a) X > XXXX Q)W C li 1-I 00 1-I LI 0o Y4 m C. o >a o i4 (1) )4 W ,U )d 0000 r4 o 4J a •.+ 0M 3 3 Ol 3 3 14 w $4 Li In w •r1 3 a7 3 3 3 3 a.u la a) U C a) a) a) O a) En E C A m C a) U U •?-i •11 •H C U U -i •rl () a a) C 0 a) C C tT a) In C -4 U •H T U U U U 11 •11 •H •.I • O a) C ro U E O C A £ Q z 7 rl 7 y C C G 0 E OE C O 9 U 7 7 7 a) (a a) awa GL P4 W W W W W WU W aanla 0 O A In U 1) Q a) C N mC. b -ad) 1; w ,C N 14 0 En H 4J 414 1 .1 U) a) t7) E to G Y4 a) H O W O O ri U I1 rl C a) C W N N C N C a) 4j ul b w >, 1-I 7 al Q .11 C •11 an E O E w X C C w 41 a) U m m L •H 4J 4a I X.Cz a) U roa) U U ••1 m 4J Crom a) :z c rorl u C X m 4 i) W4-j En b b G II ND1(d OC '1 910 m Cao .'1 r4 In x o v ro m EOC 40 Q aW aaN 3 Y4 N w a C m c 7 (1) () w O> C O d) E rd a)r:4 H C 3A al C m > a) al 4 SH .• 1 >C w 3 •= Q 44 44q t1 44 H C 00a)toro l I Ia x m u .-1 >1 a) 14 c 14 4 E 'o G E •.I A 4j u •'1 U z '1 gg .4 .+ •-+ m 1.) v m (V rd 0 •'I a) rd •'I r•1 0 m m 7> W £G7 D: Q3 3 N W£h £h h H qn Uh Ca+j•.1 .1 34 =1 N 10 044 0 aaR ......... as ....? a ... a ?. aaa ...... `. as `..! a .. a ... wawa .....r .r Hu , O v to O U 0 O C V) U4 n 1 El r1 a 1 > O N O A N b L m L N r >I G o >t >4 J.l C a u .u 4j E >+ C A a) > C n o r.. c H 4-1 0 U m -- C 0 u m 0 7 .•i C >, U O- q tD h 4J 0 U ••/ O 0 7 7 41 0 4J o m -+ u r'1 u u w o u ro ? r. >, N N al 4j •••• 1-1 M o x 3 E C 44 O a) E •r4 G N ro O ro O ro 1•i 1'1 •11 a) C• - -4 11 a) Lo -+ to u E E a W u m C •o 'A C 7 > al N 7 X .C 11 14 Ll m 41 ,1 >I +,) ^1 x II C m E O a) m C E In ro 0 ED C t O U 4J w L E. m 3 ro 3 = 3 .C 3 H U m >+ w o . H m£ u m Q 1 Ll x? X nL +a) ) U) ?7?>+wLin• tSSiFa)irA 'T)' • a.R"e:??rn r •u r T 1;m I . o .. t I ?? o-t: ds :Ea • w r v ?, ?n"',f."'+'c5'riE'a??Ft) u " w¢ ?a -Or 1 • µF I l a I fy I ` ? Sy il I j , $• fit!. I ntw,rsti,.. Emergency Management Branch j ? l Pq - Robert G. Nesbitt, P.E. Jefferson County Engineer ?u Courthouse Port Townsend, Washington 98368 Dear Mr. Nesbitt: . We inspected the bank protection and flood control projects on Ri d their d t . _: vers an Ques s the Hoh, Quinault, Clearwater an - tributaries in Jefferson County on February 10, 1987. r' Several projects were repaired or constructed by the Corps and - sponsored by Jefferson County. As project sponsor, the County ? assumed the responsibility for operation and maintenance of these a ?`• g projects. r Enclosed for your information and/or action are a lie,t-ing of the projects with a brief description and a copy of the recent inspection report reflecting the conditions and recommendations. rf :°0 Any questions you may have regarding these projects should be r' directed to Mr. Brian Applebury, telephone (206) 764-3406. -, ? Sincerel , i /r Vernon E. Cook t p ` 1. Chief, Operations Division • r , t d. Enclosures ? v n y Br+ hrAo 1 ti ,? 1 e. r , u ? i e . t RIfl3 NN, ''?„?,6? OLYMPIC PENINSULA PROJECTS sa rc *JEFFERSON COUNTY SPONSORED* t i INSPECTION REPORT FEBRUARY 9 - 11, 1987 k , HOH RIVER HOH-lA-83 afi . `k`9 RIVER MILE 18.6 RIGHT BANK 216 ROAD MILE 3.75 Project in excellent condition. Area of riprap around ., L' culvert still in good shape. RIVER MILE 18.8 - 19.0 RIGHT BANK 216 ROAD MILE 4.2 Project in fair condition. This entire project downstream of old bridge abutment to be brushed by project sponsor. HOH-1-83 RIVER MILE 19.05 - 19.3 RIGHT BANK 216 ROAD MI LE 4.4 Project in excellent condition. County has blacktop in excellent shape. Culvert intakes on land side at mid-job and upstream end of project to be cleaned by project sponsor of gravel debris for more effective use in handling of high creek runoffs. J, 1 c rosx RIVER MILE 19.9 - 20.0 RIGHT BANK 216 ROAD MILE 5.15 Project in just fair shape. Slopes are covered with trees to 8" to be removed by project sponsor. Upstream job limits begin at 1/4 cor 30/29 and continue downstream for 12001. Upstream limits begin in vicinity of County rock stockpile. This project constructed in 1964 replaced works of 1961 located at lower end of this job. HOH 1-78 RIVER MILE 23 216 ROAD MILE 6.35 Rock protection in good condition. River has moved away from upper 2/3rds of project. County work done across throat of Rock Creek and downstream for 250' is in fairly good shape. Only area to watch during higher flows will be from Rock Creek downstream. Heavy growth of trees to be removed by project sponsor. ? ??rv n t 4 r e `T r+ , - i - if wl- {? 0 1 p( r ? +}? q fSK r r ? ? r ? t 1Y ? ?? 1?( '?Ydy?, ? Y F y1? 1 V ,?y ?i 7040, f ?V1, 1 01 ei Y t far ? v ? " - 1 va, ' Skf}?,` k ; mvnn .m NtM '{ ' m -1 ?IaYwi? , . e Ai _,A°? , sW*NN 6T"I?' ' sm" r r DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ° FIRST CIass MAII. E r S EATTLE DISTRICT. CORPS. OF ENGINEERS POSTAGE & FEES PAM 1. P.O. eox C-sass DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY , SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98124.2255 • PERMIT No. G-5 F Y OFFICIAL BUSINESS ! `-J 6kM ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED fA, aV? 1 i, 1 ( 71 - 'JmV .g elk r - OLYMPIC PENINSULA PROJECTS JEFFERSON COUNTY SPONSORED* e INSPECTION REPORT FEBRUARY 9 - 11, 1987 QUINAULT RIVER 5.7 MILES ABOVE LAKE QUINA ULT LODGE Project located at boundary with Greys Harbor County is in 1 good condition. County has removed the trees from this project this past winter. d, CLEARWATER RIVER MILE 0.2 - 0.3 " LEFT BANK c' Project located just above new bridge construction is in t good condition. Has been brushed through the years. MILE 0.3 - 0.6 LEFT BANK Project i i d di s n goo con tion. Has been brushed fairly recently. A loss of toe rock in middle of project to be replaced by sponsor as a part of normal maintenance. MILE 1.0 - 1.2 LEFT BANK Project is in very good condition. Light growth of brush to be removed by project sponsor in next season. QUEETS RIVER MILE 1.2 LEFT BANK SEWAGE LAGOON Project is in very good shape. Trees along entire project, on slope and growing in toe to be removed by project sponsor. However there is an erosion problem at the upstream end of this structure to be repaired immediately by project sponsor. Erosion is into shoulder of access road to Sewage Lagoon. RICHAR BURNHAM hr MITCH MacGREG R',- -9- ?' y;". } kt9? xmy+vl?vt . wr +? ar ? w??n ?51?ri7 IH - krm? ? ? t °T p r ? i ? 4? ? I t ??? q r '? h 1 t I ? 9 r 9t ? ,?? q 1 f y t? e" ? r ? 5 } ` F t I r h }Iy?(`? ? `?i f s. I f? _ 3•i DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SEATTLE DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS DDEPARTMENT RSTCLASS MAIL P.O. eox c-3755 TA& FEES PAD) SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 96124•2255 OF THE ARMY OFFICIAL BUSINESS ERMIT No. G-5 ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED - i 1 e .3 >e f 4 y? OLYMPIC PENINSULA PROJECTS *JEFFERSON COUNTY SPONSORED* l HOH RIVER HOH-1A-83 MILE 18.6 RIGHT BANK 475' l.f. of bank protection completed 19 MAY 83 by GSNS&REC under Section 14 authority at a cost of $72,000. Resolution 411 by Jefferson County dated 14 APR 83. As-built Dwg. P _ ^ E-45-1-12. Located on Upper Hoh River Rain Forest Road a (Jefferson County Road 216) at road mile 3.75, approximately 0.65 miles above bridge over Willoughby Creek. This job ties to a an old rock job downstream which evidently is not ours. MILE 18.8 - 19.0 RIGHT BANK 1200' l.f. of rock riprap bank protection for County Road by Corps of Engineers. Contract DA-45-108-CIVENG-57-38, Dwg. r• E-45-1-3, at a cost of $39,816. Completed 31 DEC 56 under authority of Section 14. Transferred for Operation & ? Maintenance to Jefferson County by letter dated 29 MAR 61 Approximate Road Mile 4.2. This job at its upstream end ties to old bridge abutment which is also the downstream end of r u:r ms's HOH-1-83. W HOH-1-83 MILE 19.05 - 19.3 RIGHT BANK 1300' l.f. of road rehabilitation, reconstruction and bank protection completed 23 MAY 83 by GSNShREC under Section 14 authority at a cost of $280,000. Resolution by Jefferson County dated 14 APR 83. As-built Dwg. E-45-1-12. Located on Upper Hoh River Road (Jefferson County Road 216) at road mile 4.4. Project is quite obvious because of being paved upon completion. At upstream end, project ties along creek bank to exit road from Minnie Peterson Park. MILE 19.9 - 20.0 RIGHT BANK *HISTORICAL* 700' 1. f. of rock riprap bank protection which is no longer adjacent to County Road 216. Contract 62-9, Dwg. E-45-1-4, cost $8,120. Completed Nov 61 under authority of Section 14. Resolution by Jefferson County, dated 14 AUG 61. Approx. Road Mile 5.0. The downstream end of this project was replaced by the 1964 works. -8- ' SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98124.2255 OFFICIAL BUSINESS - DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT No. G-5 rw - ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED " 5 : 7 ? l , ?I 5.7 MILES ABOVE LAKE QUINAULT LODGE 385' l.f. of rock riprap protection adjacent to County road. Contract 62-31, Dwg. E-66-1-3. Cost approx. $16,549. Completed DEC 1961 under authority of Section 14, 1946 Flood Control Act. Resolution by Jefferson County dated 21 AUG 61. Located by exiting Highway 101 at mile post 125.6 and continuing up Lake Quinault Road for 8.0 miles to boundary between Greys Harbor and Jefferson Counties. Projects downstream limits are at County sign. -9- a A? Y R r ?, -t?r?t'?"?'saw"?uta?aYTS mod' ur^°b?i'k? ? 8 3?..124?,^" _?d?+... ?ar.• ?qt "sro - N '?1 ,t Akk DEPARTMENT OF TARMY + SEATTLE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS FIRST-CLASS MAII. POSTAGE Bc FEES PAID - r _ a.D. eox c-375s DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ' SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 28124.2255 PERMIT NO. G=8 OFFICIAL BUSINESS = ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED `9a4 I 1 i rr•9 y, T4 ?il` u? - M ' ? f i r h Y ' v 1 ? 1. ?2 t f_? k « ?f 1 y 4 , i u 4 '? 7 f y pD} W i 1 'r 7 u 7 Y i11 " rraa S OLYMPIC PENINSULA PROJECTS *JEFFERSON COUNTY SPONSORED* CLEARWATER RIVER MILE 0.2 - 0.3 LEFT BANK 350' 1. f. of rock riprap bank protection for county road. J b 68 o -2 DACW-67-68-C-0006, Dwg. E-37-1-6, contract cost $58 700 (both 68 1 , - and 68-2 included in this cost) completed SEPT 1968 under authority of Section 14 of 1946 Fl ood Contr-o-I-ACt. Resolution by Jefferson County dated 20 APR 64. Job replaced 1939 WPA constructed cobble-filled timber cribs at Mile 0.25. Located by exiting Highway 101 at mile post 146.9 and continuing up Clearwater Road for 0.9 miles across bridge and middle of most downstream project. MILE 0.3 - 0.6 LEFT BANK 1550' 1. f. of rock ripra bank t ti p 1949 by Corps of Engineer pro ec on constructed in s. Dwg. 37-1-4, sheet 1. This job adjoins Job 68-2. MILE 1.0 - 1.2 LEFT BANK 970' l.f. of rock riprap bank protection for the County road. Job 68-1, DACW-67-69-C-0006, Dwg. E-37-1-6, completed SEPT 1968. Cost $58,700 which includes Job 68-2, under authority of Section 14 of 1946 Flood Control Act. Resolution by Jefferson County dated 20 APR 64. MILE 1.2 LEFT BANK SEWAGE LAGOON QUEETS RIVER QUEE-1-80, 550' l.f. of riprap bank protection for the protection of the Queets Sewage Lagoon. Completed 3 March 1981 under authority of Section 14 by GSNS&REC at a cost of $71,575. JOINTLY sponsored by Jefferson County and the Quinault Indian Nation, resolution dated 10 february 1981. As-built drawing E-37-1-8. Located off of Highway 101 at mile post 152.05, then 0.3 miles downstream. Project protects the city of Queets Sewage Lagoon. -10- ,i me?? ?d Ka ki ' wrRaw? 'm ar W l 1 ' ? {, f 5 I 3 ? 'F la 4 rv t ? 7 a i r r} u ???" ??? i 6 { ?? ? ? ? ?n ?' „ ? ?,.?.Px21 d1 f t"? f ti'?Afi' ?? ? 't4Y n???? ';ci 1 r' f? ?? t ? e 3 ? ? ? 1 ? !? ? r r tr ?i t ,z ?4 d r i ' 2 p? t , f r?? a.?1? t ? ? .? ?zs ? ?r ? Y i ? r,?? tF ???i' ? ?p 7 ? ?p,?{g ? ? 1` }{ i n? l rt _`i r ?1 tY??ir4? , e ? :? ?4 fi . i ? t ? } . ,... .,- .,. ?.? .1 _x, l Fro. n?,rryGoa?' +??? ?v75 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SEATTLE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS P'O' 80 (- v. AS C-3755 ?? SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98124 fIf' November 25, 1985 ,,9"51 Emergency Management , k[1 EI(SON CUUI(r'( Branch LOUD OF COP;1G}ISSIONERS Jefferson County - Board of County Commissioners County Courthouse Port Townsend, Washington 98368 Dear Sirs: An inspection of bank protection and flood control projects on the Olympic Penninsula was made in October, 1985 Several bank protection projects constructed by the Corps were sponsored by your agency. As project sponsor, your agency assumed the responsibility for operation and maintenance of these projects. Enclosed for your information and/or action are a listing of the projects with a brief description and a copy of the recent inspection report reflecting the conditions and recomendations. Any questions you may have regarding these projects should be directed to Brian Applebury at (206) 764-3406. Sincere1 ; O&W Vernon E. Cook Chief, Operations Division 2 Enclosures s"a1bW3?Wwt3E114?" asftR???1????; 2Y "4 I "?411µ11 1 Y y? r"'???A?'?S W4 5 'I ! 1 1 1 ibN tl?1 r i ? tJl I I ?'? ;1 i f ??.? {.F??? ?rr ,? ? f t f r ? r e *? r 5vg??' 1 1 ? t y c 1 J ?_ 1 _ x ? 1 ?1 ! { y.I. 1 ? f'= I g: S'?i 1%ta'(r R s ? r Jefferson County e Board of County Commissioners s ' County Courthouse Port Townsend, Washington 98368 a Y Dear Sirs: ? An inspection of bank protection and flood control projects on the Olympic Penninsula was made in October, 1985. Several bank protection projects constructed by the Corps were sponsored by your agency. As project sponsor, your agency assumed the responsibility for operation and maintenance of these projects. Enclosed for your information and/or action are a listing of the projects with a brief description and a copy of the i ` recent inspection report reflecting the conditions and ! recomendations. ou may have regarding these projects An uestions .v ? y y q should be directed to Brian Applebury at (206) 764-3406. y e Sincerely, Vernon E. Cook Chief, Operations Division 2 Enclosures I ` 4 m ? ? Vr?YdW° rr L. a . 'f i 7 S? 1 I r ? F? ', 1 r 4 I rk arks'. ? A ?,, HOH RIVER HOH-LA-83 RIVER MILE 18.6 RIGHT BANK 216 ROAD MILE 3.75 Project in excellent condition. Toe shows only the slightest wear. Area of riprap around culvert still in good shape. RIVER MILE iB.B-19.0 RIGHT BANK 216 ROAD MILE 4.1 Project in fair condition. This 1200' reach is badly in need of brushing. HOH-1-83 RIVER MILE 19.05-19.3 RIGHT BANK 216 ROAD MILE 4.4 Project in excellent condition. County has blacktop in excellent shape. Culvert intake on land side at mid-job needs watching. RIVER MILE 19.9-20.0 RIGHT BANK 216 ROAD MILE 4.9 Project in just fair shape, slopes are covered with trees to 6" that should be removed. Project needs to be more defined ?'. in field to County sponsor. RIVER MILE 20.3-20.5 RIGHT BANK 216 ROAD MILE 5.1 Project is covered with trees to 8" that should be removed. U/S job limits begin at 1/4 cor 30/29 and continue d/s for 10001. Area is in vicinity of County rock stockpile. -a- w> • - - . tli4 ? i . f • f F 7 ,h? DEPARTMENT OF TH® E ARMY y , m SEATTLE DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS N .. P.O. BOX C•3755 : - SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 981.24', OFFICIAL BUSINESS . ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED - i M r 6 I F rl y ?n (?N.,? r + i .1 4 ?k n i I r ! , ' ( l v f k.l, of + r?i I ? 1 t I i } t - ?h?I* I i;` i ? 1 s Y 1 x ATrI,?? `t'vYWh.' yy*` Un 1,,??}t Sy NN ?y1 7 - ?la?? ? ? } _ ' l?111T PT.. b OLYMPIC PENINSULA PROJECTS 3 *JEFFERSON COUNTY SPONSORED* + HOH 1-76 s RIVER MILE 23 216 ROAD MILE 6.35 Rock protection in good condition. River has moved away from ?? u/s 2/3rds of this project. County work done across throat of Rock Creek and d/s for 250' is in fairly good shape. Only _ area to watch during higher flows will be from Rock Creek d/s. Project, however5should be brushed this season, as trees become larger and harder to handle. ' OUINAULT RIVER 4 MILES ABOVE •? ,l + LAKE OUINAULT Project is in fair condition. Brushing needed at upstream ri{ t end of project. Culverts in good shape. CLEARWATER RIVER' MILE 0.2-0.3 LEFT BANK " Project in good condition for its age. Has been brushed through the years. About next summer would be good time to brush again to continue excellent maintenance. r .x• Y gyp:„ MILE 0.3-0.6 LEFT BANK Project in good condition. Has also been brushed fairly ` recently. Light growth of brush not a problem at this time. " MILE 1.0 - 1.2 r } LEFT BANK Project in very good shape, a light growth of brush should be maintained in next season. OUEETS RIVER MILE 1.2 LEFT BANK SEWAGE LAGOON Project is in very good shape. However there is an erosion problem at the u/s and of this structure that should be repaired immediately. Erosion is into shoulder of access road to Sewage Lagoon. RICHARD BURNHAM ;?..? MITCH MacGREGOR -9- + r f ? ? 17111-1-11.1- -1- ::? F *? r r Y' y b h ?i l ` )f ? f 1 ? 1 r ???. t r t 1? e + F a` k 1 r . ? 11 i l r+t ?? 1f 1 ? ? ? an. r' r^ • y {`ky,.. i`,'I a, Z? 1 .en3 •C d ?5. +3 . I 't ?. e DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY } SEATTLE DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O. SOX C-3755 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 95124 4 t OFFICIAL BUSINESS n.u.v na..erven v aoo = ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED t 1 , - grim. .r iH v 1 F W? fc '3. _..... .. r g x. C ? ) i _ l 5 9 X ) ? 1 )?sl ?? ! ? in f a ? a f' ?kFd. OLYMPIC PENINSULA PROJECTS &• ?> F ? *JEFFERSON COUNTY SPONSORED* ' w ' sw HOH RIVER `i14 HOH-1A-83 MILE 18.6 ti RIGHT BANK 475' l.f. of bank protection completed 19 MAY 83 by GSNS&REC under Section 14 authority at a cost of $72,000. Resolution by Jefferson County dated 14 APR 83. As-built Dwg. E-45-1-12. Located on Upper Hoh River Road (Jefferson County _ « r ai Road 216) upstream at Road Mile 3.75, approximately 0.35 miles above bridge over Willou hb Cr k Thi - g y ee .. s job ties to a an old rock job downstream which evidently is not ours. « _ - ? MILE 18.8 - 19.0 - ._ RIGHT BANK F . 1200' l.f. of rock riprap bank protection for County Road b s ?c y Corps of Engineers. Contract DA-45-108-CIVENG-57-38, Dwg. E-45-1-3, at a cost of $39,816. Completed 31 DEC 56 under authorit of S ti ; y ec on 14_ Transferred for Operation & Maintenance to Jefferson County by letter dated 29 MAR 61 . Approximate Road Mile 4.1 This Job at its upstream end comes ' _ within 200 of tying to downstream end of HOH-1-83. '«? MILE 19.05 - 19.3 RIGHT BANK ' 4i - - 1300 1.4. of road rehabilitation, reconstruction and bank protection completed 23 MAY 83 by GSNS&REC d S t un er ec ion 14 authority at a cost of $280,000. resolution by Jefferson y" - County dated 14 APR 83. As-built Dwg. E-45-1-12. Located on Upper Hoh River Road (Jefferson County Road 216) upstream of 11.ID ^?3: .. Road Mile 4.4. Project is quite obvious because of being r paved upon completion, also at upstream end, tie along creek bank is at exit road f Mi « rom nnie Peterson Park. " MILE 19.9 - 20.0 r RIGHT BANK r T 700' 1. f. of rock riprap bank protection adjacent to County f r `s Yt Road 216. Contract 62-9, Dwg. E-45-1-4, cost 48,120. { Completed Nov 61 under authority of Section 14. Resolution by Jefferson county, dated 14 AUG 61. Approx. Road Mile 5.0. -e- ???, ^i?A ?tn^uY?rYti Ardb}?'n7?Y?F Y?'.d?Y? ?j ?1L8'?S ?? ? ?4Y7 tlbfl'?'.pi'?*'r.?'?'??37? - ` 1 '@' f'.L . k1atL r?46.4u,'1? ?Sb' "?`1r ?J?+vMpi?+1 1 ?+y}'?t .w.?e... _ if y F h jJ ? ?.l S +h ? r t ` ?i ?Sf ? I i hµ T N r 4 _ r` ? 4 v .. 3 + o? r r P .? MILE 20.3 - 20.5 RIGHT BANK HOH-79-1 MILE 23 M OLYMPIC PENINSULA PROJECTS.. *JEFFERSON COUNTY SPONSORED HOH RIVER 1175' l.f. of rock riprap bank protection adjacent to County Road 216. Contract 65-28, as-built Dwg. E-45-1-8, cost 2289536.50. Completed 30 OCT 64 under authority of Section 14. Resolution by Jefferson County dated 29 APR 64. C er 4 750' l.f. of armor rock bank protection under a near "vertical bank adjacent to County Road 216, immediately upstream of bridge over Rock Creek at Road Mile 6.35. Completed 24 SEPT 79 under Section 14, Flood Control Act of P 1946 at a cost of $93,000. Resolution by Jefferson County. _ As-built Dwg. E-45-1-10. Downstream end of original works tied into and up left bank of Rock Creek to bridge. Later County Flood works have been added at confluence and downstream as rivers impinging has gradually worked its way downstream. OUINAULT RIVER 4 MILES ABOVE LAKE OUINAULT 385' l.f. of rock riprap protection adjacent to County road. Contract 62-31, Dwg. E-66-1-3. Cost approx. $16,549. Completed DEC 1961 under authority of Section 14, 1946 Flood Control Act. Resolution by Jefferson County dated 21 AUG 61. -9- 9b - OLYMPIC PENINSULA PROJECTS " Q - *JE FFERSON COUNTY SPONSORED* CLEARWATER RIVER _ MILE 0.2 - 0.3 - '-: LEFT BANK - 350' 1. f. of rock riprap bank protection for county road. Job 68-2 DACW-67-68-C-0006, Dwg. E-37-1-6, contract cost J - $58,700 (both 68-1 and 68-2 included in this cost) completed - SEPT 1968 under authority of Section 14 of 1946 Flood •? Control Act. Resolution by Jefferson County dated 20 APR 64. ! Job replaced 1939 WPA constructed cobble-filled timber cribs `n MILE 0.3 - LEFT BANK at Mile 0.25. 0.6 - 1550' 1. f, of rack riprap bank protection constructed in 1949 b y Corps of Engineers Dwg. 37-1-4, sheet 1. This job adjoins Job 68-2. _ MILE 1.0 - 1.2 LEFT BANK 970' l.f. of rock riprap bank protection for the county ,- road. Jab 68-1, DACW-67-69-C-0006, Dwg. E-37-1-6, completed :.. SEPT 1968. Cost $58,700 which includes Job 68-2, under authority of Section 14 of 1946 Flood Control Act. _ -?. Resolution by Jefferson County dated 20 APR 64. MILE 1.2 LEFT BANK OUEETS RIVER OUEE-1-80, 550' l.f. of riprap bank protection for the protection of the Oueets Sewage Lagoon. Completed 3 March 1981 under authority of Section 14 by GSNS &REC at a cost of $71,575. JOINTLY sponsored by Jefferson County and the Ouinault Indian Nation, resolution dated 10 february 1981. As-built drawing E-37-1-8. Located 0.3 miles d/s of Highway 101. -10- ?' ` I .. ? r ' T r ,«1 a ?? } ?xv„ , fr t N, 1 s fi?i,r 1? H tir r .j431` b M J! i' A ce: ?. N(?,.raa'r ? 1 1 r 1 1 ? F ?? " l ? ?{ r" 7 I ? l f K Y s ? k r. ? 1 ! }Z 1 i l . X T ,i C , } !xa?? rt r; ' ?r •,?? It .:, , I CIE ?rI i? _ Ma? t.. DEPARTMENT OF THERMY SEATTLE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O. BOX C•3755 F SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 981 24 OFFICIAL BUSINESS .11 $300 ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED C w A 'F +a1 , I? 7 4+M' .`>! rata ?V}r"3A1 i:. vP 1 r9.?1 ? rk?@ r .... L j? ... ... l A ? • C }" # . dry ?„?'? ?, a? 1 ? . I?k1 ? n r m I, f J f t',, r t1 I .1 4 ti G f Y? M ' la l - 'r ? Z ! t 1? 1 ? 'n11ri , ,? ' ? ,rr r % MV, DEP ARTMENT OF THE RMY SEATTLE DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS E' .r P.O. BOX C•3755 - 'f SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98124 OFFICIAL BUSINESS I.....r..on .w v.n USE $-. - ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED S. 1 trr.^ ? R ? ?u my !?',? ! 9 ^?Mflsr"l?i Y?Jv ?? 1a 2ps )y k'f ? w??"iw?Sgdt''1S4?kd ?£4? ?Jp? 4 }JM > t?u?1.'?''?k°i17??,?y I' ? l hl7 A i i a?iw PP i r J?Z S ' . ? r a 1 w rl 4 ?: V +rypj r F XK1 N ? 1 1 T 1 - wn?mn.rvn I i _ ?eI-,t., I _ wh Iii l= )"Vi FI FOWLER S7:QE OF 1VASf IING1YIN _ DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 4720 E. Afdrtin tlay . Olprrrpia, l+S,.hinpuur 'lltsfl4 . (206) 459-9191 . (SCAN) 23.1-5255 . i August 23, 1985 M E M O R A N D U M .'a TO: County and Metropolitan Area Emergency Management Directors - - County Public Works Directors and Engineers FROM: Terry R. Simmonds, Administrator (;!?? Community Support Program Operations Division F - SUBJ: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Proposed Changes to Regulations F Pertaining to Public Law 84-99 With Regards to Rehabilitation Program I have enclosed a summary copy of the subject proposed changes and a copy of the federal register for your review. I suggest that local emergency management directors and public works directors/engineers work together in coordinating this information to diking, levee and flood control districts so that they have an opportunity to respond. , - - All comments must be in writing and sent to HQDA (DAEN-CWO-EO) Washington D.C. 20314-1000. Comments must be received on or before September 13, 1985. yl. If anyone has any questions about the proposed changes, they should contact r1 ?" Mr. Brian Applebury, Seattle District Corps of Engineers at (206) 764-3406. TRS:lf ;r . r r ,? Enclosures ''.UuC, 11 is 7p 'S y 7 t t, Y: J ROUTE T¢ ?iC1 r DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ::f-RECTOR SEATTLE DISTRICT ti . _ P.O. BOX C-3755 hy, t, ry`•4f,,,?,'L'l _ I SEATTLE, WASHINGTON TON 98124-2255 ADIAOM ADIP&P f ADIR&R - Emergency Management Branch -f'SCAL p p 204 & 2ZaZ/ OTHER, . L _ = _ i ACTION 21 ??......._- a= CENTRAL FILES Hugh Fowler, Director Department of Emergency Services *?.? 4220 East Martin Way Olympia, Washington 98504 - - l er: Dear Mr. Fow r ? I The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is preparing to change provi- f Public Law (PL) 84-99 with regard to the rehabilitation i 1 ons o s program. Under this program, we can assist local governments, `-a levee or diking districts, and individual property owners in the repair or reconstruction of flood control facilities that have been -' damaged during a flood. The proposed changes are as follows: a. Establish eligibility (inspection) guidelines and proce- dures for use in evaluating whether any non-Federal levee meets minimum Corps standards for design, construction, and maintenance. b. Establish requirement for public sponsorship of non-Federal levees to receive Corps assistance under PL-84-99. c. Establish requirement for cost-sharing (80% Federal - 20% non-Federal) for Corps assistance to rehabilitate a non-Federal levee. d. Establish revised procedures for performing economic analysis of proposed non-Federal levee rehabilitation projects. The proposed changes have been published in the Federal Regis- ter Volume 50, No. 153, Pages 32092 to 32095 (copy enclosed). The public has 30 days to comment on these regulation changes prior to their enactment. Comments will be accepted by HQDA (DAEN-CWO-EO), Washington, D.C. 20314-1000, until 1.3 September 85 because of the late publication of the Federal Register. We will continue to manage the PL-84-99 program in your area, and would appreciate receiving a copy of any comments you have on these rule changes and effects they will have in your area. !^4W`?tS , W-0 r -?- Please contact Brian Applebury at 606) 764-3406 should you have any questions regarding these proposed changes. ?,yw?py Sincerely, /.a.ce H. Ro tree Lt. Colonels Corps of Engineers Acting District Engineer Enclosure RZECEIVED 4U G 19 1985 DEPAkrfAg4,, ur "'o?curV AAANAr FMCNT 71 A3 F _ .•ra_,N?y, 1 a Y'?5T3F ,. fys r I` -51d .mL.n..":'t.?1u`Ys _-._+,rdta?:tTS,". usu 'i l n+ '3(U<^ 32092 Federal Regi / Vol AUG P1 50 No 153 / Thursda Au uso 1985 / P d R l 1A . , . y, o ropose u es P - ) ' in paragraph (a) of this section. the in ragmph (a) of section, the Federal heavy vehicle use tax are Federal heavy vehicle use tax are FA presented at the hearing and the HQ presented of the hearing and the lime ` ! - .? I +. Federal Highway Administration shall forwal d the proposed determination of reglslered. they wish to devote to each subject. • nonconformity to the Secretary. Upon IFR Doc. 85-10897 Filed B-7-e5; 8:45 am) Each speaker will be limited to 10 i ' y - ? ?1 approval of the proposed determination by the Secreta th fi l d mwao cone lsto-n•u m nutes for an oral presentation exclusive of the time consumed by -?'• F • ';? ry, e na re uction specified by §869.13 will be effected. questions from the panel for the d (d) If tF.e State requests a hearing DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY government an answers to these uesltons t 1`1 pursuant to paragraph (a) or (b)(3) of this section, the Secrete shall Secretary Intemal Revenue Service q . Because of controlled access restrictions attendees cannot be z ? expeditiously convene a hearing on the record which shall be co d t d 26 CFR Part 7 , admitted beyond the lobby of the • , n uc e di h Internal Revenue Building until 9:45 a.m. }- accor ng t t e provisions of the Ad i i t ti P ILR-227-841 An agenda showing the scheduling of r 1 m n s ra ve rocedure re Act, 5 U.S.C, d the speakers will be made after outlines 556 an 557. Based on the record of the ' Limitation on Investment Credit in the are received from the speakers. Copies r proceeding, the Secretary shall d i Case of Certain Regulated Companies; of the agenda will be available free of y eterm ne whether the Slate Is in nonconformit ith thi l Synchronization of Interest; Public Hearin charge at the ]tearing. p •. - y w s regu ation. if h g By direction of the Commissioner of ,? t e Secretary determines that the State Is in nonconformity, the fund reduction ADEN CV: Internal Revenue Service, Treasur Internal Revenue. - Paler K. Scott, specified by J 669.13 shell be effected. y' Director, Legiskdon andRegalarians k (e) The Secretary may reserve up to 25 ACTION: Notice of public hearing on Division. r - percent of a State's apportionment of f d d Proposed regulations. (FR Doc. eis-18854 Filed 8-7-85; &45 am) - + r Y on s un er 23 U.S.C. 104(6)(5) pending e final administrative determination SUMMARY[ This document provides ti f bl mwsa coos .aso-at-w r{ .,f under this regulation to prevent the no ce o a pu ic hearing on proposed regulations relating to the limitation on apportionment to the State of funds which would be affected by a the investment credit in the case of certain regulated com anies DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE - ' a i determination of nonconformity. p . DATES: The public hearing will be held Corps of Engineers, Department of ? (I) Funds withheld pursuant to a final administrative determination under this on Wednesday, August 28, 1985, the Army `. , E - regulation shall be reapportioned to all th li ibl S beginning at 1000 a.m. Outlines of oral comments must be delivered or mailed 33 CFR Part 203 ,N? J ' o er e g e tates one year from the date of this determination, unless before this time th S t d by Tuesday, August 20, 1905. ADDRESS: The public hearing will be (ER 500-1-11 '"• e ecre ary etermines, on the basis of information submitted b Y hood the uditorium, Seventh Emergency Employment of Army and O h s" ^ w ' r, the State and the FHWA, that the State Corri Floor, 7400 Corridor, Internal Revenue t er Resources, Natural Disaster Procedures .{ r hat come Into conformity with this Building, g, 1 1171 Constitution Avenue NW., regutalion. If the Secretary determines Washin ton, D.C. The re uests to s eak g q p AGENCY: Army Corps of Engineer, DOD. r' -.- IS - + Ihot the State has come Into conformity, the withheld funds shall be rele d t and outlines of oral comments should be submitted to the Commissioner of -ACTION: Proposed rule. y - p4 ase o the State subject to the availability of internal Revenue, Attn: CC:LR:T LR- ( SUMMARY: These d then es will propose such such funds under 23 U.S.C. 710(6). 227-04), Washington, D.C. 20224. a amend the regulation dated December a 4 The reapportionment of funds FOR FURTII£R INFORMATION CONTACT: 21, 1083, and will provide revised as ,. under paragraph (e) of this section shall par B. Faye Easley of the Legislation and procedures for the Corps of Engineers In ,g ; yy it be stayed during the pendency of any a y Regulations Division, Office of Chief conducting certain emergency activities t :. judicial review of the Secretary's n Counsel, internal Revenue Service, 1111 pursuant to Public Law 84-99. y; administrative dlerminatlon of Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, The Carps of Engineers proposes to !?( nonconformity. D.C. 20224 or telephone 202-58&•3935 est ab l new policy r ingthe t 1 f 669 17 P d l f (not a toll-free call). reh t cont o rehabi litation of flood control projects T sd`• of s';; . roce ure or eva uating State compliance SUPPLEMENTARY : •fhe levees w (normally ) which are CanslmCtCd ? t . The FifWA shall periodically review th St le d of public hearing I subject of the public hearing s proposed regulations under section 4614 of the and maintained by non-Federal Intcresls. The proposed policy will make e a d proce ures for complying with 23 U S C 141 d I l d Internal Revenue Code of 1054. The Ihta regulation more consistent with li I , . . . ( ), nc u ing an proposed reguhdlons appeared in the po ry and procedures aslablished by e, t1 c r? Inspection of supporting documentation Federal Register for Wednesday, June other Feders agencies for disaster r i and records. The States shall retain a f 20,1085 (50 FR 263351, assistance. Additionally, state and local i - ; copy o the recefpled Schedule 1, or an acce tabl b tit The rides of I B01.601(n)(3) of the " governments will assume o more active l r ? p e su s ute prescribed by 28 CFR Part 42 1 41-3001-2 for a i d f Statement of Procedural Rules" (20 ro e in determining the most effective u e f il bl C f E i r • . , per o o 1 f CFR Part 601) shall apply with respect to s o ava a e orps o ng neers _ year or purposes of evaluating Stale the public hearing. Persons who have resources for rehabilitation of flood I ' .' compliance with 23 U.S.C. 141(d) by the submitted comments within the time control projects damaged by a flood ' FHWA. In lieu of retention of Schedule 1 Sl t k prescribed in the notice of proposed event. 1 , a i ;.5 II , a es may ma e an appropriate entry In an automated olio or on registration rvlemoking and who also desire to re d t DATE: Written comments must be i d b 1 r. + documents retained by the State as p sen an comments at the hearing on tha proposed re ulations h ld b i rece ve on or orers August 23,1985. q. t evidence that prouf of payment has been i d b f g s ou su m t, not later than Tuesday, August 20, 1965, ADDRESS: Comments should be addressed lo: HQDA (DAEN-CWO- 5 ' t "i)ib ' rece ve e ore vehicles subject to the and outline of the arni comments to be EO), Washington, D.C. 20314-1000. t gg, ` r 4 .rust h?;?ttt ? N ? *? 7 t w t ? t d y {1 r e rt r ,qj ? i-, r G 4 y ?, d 'i' a.D?+?2.i ? •a i - u, r?Ci ?,n?a r{,?y ?:. ? I , 1 ,I ? J , J (, Yt I .11? t OF? ?..?Y g 1. 1iq? i ,r x ] . V r• +1 rr,? ' { J ?. ? l i ?Y'I lot I4 ?s .? ? ( I ,? y ly?i i) ¦ ? ¦ l ?1 Y % 4j 1 T A Y0- Federal Register Vol. 50, No. 153 / Thursday, August 81985 / Proposed Rules 32QJ3 Am ',y FOR FARTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. direct Corps rehabilitation assistance in (c) Rahobiliration. Prior to Carps ter. Edward J. flecker, (202) 2^2-0251. the post will be given a two-year rehabilitation of non-Federal projects. ' SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: .. gm Le' perlod before the public non-Federal interests must furnish A sponsorship requirement will become a formal written assurances of local ?s - Background binding condition an further Corps cooperation. (The local cooperation The Corps of Engineers has authority, assistance in repairing their projects. requirements are detailed in Subpart G 'i -sharing requirements of this regulation.) Sponsorship by a Pl v ,µ k under Public Law (Pub. L.) 84-99, to The new cost establish an 80% Federal-20%non• public entity 1s required. Additional T repair flood control projects which are damaged by flood. Projects consWCted Federal distribution of the cost of the requirements of local participation '?y f x by non-Federal interests may be eligible rehabilitation (minus engineering and include such Items as cost-sharing and f for this disaster recovery assistance design costs). This replaces the current costs attributable to deficient or 1 r i provided that certain eligibility criteria formula which applies only to deferred maintenance. z are met and required items of local modifications of these projects. . ,, - • _ Ns cooperation are furnished. The eligibility Reasons for the Changes ?• criteria Include the provision thatn § 203.42 (Amended] ro•' project constructed by non-Federal These changes will promote 3. By revising § 203.42(c) as follows: N interests must meet standards set forth cooperation and assistance by state and _ 'j by the Corps o[Engineere to establish local emergency service organizations - ' 1 structural integrity of these projects for with the Corps in review of requests for (c) Maintenance and dereriorariort flood control purposes. levee rehabilitation assistance. This will deficiencies. Rehabilitation under Pub. 'i ! In the past, there hds been a wide help assure that requests fulfill stale L. 04-99 will not be applied to works h t variation in interpretations of Corps objectives for land use and flood plain which, as a result of poor maintenance standards as the apply to structures management. As 'a result, Federal or deterioration, require substantial R rr they resources available for ost-flood reconstruction. All deficient or deferred 4 not originally constructed by a Federal p I y. The proposed changes will lead recovery under Pub. L 84-99 will be maintenance existing when flood agenc e 4 {• to improved uniformity between Corps applied to projects which will yield the damage occurs will be accomplished by district offices in establishing greatest benefit to the general public. or at the expense of the responsible non- vF The changes will also lead to Federal interests, either prior to requirements for stele and local proposed improved Carpe response in completing concurrently with authorized t rehabilitation ipattassociated assistance. with The Corps proposed action on requests for levee rehabilitation work. When work .,y p Corps-wide eligibility guidelines for non- rehabilitation. eccom lished b the Co acts "ate Federal projects will help ensure that These yrovosed changes will provide a erne maintenance the estimate _ project sponsors are asked to provide - for • reeler olet nllon in the Corps ce errs maintenance cost Will a eves re or i atstion by incTu?Te3 ns contributed no •F m! consistent items of local consumption Otlfl" `• r k regardless of project location. concerned state and local os rams encies funds. ar urea responsible non- ' The Corps has recently completed a ensure that project sponsors notion- Federal interests to correct significant ? r comprehensive review of the levee wide are all given the snare program daficienalas noted during regular f a rehabilitation program under Pub. L. 84- eligibility requirements, and provide for inspections may result in suspension of - 99 which focused on development of greater attention to important flood any future rehabilitation assistance uniform eligibility guidelines and preparedness activiliea by encouraging under Pub. L 84-99. t+ v, rquiremenis for public sponsorship and improved levee design and maintenance. local cooperation, to include cost as well as sound flood plain " sharing management practices. 4203.81 (Amended) ' Therequirements for public follows: .?n a Note: The U.S. Army Carpe of Engineers 4. HY revising 4203.01 (a) as sponsorship and cost sharing will has determined that this proposed regulation w A a establish closer uniformity with is not a major rule under Executive Order (r0-) Requlremenfs for eo0pemll0n and ?. requirements for disaster assistance 12291. It has been determined under the tion. In order to maintain a firm programs administered by other Federal criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act that particiarticipaLion between the Corps and + agencies and help reduce public this proposed rule will not have a significnN understanding t - r Impact un a substantial number of small non-Federal Interests concerning the confusion over inconsistent local entitles, responsibilities of each party in cobperallon requirements between those responding to a natural disaster, } Federal progratas. List of Subjects In 33 CFR Part 203 division or district commanders should Proposed Changes Disaster assistance, Flood assistance, negotiate a local cooperation agreement a )? The proposed changes to the drought assistance. with local Interests whenever assistance J Is furnished. Non-Federal interests or regulation prescribe n set of minimum PART 209-(AMENDED] local interests may be public entitles, I I M^JF "1 guidelines for non-Federal hood control organizations, groups or Individuals. For ' a ic,; M1 projects to be eligible for rehabilitation Accordingly, 33 CFR Part 203 is assistance to other than o party entity. It under the provisions of Pub. L. 67-99. proposed to be amended as shown: Is roquired that there be a public agency t ' t 't These guidelines address both 1. The authority citation for Part 203 to sponsor the project and coalgn the 1 77 maintenance and onglnaering criteria. continues to read as follows: agreement Project sponsors must be one L Thn ro 0spd chap ms also Ir c ado n Authority: Pub. L 87-0-1, 60 Sidi. ten, 33 of the following: ors 1' r r rc mromenl t of 0- 2 vu or r l ;. } r US C. 701n. (1) Lpgal subdivision of a state or a t r 1c. a a r u ton o n. •I`eda'. ro + te,. t r 1 t ha ca n e Ic r onwr an prov o lot n § 207,17 [Ammdedl state government. V aga in the exrsung coet•ehsting (2) Local unit of government. r 9• 2. 0 rcvlsin ^03.13 c as falluw+: ?``r P y formula for these projects. Private Y 8 4 - l) (3) Qualified Indian tribe or tribal r a r. I v 7 Individuals or groups who have received organization. `? } I rr .r ` iiQr ?? to by n?Y ..L 4 •,,-,,v ?- wL ir.` u;21 cam 7???..'u,. a i ??e '? I { , r- r E tt ?r i µ}_ I t t 1 lei r ',h 4 ' fr ? t • ? t :. 1 a ) l I ?yh _ ra 9P O ? F ? ?r ?t rs t ` r t` r P? ) 3209 0 rt4 ? ¢ .1 Federal Re st gi / Vol. SOr No.. 159 1: Thursday, August 1985: / Proposed Rules - (d) State chartered organization, such protection works. In addition, other key as a levee board etc.) for the screening purposes of these . Agreements do not require approval of information required to determine the Federal interest in repairing the levee inspections. Also included are flood probability estimates water surface ' HQUSACE unless they contain special will be obtained. Any levee repaired by , p rofiles and errosion control features X. or unusual conditions of local coo ti d the Corps will be Inspected periodically . (c) Ceotechnical analyses The y .. - pera on an participation. ' to assure that the conditions of local . geolechnicnl evaluation will be based cooperation are fulfilled by the sponsor. Those Inspections will also review the primarily on a detailed visual i r § 203.02 (Amended) eligibility of the levee for possible future Inspection. The initial inspection should 5. By revising § 203.82(d) as follows: • Corps assistance under Pub. L U-.99. In this manner the project sponsor may be idantify critical sections where levee stability appears weakest and should ' (d) Cost sharing. The Federal advised of any work required to keep li ibl f ' h document the location, reach, and cross section at these points '19 i. government may hear up to 80 percent of the construction costs for n cos s for e project e g e or the Carps levee rehabilitation program. The guidelines . (d) Maintenance. The Rating Guide 'r0 rehabilitation of t non-Federal projects. established here may also be used serves several purposes. It is intended Sponsors may provide th 'share of where an owner/sponsor who has not for use in evaluation of maintenance ° cons rue on coats e farm o cos in-kind servmes sue as - he previously received levee rehabilitation assistance from the.Cdtps, submits o performance and deficlen.des In order to determine compliance with local •, -, Ile r or ant etc. r a combination at cash an in- ind services T e s ons ' request for inspection to determine whether his levee meets established cooperation agreements. The procedures for this cam Ifance recess are • S '. . p or s s, are is in a li t all ibtllty criteria. con sine in 33 t•T2 208 10 T Ie I on o providing real estate interests ne d d f interests Oinspection procedure. "Rating . . maintenance compliance inspection will ' e e or construction and inspection Guide will be used to establis- Imo-` l be performed concruxently with the .: . • per o mance levels for non-Federal Inspection to review levee eligibility for [{? 0. By adding a new Subpart H levees to be Included In the Corps rehabilitation program. This Ide Il rehabilitation under Pub. !. 899. The guide is also applicable to levees h tt" (§ § 203.91 through 203.95) to read as follows: be provided to all non-Federal eves s ons 11' t i ' ' w ere no local cooperation agreement exists i ,._ ly -. , :. p ors o or a r use in m?a1 it?8m?in8 o?r ( .e., not previously repaired under Pub. - Subpart H-Non•Federal Levee u the e r ro acts re ubad to 4 "9). but an eligibility review is Rehabiiitation Ellgibltlty Guidelines remain ell i e r t o s requested by the owner/sponsor of the " Sec re o r itatian o A co of the project. The Rating Guide Is self- 2e3.91. General. ro atin Guide is availab a ram explanatory as to the level of 203.92. Procedures. me Corps of Engineers r writing to a - maintenance required for a levee to 1 203.93. Inspections. o li ' Tr rasa: to inspection will remain eligible for the Corps levee ' 203.94. Rating guide. 243 95 R h entify all areas where work is required • rehabilitation program under Pub. L 84- t . . e abilitation Investigation. to upgrade the levee to an acceptable 99. - _ Subpart H-Non-Federal Levee performance level, and specify an appropriate time period to sponsors In § 203.04• Rating guide. , - Rehabilitation Eligibility Guidelines which to accomplish the work. if a levee After the technical evaluation has r J?1 11211.91 General. sponsor fails to comply with identified assessed the Integrity of the flood (a) latent. The talent of those requirements, he will be notified that his control levee, the current levee - , I guidelines is to facilitate the evaluatio Is t a project is not eligible for consideration conditions will be evaluated using the V n of non-Fe deral levee design, for rehabilitation under Pub, L. 84-99 . until he advi th C h Rating Guide as a basis. The following F construction and maintenance to d ses e orps t at the work Is completed. No further inspections of a table provides general quidance on i t' etermine eligibility for repair under Pub' L 41-99. project in an ineligible status will be appropr ate inspection recommendations based on the Rating (b) Level of detail. The evaluation will performed until reactivated by the ' Cuide parameters: be made through site inspections by experienced district technical staff. This i ti sponsor s letter Indicating that noted deficiencies have been corrected. (c) Technical evaluation. Technical cO? a«anm.rn"F'" , ` nspec on will assess the general evaluation p ace Inte d d t functional and structural Integrity of the levee for flood control purposes and will n e o establish the general ability of n non- A_,cc.vua.__.. ns.nnrpuaca B-'"^"^•v A a.nPent caeron „4u .non "`?pOa' n sons as a bnsis for determining Corps Federal levee to provide reliable need protection. aie °i '"'p0 M "'• ' ' r"• ". 0^""- 0° n ass(stanca.The guidelines are not ' aWOa°s'„""'•"D""0tC••a" rdra a i 'y Intended to establish design standards §203.93• Inspections. Pp«. .q es wrcw naiM is ua, u,n<n 7;a? 4 for non-Federal levees, but to provide uniform roc d i h (a) Cenral. The initial inspection of o_un.ea°ab?" °'m, •ncn W `"loin airs ai«tar y ,.rs« uv ia.« msix e4 to -^ ;? i• „.. p ures w e t in the Corps for determining eligibility under Pub. L 84- th any non-Federal levee using these guidelines will establish the estimated •h+G+umn -Io PL et-es ante `?" LOn'dx"C ° "`"n b . 99. - level of protection and relinbillty of the y IN 10 IN cp0_`. "1 tor. «.wsm - „,.inns .a. -...( „ § 203.92. Procedures. existing levee. Subsequent Inspections will detect changed project conditions o I `- P«cm .1.1 ^^`n ?'• roua• P«ramsecs n.ns ? I ' (n) C C rnra!. orns Invoh•emsnt w which have nn impact on the integrity of ?? o .7.. 1s„rsn taw. . ; _ an non•Fsdernl lavne nurm? basins e 1time A9ow the flood protection works. - i 3 y a . f 4 r s or rr H .PSIIS 0" • n an Pr Kr r. I_ tt4-nq To evaluate (b) Hydrologic/hydraulic analyses. I The level of protection provided b Y o f the ownerdoes not comply with these- levees, a is mpnrative that the r non-Federal levee will be expressed In I ecommendation for Condition "U" t f initial eligibility investigation assess the ems, no urther Inspection will be terms of ears e.., n 5-year level of t i l t ' •'"' integrity and reliability of the flood protection, 10-year level of protection, hat ork has been tCompletedatrirl sc ch vv ivy 1 ?y, r ' .',rA i?_ ?, 777 x, i ifl _ ?as•?_ ca?Cw?. ?s _ - ..?,,.,._ _._ S-?__ _ _ ??I'a.._u...._Yf... rrilu`t4t .. iLw ??? ? 'S ?"? - ' e Federal RegisteVo1 August 485 / Proposed Rules 32095 50 No 153 / Thursday Rw , M x . , . , j ^ §203.95 Rehabilitation Investigation. The inspection program outlined In SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB Control Number: 2070-0004. a. A copy of each health and safety study which is in their possession at the r this sub art Is int d d t f ilit t th tim th t f t r p en e o ac a e e com letion of rehabilit ti L Beck unit ?O e o manu ey propose ac ure. i t th li t d b t •?, p a on investigations when levees in the Pursuant to section Slit) of the Toxic mpor , orprocess su s ance. e s e It. A list of health and safety studies ?.I pr j program are damaged by flood. The Substances Control. Act (TSCA), EPA known to them but not in their 141 - ??. most recent -inspection report should promulgated a model Health and Safely possession at the time they propose to S J provide most of us genera n Omation Data Reporting Rule (40 CFR Part 716). manufacture, import, or process the i reui ?d t?o suoaort a request to The section 8(d) model rule requires listed substance. _ ,$',,, 1 re ah bilitate a levee un a 04-99. manufacturers, importers, and alth c A li t f h d f t t di Dated: IutY 24,29a5. processors offstedchemical substances . s o e an sa e y s u es that are ongoing the time they is ' Michael Volpe, and mixtures henceforth referred to as ( 'substances) to submit EPA copies and to manufacture, art. propose P - Colonel, corps o En lneers, Execulive l s DirecroroJCivil Works. lists of unpublished health and safety process the listed substance, and are - being conducted by or for them. , (flt Dec. es-16020 Filed s-7-05; 045 am) 20 Fit studies on the listed substances that they manufacture, import, or process. d. A list of each health and so y fer I ' j mwDa coot sn These studies provide EPA with very study that is initiated after the lima they 1 useful information and have provided significant support for EPA's propose to manufacture, Import, or - - process'the listed substance and is ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY decisionmaking under TSCA sections 4, conducted by or for them. . 11 5, 6, and e. e. A copy of each health and safety '. 40 CFR Part 716 Detailed guidance for reporting study that was previously listed as ' unpublished health and safety data is ongoing or subsequently initiated and is (OPTS-84017; FRL-2978-51 provided in 40 CFR Part 716. Also found now complete-regardless of completion d j Submission of Lists and Copies of in Part 716 are the reporting exemptions. ale. Health and Safety Studies on Vinyl Listed below are the general reporting II. Summary of This Rule Acetate - requirements of the section 8(d) model _ ' rule. This proposed rule would add the .'• AGE NCY: Environmental Protection 1. A person who, in the 10 years substance vinyl acetate, Chemical Agency (EPA). preceding the date a substance is listed. Abstracts Service Registry number 108- ACTION: Proposed rule. either had proposed to manufacture, 05-4, to the list of substances in 40 CFR u - SUMMARY., This rule proposes to add the import, or process; or had manufactured, imported, or processed; the listed 716.17. By listing vinyl acetate in the section 8(d) model rule. EPA would chemical substance vinyl acetate, Ch i l substance must submit: trigger the reporting requirements far ty em ca Abstracts Service Registry number 108-Of+-4 to the list of chemical A copy of each health and safety past, current, and prospective ) ly? , substances and mixtures in the Health study which is In their possession at the manufacturers, Importers. and 1 and Safety Data Reporting Rule, 40 CFR time the substance is listed. 2 A person who at the time the processors of vinyl acetate. A53S Part 716. Once EPA lists vinyl acetate in . , substance is listed, proposes to . Ill. Agency Objectives N ) j the Health and Safety Data Reporting Rule, past current, and prospective manufacture, Import, or process; or is manufacturing Importing or processing Vinyl acetate Is a major industrial chemical It Is prepared from ' manufacturers, Importers, and . , the listed substance must submit the . petrochemicals and then polymerized - ) • ?„ - processors of vinyl acetate would be required to provide EPA with lists and following to EPA: a. A copy of each health and safety and copolymerized with other monomers to produce a wide variety of r copies of unpublished health and safety stud whi h I In th i i t th lastics and rostra EPA estimates s studies on this substance. The Agency y c s e r possess on a e i h b l p . l d f l would use this information to support a t me t e su stance is isted. current annua pro uction o viny - s detnfled assessment of the health and b. A list of health and safety studies acetate at 1.9 billion pounds and annual > environmental risks of this substance known to them but not in their Importation of vinyl acetate at 15 million ?. •.N ,e .? . ? . Dare: Written comments on tats possession at the time the substance is listed pounds. The significant end use of vinyl acetate is as an Intermediate In the lr , II -? proposed rule should be submitted by September 0 1905 . c. A list of health and safety studies production of vinyl acetate polymers '"" , . that are ongoing at the time the (I.e., polyvinyl acetate, polyvinyl tvt ADDRESS: Comments should bear the docket control number OPTS-64017 and substance is listed and are being' d d b f h alcohoh vinyl chloride copolymer and th l i l l Th kl should be submitt d t TSCA P bli con ucte y or or t em. e y ene•v ny copo ymers). ese ' I r,. e o: u c Information Officer (TS-793), Office of d. t that Is s list each health and safety stud Initiated ott th d t th polymers will usual) contain some y u nreecled vinyl restore and are used to Toxic Substances. Environmental Protection A enc R E 108 4 1 Ni S a e a y er e e e substance Is listed and is conducted by produce a variety of consumer product s !1 '3! g y, m, - , 0 t., SW.. Washington, D.C.20460• or for them. a. A copy of each health and safely For Instance, most of the vinyl acetate is used to produce polyvinyl acetate 4 fr ( FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: study that was previously listed as which Is then used in: Packaging and ' - I ' Edward A. Klein, Director, TSCA ongoing or subsequently initiated and Is wood glue adhesives, interior latex "4 v ) d Assistance Office (TS-799), Office of now complete-regardless of completion points, paper and paperboard Coatings, , A bb q a r Toxic Substances, Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. E--543,401 1.1 St., SIN., Washington D C. 20460 Toll free: dale, 3. A person who, tiller the time the substance is li oses to t d ro and in the base for chewing gum. Polyvinyl alcohols are used In textile i i d dh i d i l tr t r , . , (000-124-9005), In Washington, D.C.: s e , p p manufacture, Import, or process the, s z ng An a es ves; an v ny chloride-vinyl acetate copolymers are 3" , Gw ly ' -r [f , (554-1404), Outside the USA: (Operator- 202-554-1404), listed substance must submit the following to EPA: used In flooring, phonograph records, and rigid PVC pipe l4 E . N aa < I' r T i add : . l 4yy. 4 . .I ,? .ia .. ?-i?•^ s T1 ul J'j Ij F 1 ++ y 1 r: +l F r 04 1 r? r,?, 'f id lft ? I ? t' . I ' t ?R y t t F. ? ? . . r 1j & r l - i - l r i fit. y j ?I ?l, S r } S- +...-r.-.....,«.......... ?J ?r++ „r,e ,b udnger or the road suddenly dropping off which would re- k quire closure of the road. This,in turn,would close the National Park to tourist traffic. Jefferson County is unable to do the slide stabilization that is needed and s ' would ask your assistance. The county will ask Don Bonker's office to assist in securing funding from Congress to get the work done. The Department of Fisheries, Department of Game, and the local National Park Department per- sonnel are very anxious t i i m o ass st n the work because of the benefit to their fisheries r s ru - e ource and the general public. None of them have any available funding. Your field examination and verification of need will help the county in securing the necessary money. r Early attention is necessary due to the dangerous condition of the road. d 4 Yours truly, M. L. Sanstrom, P.E. a Director of Public Works w,(.f cc: File n G 4?y. 24 1t I V S l 1 ?,.? t .. % .1 T gum" a k, c? pp a t ? t I a _ . Oll F t • y gg i i ' I " I. , , y , a ^ tl W x 40 ,i ? t ? r „ n ?? 1 ?t4 ?1 JV ? ? I 1r I r i January 25, 1980 3 { IC U. S. Army Corp of Engineers E i Col. LeoneK. Moraski, Diet. Engr. 3 Seattle District Copp of Engineers ?4 a P.O. Box C-3755 Seattle, Washington 98124 t Re: Dosewallips River d? Flood Control Dear Colonel Horaski: Jefferson County was recently exposed to a period of heavy rainfall that created flood related problems in the county. One area, Brinnon, is an the d flood plain of the Dosewallips river and lies between the State HighwaP 101, y the Dosewallips River and the Doaswallips County Road. w I think the solution to a long term control of the river is a dike to hold the river in its present course. You and your staff are people with the knowledge and expertise to give us assistance. Would you be able to help us 4 under the Section 205 program? There is a U.S. Poet Office, School, several' if iv fl d d he l qµ r er oo e out t be businesses and residential buildings that wil . decides to do back to the north. ' . I have been requested by•the Board of County Commissioners to contact f? y you. Your early response will be appreciated. Very truly yours, " Milton L.,Sanstrom, P.E. # Director, Dept. of Public Works MLS:al f 6M. 1 1 r? February 23, 1980 To the Jefferson County Commissioners and Engineer s Gentlemen: n the Dosewallips River, Brinnon,Wa, had a meeting The Lazy 'C' lot owners o 1980 at IO AM in the Lazy C Club house. This meeting was 22 Ri ver. , Friday February t could be done about controling the Dosewallips h ' a two.of called to.determine w erosion of land on division one and t h er This is necessary to stop fur the Lazy C Properties. t Theae Officials were present at the meeting. Steve Keller,fish and wild life a Natural u Co missioners. Pof Olympia. Dave ier, nsJeffer$on County t Brow and B Seattle. Carroll Mercer n County Engineer and Public Works Director. _ '? Milton L. Sanstrom, Jefferso n One and Two of Lazy C Properties. i i o s And 25 Lot owners of Div We would like for the Jefferson County Commissioners and the County Engineer od control on fl d o o to send a letter of intent to the Corp of Engineers to and two of the Lazy C Properties the Dosewallips River. Through Division one Brinnon,Wa. 19?9 the flood took out land on lots 34 through 49 on Division took out 18 b l er y On Decem 1 including septic tanks. Only 20 feet left of lot 49• Entire diverted to the road one , lots 143,144, 145,and 146 on Division 2. Then the River The road is now out ice . n Division 2 including the electric and water serv o of service and is impassible to cars. ;? ^ Although this road is not a county road, it has been used by the public ad in Division 2 } for 14 years. It was decided at the meeting that the ro to be a public road without could be declared by the County Commissioners responsible the County being k d „ This may have some influence on the Corp of Engeneers. Sincerely Bill & Estella Clark Lot owner,Lazy C properties a y t? v ••?r FYJ. kx h x 1r r „r cN ap t C° . '? ! Y yi1 tt,, % ` ? a I1 k"? ? ? ?N , • Jai 1 ? p r , ? : l' i A I 1 ' r A { r' 'T T r f? N 1 ? y r, r `J 1 rl p a ? Y p ? Y 1 ?y t ? ?, ° 1 i t ? q w y ? ? 4 Q J? '„?i lld ioa o.mr??am?ir LAZY C RANCH ,..; . q? DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ? SEATTLE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS bar _ P.O. BOX 03789, SEATTL. E WA Coil 2 0 FEB 1980 NPSEN-DB-CI _ ASST CO. I..,-.+I? r•g ,' CCPiST. E`;S' ?R -"OFFICE DKIN:'_'R + F t - Milton L. Sanstrom, P.E. Director of Public Works 80.10 SO?I 31 + S Jefferson County Courthouse - ' .Port Townsend, Washington 9836 i Dear Mr. Sanstrom: This is in response to your 26 December 1979 telephone request for assist- i ante under Section 14 of the 1946 Flood Control Act for prevention of bank erosion damage, and your 25 January 1980 letter requesting further assist- ' ante in providing possible solutions to flooding problems in the Brinnon Flats area. The two sites reviewed for Section 14 applicability were: n . °: tia•. ;:tea:..: a. Dosewallips River near Brinnon, Washington, at the Lazy C Ranch development and b. ',Oil City Road on the right bank of the Hoh River near the river mouth. On 3 January 1980, Messrs. Simon Yang and Lester Soule of my staff met with you and Mr. Bud O'Meara, Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners, for a joint investigation of the Dosewallips River near Brinnon, Washington. The bank erosion damage in the Lazy C Ranch development involves a road that has been completely eroded away. This area was investigated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in November 1978 under Section 14 authority. At that time, only adjacent private property was being eroded. The county was advised that we could not assist in bank protection for private property under Section 14 authority. Following the December 1979 flood, the remain- ing private property and the road have eroded away. Mr. O'Meara identified the road as a private road, and therefore not eligible for our assistance under Section 14. On 4 January 1980, an inspection was made on the Oil City Road, right bank of the Hoh River near the river mouth. A segment of the road shoulder was washed out during the December 1979 flood. However, the county had already performed repair work and it no longer appears to be in imminent danger of failure during the next high water and, therefore, does not qualify under Section 14 authority. J(SSJ'C. W7 f ?, RECEIVED FEB 21 1980 ? JEFFERSON COUNTY J2/, 2D ENGINkERS OFFICE "? IT p}!?>,r t R-' 4f ? 4 i p? "'?v. r^T r '" i q r. , w! ?x `a ? f) I r d 1 Ate ?r a n c ^ '?i 'g1 A K"! MR *a h n 9 n ?!'???lry,?A? ?yI I r ? _ ? C 1. M r a rr 71 Y0`1 7 NPSEN-DB-C I Milton L. Sanstrom, P.E. ..e,. x The statute under which we may assist in construction of small flood protec- tion projects,to eliminate the flooding problems in the Brinnon Flats area, •`'??, is Section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948, as amended. All projects "} have to be economically justified (i.e., have economic benefits which exceed s .costs), be compatible with the environment, and be publicly acceptable. ,pk3y,?fs - Federal participation in any project is limited to $2 million including .•'.?. planning, design, and construction costs, except in areas which have been 'declared Federal Disaster Areas within the past 5 years, then the limit is? _ $3 million. In addition, Federal participation in implementing any plan would be contingent on the local sponsors'agreement to provide the following .' cooperation requirements: a. Provide, without cost to the United States, all real estate inter- -? ?r eats necessary for the construction of the project. 'c bm b. Hold and save the United States free from damage due to the con- , struction, operation, and maintenance of the project, except where such - damages are due to the fault or negligence of the United States or itscon- tractors. ` c. Maintain and operate the project, or integral parts thereof, is accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Army. d. Provide all necessary relocations and alterations of buildings and utilities, roads, highways, highway bridges, sewers, and related utilities. e. Prevent encroachment of improved channels or ponding areas which might interfere with proper functioning of the project. f. At least annually,inform affected interests regarding the limita- tions of the protection afforded by the project. g. Assume full responsibility for all project costs in excess of the p Federal cost limitation of $2 million, as provided in Section 133(b) of Pub- ya lic Law 94-587, approved 22 October 1976. h. Comply with Section 601 of Title VI of Civil Rights Act of 1964 '°f (Public Law 88-352) and with Section 210 and 305 of Public Law 91-646, enti- tied the "Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Poli- cies Act of 1970." dl'1 Flooding throughout the Puget Sound basin during December 1979 has left us fyy 1? ! with a backlog of requests for Section 205 studies. We are now committed to t } vyf other flood reduction studies and estimate that a study of the Brinnon Plate ?? ` yJ + #4 ' area could begin in early 1981. 2 y ^I 0C4 W t Q ; Y L A ^?'ttfAYl ? t 1 i` ' ,5 in i 1' 1ti :r r r Y h i 1 z ?i + { 1 9 ffil NPSEN-DB-CI Milton L. Sanstrom, P.E. If you continue to be interested in pursuing your flood control project under the Section 205 program, inform us by letter of your interest and intent to meet local cooperations requirements. Formal assurance would be required prior to actual construction. Following receipt of your letter, we will schedule a reconnaissance study. If you have any questions or need additional information concerning 205 studies, please contact Mr. Walt Farrar at (206) 764-3604. Sincerely, LE K. SKI lonel, Corps of Engineers - ,- District Engineer r' 3 s lift- ;-e - -vLneers in eliminating the flooding problems on the osewallips River in the Brinnon vacinity. From your letter we understand that assistance may be available under the Flood Control Act of 1948, as amended. Your letter outlined the criteria which would be used to judge any flood control project and, on page two, outlined a number of provisions requiring local agreement. We are particularly concerned about items c and g, the agreement to maintain and operate the project and to assume full responsibility for all project costs in excess of the federal cost limitation. It is the general consensus of the Board of Commissioners that if a flood control project is authorized the cost in excess of the federal funds authorized and the expense of maintenance should be paid by the property owners who will directly benefit from the project. Our thought is that assurance for payment of those expenses could best be met by a Flood Control District for the area. Such a district is authorized by the Revised Code of Washington, Title 86. Could the guarantees which you require be provided by such a Flood Control District? We request that you proceed with the reconnaissance study, and request that you advise us on the question of whether the guarantees can be r ^? a k q ..n"?'u a,. ,I yFi.?Z ??M?;trr? 1 ? ?;{q'?ygrypeA?wx'?.1 f ? fi*•, Wmnon ??" r 1 { , Pr'4?1 L h} 12 h `J h .??1?f4 lr Y l - ?. i Yf r 6? S 1 } ? t 1 '10 k ? L ?U Colonel Leon K. Moraski February 27, 1980 7-1 Page 2 ` i ' met through a Flood Control District or other local entity. zrf Very truly yours, :1 ?-. 0 4'"? n 1 }. ? f { 1 r t y t *d? ? .t ? `4 77 r ? ism 4 '- CORPS OF ENGINEERS' PROGRAM FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SMALL FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF - SECTION 205 OF THE 1948 FLOOD CONTROL ACT AS AMENDED t BACKGROUND: Section 205 of the 1948 Flood Control Act, as amended by 3 . '.. subsequent legislation, provides authority to the Chief of Engineers to , SS - construct small flood control projects that have not already been - specifically authorized by Congress. Each project selected must be complete-within-itself and be economically justified. In addition, each project is limited to a Federal cost of not more than $4 million. This •,..f;.., Federal cost limitation includes all project related costs for investi- ? gations, design, preparation of plans and specifications, supervision - ? and administration, and construction. : - PROJECT SOOPE: A project planned and constructed under Section 205 is , designed to provide the same complete project and same adequate degree E of protection as would be provided under specific congressional author-. , r - ization. Flood control projects under Section 205 are not limited to _ - any particular type of improvement and a project may include features - for other purposes, such as water supply, when local interests indicate e the need as well as the willingness and ability to contribute the proj- act cost representing the cost assigned to that purpose. LOCAL ODOPERATION: Formal assurances of local cooperation moat be fur- nished by a local sponsoring agency. The local sponsor must be fully ?•'' authorized under state laws to give such assurances and financially capable of fulfilling all measures of local cooperation. As a project is dependent upon local cooperation and participation, the basic _ importance of the existence of a legally authorized and financially capable local sponsoring agency cannot be overemphasized. The sponsoring agency must agree to: a. Provide without cost to the United States all lands, easements, f{ and rights-of-way, including interior ponding areas, borrow areas, and d excavated material disposal areas determined suitable by the Chief of Engineers and necessary for construction of the project. b. Hold and save the United States free from damages due to the construction, operation, and maintenance of the project except where . such damages are due to the fault or negligence of the United States or ?, At. its contractors. i}a c. Maintain and operate the project after completion without coat .ti to the United States and in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Army. d. Accomplish without cost to the United States all alterations and p relocations of buildings, transportation facilities, storm drains, util- th - b e con y ities, and other structures and improvements made necessary es and approaches and d brid il di o l g r a ng ra u struction of the project (exc facilities necessary for the normal interception and disposal of local r", ,,_ ,11A cy . , interior drainage at the line of protection). 41. r a e r ` ti3 I, u1 L?J 2 w ? Nt?° `'fisdef ,?? ?€ 4 F 7 wtw e. Prescribe and enforce regulations to prevent obstruction or encrachment on channels and interior ponding areas which would reduce h theior flood carrying capacity or hinder maintenance and operation, and ° control development in the project areas to prevent undue increase in the flood damage potential. f,t J f. At least annually inform affected interests regarding the limitations of the protection afforded by the project. g. Publicize flood plain information in the areas concerned and provide this information to zoning and other regulatory agencies for their guidance and leadership in preventing unwise future development in the flood plain and in adopting such regulations as may be necessary to insure compatibility between future development and protection levels provided by the project. h. In carrying out the specified non-Federal responsibilities for the project, comply with the provisions of the "Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970," Public Law 91-646; Section 601 of the Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Public Law 88-352; and Section 221 of th_ Flood Control Act of 1970, Public Law 91-611, as amended. i. Assume full responsibility for all project costa in excess of the Federal coat limitation 04 million). j. Assume a portion of the mitigaton costs in the same proportion that local costs for land easements and rights-of-way are to total proj- ect coats less mitigation costa. HOW TO REQUEST A PROJECT UNDER SECTION 205: A project is adopted under Section 205 only after full detailed investigation and study clearly shows the engineering, economic and environmental feasibility, and prac- tical acceptability of the project proposed. An investigation of a prospective small project under Section 205 may be initiated after receipt of a formal request from a prospective sponsoring agency fully empowered under state law to provide all required local cooperation. This request and any further inquiries concerning a small flood control project should be made directly to the District Engineer for the con- cerned area. Request for such investigations should state the general nature and purposes of the project desired, indicate the petitioning group's awareness of minimum local participation requirements and define the ability and willingness of the local group to cooperate in project development. Upon receipt of a proper request from local interests, the District Engineer will conduct a prelininary investigation to determine the like- lihood for development through further detailed study of an economically justified and engineeringly feasible project under the provisions of the authorizing legislation. A favorable recommendation for further study TA. M 2 will be made if there is a reasonable probability of an economically favorable•.ptoject in which local interests will probably be able and willing to participate. If the preliminary report is favorable, the District Engineer will pro- ceed with the necessary detailed investigations and preparation of a detailed project report (DPR). The decision to adopt and construct a project under Section 205 is made upon the basis of information contained in this detailed report. The studies for the report will develop project plans and data in sufficient detail to assure that the contemplated project will meet anticipated functional requirements in conformance with sound principles of engineering design, economic justification, environmental protection, and practical feasibility. The environment protection, depending on the seriousness of impacts, is documented through either an environmental assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS). A recommendation favorable to project construction requires satisfactory evidence that the local interest fully understand their responsibilities and that they are legally responsible, financially capable, and willing to cooperate to the necessary degree. The DPR generally requires 2 to 2.5 years for completion. Following these detailed studies, a final DPR and EA/EIS are completed and submitted to the District Engineer for his review and approval. The Division Engineer will review the DPR and EA/EIS to insure the technical analysis of the proposed project was adequate. Upon approval of the DPR and related EA/EIS by the Division office, the documents are forwarded to Office, Chief of Engineers (OCE) for final approval. OCE will review the DPR and EA/EIS, verify the analysis, con- sider all comments received concerning the proposed project, request comments of the governor(s) of the state(s) involved and, if acceptable on all counts, approve the project. Following approval, the District will prepare plans and specifications for the project, and obtain all the necessary signed agreements from the local sponsor prior to implementation of the project. xi ?G r All .1 RW r, Any ?. F' tP" ', y"t r ? r,?r" '1' n r ,J?(p ,115'Pa'tl iron" "" ?,1'?.,?? 1 s Ittl ?kr13.P.mM,au,? '9•'°r" 1""'ri'...,"?"" ."' " v-n?.?S}?T?1i. }??fr1?'l3_'d'?{ 'i? ?' t r ? " k f ` t { N ' C 4 r 1. s+ Ar?.t s? ' d X 1 1 ?Y c ",Yl? ? f k- t "All M I 9w t a -::..;. AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND .(; JEFFERSON COUNTY PORT TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON FOR LOCAL COOPERATION FOR BANK PROTECTION _ FOR THE HOH RIVER NEAR FORKS, JEFFERSON COUNTY THIS AGREEMENT entered into this day of , 1983 by and between the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (hereinafter called the "Government"), represented by the Contracting Officer executing thi.s agreement, and Jefferson County (hereinaftei called the County), WITNESSETH THAT: ti? WHEREAS, construction of the Hoh River Bank Protection Project No. HOH71-83 (hereinafter called the "Project"), was authorized by Section 14 of the Flood :Y u s ?: Control Act of 1946, as amended (Public Law 526, 79th Congress), and will be constructed substantially as shown on Drawing File No. -•qS -1.1, attached as Exhibit "A" hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the County hereby represents that it has the authority.and capability to furnish the non-Federal cooperation required by the Federal legislation authorizing the Project and by other applicable law. Sr ?:d9 NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: y? rs 1. The County agrees that, upon notification that the Government will commence construction of the Rob River Bank Protection Project No. HOH-1-83 substantially in accordance with Federal legislation authorizing ouch Project, Section 14 of Public Law 526, 79th Congress, the County shall, in consideration of the Government commencing construction of such Project, fulfill the following requirements of non-Federal cooperation, to wit: 1 1 w" F Yi A .t a P r r; ?q / J..[P+% LF l 0? J +C r r l r ?tP # I JI1 $S: >4 I wry wyi' V Ah 4a, V t i ! ? 1 'F, ? it Y S ? fl t r ? ? ?s ti f 1 1 + "'t y '?r*Ygl1? ' 4 ?- 1 ,ry?11.. i 1 f l 9 'Y ' 4 s14 4 _ Oil -P . a4 ,(a) Provide without cost to the United States, all lands, easements, and - rights-of-way necessary for construction, maintenance, and operation of the project. r f a (b) Accomplish, without cost to the United States, all relocations and alterations to existing improvements, other than railroad bridges, which may, ?- i be required for construction of the project. IR (c) Hold and save the United States free from damages due to the construction, operation, and maintenance of the Project except for damages due to the fault or negligence of the United States or its contractors. (d) Maintain and operate the Project works after completion without cost to the United States in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Army. (e) Prevent future encroachment which might interfere with the proper functioning of the project. (f) Assume full responsibility for all project coats in excess of Federal coat limitation of $250,000.00, as provided in Section 27 of Public Law 93-251, approved 7 March 1974. 2. The County further agrees to: (a) Comply with the Section 601 of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (PL 88-352) (78 Stat. 241) as implemented by 32 CFR, Part 300, (issued as Department of Defense Directive 5500.11, December 28, 1964) that no person shall be excluded from participation in, or be denied the benefits of, or be subject to discrimination in connection with the projects on the grounds of race, color or national origin. (b) Comply with Sections 210 and 305 of Public Law 91-646, approved 2 January 1971, and entitled the "Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970." 2 r ?+a i i' 3' d" r M ° Irv i r Y 5 Ytt br?fl iLC" ?, ?.a rY5 a idu 4 ON, p ? ( R 1 a? A ! Q(!3 - ? T i?ryq ??+p1 ? it a ?N M 3. 'The County further agrees to pay all royalty costs for gravel and rock required for construction of the project. 4. The County hereby gives the Government a right to enter, at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner, upon land which it owns or controls, for access to the Project for the purpose of inspection, and the purpose of completing, operating, repairing, and maintaining the Project, if such ;.? inspection shows that the County for any reason is failing to participate in the Project in accordance with the assurances hereunder and has persisted in such failure after a reasonable notice in writing by the Government delivered to the Jefferson County Courthouse, Port Townsend, Washington 98368. No completion, operation, repair, and maintenance by the Government in such event shall. operate to relieve the County of responsibility to meet its obligation as set forth in paragraphs I and 2 of the Agreement or to preclude the Government from pursuing any other remedy at law or equity. 3 i ?b..cvusa§w9 ? ._- Mme' ,t the day and year first abuve written. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS JEFFERSON COUNTY APPROVED: By: By: -t Colonel, Corp- of Engineers CHAIRMAN, A.M. 0 MEARA District Engineer, Seattle .i Contracting Officer FOR THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY: By: COMMISSIONER Date: By: COMMISSIONER Date: DATE : Attorney or Jefferson County 4 Ir t YF ? r S ,iJ ? i ? l l t ? t 1 ? ? J IA t r} ? y kilt ar } ?? ' 1 '? P I h ' 4 ? err 1 ? 'P 5 ?! ?rT' LF .7 ,`? 'w'gp49'? ?s` . Y• 7 4 i fi'.yA i'x g 7 5 r ?! +' x S } y AGREEMENT BETWEEN ? a t t ?r? THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA t ?` I, ?? SST. f .? %//1• W AND .. • JEFFERSON COUNTY COL?!, f. _... I s? ^} 72 _r PORT TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON FOR LOCAL COOPERATION FOR BANK PROTECTION t FOR THE'HOH RIVER NEAR FORKS, JEFFERSON'COUNT?` 'rk q THIS AGREEMENT entered into this _ day of , 1983 by and p. between the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (hereinafter called the 'Government"), represented by the Contracting Officer executing this agreement, and Jefferson Sn County (hereinafter called the County), WITNESSETH THAT: WHEREAS, construction of the Hoh River Bank Protection Project No. HOH-1-83 (hereinafter called the "Project"),-was authorized by Section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946, as amended (Public Law 526, 79th Congress), and will be constructed substantially as shown on Drawing File No. E-45-1-12 attached as Exhibit "A" hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the County hereby represents that it has the authority and capability to furnish the non-Federal cooperation required by the Federal legislation authorizing the Project and by other applicable law, ` NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 1. The County agrees that upon notification that the Government will commence + ?k? Mkt construction of the Hoh River Bank Protection Project No. HOH-1-83 " 1 1 rf i substantially in accordance with Federal legislation authorizing such Project, f5 Section 14 of Public Law 526, 79th Congress, the County shall, in Y consideration of the Government commencing construction of such project , I ,'dufi ?M???1 Y eF fulfill the following requirements of non-Federal coo erntion to wit: ?7f tf?k??a "IN Yak-` u ' S ;-? ' (a) Provide, without cost to the United States, all lands, easements, and Fa'? rights-of-way necessary for construction, maintenance, and operation of the a i? project; e ,u (b) Accomplish, without cost to the United States, all relocations and alterations to existing improvements, other than railroad bridges which ma , y be required for construction of the project; M+; (c) Hold and save the United States free from damages due to the construction, operation, and maintenance of the Project except where such damages are due to the fault or negligence of the United States or its - t .} con ractors. - (d) Maintain and operate the project works after completion without cost - IL. to the United States in accordance with regulations prescribed by the • Secretary of the Army. (e) Prevent future encroachment which might interfere with the proper - functioning of the project. , (f) Assume full ibil respons ity for all project costs in excess of Federal t t.:. ` cost limitation of $250,000.00, as provided in Section 27 of Public Law l: . 937251, approved 7 March 1974. (g) The County further agrees to reimburse the Government for the following special features of the project: (1) Roadway Embankment material (2) Culverts (3-36") (3) Subbase and asphalt paving. 51? 2" 1 The total cost of these features is not to exceed $189,000. The funds for the h t features are obligated by the Federal Highway Administration under their Title 23 authority, The County agrees to reimburse the Government for such costa within sixty (60) days offer demand, . c 2 ze an° Department of Defense Directive 5500.11, December 28, 1964) that no person Depart SY be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of or subjected ?, to discrimination in connection with the project on the grounds of race, color 2 P ?f or national origin. ` a (b) Comply with Sections 210 and 305 of Public Law 91-646, approved xwg 2 January 1971, and entitled the "Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970." i 3. The County further agrees to pay all royalty costs for gravel and rock { required for construction of the project. 4. The County hereby gives the Government a right to enter, at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner, upon land which it owns or controls, for access to the-Project for the purpose of inspection, and for the purpose of t completing, operating, repairing and maintaining the Project, if such r f ' inspection shows that the County for any reason is failing to complete, repair 7 "- ¢S i and maintain the Project in accordance with the assurances hereunder and has persisted in such failure after a reasonable notice in writing by the n Government delivered to the Jefferson County Courthouse, Port Townsend, Washington 98368. No completion, operation, repair and maintenance by the 7 7 < Government in such event shall operate to relieve the County of responsibility to meet its obligation as set forth in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of the Agreement, or to preclude the Government from pursuing any other remedy at law or equity. 3 `-, the day and year first above written. THE UNITED STATES OF ANERI(e1 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS JEFFERSON COUNTY r .,. APPROVED: By` By:f d? L 2??//2/I / Colonel, Corps of Engineers C IRMAN, A.M. O'Meara xs District Engineer, Seattle Contracting Officer '. FOR THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY: By: {e.c.GM CO ISISIONER, 15.U. Brown Date: By: COMMISSIONER, John Pitts The foregoing agreement has been reviewed as to orm and substaannce?;fc-on- sideration has been given to the effect of Section 221 of the Flood Control Act of 1970; the obligation of continued performance is not contingent upon any post-commencement act of the sponsoring agency; and the said agreement is hereby approved. DATE: y?E ???? Il`iY Att r ey for Jeffe ao my i i CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY ra u 9 I, JOHN F. RAYMOND, do hereby certify that I am the Attorney for - Jefferson County, and that the County is a legally constituted public body ' with full authority and legal capability to perform the terms of the agreement between the United States or America and the County in connection ;y with the Hoh River, Washington, and to pay damages, if necessary, in the event of the failure to perform in accordance with Section 221 of Public Law n 91-611, and that the person(s) who have executed the contract on behalf of the County have acted within their statutory authority. a- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have made and executed this Certificate this 28th day of.February, 1983. i s ney for effer on ouf 8 / 5' r a r N I Yf' YMb ??M1 . 1+ 4J/1' § ?u I ? ? Il ' 1 OttU? { i .. Ill ' ??A?? d Y YID[ V .' •t ri' 1 1.' r r I W, 14, FORKS ) c>,? ` 'rVLKLFT ON ti ?? PROJECT y ATTLE YPICAL REMERTON Z Y?yy r :TING ` PA\ ?? ' N S SNELTO so q . . •. ? .r r? .- ° ABERDEEN + _ . (S -?QP ChlbOlia OLYMPIA 2 ?` ... ,np - p• Mt. Roinilr ;AL ti:tAR .. s1? _.., :!4t?. ?•1 •'_' .,. ..-.a.._..._a.= ..... .•... 'I i'P. L'w' .1? OF: R0 IS Sl" RWY ENGINEER. DISTRICT SEATTLE r 1 CoRPS':OF'°ENGINEFRS EL"'' FIL : SEAmE,'WASH{NGT01?•'1. '.. ?_ SECTION 14 BANK PROTECTION '''`'`'? H O H -1-8:3 ; -sCCTI°" JEFFERSON COUNTY ROAD 216 XISTING? o HOH RIVER Nk FORKS WASHINv".i 0 . OTYPICA'-=--C-_ SIZE -NVITATION NO NU NO E -45-1-12 0A11 83 FEB R.11 I OSGN. SOUL-E W I CN" MGKINLEY,4W\ I SNFST 1 kA- I ..'- -.-. 1 ?w?n....:wx '?]q?? R? ?ar{7?+,•r,.?s tr"'T.t?.51 ai 1•,.? ._ .. .. .. y ;c- ?,?yy?? ^r? •< r ?'?? Ism' ^? t: (, 7 r ?1zfi { T JEFFERSON COUNTY COURTHOUSE -` NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE JOHN L. PITTS, DISTRICT 9 PoRTTOWNSENO, WASHINGTON..; y February 1, 1983 '• f _ Colonel Norman Hintz p? District Engineer 6 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Post Office Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Dear Colonel Hintz: % ' This is to confirm our converations with your Mr. Lester Soule on January 31, 1983 concerning riprap protection of eroded bank on the Hoh River near Mile Post 4.5 in Jefferson County, Washington., During the December 16 and 17, 1982 and January 7 and 8, 1983 flood, damage was in- 4 flitted to County Road 216, Upper Hoh River Road, approximately 1,000 feet of road-r' iv way lost. Jefferson County is unable to correct the erosion problem due to the lack _ of funds. Therefore, the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners requests - assistance and agrees to provide local sponsorship for the proposed project and will t comply with the following items of local cooperation agreement: p a. Provide, without cost to the United States, all lands, easements, and rights- of-way, including borrow areas and disposal areas for excavated material, determined ` suitable by the Chief of Engineers and necessary for construction, maintenance, and operation of the project. o. r b. Accomplish, without cost to the United States, all relocations and altera- tions to existing improvements, other than railroad bridges, which may be required ? for the construction of this project. c. Hold and save the United States free from damages due to construction, opera- tion, and maintenance of the project, except for damages due to the fault or negli- gency of the United States or its contractors. d. Maintain and operate the project works after completions, without cost to the I!;?Ir 1 f United States, in accordance with re ulations Army g prescribed by the Secretary of the <; u 1 k I? e. Prevent future encroachment which might interfere with the proper functioning k? ;c Ts? of the project. ?1i } i " '+4iC "F d?b'r:c4$n1 4 M pr' s 7 ''? c .? 1 P Ir? ?r I - 1 +'OI ?T} 1 i' h r ; 'v d I; i r I I !<?ui1 ?? I 4. I fi I ? liil7?'r L U h , 11 j? ? , II. y ?A'n t I 7 .4± J g. Comply with Section 601 of Title VI Law 88-351) (78 Stat. 241) as implemented of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Public 32 CPR Part 300, (issued as Department .,q. ' _ of Defense Directive 5500.11., December 28, from participation, in or be denied the be tion in connection with the project on the 1964) that no person shall be excluded nefit of, or be subjected to, discrimina- grounds of race, color, or national origin. r? k h. Comply with Sections 210 and 305 of Public Law 91-640, approved 2 January 7 1971, entitled the "Uniform Relocation Ass istance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970." o . Sincerely, _ r ? A. M. O'Meara, Chairman _ Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners I! revi i ` i .f ?W:h- Q '?^ i ^'k?i'?1VtiTXr1T41yr 77L ?. ?dSMn3n`{.?N rr? ).CkP rra,`t e A ^+j ? 1 ? ,'?? ? J 4yf r? ?' M?^ ? )? ((?at? ,, ? y ? i t ? a? t ? ' f ' r 7i t ? ir r r r February 1, 1983 JEFFERSON COW - HOH RIVER FLOOD DAMAGE Attachment to Request Letter to Colonel Hintz with Data Required by Corps of Engineers k e s J; 1. The A.D.T. for this road is 368, seasonally adjusted. 2. The road is used by local residents living above the lost roadway, by Jefferson County Road Department for access to the county shop and Road Department support facilities, by private timber companies, by the D.N.R., by the National Park Service personnel stationed at the Rain Forest Park, by tourists visiting the Rain Forest Park, by hikers using the Olympic Mountain trails, by fishing, hunting and other out- door sportsmen. It is also used by the P.U.D. and Peninsula Telephone utilities to maintain their lines that serve the Upper Hoh as far as the State Honor Camp. 3. Cost to relocate on a new alignment for a three (3) mile loop on a higher bench away from the river with new right-of-way, cleaning/grubbing, engineering, P.S.&E., construction cost, would estimate at $950,000. Useage of the new alignment would be too late for effective replacement of the lost roadway. Side shifting the road away from the river is not possible because of steep terrain that would require hauling to a disposal site. The new right-of-way required, high haul costs, unstable slopes, make a side shift too expensive, estimated at $500,000. - 9. "The cost to provide access if road is washed out" If this refers to providing a county. access road to Jefferson County standavd design, refer to #3 above. To re- store the over 1,000 feet of lost roadway is estimated to cost $250,000. 5. Contacts of phone numbers of people with this information: M. L. Sanstrom, Director of Public Works, (206)385-3505 Glenn Bagley, Assistant Director of Public Works, (206)385-3505 A. M. O'Meara, Chairman, Board of'Jefferson County Commissioners, (206)385-2016. 6. Schedule would be to start as soon as funding was approved to avoid further loss of roadway which increases cost,and to provide direct access to the area as soon as possible. Work should start immediately, February 7, 1983, but a 30 day schedule for funding authorization procedure.would dictate March 7, 1983 as earliest start work date. 1 9. 1*0 1 ny 4 A M }' ? r /1(d rv.r.. ?i.,f Colonel Leon-l?i District Engineer U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Post Office Sox C-3755 Seattle, Washington 98124 t Dear Colonel {6'als rnski•r ' This is confirm our conversation with your Mr. Lester Soule I d (J ' on Cen/°/?' concerning riprap protection of eroded bank on ` the A Ri i ?('s ver near tlt?Ci/ =y-of in County, iV i During the }7.*2--V1 flood, damage was inflicted to i ) r '° `? C7 (description). rr v - ?v T4tt -e is unable to correct the erosion problem due to the lack of M Cs p' ?e.) ry p ./ funds. Therefore, tbe,? requests assistance and agrees to provide Cspe e? l local sponsorship for the proposed project and will comply with the following items of local cooperation agreement: a. Provide, without cost to the United States, all Lands, easements, and rights-of-way, including borrow areas and disposal areas for excavated maLe6111, determined suitable by the Chil•f of Engineers and necessary for construction, maintenance, and operation of Live project. '?a .r b. Accomplish, without cost to the United States, all relocations and alterations to existing improvements, other than railroad bridges, which may be required for the construction of the project. C. Hold and save the United States free from damages due to construction, operation, and maintenance of the project, except for damages due to the fault or negligence of the United States or its contractors. d. Maintain and operate the project works after completion, without cost to the United States, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Army. e. Prevent future encroachment which might interfere with the proper functioning of the project. f. Assume full responsibility for all project costs in excess of Federal cost limitation of $250,000, as provided in Section 27 of Public Law 93-251, approved 7 March 1974. g. Comply with Section 601 of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 Public Law 88-352) (78 Stat. 241) as implemented 32 CFR Part 300, (issued as Department of Defense Directive 5500.11, December 28, 1964) that no person shall be excluded from participation, in or be denied the benefit of, or be subjected to, discrimination in connection with the project on the grounds of race, color, or national origin. Ur ?ry?b'??' ?a as 5 ? 1 Gclvt'c? J / / r } 3 Cc, s / 7`? /? e ! o c u ( iv r /'/ /(e LI C, Y'" repa;l ? C20 S? 7? ,Qyalir ( c ?'CCr"SvC /? r (? T ?. i G(9G ??vNf f.•<=?i?J?o? cl ?JO?iu/c? (ter c+c? ?i? u ?b ?'{i,Rk? N'A.:7 a f r MuYF 1 it,i ow! a x5 P2 r L ?! 5? t " , p?' 1 1 f+ s 1rllr ^1?'?1 YHh: t -.i + °+? .i a C f?? i Hc3z4 r( ?i1 - d l? F ?-N5ffi9 1 7.b7C?N? 1 f card 1 ?? ? 4,? J I 9 1 ? S w ? rs ? ` ? A Fry ''? 1 ? f w r rr5 ri ,?3 Rwm b ENT OF THL'?ARM D P E ARTM Y 1 ? 1 , SEATTLE DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS POSTAGE AND IEEB PAID - :• ?- HE P.O. 80X C-3755 U.S. DEAR-ENT OF T Aq M SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 90124 D0D-3141 Y ' 1 .-USIVIAIL sa L OFfICIAL BUSINESS . ' .....,..o,.a....,,.. $300 oYB-1-007241 ADDRESS CORRECTION REOUESTED (1 1 ? I J A ll- e z4 A PORT OF PANT TOWPISFt)D " J1 JFFFFRSON COUNTY CPtIRTHOtJSE 4 i'c PORT TOW1J9[NO WA QA368 ? - }? 1 c DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 1 SEATTLE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS r 4 P.O. BOX 03733 ?.. F SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98124 NPSOP-RF np ff1?r? rltl 29 April 1981 1 0 1981 p?Yl3JJ?vJ?O?? Reference: 071-OYB-1-007241 9 Port Townsend, Port of Application has been received from the Port of Port Townsend, 2539 Washington f Street, Port Townsend, Washington 98368 (Attn: George D. Yount, Manager, tela- , phone (206) 385-2355) for Department of the Army permit in accordance with Se- g._ tion 10 of the River and Harbor Act of March 3, 1899 for certain work describced _ _ below and shown on the inclosed prints. !n PROPOSED WORK: or. t a. Location: In Quilcene Bay, Hood Canal, Puget Sound near Quilcene, Jefferson County, Washington. b. Physical Character: Install swimming float, float line, water ski 1 float, and moorage float. t C. Purpose (as explained by the applicant): Public recreation. The State of Washington is reviewing this work for consistency with the f,?f r approved Washington Coastal Zone Management Program. Preliminary review by the Seattle District indicates that this work will not significantly affect the quality of the human environment. The preparation of a Federal Environmental Impact Statement is not anticipated at this time. ' I '.Y Preliminary determinations indicate that the activity will not affect endan- gored species, or their critical habitat, designated as endangered or threat- ' f 4 ened pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (87 Stat. 844). Formal + consultation pursuant to Section 7 of the Act with the Department of the -' Interior is not required for this activity. ! s ti r a .i Presently unknown archeological, scientific, prehistorical or historical data ' ^'; f y may be lost or destroyed by work to be accomplished under the requested permit. µr?, ?? '}]•` i'k The work is not located on a property registered in the National Register of n? ? r Historic Places. lu+ .jr rf The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaLlation of the probnble impact of the proposed activity on the public interest. That decision F(I r r ? i ? i??j 1w Yr rte \?O >?ur??? r 6 } ?u?r (I Kadl a,,? r _?« , ?? r I s l } ti r ?... dy a v .:•r y Y t ?y} I t ? } 11 ? ? 1 .t ! l4 S ?. r nc? j" Y ? n ?4 ?'C, tr rs I ] f1 ! 11 ( ?7p? x !? I ?f '1111 1 I i f J }LL?q+ , ti? Al ??nw -.01 o- .. ?anxywis I®M* Y{ Ra ? 0 IR 071-OYB-1-007241 _ will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of impor- tant resources. The benefit which reasonably may be expected to accrue from ,`,. •,' the proposal. must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. Y -.,?'. .r'. All factors which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered; among ) - those are conservation, economics, esthetics, general environmental concerns, historic values, fish and wildlife values, flood damage prevention, land use, _ navigation, recreation, water supply, water quality, energy needs, safety, _ food production and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people. ?+. Comments on these factors will be accepted and made part of the record and will - be considered in determining whether it wo,ild be i.n the best public interest to grant a permit. Cocrosents should refer to the reference number shown above and reach this office, Attn: Permit Section, not later than 24 May 1481 to insure - "? consideration. f i 1 Incl r ?• Prints (3) i Yrl t'+ttrP 't r? _ y 55 LT F E[]'UMJ,A n, •, ,7?y I?G ? a Y:'2A1pW& WdetlF?tkYM f44'ttlS , a 5N ?4lib YN yr 'SWTN, ' {i 1{i' t L 4 . f ?7 PURPOSE TEAJPORAy PUBL/C 9OAr ` ^ < 1j4902AGE, PUBUG 5W11114m1r r WI.TCK K/lNG \ fa` A DATUM Lo;:FR GYATr.': t A ? Y D,1,4 CENT PROPE,PTY OWNERS. ; w NOTES o E,r,:•a??r?oi,??irF?:-;??s ra,8Ea5E? ?? ? ?'? MORK /TE L / 1S ? Al OA 717 ANCHORS ? 7765 oc,rv,rY MAP ?q ?y fi O FROM-'U.SDE. t' l ?1 V:b?: PK?Fk. t G:'VE (c?/2c'l. E _? ?? OPOSC-o Y<-1jLr2-sK/ F/O r AREA \ ?:?,C Fin o5EG7 B A/' FLOAT r F(?? C ?/N ua c/ j"ll/ ro FG o r ENO.1 Y/I,GC I t 1 NOrF. /rE :zr /s1 1 I LSI TE - I ?cr s01lrmr-< qY PL A/V ?El f/ SCALE: /'= 50 LONI/. /22 •'$/ =S7 Hl ? C?'l.;yCl/,c• L.•-/`!',/AL ? J ? /?OTE: WATER CEYEL I/AR/ES MSG ? 6.70'/opPror.) 0-:/2 ?? MLLW • O.GD' 74 ROUND GE 6-V 2- DATU,SI I?[FERENCE,_ !,LJLLEY?o oO.?-?J?I?.Q!`.O.::I.Ll11- ' _?E!-n/17 /Nt 47 /JL CENC BAY MOOD CANAL, PS. 5CALRS . E 'I•??OQ-A /Z, / 50 1VVA'- OU/LCC-NE 80Ar PA?EN ', r/EFFERSON COU TY, K/ASN/NCB rON !/ER1: /"• 2d' 6Ys Po,er OF FORrTOliINSEND A I g- ' 0 x tp NOTE: 7/ .'/S 4PFF'_:J. / \:. U,''LEE•?/E P?OAT 30G YG5• TO , tYE ,4/o f7?4 V5AII 6,45/N irE -_a PLAN V/,--W SCALE.- °50' G G?'J _r22 `61=s5' V, Zar. ,e7-cam Oe4r luw. iQ CEN ?.? ? FL OATS (J (2Q ?t.? • ?dO,IT FLOAT , ?; ? OCEA "} LG//CF•, ?'`?lii> 1l FLOOR l?._ i 7? 4,•-,-?._a .. =-W- „?,? .` ,? -- •_..?_.,.-... . -ra` T , i 7-'712 eF, c:9?,BODr6.?PRE- CACT N,:oRA?O f?/JCyrR - i . ?7/-OYB l 00%2 A/ .?, To ?<?.. NO jE : /2EA. ANGNnic s c/EEDEG: ROOR14 E QNc/!Ok zonfrAvAls yE? SCE. r y3 GY EXCAj/ON 2 D _ ExisritiG ./k'_<A / / .•\-... 6AtiIoY BEACH-/ r° ` _ /? \ ExlsT`Ny RocK (b ov/ w? ti az< QREPrLpEp ?:0<R 4/*X/ 6>- NEARI L1AI ER LONGER ROAD/ENO) R, .W DEVr/??fE, L..f, t:OJ ?EffERSON COUNT,, X ASN/NGrON a Y•' POR7O/3F 3 oRr• TOWNSEND - sheet? 0 - • Dat, I R r p ? `.. ? . ?. .. ,' V - A o BOLO _ b O ?. A t Ci J { r.. t a YY??FF ? pg \ ?y t C" q? J .I m SaTar ? ? _ N rJ I` , _" aL. i 7 ? m a rc r ? a 1 J J ?oAsT ? .' Or+4,co.r I n y `: I vaearwarerr ? €1 r J ? : ? ?1 ??FCP115 ? yi I?/ ? ?? 1 ` 3 • ? U r ? a r .-q, '? i r 67 SUi c ?> I ?• - , _.c?arnec r ra r f! r ? tM ? I :.r,1p?? I ? I rJ ? r `rti GO. 1 .4u { i ? SupplimentUl In form4tion•tDJerall Plnn) .` i to acwrnpony Port bf Porf Townsend perm'% gppliwHon No 071 -0YE5007Z4I. a a ' PROPOSED F•LOATSFLDATLINE ) Hood " IN Qullaene- BA S tQ'' ? C.ov,al J Puget ound & >;,; tir EAR alACer%e. N ?"? / KJuv 7 of YefFertor St4tC N ,i ` L Appbc4o? By; Port o F Port' ?nserl i {{ ad. O 4-13'81 SHEET 3, of 3 Da1C y .,,;St;? o try rcxV r 'm? :S1 k.r 45a4,jbl" '?•? p){ `it1' r 1`.? r )' p L I ? r 51Efi517?a ? ? ? i ?V ! 4 ? ??''zy yltr r' r J' '?? 7y kr?y< t ? k ?t M I.!VL? ? L Q M r? .r r ? I 57 S al A.c?u r d 01 't u 7 `` k 1 t m. ft5 C ?a IO S KLU G vernor ,ernor iN DONAID W. Go A400' ' ' Direrlo r ?, k STATE OE WASHINGTON 9 DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY M,11151o PV' I I . C)1 m J. LVaehur 1,,n 118504 . r I 29Apri11981 STATE OF WASHINGTON i DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY - Notice of Application for Certification of Consistency with the ,. 1 f I Washington Coastal Zone Management Program e F Notice is hereby given that a request is being filed with the Department of Ecology for concurrence that the project described in the Corps of 1r. Engineers Public Notice No. 071_pyg_1_13137241 will comply with - the Washington State Coastal Zone Management Program and that the project will be conducted in a manner consistent with that program. _ '?- Any person desiring to present views pertaining to the project's compliance * - or consistency with the Washington State Coastal Zone Management Program may do so by providing written comments to the Department of Ecology, Inter-Agency Operations Section, Mail Stop PV-11, Olympia, Wash'ngton 96504. a Please note, our policy requires a minimum of 20 days of ublic notice. The r comment period will begin ?aAl 19R) (date of publication) and run until final comments are received from reviewing state agencies and the local government(s). b d t ,, a ti F e r u 1 ?? ? ? ? ??? ? e `srx d r o x, a ? Id ? ? -I ? ,. ?F + 1 ?' ¦ _ 1 I ? 'N ,fit'' F % yl `?? xL 4? I t r{??r? i t ? di { y . - ql Y r , M 1 . I ?tl Y1? {? I t{ i I'm *y`+:?r 11F ReC YY 3# ;'pj;• , . , ISIEPARTMEN1- O THE ARM1 SEATTLE nISTRIC PS-0E-EN-GINEERS ((11 Sl+++??? i1 P.O '3vss F, r111'v, `Jr/ SEATTLE AG'fpN 991241 ?--: CO. ST Ef I lr i? I d 3` NpSEN-PL-RP 26 MAR 793 1 'f7 Mr. Michael P. Shay '- ` 1126 Maraden Road - f I Port Angeles, Washington 98362 rlrE - -1 -? Dear Mr. Shay: This is in. reply to your letter of 14 January 1981 regarding streambank erosion and flooding on the Dosewallips River at the Lazy C. On 19 February 1981, Messrs. Bill McKinley and Forest Brooks of this office t visited the Lazy C development and met with Messrs. Leroy Wright, Lyle Tinker, and Otto Gregorie. They inspected the flooding and erosion problems and discussed applicable authorities under which the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers could be involved. These authorities include: Section 14 of the + 1946 Flood Control Act, Section 208 of the 1954 Flood Control Act, Sec- tion 55 of the 1974 Water Resources Development Act, and Section 205 of the 1948 Flood Control Act, as amended. Corps personnel have °- previously, in November 1978 and January 1980, investi- gated this problem under our Section 14 emergency authority and determined the area did not qualify since no public facilities were involved. Although erosion is continuing on the left bank of the Dosewallips River, it is affecting only private land. However, if erosion continues, the county road (Appaloosa Drive) and the community water supply line could be threatened in ? r some future flood. Only if the county road were in imminent danger of failure could the Corps of Engineers consider remedial measures under C. .R Section 14 authority following a specific request from Jefferson County. Section 208 of the 1954 Flood Control Act provides for removal of accumu- lated snags and other debris and for channel clearing and straightening for r flood control. Each project must constitute a complete solution to the lq F problem involved. All revetment for erosion protection is a non-Federal cost. Corps of Engineers' assistance is not warranted under this authority I because it would not provide a complete solution to the problem. '1 ti's I ;M If you and your neighbors should decide to resolve the problem yourselves, E „ the Corps of Engineers has authority, under Section 55 of the Water °' cl a Resources Development Act of 1974, to provide technical and engineering RECEIVED a 4ti MAR 2 7 1981, "fig {3 ? ? ., mt JEFFERSON COUNTY e ENGINEERS OFFICE T, rr, r e i L ? ?y?. Ip 8 AN" h I ?` f 1 f 14`t4 1 f?R!'.Z9' 11 ? 4 , ?? ? }5 js 4 r, °st; - ,di'? j .: ?r?dS' nu.d {P^ 4tlAe } - ' ?? • 8 yr NPSEN-PL-RP - Mr. Michael P. Shay r assistance to non-Federal public interests in developing structural and g nonstructural means of preventing damages caused by sbore and streambank ? erosion. This assistance can include review of the specific problems, advice on otential methods to t i d i p preven eros on, an rev ew of plans and specifications. We cannot conduct surveys of the problem area, prepare plans and specifications, nor fund or supervise construction. We would be s ` able, within funding constraints, to assist Jefferson County in regards to m erosion problems at Lazy C if we receive a specific request from Jefferson _ County. • On 27 February 1980, Jefferson County had requested the Corps of Engineers to co d t t i d e' ?' 1 n-, n uc a reconna ssance s u y under the Section 205 authority covering ,.. flooding problems in the Brinnon vicinity. The Corps of Engineers responded -?. by letter dated 13 March 1980 that such a study would be scheduled for early 1981. Subsequent to the 19 February 1981 meeting, Mr. Brooks discussed the Lazy C problem with Mr. Milton Sandstrom, Jefferson County Director of Pub- - r lic Works. Mr. Sandstrom indicated the county intended the Corps to examine both the Lazy C and the Brinnon Flats roblems i th d p n e same stu y. We will _ be able to perform the reconnaissance study covering both the areas this _ spring. If the reconnaissance study identifies potentially feasible 'a measures, then we would conduct more detailed studies and produce a detailed ? >. project report which would include an environmental assessment/environmental F impact statement. If a flood damage reduction project were recommended, the r earliest construction could start would be during 1984. I do not know of any specific programs other agencies could apply to this problem. However, from past experience, you may be able to obtain help on - .._;' erosion prevention from the U.S. Soil Conservation Service. The District ??•'-' Conservationist for Jefferson County, Kerry W. Perkins, is located at: Room 203, 206 South Lincoln Street, Port Angeles, Washington 98362, tele- phone (206) 457-5091. k . If h f h i l ? you ave urt er quest ons, p ease contact me at telephone (206) 764-3690 or Mr. Walt Farrar, Chief, Regional Planning Section, at telephone (206) a 1 764-3604. y' Y Sincerely, ? f LEON K. MORASKI d `.- C*W Cape of Enthan OhOidEnjineer ' ? r ,' Copy Funished: (See next page) - aa'??C wr •+sxs?xnryw5'S E? -'b'"- „} E - - ?a NPSEN-PL-RP Mr. Michael P. Shay + - , ? 4 { Copy Furnished: a. _ Mr. Lyle M. Tinker } r r Post Office Box 127 , Brinnon, Washington 98320 " % i ?j Mr. Leroy D. Wright ? 5103 Rehklau Road Southeast ? Olympia, Washington 98503 Mr. Milt Sandstrom Jefferson County Public „ Works Director • Courthouse _ ? Port Townsend, Washington 98368 _ -? Lt. General William R. Peers (Ret.) 120 McAllister Avenue Kentfield, California 94904 ` M .d ?. r. Otto Gregorie r c/o Mr. Lyle M. Tinker Post Office Box 127 a? Brinson, Washington 98320 `s z } x Mr. Kerry W. Perkins Soil Conservation Service . 206 South Lincoln Street, Room 203 Port Angeles, Washington 98362 3 A"?t YV t ??gC{FA?egeT?? .7i "llt°' rG ,X, f • i 4 ??'? J N?Y 1 r w I[ '?k?? t i t h1??"?l - 4 I - a 'k r J JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS A.M. O'Meara B.G. Brown Carroll M. Mercer CHAIRMAN MEMBER MEMBER Jefferson County Department of Public Works COURTHOUSE PORT TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON 98368 4._d February 19, 1981 Re:' Financial Capability to Maintain Cot.ty Roads „ Enclosed herewith is a copy of the Jefferson County Road Department Budget for 1981. The "Expenditure" section of the budget coded 542.00 is monies assigned ' to maintaining the County access roads which includes the Queets Cannery Road. This as per your telephone request this date for financial data on the county's ability to maintain the road when your work is completed. Yours trylY, r¢n M. L. Sanstrom, P.E. Director of Public Works MLS: e,j s cc: Board of County Commissioners 1 Enclosure (Budget) 63 l i t a r [ i , 411 r fN 1 t t r ?J"?y,? ,? 1 L ": r f t ? ? M ? Milton L. Sonstrom, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS Ed Russell, Real Estate Division U. S. Army Corp of Engineers P. 0. Box 3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Dear Sir: 9 HEADQUARTERS 4 FORT WORDEN, WASHINGTON - OFFICE OF TdE POST ENGINEER E4/au ., ?•..n?r.d..a: 10 October 1947 SUBJECTS Use of Ccunty Fair Grounds Removal of trees at each end of County Airport T02 Board of County Commissioners Jefferson County, Washington it is requested that this Headquarters be permitted to use the County Fair Grounds during the period of 1 April :,948 to 30 kay 1948, for ' the purpose of bivouacing troops of the 2nd Infantry Division. r It is further requosted that consideration be given to the re- moval of the trees at each end of the County Airstrip. Enclosed are three photographs indicating the areas in question. Dotted lines imposed on the photographs, illustrate the approxi- mate areas that need cutting in order to alloy: safe clearance for take-offs in either direction. These trees are a very definate menace to flying a safety. It is further requested that the telephone and power lines at _ • either end of the field be lowered or entirely buried, as they further create a menace to flying safety. LANE Major, CE Post Engineer Ft? " u 1? ho w- Y T ?f y Hd. iJ W e O e 9 W 1 'till, IRA ' '?'? y,,, ..? ?+<..??n-a'ue..:' E???'??.f { ._ _'b"." ar9r+'a1u?+ .a+•.+rwfsr??1s. ..a?.+ -{. Y I 1 ? r? c ? + t ' ?Jlj r s' r i ' E t >a r 1 q. ? ? r ?s)At I 2r ugdR (" { F0??? '?o o I { -? !Y ?; ter ? el z _?"I 1 ? t ?f ? 1 4-'I •2 li j l?F Vi I ? .? ?? lye q ? i ,i ? rewa `r +s ? I?1r ?t???? 1 ! ?? ???? ? ?1 ?''?' a ?.? ? ? j1 tl??„ ??r• { rr•? ? ? _. ? ?? + ??? ? ? ? ^ I ( tF?u w a 1 t .? , ? s ?E b ? 7 ? +l! ,era ? , , ? ?. ? ?.I??+'??I t + - ??? ? i s ,?.-: Inl? .r r`9Y . +?? a ? y cat t I, +i `l? I ? ???'t pl??? i1 ' t! '? ` r ? ? r• ? ! sk 1 i' 4y.51 i ? ° ?' ?± ?""bi ? 1?n`?+ `?' ?Y` ti ,a4.K rL .' ? F tw• q ? { t ?;?! 99rI rffik { r __ r1Y*Y DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SEATTLE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O. BOX C•3733 SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98124 Planning Branch W 9 Mr. Lyle Tinker Lazy C Club .. Post Office Box 119 ? • Brinnon, Washington 98320 Dear Mr. Tinker: tp I have enclosed a draft copy of a U.S. Army Corps of .• _ I >e Engineers handbook on streambank protection which was developed `- to assist citizens and local governments in constructing bank 1 ' erosion projects. It may be of some use to your group or the county. " Sincerely, l r fl V L I? t ` F /s/ Linda Smith - - Enclosure Copy Furnished: Brian Shelton, Director Jefferson County Public Works County Courthouse Port Townsend, Washington 98368 4 i w P? 76 t zoo z? I RECEIVED MAR 12 1984 r 1 v ?: JEFFERSON COUNTY ?is??Ganw?5w? ENGINEERS OFFICE s Fad w b?v??t? 1 u t?.? ? sYr<?L.• A FF x T? y 1 I F; L ? r ti `t .I 6 r u; F G? I I? I CT y_ 7 ? 7J }} h t t I ? ?1 J, i ?'y - X11 y i br< ?c0 - i i r,?? 77 ?( 7T i j, g R 9 nV f P ?7 mt Sy ? P? a ?'? ? - r W H 3 r y t ? Y0j0ln®d Gj $'ulgns - A STREAMBANK PROTECTION GUIDE FOR LANDOWNERS AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS r, - Krf" } June 1982 Prepared by U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station Vicksburg, Mississippi Ad PREFACE 'In recognition of the serious economic losses occurring throughout the Nation due to streambank erosion, the U. S. Congress passed the Streambank Erosion Control Evaluation and Demonstration Act of 1974, Sec- tion 32, Public Law 93-251 (as amended by Public Law 94-587, Section 155 and Section 161, October 1976). This legislation, called the Section 32 Program, authorized a 7 year study to examine the causes of streambank erosion, to evaluate the effectiveness of existing and new methods of bank protection, and to prepare documented guidance for the engineer and layman confronted with streambank protection problems. This pamphlet was prepared principally as a primer for landowners and local governments who must by necessity independently plan, fund, construct, and maintain a streambank protection project. This pamphlet has also been prepared for those landowners and local governments who are fortunate enough to have their property or jurisdiction in a funded project area where streambanks are to be protected as part of the project. Landowners and local officials are often requested to participate in the planning and decision-making phase of such projects. The material in this pamphlet will provide beneficial background information that should enable indi- viduals and local government agencies to more effectively communicate with project officials. t ns era ' - z ?r ?? 401 F! ? k ti ' ,? r a i 2? r' 1 ' r ? r ? TY i l f r , A STREAMBANK PROTECTION GUIDE FOR -? LANDOWNERS AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS PART I: INTRODUCTION 1. The development of methods to control soil erosion have been underway since the "dirty thirties" when wind erosion turned much of the u fertile farming area of the Great Plains into a wasteland. Initial soil conservation efforts were directed towards saving topsoil in agricultur- al areas, however, as the value and use of land near streams increased, the need for effective bank protection techniques quickly became appar- ent. Many miles of streambank along major waterways have been protected as part of navigation and flood control projects, however, many streams still need bank protection. A survey by the U. S. Army Corps of Engi- neers showel that of the 7 million miles of streambank in the United ' States, 16 percent were experiencing some degree of erosion, while J 4 percent were being severely eroded. Although 4 percent seems like a small portion of the total length of streambanks in the United States, the annual economic losses occurring as the result of the severe erosion approached $250 million in 1981 (Figure 1). Estimates by the Corps of Engineers indicate that $1,180 Fyillion would be required in work and T3 material each year to prevent the severe erosion from occurring. 2. Streambank protection is not an exact science. There are no engineering manuals available with construction plans for bank protec- tion projects that are guaranteed to work. Likewise, the information t ? provided in this ah pamphlet ould not be interpreted as providing a fool- h? ar proof approach to save a bank. What this pamphlet can do fqr landowners ' } ?N and local governments is to provide the information needed id organize a ? systematic plan of action for solving a streambank protection problem. ?e By understanding the cause of the problem, matching the problem with a k suitable bank protection method, making efficient use of available re- sources, and by initiating a regular maintenance program once the pro- ' l d h r ,. ? ete ject is comp , t e chances for successfully protecting a distressed q, i?k d t streambank will be greatly improved. nj".,? R t?i '?? t. rrr?'11FP Y '7CplSx lr?'W" y). '?} ?t ?} ?pi? 10'7"9. S4? '?? ?'1 f '41't r 1 .c 1 t ` 1 ? F i y" l .? 1) ' 1 r s t r ? h/1 Y??V 1 r t ? ? d ? } a ' S ?r ? ? r I ry .' '` r T v t c 1 r 1 .? 1 r i?? 1 . /. Yr s i Jaw" ??1Y f`?k i .gig . 7 'd n4..ryyF ? ?, .'1 } kT ?1 ? f? S ' 4 ? - PART II: STREAMS ` r ? s 3. Streams,* lice men, go through a progressive life cycle from H youth-to maturity. While year to year changes can be observed in man, ,r changes in a stream are not always apparent. As a case in point, con- ' y r sider a small stream flowing through a country village. The stream and its banks have always been a fixed part of the landscape. Suddenly a a , bank that has shown no signs of failure since the village was settled suddenly sloughs off. The local population wonders what undetected course of events triggered the bank failure and what terrible consequences will follow. What th_e townspeople do not realize is that the stream is either moving into another stage of its natural life cycle or is responding to s. some impact caused by man's activity. Prior to developing an understand- , ing of streambank erosion and failure, we must first understand the nature of a stream and its bed and banks. 4 a 4. A stream should be considered as a delicately balanced mechanism that is gradually maturing. Naturally, landowners and local governments d woul like to find a stream in a well-balanced condition with smooth, ' gentle bends, well-vegetated banks free from erosion or failures,** and a channel bed that is neither scouring or building up with sediment. Unfortunately, this pleasant picture is often only a passing scene. A stream, like the plants and animals that live near the stream must con- , tinually adjust to new impacts in order to maintain its balance. These , * Although every effort was made to avoid the use of technical lan- guage during preparation of this pamphlet, some words that are per- haps unfamiliar to the reader must be introduced in order to properly discuss ideas related to streambank protection. The meaning of many of these terms is discussed in the text; however, a glossary is pro- vided at the end of this pamphlet for reference. ** Note the difference here between streambank erosion and failure. Erosion is removal of soil particles from a bank surface primarily by water action where failure is collapse or slippage of a large mass of bank material into the stream. - t ?f w impacts are not only caused by man's activities, but are also natural in origin resulting from the maturing process of the stream. When the balance of a stream is,upset, the stream will respond by some compensat- ing action to bring the stream system back into balance. The most common of these compensating actions are streambank erosion and bed scour or build-up. 5. As examples of situations where a stream is thrown out-of bal- ance, consider the following common occurrences: - A dead tree topples into a small stream. Much of the water flow begins to be diverted by the tree against the opposite bank. At the same time water still moving near the tree slows down $Qd deposits sediment. As sediment builds up around the tree, She velocity of the diverted water increases. Eventually the opposite bank begins to seriously erode and a bar builds up over the fallen tree. Thus, the response of the stream to the fallen tree was realignment of its channel around the tree and erosion of the bank opposite the tree. - To increase his planted acreage, a farmer clears off a greenbelt parallel to the stream flowing through his farm. He is then able to plow to the top of the bank. Unfortunately, the farmer does not realize that rainfall runoff will be channeled down the bank face. As the soil holding the shrubs and grass in place on the bank is slowly eroded away, the natural vegetation is lost leaving a relatively smooth slope. The stream responds to this loss of "natural roughness" by seriously eroding the surface of the bank during the next flood. After several floods, the farmer not only loses the land originally covered by the greenbelt, but many valuable acres landward of the green- belt. - A real estate developer is clearing land near a stream. Although many of the large trees are harvested and taken to a saw mill, much of the brush and scrub timber is pushed by bull- dozers into the stream channel to be carried away by the next high water. During the next flood, the refuse is indeed carried downstream and in combination with some dead trees that have fallen into the stream, form several very large brush and tim- ber piles. When low water conditions return, a few of the piles are positioned such that the streamflow is deflected against the bank toes. As the toes are eroded away, the upper banks collapse. Thus, because a developer used improper land clearing techniques, downstream landowners are losing land along the stream through no fault of their own. a . k c x S i7 S at+ !t+ x .:r the on r develops, the stream could respond in one of two ways: by acourino n out its bed or by depositing excess sediment carried by the etrPam onto the bed. Either condition can lead to problems for the landowner or local government. S. The streambed acts as a foundation for its banks. If streamflow v scours out the bed and in the process erodes the bank toe, then the upper bank no longer has any support; bank failure may follow. On the other - Rapid urbanization of a watershed's upstream area has eliminated h?of muc the unpaved and unroofed ground surface area originally a vailable for rainfall infiltrati N t f ff 1 on. o provisions were made by urban planners to control the runoff rate. As a result 5 , the downstream flow during storms is greatly increased The . response of the stream is•to enlarge its channel by bank ero- sion and channel m scour to accommodate the increased flow. As in the case of th e real estate development, downstream land- owners again lose acreage along the stream because planners did x not properly assess the impact of an upstream activity on dow t ns ream flow conditions. 6. The cases discussed above are only a few that could occur when a stream is forced to respond to an impact that is not part of the stream's natural development. Landowners and local governments must realize that most streams are in a continuing state of adjustment (although possibly changing very slowly as compared with the human life- a' span) as the stream attempts to compensate for an imbalance at one loca- ' tion by making changes at other locations. Further, when some form of bank protection is put into place the stream will respond to this change, The response may be insignificant or it could be as serious as transfer- ring the erosion problem to a bank downstream. Thus, protection of a bank should be taken seriously, not only in light of successfully protect- ? ; ing the bank, but considering the impact of the bank protection on the entire stream system. Streambeds E c 7. One of the characteristics of a well-balanced stream is that the ele- vation of its bed remains relatively constant. If an imbalanced co diti 6 • side'of the coin, a stream may not be able to carry its sediment load. ' As sediment is deposited on the streambed, the elevation of the bed will rise,, thus reducing the size of the channel. When the next flood comes, the stream will try to enlarge itself to its original size in order to carry the flood f],w. As the enlargement process occurs, not only will - the bed be scoured out. but both banks may also be eroded as well. The bottom line to this stoiy is that if the bed of a stream is rising or - falling, the investment of time and money into a streambank protection project is questionable because the problem may be with the bed and not - the bank. 9. Prior to considering construction of a project to protect a stream- bank, the landowner or local government should first determine if the streambed is in balance. Typical signs that the bed is not in balance , are: rushing water in an otherwise tranquil stream, waterfalls (often Y called headcuts), or build-up of bars on the bed of the stream. If there is any reason to believe that the streambed in the vicinity of a proposed " streambank protection project is not in balance, then professional assis- - tance should be sought and an opinion rendered before further project planning takes place. If the bed is not in balance, a project should be considered only if the bed elevation can be controlled. This constraint necessarily limits landowners and local governments to work on small streams in situations where the bed elevation is changing - - it n.ea t? - Streambanks 10. When a bank comes under attack, it must be able to resist the attack or suffer erosion or failure. The outcome is dependent on the strength of the attack as counterbalanced by the resistane ? Y e;af the natural vegetation to hold the streambank's soil together and the type or types of soil found on the surface of and in the bank. Soils are grouped into five major types based on particle diameter and whether the particles tend to stick together (known as cohesion): V° h?&F 7 Yl '' Particle ? Soil Type Diameter Range Cohesive ? Cobbles Greater than 3 inches no Gravel ' 1/5 to 3 inches nd Sand 3/1000 to 1/5 inch no Silt Less than 3/1000 inch no y ? Clay _ Less than 3/1000 inch yea The lower limit at which the unaided human eye can see an individual soil particle is 3/1000 inch, thus only cobbles, gravel, and sand parti- cles can be directly observed. Soil particles that cannot be observed can be identified by their cohesive properties. Because clay is cohe- sive it can be molded into a ball that will not crumble. Silt is not cohesive and will crumble when rolled into a ball. 11. Thus, particle diameter and cohesion are the significant soil properties that determine whether a particle will be carried away by i? eroding currents. The larger diameter particles weigh more and are harder to move, thus gravel is less likely to be carried away by swift currents than sand. On the other hand, a clay particle is. more likely u rir to stay in place on a bank than a silt particle because of cohesion ? among clay particles. 12. The soil composition of a streambank can range from simple to ' very complicated. The simplest case would be a bank where only one soil type is found. At the other extreme, the bank could be an indistinguish- able mixture of cobbles, gravel, sand, silt, and clay for which a labora- tory analysis would be required to determine the exact composition. Natural streambanks are often stratified, that is several soil types or g mixtures of soil types are found in horizontal layers (Figure 2). The break between the layers can often be seen on a bank face as•a change in color or texture of the soils material. B ." ti PART III: UNDERSTANDING STREANEANK EROSION AND FAILURE s {' 13. Construction of a successful streambank protection project without understanding why the hank is eroding or failing probably relects more bn happenstance than common sense. Understanding the principles of -; streambank erosion and failure requires study and then considerable " thought in extending these principles to a particular problem. The time spent in careful study of this section of the pamphlet may mean the dif- ference between construction of a successful bank protection project and r. waste of time and money. 4 t 14. As mentioned earlier, the terms streambank erosion and stream- bank failure are often used interchangeably to describe the condition of ,. a distressed bank; however, these terms are entirely different in concept. 4 ? Erosion occurs when individual soil particles at the bank's surface are f r ai carried away, streambank failure differs from streambank erosion in that 0. r a relatively large section of a bank fails and slides into the channel. The major causes of streambank erosion are: - Stream currents y' - Rainfall } - Seepage - Overbank drainage -Structures in the stream i - Wave attack Lj -Freeze-thaw and wet-dry cycles ' -Ice and debris r- Chemical reactions L - Changes in land use ?Y While the major causes of streambank failure are: 4rF1` j` r - Swelling of clays due to absorption of water - Pressure of groundwater from within the bankr - Minor movements of the soil or "creep" ti tir, # - Changes in channel shape due to bed scour or erosion of the ?I' it n 'bank face Increase of load on top of the bank , fr - Rapid drawdown of water against the bank face J t .h' r ? r? I r 1 ? ayi a'U ,1 I r ? ? ,Iti {{S 4 I 4 MONK ? n s xr 1 r r ? i ] r?',?c r ? ' " j a I '? 4 yy ? I ? I I k; I't . . 14 i a? M ? y- - Often, several of these causes work in combination to place a streambank in a distressed condition. + .e m Streambank Erosion Stream currents 15. Soil particles carried away from a bank by currents (or flowing water) are rembved by a:"tractive force" which tends to pull particles along with the streamflow. The removal of particles by tractive force r? is similar to rubbing your hand across a bank surface and picking up soil particles, except that in the case of streamflow, the moving water in contact with the bank rubs against the particles and once they are dis- lodged carries t1?em along with the flow. The strength of a stream's tractive force increases as the water velocity and depth of the stream increase, therefore erosion is more likely to occur during a flood than during normal flow. 16. As streamflow moves through a bend under normal flow condi- tions, the velocity increases towards the outside of the bend (or cut bank) increasing the tractive force to as much as two times the value found in a straight reach of the channel upstream or downstream from the bend. As a result erosion can occur along much of the cut bank, often extending a short distance downstream past the end of the bend (Figure 3). On the inside of the bend the stream velocity decreases allowing supended. sediments to deposit and build up a point bar (Figure 4). Sharply curved bends are more likely to experience erosion along the cut bank than grad- ually curved bends (Figure 3). During flood flow the path of maximum velocity moves across the channel against the point bar, often removing part of the material that was deposited during normal flow conditions. Rainfall 17. As raindrops strike the earth's surface, the water can move overland as surface runoff or can infiltrate into the soil. Raindrops falling during an intense storm often reach velocities of 20 miles per hour as the drops impact on a streambank. When the drops strike the bank, soil clods are shattered. reducing them to smaller particles.. A raindrop hitting a wet streambank forms a crater, compacting the area immediately 10 , r ?ar3r a FT?' 6Fan?mS x 1 , ? . ; ! 'ss 77 ", 1 o in k ?'4 ? nr ?P°?s", r "u ?? ?tk ti y 9 Ms ?z t 5 tF '^ ??? ?1 i r t 4 r r ? r ? ?r ` ! ? $ ohs ? 5 . M " (n34 , a below the center of the drop, and moving detached particles outward in a circle around this area. On a sloping bank, the splashing raindrops tend to shift the detached soil particles down the slope, and probably more significant reduce the infiltration capacity of the soil. With the infil- tration capacity reduced, more and more of the rainfall is diverted down * „a,+ the bank which increases the tractive force of the runoff. During the per';'. storm, runoff down the bank is splashed and resplashed by the falling raindrops. This further breaks up the soil particles carried by the run- off and helps to keep them moving down the bank. ? 18. If the combined action of splashing raindrops and surface run- off removes soil in thin layers, the process is called sheet erosion. k If the runoff down the bank slope forms small channels as it removes soil particles, this process is termed rill erosion. The net effect of sheet and rill erosion, in addition to removal of soil particles that hold vegetation in place, is to remove mineral nutrients and organic matter OAN, leaving coarser, less fertile soil behind. Thus, once the surface of a bank has been eroded natural reestablishment of vegetation may be diffi- cult. Seepage R 19. The portion of the rainfall that does not move down the bank i • slope as surface runoff infiltrates downward through the subsurface layers . of soil and rock eventually joining the groundwater flow unless the path is blocked by impermeable material. If the infiltrating rainfall does successfully reach the water table, the water will move with the ground- water flow from a higher to lower elevation (Figure 5). 20. Groundwater seepage across the face of a streambank is caused by exposure of the groundwater table (Figure 5). The water slightly below the bank's surface is forced onto the face of the bank by pleasure from rF. groundwater movement deeper inside the bank. As seepage occurs, soil ? particles at the bank's surface may be forced loose. The resulting down- r slope movement of seepage water and loosened soil particles can further H erode the bank. 11 % - - LU4 K arainage 21. Closely related to the problem of streambank surface erosion ` due to seepage is erosion due to overbank drainage. Unless properly con- trolled, overbank drainage can cause severe sheet and rill erosion (Fig are 6). Although this problem occurs under natural conditions, it is caused more frequently by land clearing and plowing near the top of a bank without provisions being made for drainage control. t Structures in a stream 22. The potential for bank erosion can be substantially increased or decreased when manmade or natural structures are built in, dumped in 7 , or fall into a stream. The word "structures" is used here in a very broad p. ? sense to include dams, bridge piers, boat docks, rubble, fallen trees, etc. These "structures" can cause significant changes in streamflow characteristics as well as changes in the location of the channel and in th e amount of erosion or sediment deposition occurring in the bed or o u n the banks of the stream. Structures in the stream can be divided into three general categories: - Structures that are built completely across the stream - Structures that constrict the streamflow - Structures that deflect the streamflow 23. The most frequently encountered manmade structure that is built completely across a stream is the dam. This structure can cause bank F erosion both upstream and downstream from the dam site. Upstream from " the head of the dam's reservoir the stream velocity may decrease allowing suspended sediment to settle out of the passing streamflow onto the bed ? of the stream. If the sediment load is heavy enough the bed of the stream Px CY ,' will build up reducing both the slope of the bed and the water carrying capacity of the channel. The stream may attempt to compensate for the flatter slope by shifting the location of its channel which in turn may lead to bank erosion. The possibility also exists that during flood flows a which exceed the capacity of the channel, excess discharge will overflow ,`4`' •, the banks as the stream attempts to force the channel to become wider. i y^ 24. Downstream from the dam a different situation may develop. An the water velocity decreases when it enters the reservoir, the heavier 12 w k .. fN R ? a y ? x ur wgµ? dy J ?t mxr ' vV .wrE1 .c ? ? i V t di h 3 F 1 "r fi f - i r l? ,? '( i I A ? t F . c i JJ 1 1 t K ? E fr ti? ?•r? 1 r ?ti Y ? i I. a4 r l ., M r sediment can no longer be carried and will be deposited on the bottom of r 9.. the reservoir. If the reservoir can effectively retain the sediment, .; the dater discharged from the reservoir into the downstream channel will a' be relatively clean. As the stream.-tempts to regain its normal sediment x .-r load, bed scour and bank erosion .wi e ?e3+y occur. The stream may also tend to meander which will lead to further bank erosion. Some of _ the same erosion proble-ins that occur downstream from a dam may also occur when a check dam (also called a sill) is placed across a stream to stop e ? headcuttin g (see definition in Glossary). 25. Constrictions to atreamflow (Figure 7) can result from natural 1 ° formations like a gorge or from man-made construction such as a bridge. ; k The net result of any constriction is a reduction in the width of the _4 stream. As the constriction attempts to pass the flow, the water approaching the upstream end of the constriction begins to move faster emu, '? r which in turn raises the potential for streambank erosion both upstream from and through the constriction. As the fast moving water leaves the constriction, it spreads out. If the "spreading" water or main flow can- not follow the bankline, a rotating current, called an eddy, will be set up next to the bank. The eddy can cause severe erosion if the bank is not properly protected. Further downstream from the end of the constric- tion, the main flow will contact the bank, possibly causing additional p g erosion. P z 26. Typical structures that deflect atreamflow are fallen trees, _ boat docks, sand and gravel bare, irregular banklines, etc. (Figure 8), a .? x r If the structure is aligned with the stream current such that erosive ,.. I r + currents are deflected away from the bank and eddy currents are not set •`1_,.r ? •' '' J => up, then the structure will protect the bank and possibly cause deposi- a r tion. on the other hand, if stream currents are deflected against one of x iL the banks by the structure or eddy currents develop, then -sae4ees bank x i; `+ r `' c w..k erosion can occur. pp dru?? ° t i r 1 7 i y 4 Wave attack 27 P i } _ . ass ng boats or the wind can set up waves that move across + r r i the surface of a stream. As the waves come into contact with a streambank ' the repeated agitation tends to dislodge soil particles (Figure 9). Wave attack can be a significant erosion force on streams with heavy commercial 13 t eta ? _ traffic and recreational activity or on streams with large areas of open water where the wind can build up waves. Most of the streams subject to •h;; e' bank erosion that must„be dealt with by landowners and lopal governments are relatively small as compared to' major commercial waterways such as the Mississippi; hio, and Missouri Rivers, thus wave attack is general- ` ly not a serious problem. a' M Freeze-thaw and wet-dry cycles 28. In many parts of the United States temperature variations during the winter months can cause banks to undergo one or more freeze- ! r thaw cycles. After the surface of a bank has frozen, an ice layer often forms below the.surface. As the ice layer grows thicker, the surface bank materials aie pushed outward. When thawing occurs the bank materi- u als settle bac% into position in a loosened and more erodible condition. 29. Drying of exposed wet clay and silt on a streambank slope can 95 lead to shrinkage and cracking of the material near the surface, forming a layer of soil that can be easily eroded. During the next period that water moves over the bank face all or part of the layer may be removed. ' r , As the newly exposed material dries out the cycle can repeat itself. 3 Ice and debris 30. After formation of an ice pack, the ice remains essentially ?. "in place" during the winter months (Figure 10) and causes very little ? streambank erosion. As the pack thaws in the spring, the ice breaks up into chunks and begins floating downstream. During this period, the (t p amount of damage to the streambanka is largely determined by whether the banks are still frozen or have begun to thaw. Frozen banks generally r, sustain little soil lose; however, structures such as boat docks, as well ri a as trees and other vegetation, may be stripped away from the frozen banks "-,P", by the impact of the ice chunks or pressure build-up from an ice jam. y ' If the chunks of pack ice pass through a channel where the banks have Y 7 already thawed, severe bank erosion can occur, mainly due to grinding of the ice against the streambank (abrasion). Debris, like ice, can cause streambank erosion by either abrasion or impact-(Figure 11). The ° yf most common debris found in streams are the remains of fallen trees. Hwe?rt. 14 IAOA? J - ? `? Y ? j I . t , v lf j I 01 '3 4 , 4.?. 4' .?f n x 4 Iii.. . d Chemical reactions 31. All of the streambank erosion forces described so far have been,physical in nature, that is, soil particles are removed from the bank by physical action, such as passing stream currents. Bank erosion can also occur as the result of a chemical reaction between the water and soil in the bank. If thisreaction takes place, the bonding between Soil particles is weakaned and the particles are more easily removed by the physical forces. Streambanks with large concentrations of gypsum are susceptible to this type of erosion, particularly if the channel is newly dug, such as an irrigation ditch. Natural streambanks with large concentrations of gypsum are somewhat more resistant than a newly dug channel because the gypsum near the surface has been removed, and the remaining surface materials as well as deposited sediment can form a sur- face layer that is resistant to further chemical reaction. Changes in land use 32. Under natural conditions, a bank may show no signs of erosion for many years. On the other hand land-use changes that influence stream- flow past the bank and the amount of sediment in the flow can cause an otherwise erosion free bank to rapidly become a serious problem. The increasing area needed for urbanization (Figure 12) and the continued clearing of forest and grasslands for agricultural purposes (Figure 13) have dramatically changed the land use in many parts of the United States. Statistics compiled by the U. S. Department of Commerce show that in 1850 only 16 percent of the land area in the U. S. was in farms; by 1969 over 47 percent of the land was being used for farming. In 1930 urban areas covered 3 percent of the land area in the U. S.; by 1969 this percentage had more than doubled. These statistics indicate that nearby half of our surface soils have been disturbed and are potentially etodible V not properly managed and that much of the land now in urban arean is no longer available for rainfall infiltration due to the construction of buildings, highways, and parking lots. 33. The inevitable result of removing vegetation cover, disturbing surface soils, and decreasing the area available for rainfall infiltra- tion is downstream flooding and increased sediment loads. Streambanks 15 r rcrfia 4_1 s ? a f that•once suffered no erosion now are subjected to greater stream veloci- ties during unprecedented flood flows. Increased sediment loads can lead to accelerated streambank surface erosion due to abrasion. In addition, as the flood flow subsides, the excessive sediment load can be deposited on the bed of the stream, reducing the channel's flood carrying capacity. If the deposited material is not scoured out before or during the next flood, the stream may attempt to widen itself to carry the flow,_further eroding the banks. Streambank Failure 34. A streambank will remain stable as long as those factors re- sisting failure are stronger than those factors that could cause the bank to collapse or in the language of the engineer: "The shear strength of the bank soil must be greater than the shear stress required for fail- ure." Two types of bank failures can occur (Figure 14): a relatively thin soil layer sliding down a bank (sand) or a large mass of soil that slips along a curved path deep in the bank (clay). Regardless of the type of failure that occurs, the general conclusion is that "the bank sloughed off" (Figure 15). A decrease in the shear strength of the soil or an increase in the shear stress required for failure can individually or in combination lead to a bank failure. Decrease in shear strength 35. The major causes for a decrease in bank soil shear strength are: - Swelling of clays due to absorption of water - Pressure of groundwater from within the bank - Minor movements of the soil or "creep" Swelling clays or indications that excessive groundwater pressure is building up in a bank cannot be directly observed. Evidence of soil creep can be observed by the development of bank cracks that generally run par- allel to the stream (Figure 16). Increase in shear stress 36. Increases in shear stress that can lead to bank failure are most commonly the result of: 16 f , 3 D - Changes in channel shape due to bed scour or erosion of the bank face - Increase in the load on top of the bank - Rapid drawdown of water against the bank face 37. As the bed of a channel is scoured out by passing streamflow, the height of the bank above the bed increases. Clay and silt banks may fail if the bank height'continues to increase. The conditions leading to failure of a pure sand bank are not affected by the height of the streambank. 38. Erosion of a bank face can increase shear stress in two ways: by undercutting the toe that buttresses the bank (Figure 17) or by steep- ening the bank slope. Sand, silt, and clay banks all suffer increased shear stress as a bank slope is steepened by erosion. A sand bank will fail if it is eroded to a slope greater than the maximum natural slope of the material (called the angle of repose). This angle varies from a maximum of 40° for coarse dense sand to 20° for very fine loose sand (Figure 18). If an eroded sand bank is wet, it may stand at an angle greater than the angle of repose (Figure 18); however, when the sand dries out, the bank will fail. Eroded silt and clay banks can generally stand at steeper slopes than a sand bank. ' 39. Increased load on top of a clay bank can lead to failure. Typical loads includes buildings, vegetation, railroads, and highways (Figure 19). Sand banks are not affected by increased load. 40. During periods of high water, banks can become saturated by inflow from the stream, by infiltration due to rainfall or runoff, or by groundwater sources deep in the bank. When the bank face is covered by water, a pressure balance exists between the water in the channel and the weight of the saturated bank. This balance keeps the bank in place. If the pressure of the stream water is suddenly removed by a rapid drop in water surface elevation (or "rapid drawdown") and the soil cannot drain quickly, a pressure imbalance will exist. This imbalance may cause the streambank !o slough off if the bank does not have sufficient shear ?f strength to resist failure (Figure 20). Bank failures caused by rapid 17 ^?:e 18 ?FC PART IV: I14PLEMENTING A PLAN OF ACTION TO PROTECT A STREAMBANK t 41. There is no substitute for professional engineering assistance ' to solve a streambank protection problem. When the professional level of assistance is r•t available, this pamphlet can be used to give the x _ landowner and local government guidance in developing a plan of action j9 to protect a distressed_:streambank. Such a plan of action has eight . basic steps: , _ Step Action p 1 Determine why the streambank is in a distressed condition, 2 Decide if the bank is worth protecting. 3 Inventory available resources. 4 Select a bank protection method. v? 5 Develop a project plan. 6 Obtain a permit. } 7 Construct the project. 8 Inspection and maintenance. ? . Following this plan of action cannot guarantee that a distressed stream- bank will be saved. However, by using an organized approach to deal with a bank erosion or failure problem the chances of success will be improved and the possibility of a fruitless investment of time and money f greatly reduced. ' Step 1: Determine Why The Streambank Is In A Distressed Condition 42. The search for clues to determine why a streambank is eroded or why it failed is often an "after the fact" investigation: In most instances healthy streambanks warrant only a passing glance. When a bank becomes distressed and public safety or loss of tangible assets becomes a factor, only then does the typical landowner or local govern- ment become concerned about the well being of the bank. 43. Many distressed streambank problems start during floods. Because of high water, direct observation of developing bank 19 ?. r Ah URI d r I Y,l ! ' ?:l f ? H ?i r N f1 ? ? ? 1 ' a Y 1 ? ti ' ? ? rs i? 1 l q?yl t ? ,r ?l , erosion or failure is often impossible. Only after the high water has receded can an attempt be made to determine why the bank eroded or failed. a f In malty cases, the clues must come from inspecting a raw steep bank whose surface vegetation has been stripped away leaving only large trees leaning " towards the strear. with parts of their root masses exposed. What hap- pened? Did flood flow scour out the toe leaving an unsupported bank... difficult to tell if the bank sloughed off and covered up the eroded toe. Did the stream current erode the bank face back to a slope steeper than the bank could stand..... difficult to tell since the erosive action could not be watched. Did clay swelling in the bank due to flood water inflow cause the bank tq fail.....difficult to tell since clay swelling cannot be observed. ` 44. Obviously, these are cases where professional assistance is q but where does this leave the landowner or local government needed ;t ..... when aid is, not available? The answer to this problem is to avoid trying to identify the cause(s) of streambank erosion or failure strictly on the basis of an after-the-fact investigation. Putting together a well- documented history of the development of a distressed bank cannot be based 9 on a single inspection visit. Streambanks should regularly be visited to check for "warning flags" that may indicate troubles are ahead (Fig- ure 21). Typical signs to look for are: +}"" Exposed Roil : - Loss of vegetation and fenceposts a - Sheet or rill erosion resulting from rainfall, overbank drainage, or seepage - Cracks in the bank - Overhanging banks - Undermined trees with roots exposed .. - Scour along the bank toe ?A4 r y! - Changes in channel bed elevation ' - Wave action ' Rapid drawdown Increased load on the top of the bank 1- - Higher flood stages than have occurred in past years 4?n a. - Logs, debris. and sandbars in the channel that could ? deflect eroding currents into the bank } 20 f u sa, N'YC 7 E ?( I t? 1 4 '•WE('IIVC? A ` ? 1 ! i. ,. A } + y lE i y W if11-. IAN' V , A a 4 ? .? W 4? s a y , T` g s ?VV M ? ? ? R R? 1 'S r 3 rl, 7 5 , ? , ? , 0,_ f r ?, ? Y , I k Tk? ? 11 a f ? 45. These types of problems should be recorded during an Inspec- tion visit on a dated map sketch of the site (Figure 22). This sketch shoulA show the location of the streambanks (top and toe), eroded areas, vegetation, fence lines, buildings, 'sandbars, logs, debris, and any streambank protection works already in place. Side views of the bank should also be:made at various locations. Be sure to reference all side views to some fixed point such as a tree or fence post. Photographs should be taken (and dated) and the locations from which the photographs • are made shown on the sketch. Additional visits should be made on a reg- ular basis, probably once during low water season (normally during the - - summer or fall) and once immediately after any high water period. 46. Even if there are no.problems observed during a visit to the streambank, a dated map sketch should still be made for future reference. If the day comes that the bank does become distressed (Figure 23), his- torical information will be available that may give a clue to the cause of the problem and to what type of measures would be most effective in dealing with the erosion or failure.* Hopefully, the solution will be ; obvious such as constructing a bulkhead at the foot of the bank to r p event erosion of the toe due to wave action. On the other hand, the problem may be more subtle and will require professional guidance. The sketches and photographs made of the bank over past years will provide the engineer with inval bl i ua e nformation needed to make sound recommendations for ro- p tecting the distressed bank. a 47. The suggestions made in the preceeding paragraphs do not pro- ? vide much guidance for landowners and local governments who do not have the advantage of historical records but need to identify the cause(s) of streambank erosion or failure. If study of this pamphlet and the cur- rent condition of the bank do not provide the clues needed t6 determine Another source of historical information is aerial photographic sur- veys conducted b the U S D y . . epartment of Agriculture Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service (ASCS) Ph . otographs are made every six°to ten years over most agricultural areas. A check should be mad i h _ F f ; e w t the local ASCS office to determine if photography is available and h i . r ow t can be ordered. Costs are usually minimal. , 21 uw -.? a '?IA'??ttiF 1,? t t 9 sfn, mawt d,5'.M x 8 +' nH arr ? n y ., t W' asp sa 3 s 1 3 uJ"d:7 ? y ` ? q d , r Ni ?t ,1 r: ? .. t J f ? ? ar 1 4'? a r k1 a ? h m Al why the problem developed, then the last recourse is to draw on experi- ' ence gained through solutions of similar problems that have occurred in P f i l a i l b d d ro ess ona the p st. ass stance wil e nee e in most.cases to ex- tend available past experience to a'specific problem. Step II: Decide If The Bank Is Worth Protecting ` P 48. If examination of a distressed bank condition indicates that t P the problem is not related to the rise or fall of the streambed elevation, and those causes that have placed the bank in a distressed condition can be identified, then the landowner or local government must decide if F action should be initiated to protect the bank (Figure 24). Unfortu- nately, the question is generally not should the bank be protected but instead is the bank worth protecting or turning the question around, what is the risk-if the bank is not protected? Consider the following situa- tions: - Farmer Brown has 50 acres of bottomland that he occasionally i _ uses for livestock grazing. The stream adjacent to the pasture bottomland has been slowly eroding the bank away for the past 1, _d 15 years. A local contractor estimates that Brown will have A to spend at least $5,000 to protect the bank. Downstream from Y the erosion site, Farmer Brown is gaining some acreage due to sediment deposition. Although this area is not building up as L fast as the upstream pasture is being lost, it is suitable for , grazing--should Brown invest $5,000 to protect the eroding bank? vc - Dr. Jones has a home valued at $150,000 on the bank of,what is normally a small stream. An unusual number of floods over the past 5 years has eroded the bank to within 50 feet of Jones' s.s home. An engineering firm studied the problem and determined that the flooding is probably caused by accelerated runoff from the parking lot of a large shopping center upstream from Jones' home, although the evidence is not conclusive. Farther, the engineers recommend protecting Dr. Jones' bank by constructing several dikes extending into the stream. These structures would deflect eroding currents away from the hank and would slow down s the water flow near the bank. As the water slows down the sedi- ment it carries should be deposited between the dikes and on the eroding bank. If sufficient sediment deposition occurs the dikes will be covered u and the bank restored back to its ' original condition. The only problem wlth•this approach is that the eroding currents deflected away from Dr. Jones' bank by the dikes may cause erosion on the opposite bank. This possibility ` could bring about legal action. Should Dr. Jones have the dikes 4 a 22 r 7 7' y, } ) ! Y 5. }? !? J 1 Y ? d J ! rl I ?S Q 'Y y }?? ? , t& ; built.....consider another approach to protect the bank,,... move his home..... abandon the home ..... tough decision. Mr. Smith purchased 50 acres of hardwood forest adjacent to a stream for $1,000 per acre. Foresters told Smith that he will have $20,000 to $30,000 worth of marketable timber in 10 years with inflation discounted if his stand does not become diseased which is a common problem in this area. A year after Smith purchased the land, he noticed that the streambank had receded 10 feet; at that rate 10 percent of his timber stand would be lost by the time the timber matures. The local Soil Conserva- tion Service district conservationist tells Smith that he could place a mattress made of used tires on the bank for $10,000 which should control the erosion. So Mr. Smith is faced with investing $10,000 to save 5 acres of land (which will appre- ciate in value) and $2,000 to $3,000 worth of timber provided the stand does not become diseased..... another tough decision. The city of Pickettville is located on State Road 32 which par- allels the bank of a major waterway. Pickettville's main water and gas lines were placed under SR 32. Several major floods have seriously eroded the bank and endanger SR 32 and the util- ity lines for a distance of one-half mile along the bank. During past floods, city, county, and state crews have dumped enough rubble down the bank to save SR 32, but all agree that sooner or later the river will take the road. After several years of discussion the City Council wrote the Corps of Engi- neers for assistance. The District Engineer authorized a study to be conducted. The results of the study indicated that the bank could be stabilized; however, for one-third of the cost of the streambank protection works, SR 32 and the utility lines could be relocated. Further, emergency funds could be made available for this relocation, but sufficient funds were not available for construction of the more expensive bank protection works. The Corps of Engineers report also predicted that the bank could stand only one or two more major floods before SR 32 and the utility lines would be lost. After these losses, no further significant city or private damages would occur within the foreseeable future. The City Council finds that the community is strongly opposed to the proposed relocation because SR 32 would have to be rerouted through the city's park and across the playground of the elementary school,,. With an election on the horizon, the City Council has reaervations about the relocation. On the other hand, if the bank washes out next spring, the council will be blamed for not proceeding with the Corps of Engineers proposal. 49. Each decision to determine if a bank is worth protecting is unique. No:step-by-step guidelines can be laid out for reaching P. decision. Tangible and intangible assets must be weighed against the anticipated costs of proposed solutions and in some cases, legal and 23 as. ?" ',k r` . LPiFG t ? Y I '(1 F Y C "r n ^9+?rt n ?"" `, i?w HM ... u 5 ?k t9 ?.1 r k l J ? ? ?i? '+' - r if ? : f ? 1\ 1 ti 1 l ?J 'I r q a4 u J qtr' h I X ? r ?.? i1 k , 511 , ? ? n ? s political consequences. Thus, with all of these factors under consid- eration, the final decision to protect or not protect a bank ,at ultimately rest with the landowner or local government. Step 3: Inventory Available Resources i p 50. Once the decision has been made to protect a distressed streambank, an inventory should be conducted to determine what level of group or community cooperation should be expected and to identify available financial, technical, manpower, equipment, and construction material resources. The results of this inventory will determine to a large extent what types of streambank protection works are feasible. Group or community cooperation 51. Distressed streambanks rarely begin and end at property lines, thus bank erosion or failure problems are, in many cases, group or community problems as opposed to an individual problem. Prior to initiating individual action to protect a streambank, adjacent land- owners should be contacted. Possibly a cooperative effort can be organized that would mutually benefit everyone involved. Otherwise, a well planned and properly constructed streambank protection project could be damaged or.lost because erosion or failure continues on adja- cent property. By pooling resources, a much lower cost per foot of bank protected may result from a group or community effort. In addition the bank may be effectively protected for a longer period of time because the entire length of an eroding or failing bank was protected as opposed to only a portion of the bank. 52. Another important advantage of group or community, action is legal protection. For example, an improperly alligned streambank protec- tion project could direct stream attack against a downstream neighbor's bank, or the project could present a safety hazard or be considered as an eyesore. If such undesirable consequences can be directly linked to an individual's streambank protection activities, he may be found liable for damages. Group or community agreement regarding the method to protect a 24 1 yr -"i' S?Lx.6. ?;aom ?£Cw 9r'dh@?i?V.?.'Y}L.; YPi,G4+ ?"T?". Y i...: ?:" " ' E? ' ? i_ ._ 9pF,g ? , t Q ?; ?e4?i ?' .? • ...x i:Gt C Z bank'should be reached prior to construction. A legal contract reliev- ing all of the principals involved of any tangible or intangible damages x? resulting from a streambark protection effort can help to avoid strained relations and legal problems. Financial and technical assistance 53. Financial and technical assistance may be available from the U S A cr . . rmy Corps of Engineers, U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Con- " servation Service, and various state and local agencies. Under present law, the Corps of Engineers cannot provide financial assistance for a streambank protection project aimed solely at protecting private property; howe ver, the Corps of Engineers can participate in the funding of certain kinds of emergency protection work under the authority of Section 14 of ' the 1946 Flood Control Act (Public Law 79-526) and Public Law 84-99 . 54. Section 14 of the 1946 Flood Control Act, as amended, states: "Th S e ecretary of the Army is hereby authorized to allot from any appropriations heretofore or hereinafter made for flood control, not to exceed $10,000,000 per year, for the construc- tion repair rest i , , orat on, and modification of emergency stream- bank and shoreline protection wo k t r s to prevent damage to highways, bridge approaches, and public works, churches hospi- , tals, schools and other non-profit public the e i opinion of the Chief of Engineers suchwork advisable: is Provided, that not more than $250,000 shall be allocated for this purpose at any single locality from the appropriations f or any one fiscal year." Distressed streambanks that could qualify for funding under Section 14 must be close to highways and bridge approaches that are considered to be of national importance, or near principal highways, streets, and roads needed by local communities and adjacent settlements or roads designated as primary farm to market roads. Distressed streambanks adjacent to dr "public works" or structures used for "nonprofit public secyices" may 7 ti also qualify for funding. "Public works" specifically means those es sen- tial facilities that serve the general public and are owned and operated ? d? U? by Federal, state, or local governments, such as municipal water supply systems or sewage disposal plants. "Non-profit public services" relate as„q ?s to structutchs that are fully open and available to the general public such as churches, public and private nonprofit hospitals, and schools. 25 n 3 7 e} a ? ? ". WO o? ? d A MV 1ot? i l" ( o of"' ? ??" i o ? dd??++ ??4 1 F 1 ??? I 1 ? r ? 1 y ? ?. 't 55. Each project funded under Section 14 must be complete within itself (that is not part of another project) and must be economically justified meaning that ,the benefits received must exceed the coat of planning, design, and construction.- The procedure for obtaining Federal assistance under Lite Section 14 authority includes: A written request for help must be submitted by local offi- cials to the District Engineer (addresses and phone numbers are listed in the back of this pamphlet: a map is provided in Figure 25 showing district boundaries). An evaluation of the streambank erosion or failure problem must be conducted by Corps personnel. The Corps of Engineers must prepare a report that includes a description of the problem, one or more proposed solu- tions, any environmental impacts that may occur as a result of implementing a proposed solution, and an assessment of the economic feasibility of the solution. The local sponsors must agree that they will provide without cost to the United States, lands, easements, and rights-oE- way necessary for the construction and subsequent operation of the project, participate in the cost staring of the design and construction of the project, and provide main- tenance of the completed project. Funds could then possibly be assigned to the proposed proj- ect; however, funding is dependent upon annual budget allo- cations. The average time needed to plan and construct a project under this au- thority is two years. In extreme emergency situations this time can be reduced to six months. 56. Public Law 84-99 authorizes an emergency fund, to be expended at the discretion of the Chief of Engineers, for flood emergency prepara- tion, flood fighting and rescue operations, and repair or restoration of any flood control works threatened or destroyed by flood. Thus, funding for streambank protection under this authorization is limited to the repair and restoration of existing structures that were constructed pri- marily for flood control (although streambank protection may have been an indirect benefit). Exceptions may be made for streambank protection works constructed by the Corps of Engineers. 57. Even if financial assistance is not available under the authority of Section 14 or PL 84-99 the Corps of Engineers can still 26 '` ns 1 3 7 N,i t 9,7F-f 6' axw?traw arx ?t, u u ,1 h r is I r L h ._ 1 a?I r r i r .. ? :1 ?,.?ri:,:. .. .. •a?,Ya ?. , . u??,?'_. .. ., ,,..Kar,?t?z. ..?_.... .;.. ,» ..,_.... _..aW,,._,:?- ,. -,'..u .,..:..: ? .. .,a?,,-??rc?is.'f..t+s:?r??i s >? ,x ea'.-. aZ., '?. .. provide technical assistance. Section 55 of the Water Resources Develop- ment Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-251) authorizes assistance to non-Federal public interests in developing structural and nonstructural methods to s., minimize damages that result or may:result from streambank erosion or w failure. 58. Another source of assistance is the Soil Conservation Service 4 : (SCS). The SCS has an office in each state capital and generally a local office in each, county (a telephone number is listed in most directories). _ At a landowner's or local government's request, the SCS will inspect a distressed streambank. If a problem exists that warrants remedial action, the SCS will madrecommendations and assist in developing a plan to cor- n rect the problem. Some financial assistance may be available through the Agricultural Stabilization Conservation Service (ASCS). To be eligi- ble for funding the streambank must be adjacent to an agricultural pro- ducing farm of at least 10 acres. If this requirement is met the ASCS can fund an annually determined percentage of the total project cost not ° to exceed $1,500. The SCS will assist the landowner in obtaining finan- cial aid through the ASCS if the project is eligible. 59. The state offices of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) are sources of valuable information useful for planning. A variety of geo- logical and topographic maps are available from the USGS. They also col- jW, lect and can furnish data on streamflow and water surface elevations at many locations (the Corps of Engineers may also have data). Other possi- ble sources of technical information and assistance are state geological surveys and state departments of public works, transportation, and natural resources. Some local agencies may also be of assistance. Manpower, equipment, and construction materials 60. If good group or community cooperation is developed, sound a technical advice is provided, and sufficient financial assistance is n' authorized, then the availability of manpower, equipment, and construction materials may not be important considerations. Unfortunately, these opti- tii ?? t+ mum circumstancea are rarely realized. A more realistic situation is ka rX, some technical advice, no financial assistance, and the responsibility for rounding up manpower, equipment, and construction materials being 27 t n r r left entirely to the landowner or local government. Thus, the type of i streambank protection works to be constructed are, in part, dependent on the resourcefulness anti inovation of the builder. ' 61. Once manpower, equipment, and construction material resources are inventoried, project planning may be pretty well boxed in. If man- power is limited then labor intensive streambank protection works are not feasible..... if equipment such as trucks, tractors, and graders are ' not available, then movement of large amounts of soil and rock will not be possible..... if materials needed to construct the project cannot be sit 7 ' economically obtained then other solutions to the streambank erosion or failure problem.pwst be considered. Obviously the manpower-equipment- construction materials inventory is essential to the success of the pro- t ject, thus, no stone should be left unturned. Solicit manpower from neighbors, friends, Boy Scouts looking for a community service project, etc. Equipment and operators can possibly be secured gratis or at a 3 M nominal fee from sympathetic construction contractors, timber and logging companies, or state and county highway departments. If suitable con- struction materials are not available, look for substitutes ..... although quality stone riprap may be desirable for a project, consider substituting broken pavement, concrete blocks, brick or tilt (provided it is heavy enough not to be washed away by the streamflow). If the timber needed to construct a bulkhead is too expensive, consider rounding up used tires from local service stations, and then stacking the tires to form a bulk- m head. Landowners and local governments, who are willing to negotiate, p ::. substitute, and scrounge, stand a better chance of constructing a success- ful streambank protection project than a builder who takes the attitude 5 of "we'll make do with what's behind the barn." ? 'I h ? Step 4: Select A Bank Protection Method f- A r# r t 62. The selection of a method to protect a distressed streambank is the key Step in the "eight step plan of action." .At this point, the ? ti landowner or local government has hopefully correctly assessed the reason A ? Yd° tr. that the bank is in a distressed condition, has decided V it the bank is ; K 28 Y worth protecting, and has carefully conducted a resource inventory. The problem and available resources must now be matched against a bank pro- tectijon method that will effectively control further loss of the bank. An improper match may commit the project to failure before construction is ever started. 63. Prior to making the final selection of a method to protect the bank, every avenue:yf technical assistance should be explored and all legal ramifications carefully weighed. Consideration should be given to every feasible type of streambank protection. Methods that have proven to be especially suitable for use by landowners or local govern- ments are discussed later in this pamphlet. The text and photographs describing these methods should be studied in detail to appreciate the full range of alternatives. When all possible information is in hand, the selection must be made; once past this point the resources are com- mitted. 64. 'ethnical advisers will almost always recommend that permanent protective works should be built but understand that landowners and local governments cannot always afford the large costs. This means there may have to be departures from standard designs to provide some degree of protection against erosion or failure. These compromises will tend to decrease the initial cost of construction; however, higher maintenance costs and shorter project life are inevitable. The danger is to under- design the project to cut costs and as a result risk total failure. Step 5: Develop A Project Plan 65. Improper project planning can result in problems during the entire period of construction. Time invested in detailed planning prior to beginning construction will yield dividends throughout the life of the project. Project plans should be laid out in steps; a typical plan 1s: a. Prepare drawings of the construction site showing detailed protection structure; this may a have views already the been done by a technical advisor. 29 b. Arrange for financing the project. r g project plan has maintenance possibilities included; thus, future funding requirements may need to be anticipated dur- ing preliminary planning. c. Draw up and sign any legal contr t ) ac s needed to protect the landowner(s) or local government. d. Investigate potential adverse environmental impacts that may result from construction of the project (see discussion 'in following paragraphs). e. Apply for all permits required for construction. - f. After all required permits are approved, determine when construction can begin and when it should be completed. If there is a lengthy delay between initial plannin and g construction, project plans should be reviewed to determine if1the selected streamba k n protection method will still be effective. p,. Insure that road access to the site is available. " h. Make arrangements to secure all materials needed for con- structi on and be sure that delivery can be made before the materials are needed at the site; essible areas at the site where the material r a s canbe stored i. Determine that the constructi on period will be properly coordinated with manpower and equipment commitment s, weather conditions, and low water. ' 66. Although environmental impacts may not be of immediate con- tern to a l d !1 . an owner or local government in the process of developing plans y to build a streambank protection project, a construction permit applica- tion could be rejected because the proposed project has an adverse impact. Typical examples of projects that would probably not be approved because of adverse environmental impacts are: - Automobile bodies placed on a bank across the stream from an exclusive housing area; the homeowners will claim that the bodies are not l on y an eyesore but will lower the value of their homes. '` - A used-tire mattress constructed by a farmer on a bank above a sand berm that is used ' as a beach during low-water periods. Bathers will say the nmttreas denies recreational access to the beach because a mattress is difficult to walk over. The farmer views bath ? h` ers as trespassers but is not sure where his property line is because the atream has changed its course several times ove *` r adl a d r past years. - A set of fences built from a bank toward mid-stream k ti? a..t r n . Although the fences will deflect the current away from the bank and encourage sediment deposition pleasure boat y. , ers will regard the fences as n hazard. j 1 30 a, r r: 1 JL ry ?' {'Ai ? L ?' D i`J? t?M i G k7 h r Y y 4?9jY ? + ???I . . y x vm ?G 1 ? . k Cor " 1 1 ? I S Y i it 3 ?{ 1 ?? . Y y f I I } b I 1 ? _ 5 1.1 z ?e a r if there is any doubt as to whether a proposed bank protection method constitutes an adverse environmental impact, the agencies that issue the _ neces$ary construction permits should be contacted prior to submission of the required paperwork (see next:section on permit requirements), Most g ies wil' try to work with the applicant by suggesting modifi- cations or alternatives to the bank protection plan, such that the en- vironmental problem wil,4 be eliminated or minimized and the applicant will still get the streambank protection needed. _ 67. On the other side of the coin, construction of a streambank protection project could have positive environmental impacts such as @s reducing the sediment load of a stream by protecting an eroding bank or ° improving the appearance of a raw bank by grading it off and planting grass. Hopefully, consideration of impacts will be built into the land- owner's or local government's project planning process such that the environment is improved because a bank was protected. - `i - Step 6: Obtain A Permit 68. A Corps of Engineers permit is usually required if a landowner _ or local government plans to build a streambank protection project in the "Waters of the United States." The Corps of Engineers was assigned the responsibility for issuing permits by the Congress under _uthority of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. The purpose of this F ; legislation was to prevent alteration or obstruction of navigable water - Y ways in the United States. 69. Water pollution and maintenance of freshwater supplies have become serious problems in the past few years. Responding to this need , the Congress passed legislation requiring permits for the discharge of dredged or fill material into the navigable waters of the United States (Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1973 as amended by the Clean Water Act of 1977). Administration of this permit program was also assigned to the Corps of Engineers. In 1975, r ? the U. S. District Court for the District of Columbia directed the Corps of Engineers to extend its responsibility to regulate the discharge of R 31 4::. dredged or fill material under Section 404 to all "Waters of the United States." 70. What does all of this legislation mean to the landowner or local government trying to protect a streambank? The term "Waters of the United States' includes all dry land and water-covered areas between the ordinary high water marks on navigable streams and between the top of the banks on nonnavigable streams. Thus, any proposed bank protec- tion project requiring soil excavation or fill or a project where a struc- ture is to be built within the zone defined as "Waters of the United " States will probably require a permit. r= 71. To rg4uce the delays that would result from processing a permit for each streambank protection project, the Corps of Engineers has issued a nationwide permit. This permit covers streambank protection projects on small streams that would have a minimal adverse impact on the environ- ment. The Regulatory Functions Branch of the Corps of Engineers District having jurisdiction over the stream in which the project is to be built Y_ should be contacted to determine whether the project is covered by the 71 nationwide permit (the addresses and phone numbers of Corps of Engineers districts are listed in the back of this pamphlet; a map is provided in Figure 25 that can be used to determine which district a particular proj- ect is in). If the proposed project is covered by this permit, the land- owner or local government will be advised in writing and construction can begin. If the project is not covered by the nationwide permit, the Regu- latory Functions Branch will advise the permit applicant that he'must apply for either a general or individual permit. 72. General permits are similar to the nationwide permit but are limited to specific areas. Before a proposed streambank protection proj- ect can be authorized by a general permit, the following inPbrmation must °ayr: be submitted in writing to the Regulatory Functions Branch: spf a. The number of the general permit under which the applicant thinks the proposed project can be constructed. r? rf;4 -''' b. A statement that construction will be conducted in compliance • ?+Y . with the terms and conditions of the general permit.. A map showing the project location.. 32 J a? - d. A drawing of the ?. project including the amounts of excavated `+' and fill material (in cubic yards) that will be required to 1 complete the project. %e. A brief description of the need for the project. _,f. The estimated starting and completion dates of construction. r g. The name, address, and telephone number of the person(s) apply- ; ing for the permit. ' Upon receipt df this information, the Regulatory Functions Branch will advise the applicant in writing whether the proposed project is covered by a general permit. 73. If the proposed project requires an individual permit, an application form (Engineer Form 4345) must be submitted. Engineer Form Y 4345 can be obtained from the Regulatory Functions Branch along with pam- ?. •r h phlet EP 1122-2-1, "U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Permit Program, A Guide for Applicants," which describes the application procedure for an indi- vidual permit. The form should be filled out completely and accurately £ " and submitted to the Regulatory Functions Branch along with a map showing the location of the project and a good quality, easily reproducible draw- r ing showing the important features of the method proposed to protect the streambank (Figures 26 and 27). Each application is then evaluated to determine the probable impact that the project will have on the public r `` interest. During the evaluation, a public notice is prepared and circu- lated for comment to the Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish ? ?• and Wildlife Service, and other appropriate Federal and state agencies and interested individuals. If there are no objections,,a permit will be issued in writing usually within 60 to 90 days after a completed appli- cation is received. t ` 's 74. Objections to the project that are received in response to the public notice will be discussed with thw applicant by personnel of ' the Regulatory Functions Branch. Possibly, the proposed design may only 5}?g4,/? a • i I have to be slightly modified to eliminate the objectionable feature. On 1 the other hand, a completely new design may be needed. Regardless, an +rr applicant should never begin work that requires a Federal permit before official authorization is received. Persons responsible for willful or direct violation of Section 10 or Section 404 may be subject to fines eY 33 ?. r 7 "'" f ' r,.. 1 *? , IT! 1 1 "tll# 1 ,: krk l 96.4 ?" a M2 1 0. ? A I t '+ 1 } 1 ',?l1 l1 } } 4`+ F ? ? "?-? T ? ? I t l L St l+?ttR ? rC` 1 ? ?tµt j a kn ? 1 ! l t 1 . 4 - ranging up to $25,000 per day of violation and imprisonment for up to one year. 75. All states tequire a water quality certification stating that a proposed project will not violate the water quality standards of that state. The Regulatory Functions Branch can advise the landowner or local x' government regarding which state pollution control agency to contact for the water quality certification. In addition, the Regulatory Functions Branch can furnish information about other permits that may be required. Step 7: Construct The Prolect 76. When all required permits are approved construction may begin (Figure 28). If the landowner or local government is handling the con- F struction, then timeliness, efficiency, and safety are the keywords - timeliness in constructing the project when the water is low and the bank is dry; efficiency in arranging for the availability of materials, equip- ment, and manpower to reduce any loss of working time; and proper safety ?`. considerations to minimize the chance of accidents. Several common sense safety precautions should be followed: Safe access and working conditions must be maintained in all construction areas. b. First aid supplies must be available. All workmen should be physically able to undertake the effort required. No one should take unnecessary risks such as working in or near deep water without a life preserver. c. Protective clothing, such as safety shoes, gloves, goggles ? , and hard hats should be worn by all workmen during any type f v,r o activity requiring protection. d. Construction materials should be stored in an-,orderly manner c on a solid, level surface. r a. Waste materials should be removed from the work area regu- larly and disposed of properly. 77. If a contractor will be hired to construct the project, bids 4 i should be obtained from a number of sources to insure obtaining quality ! {'t work at the lowest price. Another factor to consider in selecting a con- r tractor other than cost is experience. If the contractor has not previ- ously constructed streambank projection works, he may have difficulty a G ]4 ?rlIs s ? 9ne sd'- ?? t .a,F r Yz ? J ?{ f ? I } ..T 77777T7 0!, Y( (lh ? a ti? ?. R i ' 1 { t e 4(5 I 1?y J i z r, fi a;p s completing the project because of inexperience or underestimating the job. When a landowner or local government enters into an agreement with a contractor the contract should clearly state the responsibilities of both owner and contractor. The contract should indicate exactly what will be built, how much material will be used, the beginning and ending dates of the construction period, and cost. Contract plans should be pro- vided by the contractor Step 8: Inspection And Maintenance 78. A streambank protection project will generally require main- tenance in some form or another if the project is expected to protect the bank on a long-term basis. Periodic inspection of the project is a good policy for landowners and local governments to initiate soon after constructiop is completed (Figure 29). Early detection and proper main- tenance of a developing problem will not only avoid needless expense and property loss but could eliminate a potential safety hazard, 79. Each inspection or maintenance activity should be well docu- mented with dated photographs and sketches. For example, a gradual loss of vegetation or stone riprap may not be readily apparent during an inspection visit; however, comparison of photographs or sketches made over several visits may indicate that a problem is slowly developing. Another method that can be used to monitor a project is to drive a straight row of plumbed stakes into the bank. These rows can be placed both parallel to the stream as well as up and down the bank. If any of the stakes tilt out of plumb or shift out of line, then bank movement is occurring which may signal that problems are ahead. 80. Once a need for maintenance is identified, more Frequent inspection visits should be made until the necessary steps can be taken to correct the problem. If no maintenance of the streambank protection works is required or anticipated, then an inspection during the summer or fall low: water season and after each high-water period is probably sufficient to make sure that no serious problems develop without the knowledge of the landowner or local government. 35 4 Ax u HIMM H?p 1 n D ! . S r t l ? ?? t `AI V ? I ? 4.t lr' a, i ? Two Case Histories 81. By carefully following each step of the "Plan of Action" sug- gested in this pamphlet, a etreambank protection project will have a bet- ter chance of effectively doing the fob that it was designed to do as opposed to the builder taking a "hit or miss" approach and hoping for the best. As an example of the need for a well-developed plan of action, consider Farmer Green, who has property fronting an eroding bank. Green inspects his bank and finds that erosion is occurring in several areas. Not bothering to talk with his neighbors about the problem or to seek technical or financial assistance, Green decides to protect the eroding n streambank with automobile bodies that he can purchase around the county at a nominal price. During the summer, Farmer Green randomly dumps bodies on the eroding banks without chaining the bodies together or attempting to tie them into the bank. The scene is now set for a real problem. During the next spring, record rainfall over the upstream watershed causes -r flash flooding. The automobile bodies are scattered for several miles downstream along the bank and in overbank areas. Many of the bodies col- lide with bridge piers and docks as they drift downstream. As a result, ' Green is sued for damages by both landowners and the county government, In addition, the Regulatory Functions Branch of the Corps of Engineers s District having jurisdiction over the waterway in which Green dumped the w bodies, informs him that he is in violation of Federal laws having fines up to $25,000 per day of violation and imprisonment up to one year; also, he may be in violation of state water pollution laws. Clearly, Green's approach to bank protection was not properly planned. 82. Consider the same situation as described above ekeept that Farmer Green follows this pamphlet's plan of action. After studying the section on "Understanding Streambank Erosion and Failure" he concludes that his bank erosion problem is due to passing stream currents during flood flow. After some consideration, he decides that he will try to anus the bank and to follow the suggested plan of action as closely as possible. He talks with hie upstream and downstream neighbors who have Y? ;? 36 i i similar problems. Collectively, they decide to contact the county's Soil zy Conservation Service (SCS) office and request that the district conser- vationist inspect the eroding banks. The conservationist determines that there are ten eroding sections fronting the bankline of the landowners, five of which should be considered as serious and five not so serious. He recommends planting willows along the less seriously eroded banks. In four of the seriously eroded areas the conservationist suggests dump- ing concrete rubble that may be available from a nearby highway recon- r. struction project. At the fifth seriously eroding area, the bank is rapidly failing on one side of the stream while a point bar is building t up on the other bank. The net result is a continuing exchange of produc- tive farmland for a nonproductive sandbar. The conservationist recommends construction of several post and wire fence dikes extending from the existing eroding bank into midstream. These structures will encourage 1 sediment deposition (and build up the eroding bank) while forcing the current against the sandbar. This type of fencing could easily be erected during a low-water period using group manpower and available farm equip- ment. The conservationist also agrees to help the landowners apply for financial assistance from the Agricultural Stabilization Conservation Service (ASCS) and to secure a sufficient number of willow shoots from ' the nearby SCS Plant Materials Center* to plant on the five less seriously eroded banks. 83. After contacting the State Highway Department through a state legislator, the landowners are advised that the concrete rubble is avail- able at no cost. The highway construction contractor agrees to break the pavement up into small enough pieces so that the rubble can be handled with a front-end loader. The County Highway Department agrees to remove ? the rubble from the construction right-of-way and to dump the material r on the four seriously eroding banks providing the landowners will provide the necessary access. The ASCS advises the group that $1,000 can be made available for construction of the fence dikes. * A listing of SCS Plant Materials Centers is provided in the back of this pamphlet. 37 % ^sr" pi reee _ 1?" ?_ , jRR ; ?5 e ?. 84. At this point, the equipment and resources needed to construct v" the project are available. Farmer Green and his neighbors and the SCS conservationist then develop a project plan which includes the following major work items: a. Prepare a legal agreement to be signed by the landowners releasing them from apparent damages to each other's prop-? .erty as the result of the streambank protection project. i- b. Draw up diagrams and maps showing how the bank will be pro- tected at each of the ten locations. c. Lay out access routes to the five seriously eroding banks. ;rv S d. Collectively agree to provide the manpower necessary to f.? construct the fence and plant the willow shoots as soon as ` possible after the beginning of the We high water has gone down, growing season and after th "r r e. Request that the county highway department dump the rubble e " . as soon as access routes can be made available. 85. After the project plan is completed, the landowners in consul- tation with the SCS conservationist determine that no apparent adverse •' environmental impacts will result because of the proposed construction. The next step is to contact the Regulatory Functions Branch of the Corps of Engineers District in which the project is to be constructed. The Regulatory Functions Branch provides the landowners with Engineer Form •? - ' 4345 (Permit Application), pamphlet EP 1144-2-1, and information on how to apply for water quality certification from the State Pollution Control t Agency. The landowners complete and submit Form 4345 and the state form ' for a water quality certification; 60 days later both the approved permit r " ;. and water quality certification have been received and construction can proceed. After the project is completed Farmer Green and his neighbors agree to periodically inspect the parts of the project fronting their r; r G property and to report any problems to the other landowners., r, 86. The two examples discussed above probably represent the n•' k extremes in landowner and local government streambank protection prof- STtV ects...one project where nothing was done right and the other where the ;gt 4 project was well-planned and there were no problems with resources or permits ...a model project. The majority of projects will fall-somewhere Y in between these two extremes; however, all efforts should be initiated t with the goal of constructing a model project. etc-. { q ?4# 38 r S its ti? r? 9 ? ?M, yy 7?m ?5 S? ml, e r?7 1'?' N d ,? p , r z rG? 'Y YEi 3?q ? G"?'1 .. r r -? 1 ? • X94 ? r hg F r ? .+rt rF % 4 ? tt Y CC _ 1 r 1 I,I r f r - Emergency Preparedness ,87. A well thought out plan of action is the only effective ap- proach for long-term atreambank protection. However, when a streambank erosion or failure problem rapidly develops under emergency conditions the time required to work out a plan of action is not always available. Forced decisions must often be made on the basis of personal judgment without the benefit of having sufficient time to properly evaluate the t problem. In areas where flooding and streambank failures are probable , landowners and local governments should compensate for the lack of available response time by developing an effective emergency prepared- ' ness plan. 88. An emergency preparedness plan to deal with distressed stream banks should include, as a minimum, the following elements: a. An adequate stockpile of materials and equipment suitable for an emergency streambank protection effort should be maintained (shovels, picks, sandbags, sand, first-aid supplies, field lights, generators, etc.). r b. Local organizations that normally respond to emergency ' situations should be involved in planning meetings for coordination purposes and to establish responsibilities. These organizations may include Civil Defense, Red Cross, Salvation Army, local law enforcement and fire depart- ments, amateur radio operators, etc. S. An up-to-date list of the leaders of organizations that can provide manpower during emergency situations should be maintained. Such organizations typically include National Guard, FFA, Boy Scouts, civic clubs, volunteer fire and police, etc. d. Authorization, access, keys, etc., should be kept up to date for the use of locally available private and govern- ment equipment such as trucks, endloaders, bulldozers, etc. e. A list of county, state, and Federal offices that can provide emergency aid should be maintained. Landowners and local goverments who plan for the day when emergency atreambank protection is needed will be repaid for their efforts. As a result of emergency preparedness planning, the response time needed to deal with a potentially disastrous situation will be reduced and the bank under attack will be less likely to be found riding a flood crest several miles downstream. lsf.'r 341 9 r AM ?s a 4( pints §?a wa"ot r i t z ? ? r:,Y r r ? ?? i r A rA _t c PART V. STREAMEANK PROTECTION METHODS • 89 Th . ere are six general approaches to be considered when dealing with a streambank erosion or failure problem: - No p:otection for the bank. :.- - Relocate endangered assets. - Implement effective land use management practices. - ? v - - Reroute the stream channel away from the problem area. 8 . - Remove streamflow obstructions. - Pl an, construct, and maintain a project that will provide the needed streambank protection. z; The decision to protect or not to protect a bank is part of the planning process (Part If the landowner or local government decides to pro- tect a distressed bank, then there are five remaining approaches; these 9? f approaches are discussed in the following pages. Relocate Endangered Assets 90. For problem areas where streambank erosion or failure must be ' halted, relocation may not be a Y practical consideration. However, if the bank can be allowed to erode or fail without any serious consequences other than loss of a structure, road, or utility line, then relocation of these assets away from the problem area may be a viable solution (Fig- ure 30). If relocation is feasible, the key factors that must be consi- dered are the bank recession rate and the available relocation distance. If a bank is receding at a rate of 10 feet per year and a road can only be moved 20 feet, relocation is not a logical consideration; however if the bank is receding 6 inches per year, then relocation would be a much more attractive solution to the distressed bank problem. Recessions rates can often be determined from dated photographs, surveys, or plat maps. } Once a recession rate has been determined, this value should be used with care if there is any reason to believe that the rate'may increase or trlk 2 t? decrease. Relocation without the benefit of any recession rate informs- y ?g 'y, •, tion is risky at beat. 40 ..? q •` i' 'a P f `' d7 3 M?Nf? n°( ?a p' wry i r k ` thk! ? f? Y} ly?.? f ? a',.f 1 V? 1 n d e. i y> r r ?t u`r 7 r ; s Implement Effective Land Use Manage ant Practices f x G k 91. Landowners and local governments can reduce the probabilit y of streambank erosion or failure by..maintaining or implementing effec- tive land use management practices. These practices include: Protection of existing vegetation along streambanks. - Regulation:of irrigation near streambanks. - Rerouting overbank drainage. - - Control of rainfall runoff. Minimizing load on top of streambanks. 92. The protection provided by existing vegetation on streambank slopes and in greenbelts adjacent to streambanks is often the key factor that prevents development of a distressed bank condition. Several basic 1 land use management practices should be observed to protect the vegeta- tion: G b reen elts should not be clear cut to the top of a bank to provide more land for cultivation (Figure 31) or to provide a better view. The greenbelt prevents overuse ti of the top bank area by man, animals, and machinery. The belt also retards rainf ll '. a runoff down the bank slope and provides a root system that binds soil t particle s together, - Many distressed streambank problems are caused by J trees that are gradually undermined by flowing water and topple into the stream. Fallen trees can cause $ two problems: they may divert the streamflow into the ^ banks or may leave a large, exposed hole susceptible to ' . erosion. This problem can be prevented by selective tree removal (Figure 32). People, vehicles, and grazing animals should be kept 1 off of streambank slopes so that vegetation is not rt stripped or trampled (Figure 33). If access between the top and toe of the bank is d d t nee e , steps oV a ramp should be constructed. Fencing can be erected along the top of the bank t k i r r i o eep vehicles and grazing animals back from the bank. g ` 93. Irrigation near a streambank should be regulated such that protective vegetation and cultivated plants receive their needed amounts T ly F of water. On the other hand irrigation should not be so excessive that the bank becomes saturated. This condition may lead to swelling of cla y material or increased groundwater pressure from within the bank, both of u 41 r d epkegti A' 1, i. r s swn.++-n ?? O I?; ag , g=;?e? rpn 1, „ { '?}ht?l r f 4 1r { ? • ?'u17 X57{ l L { ? 1 1 r? , _{ J4 ,e• 17 1 1 C 1 s e ..,,y alt, fl '.+ A J.. ' which may lead to bank failure. Another type of irrigation problem can develop during the summer months when stream levels are low. Because ^ crop irrigation is most intensive during this period, seepage may develop on the bank face. As seepage occurs, soil particles on the bank surface may be forced loose. The resulting downslope movement of s eepage water and loosened soil particles can further erode the bank . 94. Unless effeceively controlled, overbank drainage can cause R surface erosion and the formation of gullies on streambank slopes. Over- bank flow can be intercepted and rerouted away from the top of a bank by ditching or a diversion dike (Figure 34). The ditch or dike should be :.; laid out along the top of the bank to a location where the water can be safely discharged into the stream without causing soil erosion (such as through a lined ditch or pipe, Figure 35). Runoff should not be allowed to pond behind a berm and drain through the bank face as groundwater y, seepage because the bank may become saturated and fail. 95. Good soil conservation practices such as contour farming , terracing, strip cropping, controlled grazing, and construction of farm ponds can play a major role in controlling local rainfall runoff. [.'hen such conservation practices are widely and intensively used, they can r change flow conditions so that more of the runoff is held in fields and ponds or at least delayed such that peak flood flows passing a stream- bank are reduced. With flood peaks reduced, the potential for bank ero- sion and failure is decreased. Urban development can also change rainfall s runoff conditions but not in the beneficial canner of effective soil con- servation practices. Buildings, highways, and parking lots cover large areas that were once available for rainfall infiltration before urbaniza- tion. The reduction of natural surface area and the construction of effi- ;. cient stormwater sewer systems in upstream urbanized areas can accelerate r l L rainfall runoff and result in greater-than-natural downstream flood flows. V: ?, Zoning to control the locations of urban growth can help to alleviate downstream flood problems. kf 96. Excessive load on top of clay banks and some silt banks may 7 a r "7, lead to failure. Buildings, heavy vehicles, and vegetation can all con- ib tr ute significantly to the load. Since a detailed analysis by an S i"?r • ?,rc u, ry 42 s -a t c 4':r a Y }f ?1 ?.f t t 1 r? ?? i x" f } +t .( }v ky ? r . F 1 v? engineer is required to determine how much load can be safely placed on top of a bank, the best policy is probably to not construct buildings near the top of a bank and to keep heavy vehicles away from the bank. Excessive load due to vegetation (large trees) may cause failure (Figure y6c ;'' 36); however, the..a trees may be part of the greenbelt that protects a bank. Professional guidance should be sought before any large trees are removed from the top of-a bank. Reroute the Stream 97. If streamflow, along the outside bank of a bend (the cut bank)x is the principle reason that a landowner or local government finds a bank in a distressed condition, then relocation of the channel can be an eco- nomical alternative to more costly approaches to protect the bank (Fig- ure 37). Channel relocation is usually accomplished by cutting a pilot yr channel from a point upstream of the distressed bank to a point downstream from the bank. Because the slope of the pilot channel is steeper than the natural channel, the stream will start to flow through the pilot than- ' nel. This flow will erode soil from the banks and bed of the pilot chan- nel thus increasing the water carrying capacity of the new channel. Eventually the pilot channel will capture the streamflow as water move- ment through the natural channel is blocked by sediment deposition (Fig- ! r ure 37). Although excavating a pilot channel with heavy equipment or, explosives may provide a quick and relatively economical method for keep- ing streamflow away from an eroding bank, this action may cause serious future problems. Shortening the length of a channel can upset the natural balance of a stream. As a consequence, bank erosion may result upstream from the pilot channel and flooding downstream. Prior to developing a plan to protect a streambank by excavation of a pilot channel, the Corps of Engineers or the Soil Conservation Service should be contacted for professional guidance. 43 4 ?a Remove Streamflow Obstructions 198. Obstructions in a stream channel can alter the. flow character- istics of the stream in a manner such that bank erosion and failure may occur. Typical problems are: - A tree undermined by passing flow can fall into the stream and deflect the current against a bank (Figure 38).- - Log jams can develop at constrictions such as a bridge or a narrow reach of the stream or when one or more trees have fallen into the stream and block the travel of logs and debris floating downstream. The stream may try to flank the jam and, as a result, erode its banks (Figure 39). - MidZhannel sand and gravel bars form when the stream velocity decreases to a point where sediments can no longer be carried by the water. As a bar forms the current may be shifted against a bank causing erosion (Figure 40). - As water passing through the inside of a bend slows down, the sediments moving with the current flow settle out and start building up a point bar. As the bar builds up it can deflect the stream current against the bank across from the point bar (called the cut bank; see Figure 41). 99. The remedy for fallen trees and log jams is twofold: saws and safety. Due to the unstable nature of fallen trees and log jams in a stream and the potential danger of injury when using high speed chain saws, rigid safety practices must be enforced while clearing a channel. Once a log is free, it should be removed far enough from the channel such that it cannot be refloated during high water and contribute to another log jam (Figure 42). 100. Because of the large volume of sand and gravel involved, the landowner or local government probably cannot remove a midchannel bar or point bar. The alternative is to let the stream do the work by using the following procedures. If there are tall trees growing on the bar, they should be removed with a tractor and a block and tackle, if neces- sary. Always remove trees and as much of their root masses as possible. The extensive root system of large trees hold the sand and gravel in place on the bar.' If the tree is too large to pull out, cut it down at ground level. Smaller shrubs need not be removed at. first since their root sys- tems are usually shallow. If later observations indicate that the shrubs 44 ?' , ?t ti 7 l a'3,7 r . rw r 1 % I ", 1 ?.? " ? 7 t ?? i z r kit _? ri f f " rl, v •. icy r Vim '4 f ' are preventing the bar from eroding, then they will have to be removed. ct Next, dig one or more pilot channels through the bar. The pilot channels b d can y ug with hand tools if trenching equipment is not available or if - the bar is not accessible to machinery. Locate the channels at such an angle that a rapid current is diverted into the trench. This rapid cur- rent is needed to erode the bar'(Figure 43). If the bar is large, several w pilot channels may have:to be dug. Any large stones or leaf debris should ' be raked off the sides of the bar. This will increase the current flow along the edges of the bar and promote erosion. If the bar is not removed by flow through the pilot channels, a current deflector can be used x . The deflector consists of a brush pile or fallen tree secured at a point upstream from the bar. The current deflector should be positioned in such a way so as to divert the stream current against the bar (Figure 44). If the ba: is large, several current deflectors may be needed to divert th e current into the bar at several points. - Streambank Protection - 101. Many streambank protection methods have been tries over past z years, some being very successful (Figure 45) and some not a successful 1' (Figure 46). Many of these methods are not suitable for landowners and local governments because of heavy equipment requirement, costly construc- r tion materials, and the need for extensive financial and professional assistance. In spite of these constraints many approaches to bank pro- tection are realistically within the resources of local interests. Some ` of the more feasible methods are: ' - Bed scour control - Vegetation "r .. - Bank shaping - Soil stabilizers - Riprap !x r^ - Sacks n Blocks .. , - Rubble t z ., 45 % 5 - Used-tires - Fences - Bulkheads„ \ c / - Dikes V Bed scour control 102. The streambed acts as a foundation for its banks. If st ream- flow scours out the be& and in the process erodes the bank toe the h , n t e upper bank no longer has any support; bank failure may follow S . treams experiencing active bed scour can be identified by the r p esence of small waterfalls or a short reach of rough water i n n an otherwise tranquil stream. Two methods are commonly used to control bed scour: check dams and lining the channel with erosion resistant materials A ,. . check dam should be placed across the scouring channel bed (bank to bank) located downstream from the rough water or waterfall; the c net effect will be to reduce the stream velocity and to e ncourage sediment deposition which will build u th p e scoured bed. r, 103. A check dam can be constructed from stone, concrete, sand- ceme t b n ags, treated timber, metal, used tires, etc., i e 4 toe of the check dam should be well protected to prevent the structuree from being undermined. Also, streambanks immediately downstream fro m a check dam sometimes show a tendency to erode. These banks should he watched after the dam is completed. Check dam g construction can be very expensive; thus, in most cases this constraint will limit l d an owners and local governme t n s to work on small streams. Further, check dams can C affect the overall balance of a stream and its tributari es. Professional assistance should be sought before one or a series f 1 o check dams are placed in a stream. i 104. Another approach to retarding channel bed scour'i , s lining the bed and lower bank with erosion resistant materials. Suitabl dui C e mate- rials are stone, rubble, sand-cement bags, blocks, or establishin a g healthy stand of grass (Figure 48). If the reach of y a stream that is experiencing bed scour is long or the st t$ ++ kzy; .ipl`t 1t . ,. ream is wide;- the cost for con- strutting a lined channel can be prohibitive. 46 Vegetation 105. Of all the approaches available to landowners and local gov- ernments to protect a streambank, vegetation Is probably the most commonly used method because it is relatively easy to establish and maint i a n, is visually attractive, and is the only streambank protection method that can repair itself when damaged.' Below a stream's waterline vegetation can effectively rote t p c --a bank in several ways. First, the root system helps to hold h t e soil together and increases overall bank stability with this bindin net k g wor . Second, the exposed stalks, stems, branches and foliage provid " e resistance to the streamflow, causing the flow to lose ener b gy y the deforming plants rather than by removing soil particles. Third, the vegetation can act as a buffer against the abrasi ve effects of sediment, debris, logs, ice, etc. Above the ? waterline on the upper bank, vegetation prevents surface erosion by interceptin r i d g a n rops and reducing the velocity of overbank drainage flow a d n rainfall runoff. Further, vegetation takes water from the soil providing additional capa- city for infiltration and may improve ba k h n stability by water withdrawal. 106. Vegetation is generally divided int o two broad categories: grasses and woody plants (trees and shrubs) The . grasses are leas costly to plant on an eroding bank and require a shorte r period of time to become established (Figure 49). {lood y plants offer greater protection against erosion because of their more extensive root systems; however, under some conditions th e weight of the plant will offset the advantage of the root system. On very high banks, tree root systems may not e p netrate to the toe of the bank. If the toe becomes eroded, the weight of th t e ree and its root mass may cause a bank failure. 107. The mayor factor affectink species selection Is th e length of time required for the plants to become establish d e on the elope. Spe- cies selection should also be based on compatibility with the soil, air temperature ranges total i ' , ra nfall, distribution of rainfall, the slope of the bank d s1 ,e?ry? , an the ability of the soil to store water for plant growth during dry eriod p s. For sections of a streambank where scour is a prob- lem wood l , y p ants established at the toe of the slope and grass above th e toe have proven to be good protection. Trees raised in nurseries 47 k rrK,w 4 Y t + ? Y?IT'I ?e^ ?k,;t ?, M . p '?.'n 1 A ?yf..W 9I b 1 ?(A1 A? z iYAYL EMI t ! ' 49" ? 6 ? ??? ? S. d j ? ? v f6 ' ` K 5 u ? ` , ? ? 1 {Ift, 1 _ tx '?qqq? I ? L. r l "'4WWWYY I + ? z r' 4 i s it r ° r ?d , b are preferred over local plants because they are usually healthier, bush- ier, and have better developed root systems at maturity. For assistance with'species selection„ local landowners and governments should contact the U. S. Department of Agriculture' (USDA) Soil Conservation Service (SCS), USDA Forest Service, county agricultural extension services, soil and " water conservation districts, as well as other soil experts. A listing of the SCS Plant Materfals Centers is provided in the back of this pam- phlet. 108. Prior to planting, a bank's natural topsoil is generally ` stripped because it may provide a fertile bed that encourages weed growth which tends to coke out new grass. Grass can be planted by sodding, 7 1 sprigging, or by`mechanical broadcasting of mulches consisting of seed, - : fertilizer, and other organic mixtures. Several commercial manufacturers - t - now market economical erosion control matting which will hold the seed and soil in place until new vegetation can become established. The mat- ting is generally installed by hand and secured to the bank with stakes or staples. If livestock graze near a bank where plantings have been % made to prevent erosion, then a fence should be placed along the top of the bank. When the stream is used for watering, gates should be placed ? in the fence at points where the cattle will do the least amount of damage r' to the planted bank; crossings should be fenced. ;r r r " Bank Shaping 109. A properly shaped streambank should be smooth enough so that { "rough zones" along the bankline don't set up eddy currents that'may :. severely erode the bank. These zones are caused by protrusions or inden- tions in the bank line (Figure 50). Such irregularities should be removed by smoothing the bank surface. All areas that are exposed or stripped of vegetation during rehabilitation of a rough zone should be protected V S; } ' `y with vegetation or some other type of streambank protection. i? 5r 110. The steepness of a streambank is measured as an angle in tr degrees where 90' is a vertical cliff.and 5' is a nearly flat slope (Fig - i t ure 51). Bank angles can be estimated with reasonable accuracy using a +l o d WN N 111 ruler and protractor with a weighted line attached (Figure 52). One method to stabilize a bank that may potentially fail because of surface U 48 ?.W -fell -,;g 1 ,,ry'ItR 7 n4s? ' v 1, ? ? y.7 ?•?1 'j' ??W Al Pn '?rG lW1L? ? q „ - ;I 1Y 'MILL" ' '?, ? }a 'pFl 4?h I 1' ,? ?, , , y IM, g .? ?7t .3 r a? h F t ?r t r ` ` t x ?, I' ^ 4' A ' F y yfY`? t ? ? R , M1 MI, NOW- erosion is to shape the bank (more commonly called laying the bank back) to an angle less than the maximum angle that the bank can stand without failing. For clay banks the maximum angle can be determined by measuring the bank height and using Table 1. The bank height is measured vertically from the streambed to the top of the bank (Figure 53). Thus looking at Table 1, a stiff clay bank whose height is 50 feet cannot stand at an angle greater than 45°. If the bank angle is 55% it h s ould be laid back to 45° or less. 111. For banks composed of a mixture of gravel, sand, silt, and clay, the maximum angle that a bank can stand without failing can be determined by measuring the hank height and using Table 2. For sand and gravel banks, the critical factor that determines the maximum angle does not depend on height but does depend on groundwater seepage as shown in Table 3. The three tables used to determine the maximum angle that a ac t bank can stand without , failing may prove difficult for the landowner or local government to use. Ou the other hand, this is a complex problem that is not easy to simplify. If laying back a slope promises to be a '. n feasible method to protect a bank whose surface has been eroded back to a steep angle and the tables prove difficult to interpret, then profes- sional assistance should be sought. Soil stabilizers 112. Four soil stabilization methods have been successfully used for streambank protection: (a) sand-cement blankets, (b) clay-lime-cement blankets, (c) mulches, and (d) removal and replacement of highly eroible soil pockets. A sand-cement blanket with 8 to 15 percent cement is an economical and effective streambank protection method for use in areas where vegetation is difficult to establish and the bank material is pre- dominately sand (Figure 54). The sand can be mixed with cement by hand or mechanically to a depth of at least 4 inches. The mixture should then be wet down and allowed to set up. This method has the advantage of low cost; howevser, there are two mayor disadvantages: impermeability and low strength. If the bank behind the blanket becomes saturated and cannot 49 % s5 , ? ?" tia? ?t:??ti .?? ; '? - ) l ???'1 ? ?: 'w )?? 5? ? V°?1t?'$ ? r? ??Y? 'Y? t•4`}??'? ? ? ?; - ,?. r , w . , 1 ? . Y. sip 1l ?+ 7 n ? ? ? 1 I?yt.' TTj ? y , ; , h + C L L, f V ? ??? Y ti ? ti xx -- -- ---, 1°Y. +ime must first be R mixed with the soil to make the . tiny clay particles form "clods". After a suitable curing period, cement is then mixed with the soil and wet down, - The bank is then compacted by rolling a rubber-tired vehicle ovef the surface. This operation strengthens the soil against erosion. There are no firm guidelines on the percentage of lime to be mixed with the clay, the curing time, the percentage of cement to be mixed with the "clay-lime t clods," or the number of times the rubber-tired vehicle must pass over i7 the bank surface`to bring it up to a condition of maximum erosion rests- e tance. Professional assistance should be sought if this type of bank protection is considered. 114.. Mulches composed of straw, hay, and woo?lehips are commonly used to stabilize exposed streambanks prior to seeding for permanent t vegetation. In addition to functioning as a short-term stabilization > 'g measure, mulches, when applied during permanent seeding, also aid in the germination.process by conserving moisture and absorbing the impact of falling raindrops. T? 115. If the landowner or local government has access to equipment V m q,: for excavation, transportation, and compaction of soil, pockets of erod- ible material that do not have sufficient organic matter to support vegetation growth can be removed and replaced with more highly organic and erosion resistant soil. A typical example would be'removal of a ' t sand pocket from an eroding bank and the replacement of this material t with clay. The clay layer could then be seeded or sodded with grass. The feasibility of this approach is limited by the volume o*f soil that has to be removed, the availability of equipment, and a sufficiently long low water period during which the erodible soil can be removed, new i soil brought in and compacted, and vegetation established. 1 ?' S Riprap l116. Stone r! ra is P P generally considered second only to vegeta- .ijV rj` W 1 tion as the most commonly used method to protect a streambank. Three yr 4 v, y'? general approaches are used: 50 air r r F Suin w x y , ' \ r'? f II h, 7? ......,.....?..-.w.ww A '' - Riprap placed along the toe of a bank to minimize scour. - A riprap blanket laid over a bank slope to prevent erosion. " /- A windrow of riprap stockpiled on the top of an eroding bank. These..three approaches are discussed below. 117. When the toe of a bank is scoured out, support for the upper ' bank is lost. As a result, the upper bank may fail. Stabilization of a _x ban's toe with riprap inrconjunction with some other form of protection on the upper bank such as vegetation, (Figure 55) offers an effective approach to bank protection if toe scour is the major problem. 118. Riprap blankets can be used to protect streambanks in areas where quality stone is economically available. A blanket is relatively flexible and can conform to minor changes in bank shape due to settle- went or scour. In addition, construction of a riprap blanket is not com- plicated, no special equipment is necessary, and minor damages can be repaired by, placement of more stone. For these reasons, riprap blankets r are widely used as protection for an entire bank face (Figure 56) or in some cases the portion of the bank below the high water mark. Several factors should be considered in properly designing a riprap blanket. % - The shape and weight of the stones in the blanket. - Is a filter (see glossary) needed between the bank and the blan- ket to allow seepage but to prevent erosion of bank soil through 4 the blanket? - The blanket thickness. - How will the blanket be stabilized at the toe of the bank? , - How will the blanket be tied into the bank at its upstream h and downstream ends? 119. "Block-type" riprap is preferred over elongated stone for construction of a blanket because the stones fit together -bitter. In general, no stone should be used with a length greater than'khree times its width. Large stones should be removed from the blanket or broken up because accelerated water flow around a large stone can cause scour as well as removal of small stones adjacent to the large one. A well dis- tributed mix of stones weighing from 20 to 150 pounds will be suitable .•4?,t91prfiJ R.11k 4. ?.. ._ .. .. for most applications. With this range of weights, the openings formed 51 P . ?a , a ?^ ' .: Sl J'M r 11C ?h k4,. hF, Ut. t ' yYw } Jt4A v 1 Y 1:YN` M1?Gp' q PUT !i 4 ? ttin'W, ti , v1 ? - ?, G?tlr 7 i T ??1 t;S 7}k,' ;, , }w? r oXr? 1? a ?i 7 F r: -t i y? i ? gyp; r iii v =•?••s. r wacnaivnai guiuauce snoula be sought it there is any question s_ ' about the quality of the stone. 120. For banks where the primary soils are silt and fine sand, a i w filter is often placed between the riprap blanket and the bank to prevent the loss of fine materials through the blanket but to still allow seepage (Figure 57). A 6 inch layer of gravel (well-graded from 3/8 to 3 inches) or a properly selected filter fabric are suitable as a filter. Many fil- ter fabrics are,gvailable on the commercial market (Figure 58). If filter fabric is used, technical assistance should be obtained to select a fabric that will be properly matched to the soil. a 121. The thickness of a riprap blanket should be at least 1 to J 1.5 times the maximum diameter of the largest stones used in the blanket • or twice the average diameter of the stones used. For most applications a 12 to 18 inch thick blanket is acceptable. The recommended maximum bank angle for dumped stone is 27°. The maximum slope can be increased to 34° for hand placed stone. The blanket should be stabilized at its + base with a key trench or apron (Figure 57) to prevent the stone from a. sliding down the bank. The upstream and downstream ends of the blanket should be tied into the bank to prevent stream currents from "unravelling" the blanket. The most common method to tie into the bank is to dig a trench parallel with the end of the blanket. The depth of the trench should be twice the blanket thickness and the bottom width of the trench three times the thickness (Figure 57). Once the final plans for a riprap blanket are completed, they should be submitted for a technical review by an engineer experienced in stone riprap blanket design. - r 122. In addition to using stone riprap for toe protection and for construction of a blanket, riprap can be stockpiled along the top of an 1 ;! eroding bank as a windrow revetment (Figure 59). As the windrow is under- 4 << cut, riprap-will slide down the bank and armor the eroding area which 1rt d? ? ?" will help to prevent further undercutting. Once the erosion is stopped, Ih+ Qs.?,- any stone that is not undercut can be salvaged and relocat id on the top w of another eroding bank. 3 4? 52 ,3 D Sacks 123. Burla sacks filled i h p w t soil or sand-cement mixtures have long been used for emergency work along levees and streambanks during ' floods. In recent years commercially manufactured sacks (burlap, paper, • plastics, etc.) have been used to "permanently" protect streambanks (Fig- ure 60) in areas where riprap of suitable size and quality is not avail- able at a reasonable cost. Although most types of sacks are easily damaged and will eventually deteriorate, those sacks filled with sand- cement mixtures can provide long-term protection if the mixture has set t up properly. Sack revetment construction is not economically competitive in areas where good stone is available. However, if quality riprap must be transported over long distances, sack revetment can often be placed on an eroding streambank at a lesser cost than riprap. 124. If a permanent revetment is to be constructed, the sacks - a should be filled with a mixture of 15 percent cement (minimum) and 65 er- p cent dry sand. Suitable sand can often be obtained from the bed of the stream. The filled sacks should be placed in horizontal rows beginning at an elevation below any toe scour. The successive rows should be stepped back approximately 1/2-bag width to a height on the bank above which no protection is needed. The bank angle of the completed revetment should be no more than 45% After the sacks have been placed on the bank, they can be hosed down for a quick set or the sand-cement mixture can be t allowed to set up naturally through rainfall, seepage or condensation. If cement leaches through the sack material, a bond will form between the sacks and prevent free drainage. For this reason weepholes should be installed at several locations on the revetment to relieve groundwater pressure build up that could cause revetment failure. Blocks 3 125. Precast cellular blocks can be manufactured using locally available sand, cement, and aggregate or can be obtained from commercial i? sources. Cellular blocks are cast with openings to provide for drainage _ and to alloy vegetation to grow through the blocks thus permitting the i N root structure to strengthen the bank (Figure 61). Fabric or a gravel ?!-,?? blanket can be used as a filter under the blocks if there is any danger 53 ?e r +r that the bank soil will be eroded through the block openings by streamflow or seepage. If a filter is used, technical assistance should be obtained to pr6perly match the Filter with the soil. Although specialized equip- ment can be used to install large sections of blocks, hand placement is p frequently used when mechanized apparatus is not available, access to the bank is limited, or coats need to be minimized. After the blocks ,. have been placed, the revetment has sufficient flexibility to codform to minor changes in bank shape. Solid blocks should not be used because ' the bank may not be able to drain freely and failure could occur. Rubble 126. Urban renewal projects and other redevelopment efforts have made large quantities of rubble available. Although sometimes unsightly, _ rubble can provide an effective alternative approach to bank protection when minimal funds are available. The mayor problem associated with using rubble is that there is often no control over the type of materials dumped on an eroding bank. As a result, the rubble may offer little protection x because of insufficient weight to stay in place during floodflows and in addition may pollute the stream if the dumped material is soluble in water r or will rust. Some of the types of rubble suitable for dumping on an eroding bank include broken pavement, bricks, building blocks, slag, and quarry waste (Figure 62). Garbage, vegetation, scrap lumber, gypsum x ^+ board, roofing, metal refuse, etc. should not be used under any circum- stances (Figure 63). Used-tires L? 127. Used tires can often be found in large quantities around car i a ..r serv ce centers and junk yards. Because uses for old tires are limited ? N t , most of these tires eventually end up in a scrap pile or buried in a land- 1 ,1t fill. During the past 15 years, landowners and local governments have 7z' reported successful use of old tires for streambank protection Tires w }is . have been placed both as a mattress (Figure 64) and stacked back against rl} J i the bank (Figure 65). Both methods appear to have good potential as an yr NtIY4 ?h-M4',L? Itt17..4?L %GA`?? economical approach to protect a streambank. - 54 Y 128. During construction of a tire mattress on an eroding bank, several precautions should be considered to ensure that the mattress will stay An place. x - Holes must be drilled,in the tire sidewalls to prevent flo- tation. - The tires must be banded together (Figure 66); alternatively , cables running the length and width of the mattress can be woven through the tires. The top, toe, and the upstream and downstream ends of the mattress must be tied into the bank with cable and deadmen (or piles). While the precautions listed above are essential for successful construe- Lion of a stable mattress, other considerations can further improve the chances that the revetment will provide long-term bank protection. - Farth screw anchors (or some other type anchor) fastened y r, to the mattress can be placed in the bank at various points _ on the face of the revetment. - The tires can be packed with stone or rubble. - Willows can be planted inside the tires preferably at the beginning of the growing season. Once established the root m system will further strengthen the bank and obscure the ; somewhat unsightly mattress. If the mattress effectively controls the streambank erosion and remains intact, sediment may gradually cover the revetment. If willows have not been planted, volunteer vegetation will probably become established in areas with a temperate climate. 129. Prior to constructing a stacked-tire revetment, the bank face should be shaped so that the tires can be laid In horizontal rows. The revetment should be started at the toe of the bank and stepped back 6 to 12 in, per row. Each tire should overlap the two tires under it. Stacked tires are normally not banded together, however they should"be packed tightly with stone or rubble (Figure 67). Holes should be drilled in the sidewalls to prevent flotation if the tires are not packed tightly. Any apace behind the tires should be filled with free-draining soil; in addition, the upstream and downstream ends of the revetment should be tied into As bank so that there is no flow behind the revetment. 55 0 f' WA' vvlw _? r r 14, . 1 'r" •i_ + R? rFwSlSid3la 4. Fences r ' 130. Fence construction parallel to a bankline can serve three purposes: To reduce the velocity of the stream near the bank so that erosion will be minimal. To encourage sediment deposition (as a result of the lower -stream velocity) which will build up the bank'. - - To develop a new bank alignment or to maintain the existing bank alignment; that is to keep the same channel shape along the eroding bankline so that additional land will not be lost.; Many types of local materials have been used for fence construction. x Wood, used rails` pipe, steel beams, etc., are suitable as fence posts. The same materials can be used to back brace the fence (Figure 68). Wood and wire are generally used for the fencing material. If wire is used it should be strong enough to withstand the expected current load of water and debris: Field fencing and welded-wire fencing are effective against heavy and medium current loads and chicken wire for lighter loads. Double. ;'. row fences are sometimes constructed to provide additional resistance to stream attack (Figure 69) with the gap between the fences filled with brush, hay, stone, or used tires. y: ?•: F 131. Fences offer a good approach to protect a streambank for t {r ' v +pp` landowners and local governments because no equipment is needed for con- struction other than machinery commonly found around farms or in local government maintenance barns; in addition, the materials needed to con- struct fences are widely available. A few important points should be a considered during the design and construction of a fence: - If the stream carries extremely heavy debris during floods, the elevation of the fence top should be well below the high- water level so that debris such as heavy logs will-pass over yi the fence. '?f" { The ends of the fence should be tied into the bank at the up- k' stream and downstream end of the fenceline to minimize flow between the fenceline and the bank that could cause erosion. C<, If the fence is long, tiebacks are needed at regular intervals? r between the fenceline and bank (Figure 68).- R? 4 J• - Fencing should be fastened to the channel side of the fence post so that the force of the water and impact of debris will ti g '• r ,: not be entirely on nails, staples, or bolts. 56 J rn h '{ a 1 rti Yt?+ M Y°t' '+ i ?t "wi' rYU a`M.J'S}@ Py??hu ?' rl Z 'MI - ?' P ?x 1 ! _ JtXt ?? S ,? J r I j? Z S - Wire fencing and hardware should be galvanized. - Fence posts should be placed to a depth well below the probable ` level of scour. If stream velocities of 10 to 15 ft/sec are expected during flood flow and the stream has a sandy bed, posts _ should be set to a depth of at least 15 ft. - The toe of the fence must be protected with riprap or rubble if bed scour is anticipated, or if the fence is located on the cutbank of a bend. Bulkheads 132. Bulkheads can be used to prevent streambank erosion or fail- ure. As an additional benefit, a bulkhead may provide a substantial increase in waterfront area and an improvement in water/land access (Fig- ure 70). Concrete, steel, timber, and more recently, aluminum, corrugated asbestos, and automobile tires have been used to construct bulkheads. Concrete and steel bulkheads generally cost at least four times as much as a comparable bulkhead of another material; however, the service life is longer and less maintenance is required. Timber and used tires are the most commonly available materials for economical bulkhead construction and have been used by many landowners and local governments to protect streambanks. 133. Timber bulkhead construction is similar to common fence con- struction (Figure 71) except that a few precautions should be observed: - All wood should be treated with preservative to minimize dete- rioration due to repetitive wetting and drying or insect activ- ity. - The toe of the bulkhead should always be protected with riprap or rubble. The most common cause of bulkhead failure is scour around the pilings, followed by the structure tipping over due to the pressure of the bank behind the bulkhead. - Piles should be anchored to deadmen buried in the bank. - Fill material placed between the bulkhead and natural bank should be free draining, so that the soil behind t'he bulkhead will not become saturated. - If there are no cracks between the planks, weep holes should be drilled in the fence at regular intervals to allow the bank to drain. Filter fabric or gravel can be placed as a filter behind openings in the fence to prevent fine soils from leaching through. If a filter is used, technical assistance should be obtained to properly match the filter with the soil. - The bulkhead should be tied into the bank at the upstream and downstream end of the structure to prevent flow behind the bulk- head. 57 ?wK yy? 134. If used tires are readily available, an economical bulkhead can be constructed provided the completed structure is less than 4 feet high (Figure 72). The"tires should be laid out in horizontal rows and 9 stacked so that each tire overlaps the two tires under it. The tires should be tightly packed with atone or rubble; holes must be drilled in the sidewalls'to prevent flotation if the tires are not tightly Backed. Any space between the bulkhead and the natural bank should be filled with free-draining soil. In addition, the upstream and downstream ends of the bulkhead should be tied into the bank to prevent flow behind the structure. This type of bulkhead can provide protection against erosion kvc by stream currents and wave attack, but no protection against bank failure & unless the tires are banded together and anchored to deadmen buried in the bank. If the tires are properly banded together and anchored into the bank, the bulkhead can be constructed to heights greater than 4 feet. Dikes 135. Dikes can protect a streambank in two ways; `k - By reducing the stream velocity as the current passes M through the dike so that sediment deposition occurs instead of erosion (permeable dike). By deflecting the current away from the bank (impermeable dike). While a structure that reduces the stream velocity or diverts currents is called a dike in many areas, several other terms are also used to describe the same type of structure, such as groin, spur, Jetty, 'deflector, etc. F r 136. A permeable dike is most effective on streams carrying heavy z sediment loads. As sediment laden flow moves through the dike the sedi- ment will be deposited on the streambed and bank if there ie'a sufficient reduction in water velocity. Deposited material will build up the eroded bank and possibly lead to volunteer vegetation growth. A series of per- meable dikes placed along an eroding bank (often called a dike field) can be constructed using several approaches; among the most common are r7 s' Kellner Jacks, board fences, and wire fences. wr J A' ?? ` `'. 137. Jacks can be assembled from timber, pipe, rails, rebar, etc. 4d "`a k? (Figure 73). Each Jack consists of three members bolted or welded 58 J d . 4 MY, . together at their midpoint such that each member is at -right angles to the other two (similar to the shape of a toy jack). The members are then laced-together with cable. Finally, the jacks are cabled together to form a string. Strings of jacks can be placed both parallel and perpen- dicular to the eroding bank. In some cases a string of jacks will be placed in the channel following the desired bankline. Perpendicular strings can then be used to tie in the parallel string to the existing bank. Board and wire fences also make effective permeable dikes (Figure 74 and 75). Fence materials are readily available, however, the materials should be chosen to withstand anticipated piling scour, debris impact, and stream currents. 138. Although some types of impermeable dikes pass a small amount of flow, their major function is to divert eroding currents away from a bank. Impermeable dikes can be made from brush, logs, stone, or rubble (Figures 76.and 77). The first dike along an eroding bank should be con- structed immediately upstream from the location on the bank where ero- sion is first apparent. After this dike is completed, the current will be deflected towards the center of the channel and then may stay in mid- stream, return to the bank, or touch the opposite bank. The path of the current should be followed by throwing a float into the current upstream from the first dike. If the float does not return to the bank, one dike may be sufficient to arrest the erosion (this procedure should be repeated to see if identical results are obtained). If the float does touch the bank on the same or opposite side, another dike should be constructed at the point of contact to deflect the current back toward midstream. The procedure should be continued until the float remains in midstream and does not touch either bank. The flow characteristics of the stream may change as the stream moves from a low water to flood condifton, thus, the path of a float could change depending on the depth of the stream. Generally, dike locations should be determined when the stream is at a depth where the most erosion occurs. Professional guidance may need to be sought tp determine the length of a dike and its angle with respect to the streamflow. 59 ail 139. Materials used to construct an impermeable dike should be heavy enough to stay in place and not be carried away by stream currents rf lYght materials must be used, such as brush, they should be well secured by weighting the material down and, if possible, tying in the dike to the bank with cable or chain (Figure 78). 60 D 1 { a tr ' 'u ?n to •r a t -.'. SY? ^len' "t 'P'. a l repen,v?,P-f BUZZ vyre a , ? ? ? ? f ;j > Y? .? a E 1 PART VI: ONE LAST THOUGHT 140. ...and now after carefully reading this pamphlet the reader should be well prepared for his first attempt to protect a distressed ti bank ...or at least understand why he cannot. Although the preceding pages have been filled with a:stream of explanations, suggestions, and admoni- • tions the bottom line is that streambank protection is not an exact - science; there are still more questions than answers. So what has preps- ± ration of this pamphlet accomplished? Hopefully, the reader now under- t d h < o s an s t at his chances of planning, building, and maintaining a project R? ? will be greatly improved by following a systematic plan of action as w :r suggested in this pamphlet. Any less logical approach will not only com- promise the resources of the builder, but the success of the project. Good Luck! _ s 61 % L t p i 1' gn ..,r- GLOSSARY a ' Abrasion. Removal of gstreambank soil as the result of sediment-laden water, ice, or debris rubbing against the bank. Angle of repose. The maximum angle (as measured from the horizontal) at which an unsupported gravel or sand bank can stand without sloaghing. Angular particles. Soil particles with corners and sharp edges. Backwater area. The low-lying lands adjacent to a stream that become flooded during`periods of high water. Bar. A sand or gravel deposit found on the bed of a stream that is often exposed only during low-water periods. Bd. The bottom of a channel. +1? Bend. A change in the direction of a stream channel. Bed slope. The inclination of the channel bottom. Blanket. Material placed on a streambank to cover eroding soil. Channel. A natural or man-made waterway that continuously or periodically passes water. Check dam. Structure placed across a stream to stop headcueting, if headcutting is allowed to continue working its way upstream, bank failures may occur downstream from the headcut. Clay. Cohesive soil whose individual particles are not visible to the unaided human eye. Soil can be molded into a ball that will not crumble. 62 PRO i ar ? Y 3{ Cohesive soil. Microscopic soil particles that have natural resistance to being pulled apart at their point of contact. i ? Current. The flow of water through.a stream channel. gg S A a, Cut bank. The outside bank of `a bend, often eroding and across the t. stream from a point bar. Cut off. A channel cut across the neck of a bend. 4 Deadman. A log or block of concrete buried in a streambank that is d £ use to tie in a revetment with cable or chain. Dike (groin, spur, etty, deflector). A structure designed (a) to reduce th e water velocity as streamflow passes through the dike so that sedi- ment deposition occurs instead of erosion (permeable dike) or (b) to deflect erosive currents away from the streambank (impermeable dike). y % c z , r Discharge. The volume of water passing through a channel during a given time, usually measured in cubic feet per second. Distressed streambank. A bank that has or is suffering erosion or fail- ure. Dredte material. Soil that is excavated from a stream channel. Eddy current. A circular water movement that develops when the main flow becomes separated from the bank. The eddy current a;y then be set up between the main flow and the bank. Fill material. Soil -Nat is placed at a specified location to bring the ground surface up to a desired elevation. 67 % r ? 'rr t?1. ? l ?y? S t? Mg t , r ti j ? ? ' eU I '? ry! ` - Filter. Layer of fabric, sand, gravel, or graded rock placed between s, , the bank revetment and soil for one or more of three purposes: to pre- vefit the soil from' moving through the revetment; to prevent the s revetment from sinking into the soil; and to permit natural seepage f h rom t e streat.oank, thus preventing buildup of excessi e d v • groun water pressure. If a filter is used by a landowner or local government, technical assistance` should be obtained to properly match the filter Y with the soil. ' ( Fine particles (or Fines). Silt and clay particles. n Gravel. Soil particles ranging from 115 in. to 3 in. in diameter. s Greenbelt. Strip of trees and shrubs growing parallel to a stream th t ? n a prevents,overuse of the top bank area by man, animals, and machinery. $ r This strip of vegetation also retards rainfall runoff down the bank p- slope and provides a root system which binds soil particles together. Groundwater flow, Water that moves through the subsurface soil d r ' r? a an rocks. _ Groundwater table. The depth below the surface where the soil is satu- rated; that is the open spaces between the individual soil particles } 1 are filled with water. Above the groundwater table and below the ground , surface the soil either has no water between the particles or is par- ?Y ; dally saturated. U ;? ? iq? HeadcuttinQ. A waterfall or rapidly moving water through an otherwise placid stream which often indicates that a readjustment of the stream's discharge and sediment load characteristics is takin B Place. :d F Infiltration. t?ion. That portion of rainfall that moves downward into the subsurface rock and soil. IYtV. .ri ;,at ?. 64 .. Lower bank. That portion of the streambank below the elevation of the average water level of the stream. Navigable streams. Waterways of sufficient depth and width to handle a specified traffic load. ' b i Noncohesive soil. Thosd soil particles that have no natural resistance to being pulled apart at their point of contact, for example, silt sand, gravel, and rock. ? Overbank drainage. Water flow over top bank and down the slope. f Permit. Written authorization issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers approving the construction of a streambank protection project. Place. Synonym for construct; for example, to say that "a riprap revet- ment was placed on the streambank" is equivalent to saying "a riprap r blanket was constructed on the streambank." Point bar. The bank in a bend that is built up due to sediment deposi- tion. Poorly graded soil. A soil having a narrow range of particle sizes. Project. As used in this pamphlet, the planning, construction, and maintenance of revetment or river training works placed to protect a streambank. 47, Rapid drawdown. Lowering the elevation of water against a bank faster than the bank can drain leaving a pressure imbalance they may cause the bank to fail. Reach. A section of a stream's length. 65 .F.. 'IXP M4r 4 f? ?: yy { ! m { 'RT h 1? Mti . N ?..,. ?? ,fix `?' r 0 . 44 ,4 -IFF M413 Y ?•r • " ?t ° •1• ' ?1 ? Y? t 4 ?, n.1 r a l (? •S 7 fi? P ? ', I t t f 'l? ti 19 rc T? I ? Revetment. A facing of stone, bags, blocks, pavement, etc., used to protect a bank against erosion. Rill erosion. Removal of soil particles from a bank slope by surface r runoff moving through relatively small channels. 1 River training works. Structures placed in a stream to direct toe cur- rent into a predetermined channel. Rock. Soil particles greater than 3 in, in diameter. Sand. Soil partdcles ranging from 3/1000 in. to 1/5 in. in diameter; i 3/1000 in. is the normal lower limit at which the unaided human eye can distinguish an individual particle. Scour. The erosive action of moving water that can cause soil to be removed from the banks or bed of a stream. Sediment. Soil particles that have been transported away from their natural location by wind or water action. Sediment deposition. The accumulation of sediment on the channel bed and banks. Sediment load. The sediment moving through a channel that is transported by streamflow. Seepage. Groundwater emerging on the face of a streambank.`• Sheet erosion. The removal by surface runoff of a fairly uniform layer of soil from a bank slope. Sill. See check dam. 66 , D v ? s'f w.. +vur y + s ,? ?r _ 5 r .. ?, T.+. ..?...• a.w r i:.?? yy w ;:Yab ` ti 9 4+ t i s T. ? ?r f ? P Y 1 ( k '.J t",, 7xT' 5 Silt'. Noncohesive soil whose individual particles are not visible to ' the unaided human eye. Soil will crumble when rolled into a ball.. Sloughing. Movement of a mass of spil down a bank into the channel (also called slumping). Sloughing is similar to a landslide. i Streambank. The side slopes of a channel between which the streamflow is normally confined. w ` Streambank protection works. A structure(s) placed on or near a dis- tressed Streambank to control bank erosion or to prevent failure. z 9 Streamflow. The movement of water through a channel. Streambank erosion. Removal of soil particles from a bank slope primarily due to water action. Climatic conditions, ice and debris, S. chemical reactions, and changes in land and stream use may also lead 'T«•x? _ to bank erosion. Streambank failure. Collapse or slippage of a large mass of bank mate- rial into the channel. ,.w Surface runoff. That portion of rainfall that moves over the ground ?.:'. j towards a lower elevation and does not infiltrate into the soil. Tension crack. A narrow fissure that can develop in a bank due to excessive drying of the soil. The crack may weaken the bank's strength, making it more susceptible to failure. _ Tied in. An expression used to indicate that a revetment is constructed to prevent or minimize streamflow, between the revetment and the bank. Toe. The break in slope at the foot of a bank where the bank meets the bed. 67 a a m S F• e' U y f °? 4 A 1 v`q Y v MuA 4 ? , q1 Tractive force. The drag on a streambank caused by passing water which tends to pull soil particles along with the streamflow. J ? Top bank. The break in slope between the bank and the surrounding ter- rain. Z3 p? ' Unravel. Loss of material from the edges of a revetment. - Upper bank. That portion of the streambank above the elevation of the g average water level of the stream. = Velocity (of water in a stream). The distance that water can travel in ' a given direction during an interval of time. Waters of the United States. Includes all dry land and water-covered areas between the ordinary high water marks on navigable streams and ?S . ^. between the top of the banks on nonnavigable streams. Watershed. An area confined by drainage divides usually having only one streamflow outlet. Wave attack. Impact of waves on a streambank. Weathering. Physical dislntergration and chemical decomposition of ' materials on the earth's surface due to wind, rain, sunshine, freezing, Al thawing, etc. { a rf • "r t r o „ Weephole. Opening left in a revetment to permit groundwater•drainage. r ? F'- Well graded soil. A soil having a wide range of particle sizes. r _ 68 s C ti,; a r taw S 4 y? {. - ?.. elb ? '?.' I ., yy ,?? ? 55, ? Sa _ `kJ"" k ?SF+ (d]5a.. o-;? '?,'?'? vaf` '3+,ys..,?fi ... ...? dCYtY` '? l?p?'{€?".uv?? ... ._ ... ?.., .•?.•. 1. h _ •;lqf ,. .'?4'(1 U. S. Army Corps of Engineers District Directory i These Offices CAn Help the Landowner or Local Government With Technical Assistance and Permit Applications Alaska PO Bax 7002, Anchorage, AK 99510 Albuquerque PO Box 1580, Albuquerque, NM 87103 Baltimore PO Box 1715, Baltimore, MD 21203 Buffalo 1776 Niagara St., Buffalo, NY 14207 Charleston PO Box 919, Charleston, SC 29402 Chicago 219 S. Dearborn St., Chicago, IL 60604 Detroit PO Box 1027, Detroit, MI 48231 Ft. Worth , PO Box 17300, Ft. Worth, TX 76102 Galveston PO Box 1229, Galveston, TX 77553 Huntington PO Box 2127, Huntington, WV 25721 Honolulu Bldg. 230, Ft. Shafter, Honolulu, HI 96858 Jacksonville PO Box 4970, Jacksonville, FL 32232 Kansas City 700 Federal Bldg. Kansas City, MO 64106 Little Rock PO Box 867, Little Rock, AR 72203 Los Angeles PO Box 2711, Los Angeles, CA 90053 Louisville PO Box 59, Loussville, KY 40201 Memphis 668 Federal Office Bldg., Memphis, TN 38103 Mobile PO Box 2288, Mobile, AL 36628 Nashville PO Box 1070, Nashville, TN 37202 New England 424 Trapelo Road, Waltham, MA 02154 New Orleans PO Box 60267, New Orleans, LA 70160 New York 26 Federal Plaza, New York, NY 10278 Norfolk 803 Front St., Norfolk, VA 23510 Omaha 6014 USPO 6 Courhouse, Omaha, NE 68102 69 Area Code & Telephone No. 907 428-0382 505 766-2781 301 962-2020 716 876-5454 803 724-4344 312 353-6405 313 226-6813 817 334-2150 713 763-8593 304 529-5258 808 422-0531 904 791-3841 816 374-3896 501 378-5531 213 688-5522 502 582-5011 901 521-3618 1,205 690-2011 615 251-5626 617 894-2400 504 865-1121 212 264-3311 804 441-3500 402 221-3020 Mfr Portland PO Box 2946, Portland, OR 97208 502 221-6021 Rock Island Clock Tower Bldg., Rock Island, IL 309 788-6361 61201 Sacramento 650 Capitol Mall, Sacramento, CA 916 440-2000 95814 St. Louis 210 Tucker Bldg., N., St. Louis, MO 314 268-5656 63101 i St. Paul 1135 USPO 6 Custom House, St. Paul, MN 612 725-7506 55101 San Francisco 211 Main St., San Francisco, CA 94105 415 556-0985 Savannah PO Box 889, Savannah, CA 31402 912 944-5822 Seattle PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 206 764-3742 is Tulsa PO Box 61, Tulsa, OK 74102 918 581-7396 Vicksburg PO Box 60, Vicksburg, MS 39180 601 634-5000 a r Walla Walla Bldg. 602, City-County Airport, 509 525-5500 Walla Walla, WA 99362 Wilmington PO Box 1890, Wilmington, NC 28402 919. 343-4647 ,r k 70 y. r s o Ij o i F a ^ coo r 3': N 6 v o N p` of ? l ^^?titi, N O Y H 0• N M V 3 C m y Y CI 3 " y 9 u O 0 N u d u 00 o e w itl e M 1+ Iii 00 M F m M : y >? V 0 t m o a o i+ •o w g , t ? i '. U d rOI d m IVi O F .? v i. -V 21 44 M 4 m b A O m .0 ~ y m Y ? d Y > ~ p =gy - H d d tE0 ? C m C W O .Fn R 7 U b Y Y C '.? `? Lt ?. Y G m N m .mC Off. m p O N ? rl ^'? m ?p H N Y M m m 11't q ?. w , 7 N ••I O m w m u ?. m v co > V m 1.' e~0 d u m u m w m m m m zm co Y H W C C m *0 I w Y N H O A V 6 m N W p ym m •;' ?'*, t -_ CC O O Y O u w CC m 4 O O 1 6 d u C m 7 W N O C E U O p ^{• d « V M .? ^ Y 7 7 W m Yy O t.7 M ,?# CI d u m H m d m x U h Y f V7 U m F N K F m V C d d • 1 Ly I N m Y m O W Y O C a 0 y 1 1 y a K i P m y y w d' u w P1. Z° 'F' w F w 6 0 0 a m° u u a C N 'b+ ?:j i t VI O N v ? v v G ? p' d m C O m ? ? m G in 71 0 8 C, ' O N J y m ' p e'.1 . D V1 O r V1 O m O ., rn O m F v n rn 1 d O •D 10 07 ?O c Q a .^. o • v ?p a V1 b .. q m p m ? N T C 6 m N C m M C m ? O mm ? ti O ? d u N F m O+ v i cc 4 N v 3 .mi v m Y • N ? N 41 O ? y O r m N o o 3 rui - o m _ y F M M m M o 0 ? " ° 7 T w z q r C ' ca ' 0= . . 0 m 0) 0 w - N C d 9 F ?D m O? H N m 0 w SG c O U CL 4 cc .d q O " 0 0 j O 4 C m W 4 u U m " > m C o m C o C m m A C M u Z m m m ~ o . i m o D m x m N C 00 O a + W m ~ N m p .r ...' ~ O x C T ' V C 06 . i d V m • V M F O •rl '.t m F q T ?+ s d T m d u C b y C N 6 m V m 1' ~ N m ~ ? U ? m ,G rl ? . i O N N p M C c w m W C 2 m OO O N O m W m b M M K a w r7 '•'? U V u O 7 C m ?D t•1 .-1 O V N O u C 1 w e C W m u O m C y C N m y N ! . Cj C ?. m d F GmL ( O p T O w U y H N H ? W m N O mC O m C P1 W F - ?-1 ? ?+ . F. ? Rl O .. ? yp ~ ?j M ~ p H 54 ?O I d ?^? ? d a ? O W ? O N m m u m u m o + ?n v ° IY+ c . w ? d i v v o v N .+ d ? O " q m C O 0 o 1 7 d d m 0 y 73 l ?. ` ? f ??rt ? tlf Al 1 ?A?6 f ' z } 4' '? /?y?'.cA?-,? 1" ; _•? -era. , 4. 7 f?l ? n r :I ? ? w3 O o N n m • M . C C z 13 a C x r o W m 1 !$ O C O .y m m o m Eo 4 ? ••? a ao > t O a p C F O p a W W N m n0 w 1 u m ? ro 3 ? ? •d m c 3 C ? " r p ? Na ?'pC m N ti Y ? m ^ C m ?tpp W . . / _ j 'a O O cc ./ m cc 6 3 Y w° °o' 1 Sr , 1 o c r, m } 4 Y o m m u O 3 m -f 1 1 t W y O d U 1Ci p 4e1 ? ?tJ r? m m ~ o ' , [ .d ?G H O N x?m( C O W s F` L n A eo 11 c w m F o c f- V1 u N w G y h m d d '?4 r w -' 7 ,',) .tea o O W D O m , „ W iC .C u v l t p ?' µ 'Z y o F ? w y - N ' ' y r 11 I'r, t o m ? m ''L m d m m d m ? ?, { r .. ? A t } , V j t ?'"?! f \, 1 v p' N v ^? F v u v ' g m v ?h p a W 6 ? m u a D4 A a' r m Q t O t l ` 2?1 n ' N O m qmm M m m d `I ' 1 o D) F 74 7 [ j r v r - ? < f +? l CI 1 r r' ? 1 r r!? ? ? r. TABLE 1 MAXIMUM ANGLE THAT A CLAY BANK CAN STAND WITHOUT FAILING ' Bank Height (Feet) Consistency of Clay* Maximum Angle stiff -firm _ soft very soft (degrees) % 40 18 10 5 63 50 24 14 7 45 63 33 17 9 27 82 40 22 11 18 94 47 27 13 14 g - * Stiff - The soil may be dented by strong pressure of the fingers. Might be removed by spading. Finn - The soil can be molded by strong finger pressure. r Soft - The soil can be easily molded by fingers. , - Very soft - The soil squeezes between fingers when fist is closed. 75 11 t ? r - { 1 a Ic?? C ? (- i _ r Aix r stl?s TABLE 2 ,. MAXIMUM ANGLE THAT A BANK COMPOSED OF A GRAVEL. SAND, CLAY, AND SILT kfIXTURE CAN STAND WITHOUT FAILING _ Bank Height (Feet) _ Soil 1 Soil 2 Soil 3 Soil 4 Soil 5 Maximum Angle tow high low high low high low high low high (degrees) 50 36 32 26 17 17 12 8 9 7 63 87 50 47 33 27 21 17 12 12 9 45 100 83 63 47 55 28 34 17 22 13 27 100 100 1QQ 65 77 37 83 23 34 17 18 to 100 100 10b 96 100 53 100 32 44 21 14 Soil 1 - Well graded firm soil with angular particles. Fine particles cannot be molded by hand when moist. Impossible to dig with shovel. Soil 2 - Poorly graded firm soil with rounded or low percentage of angular particles. Fine particles are difficult to mold by hand when moist. Difficult to dig with shovel. ' Soil 3 - Fairly well graded medium density soil with slightly rounded particles. Fine particles can be easily molded by hand when i?. moist. Easy to dig with shovel. Soil 4 - Well graded loose to medium density soil with angular particles . Extremely easy to dig with shovel. Soil 5 - Poorly graded loose soil with rounded or high percentage of clay particles. Extremely easy to dig even with hands. Low and high refer to the level of the groundwater table. A low ground- water table occurs when the elevation of the table is at or below the surface elevation of the stream. A high groundwater table condition exists when the bank is saturated and seepage is visible on'the bank slope. 76 t TABLE 3 MAXDWM ANGLE THAT A SAND/GRAVEL BANK CAN STAND WITHOUT FAILING y. Low High Compactness of Soil f Soil Type* loose firm loose firm 50° 18° 30° 2 32° 45° 16° 26° .,.• A`. 3 26° 34° 14° lA° * Soil 1 is a sandy gravel. Soil 2 is a well graded angular sand. r Soil 3 is silty gravels, uniform sands, and silty sands. :j Low and high refer to the level of the groundwater table. A low ground- t' water table occurs when the elevation of the table is at or below the rsurface elevation of the stream. A high groundwater table condition €., exists when the bank is saturated and seepage is visible on the bank slope. 77 P i? t ? t "' " 1 F ? r v Pf? i. Figure 1. Annual economic losses in the Unitedt6tates occur- ing as the result of severe streambank erosion approached $250 million in 1981. In this photo many productive acres have been lost because of erosion and a farm-to-market road will soon be lost if the streambank erosion is not controlled. Arrow indicates direction of streamflow. M, j ?r 4! Figure 2. Typical stratified streambank. The order, extent, and thickness of the strata may vary considerably from stream to stream and along a single, stream. ..7 '? n ? 4 nr m u wi m?rin z?4 tgqti? ?"n c ? •a? rya v A ????i? 1 '? +?>fa° ^C r r .Y t ?y1 1 1 3F? ' _ 1 a 1 it e R v ' S 1 ] t! 1 3? t ?} F 7 5 i Y ?? 1 ? g ? l ? 1 r „ +r ?? _S w f Sharply Curved Bends Gradually Curved Bends Figure 3. Sharply and gradually curves bends under normal flow conditions. The arrows indicate velocity. During the path of the maximum stream floodflow this path moves across the channel against the point bait. o ?CG.m? yR'C+'+°?nur+?.7?n".r r r e r?+ xv u Rn. w,?? sw ?,N ?w gar?Ay'?11 ry{t l i ??? l ty I x?kt .:t ? f '1F? tT. iNk? M4 1 n '; M j A n '? 3 1 't Figure 4. Serious streambank erosion is occurring on the right bank of this bend, while a point bar is building up . on the left bank. Arrow indicates direction of streamflow. Y ' {+• q., r^ C1 { S 7 E NAT ?, Y AY L M f? ra 2 P 4 d t 8 Uzi' ? 1? @? ti a - ?, 3 ' a 11t. rev f y 1 ? ? v, i rrµ ??J 1`! C . rF d a v v H N d 3 b C O 1 1 1 I t 1 L q "M? r A 5 y.:) f J! t4 'j I + d t ??. Al !l i . i ? ?G? S 5 r i P r I 4 ? yet y {i 1 Figure 6. Streambank sheet and rill erosion resulting from overbank drainage. } { ??f t4saJ ALA' a ??iti+> 4 j ?? ?. G Sri '? Z1t i, ?y y 1 ? ?l ?? 4 l Fr ? ,11G at ? , fl+ r; tFl?f! 1 'F?. ? 'yq?yytgy C X 1 t* 4 ?r.•y a y..l?f ?1wfL174? Figure 7. Streamflow constriction. Arrow indicates direction of Streamflow. w+V ?, i v* rgM ti r n v? ?TM n r??p ti r j y r 1 I , t l 1 r 'P7•?y'?? 4 Sl. ? ! of ? ? ? ?,, •? ! `,t IS + _it c??1"??. { ? ? !! ? . ! 1 r S t ,,{ 1 t? a. ?? 1 A ? wS '?• r 1 I y, ? [ 1 { ail. ( 1 1 }? v1, I r , , - 5 f, ', j ? ? o ? , h t • ;, rr P ' : ' u ¦Nt1!' a! ^ i ! i JA'Al- J-1 C. C...... ........ ar. deflected against bank by grovel a. Irregular Sankhr. touted by dumped rubble ..la bar uadtea a.ring It. ll... up edgy tvnnte -61111 .'ad. bank. Figure B. Structures in a stream can deflect current flow possibly causing either erosion or sediment deposition ?Y r? a i lift 11 TI IFI c? r Figure 9. Wave attack on a streambank. ;i 5 end ?t 4 p ,C? ?y s? ?4 m r p } ?li?,° SP l ? j . } it • 5+ ct } ? y u -_" cz r y Nk ,N ?3' y 1 YC y ? 14 ?L f 8>'ak _ h?lP .TI N I G u 0b0 .M-1 w A U N N 01 7 N C1 U N N 7 0 u H U 00.0 M C w ro ?. I ?."`.f538.:-'?J.[?-c .u..?_1'k:.• .mL'arrf?ey,.. 'M`9Y, Y., zk:: _ :?tL. ?.citi_ :P.._. i ? a;;,G?-??' ????. `vim ' :?'.k"s• ? : ? ? r• ? •'S' ? ? ? i ??? y y Nr it' ?,; N•,?,?_y?t?? yy+ ?' 4 •.\. ?! -? i . Ott, •,•I ? .', y3_3 r ?t '.?3 31 ' ?1 N 0 E I?... .? y Y? {I +°i ro at0i s? 'damawe?aea?.v. Figure 11. Debris can cause streambank erosion due to abrasion or impact. Zf ; L? ?vw A r Y, ?o N m +1 ? 6 .o u > u H w u m i W U N O O C 7 G U u m ~ W N O a O w O Vl m OI A y .•1 O T C eOj U U B M •-T/ 4 H M N O u u e o w `0 a yr w w.. ? m a M w O •O w u o 0 O G m w w 'D m B b m ro m G m ++ 4 ro H u N 01 qN m O F m u o u v u e ro o +i u w u .•+ O ro 7 u N m m m N EO W 7 m ro a ro u ?P r r . A Figure 13. The clearing of land for agricultural purposes can significantly increase the sediment load of nearby streams. i Y at Water Surface -?? s A relatively thin soil layer sliding down the bank (sand) - :? .. r :r:'•r" •:: :i rt t A l .A r ?'• arge mass of soil that slips `. „- along a curved path deep in the r;? .. bank (clay) Figure 14. Two types of bank failure. y h a! Figure 15. Streambank sloughing. Arrow indicates direction of strcamflow. w &6:n? Figure 16. The development of bank cracks running generally parallel to a stream may indicate that "soil creep" is taking place. This type of movement decreases the shear strength of the soil and increases the probability of a bank failure. i. k $L Y ? I M !, I D. Bank has failed Figure 17. Failure of streambank due to undercutting at the toe. ix 17: MW 7 , M _ y i } 11 4 ? . ' _ Ill; ?9L{ll 1 t.L Water Surface A. A dry sand bank will fail if it is ? eroded to a slope greater than the maximum natural slope of the material ?' - (called the angle of repose). rrrr,l v A 1 ?' ?r + l l +' B. A wet, eroded sand bank may stand at an angle greater than the angle of repose until it dries out. Figure 18. Bank failure due to erosion of sand bank . t + ?F ? G I 4 Figure 19. Increased load due to road construction contributed to failure of this bank. a Y ly N- v? ?ti• }1 .'t B. If the water surface elevation drops rapidly and the bank cannot drain quickly, a pressure imbalance will develop. ? Y C. Bank may fail because of pressure imbalance. Figure 20. Bank failure due to the water against a saturated bank being lowered faster than the bank can drain (rapid drawdown). {., Figure 31. Streambanks should be visited regularly to check for signs of bank erosion„or failure (Photo courtesy of Northern Vermont Resource and Conservation Development Area). I F FE ? e? N 6 W f , t. g. 2 -2 i C d a 3 E E N N X 4 LI 7 ,id Figure 24. Landowners and local governments must decide if bank is worths saving. s x ? 4 ?dPF?4} t k r a is nrm.. wx . ?'E4wS c?? - 4 ? ? c 1 p 7 a .FRI+My91 t ` L r l ?s 2 _ MAP WILL BE INCLUDED IN PAMPHLET WHEN DISTRICT BOUNDARIES ARE FIRMED UP a ? , x 41 ? 'lIiE:I' .{ Figure 25. Jurisdiction of Corps of Engineers Districts. r p? • ? 1 H r /j ,T? } ?TF 1Y?17r1? ??I?[li ? V? ?? fYS fl L 11 ? {i41 Yl V`?? i C'd i ? ' r ? 1 } J -? '1 V .d. . ?E l a { 4? - r;• - r F FRI f? r 1 4A All, fi 1 1 T t l;` S ? ?Q { t7 ft © y j Ulm" l l a B t `x ;? p p _ z 2 s °[ ' '? y1{? ' J El of . SIi i i {d•bj3 s 9. - is s - •^ fl?f 7.g7iii !bd g 2E" 03":.. s g; 7l:S.71 1? 75i : ?d a v v o w M 1 ? d e M u r: o u w i. E N , N V 9W .? ?S s S - ,Fj ?#{ ?S WEIR, ir? c + 4f ?,i?'13Y C 3? ? • 1?? ?e f ??, t 1 ? ?lw J 1 i t t ? 1 ?a ,??b ? ? ? S7 ..._ -? WON- f3X;:_ 0 oo a?.? rti o ° 0 ° o 0 o p . 1 to 0 O W N - ° ° ° o 0 o x 0 J K p o ? o a v 0 °p 0 0 y •? do °o :L p ?i c ?x I i ? f a3 0 fi p t C E W ? N - u o o a H _ F i u a -_ fi u u F. g wu e '. w O C ?§ 6 H a :3 H o. u ' - m E ? ,? ? nt x d C n1 w m C u1 t J d A u H .T O N E E w H +1 .C D Y W u .G Y H Y u v u r M M H op 3 a g c o w .c ° o u N u _ - to El r' ?O = fie u o :r $$ ? w a 2. 00 u p g ? W u S ? E a' - a E f "tl1 Vy t S ? ?` ? rid ? CJ .f L t ?r k? r. i Figure 28. Local landowners begin construction of a used-tire revetment. - ?r r Figure 29. Landowners and local government officials should periodically inspect completed projects to determine if any maintenance is needed. ,1. 3. >? - IBS , f 1 r 1 91 ': R' ? 1 y 1 l p d rr 1 1 ? •? ? 1 1 (? ? h ?I SJ •? t t F1 , I r?? i 1 ? !? t vr??s,4??4 - ? r J ? F y? ?? ? 7 - h 1 4 =. l y l??w ?;' t , ?.?? ? ,.uAe ? ?; f? i , f ?- f I -? ,? ? ' r ???? ?..?F? a ? ? ?,y, '1*Y ? ho ,r 1 : , ? i ti i? 3 t i" ?? ? nr ;? r y _ ? ,5? ?? . S ?? H ,?t ?, t R ? S r 1 t, V rt ` ? f I / d , '.? F 1. `9 r 4 {?? 1 t -?'? v ? t ?? i . i ? ?? ?I ? r- ' ? ?? ? ? L ? ` ? ??4 tip iF,?? i ? ??? ? T ?+ rj ? N ' ?? c al 1,• ,x ? ?? ?? ? 1r ? ? ? ?' ? i a: 1 Figure 31. Clearing of a greenbelt adjacent to the top of a streambank often leads to severe erosion. Note natural greenbelt in background. Arrow indicates direction of streamflow. 2 i °5 + t Figure 32. Selective tree removal can eliminate problems caused by large trees toppling into a stream. i a?1 e?rSFitl Mdl??;l A A? a 3 1 } C. Figure 33. Grazing animals should not be allowed to strip and trample protective vegetation on streambanks. Y 1 r s o ? c g` ? o ov n., na s? L u D ?•??i+,Yy, r,. ?. $ ?rYi lYPJ'?,i 4' NV rRG4 JV'ai 1d'J^lA???kp91 'x ?MAA1A.+wevw+tlNL,.-,WGWr,!roNy i t. + ? r t r' a t f Y? !n l { to {, n Figure 35. Grout-.lined ditch used to discharge overbank flow into stream. 191 11: r mfR 1 1 4 A'A ?"d?a 1 r art A ?1 `?a r? Ti F a L ?GI ! 1 f ? y 117 f 1 L 1 ?'A nC ?F 1 1 ? I F M 1 I I ? I 1 1 1 is .r;' { ?t 1 I s k ,, .1 r -? I- 1 Figure 36. Excessive load of large trees contributed in part to failure of this bank. f' yfi? A Y ( t l f 'I d # W17 10 C. P11pt Ch.nnel Deplhe to copture D. POW channel Doe Ce Dtund the .If e0m110w I Iomt ee dlm.nl dlDOllil On IIIfOm110w I w0111 mOrfmtnt thr0Y0h w ...... In the hor Yrdl ch.-I, the nplYral Chonn.1 If how Dlecl ed DY a.dlment d.p..,tID, and Dpnl •rauon 11 IlopOed. Figure 37. Protection of eroding bank by rerouting the stream ?? ? F IyP , a ? C A ? ? !? +Illsu?i, +1 # 11 . rli r I f % t -.;sNFA } 1 ?? t4y 1 ) % ? A ?j? ) 1 1 c x u ? r Figure 78. Trees undermined by passing streamflow deflect current against opposite bank (Photo courtesy of Northern Vermont Resource and Conservation Development Area). 4 s x Figure 39. Stream flanking log jam which may cause bank erosion. kr 60 7 i Figure 40. Formation of a midchannel sand and gravel bar forces current against the far bank. Tilt of tree stems indicates that severe erosion is occurring around the roots. y Figure 41. Point bar deflects stream current against cut bank. Arrow indicates direction of streamflow. t A? "'"?" 4 I r y f5 J I Y i 1 ' 1,! r .._. ?_.:u?` ??V°?Vk ' J?'`''"kY:.rz ? ? ?t? ?n' ?c'4d?? 5ys,? '`6?`?g?'''? • ? 1._14kY -? r ?SPI t 3 + „r 114 Figure 42. Log being removed from channel. t r4 - p '? a m' t o vmc -V , sa b'`riN?l F 77777 i 7??R "I'll", wpA h CSC sd;s?a p ?, ?M ! 15 t ? l W i 11. r ?] l j F C l?. N? t ? ?f4x 1 -? a i a ?y .n Figure 43. Pilot channel eroding point bar. t :a • SAND BAR . 1< Figure 44. Large tree used as current deflector to erode midchannel bar. Figure 45. A check dam constructed across this small river with riprap on the bank toe and grass on the upper bank have worked successfully in combination to stabilize • the stream and its banks. qW. d? eJ? % ,ryt 2I j ?•4 5 ? ?? ? .I h I? " ? ? ? 47 . ?r r l r i n Y l _j s I J 1 1 L 5? 1 ? ? 11 w t Figure 46. A mattress of automobile tires placed on this bank was swept away by flood flow. Remnants of the mattress can be seen in the stream. The mattress probably failed because willow shoots planted in the center of each tire did not have sufficient time to become established and holes were not drilled in the tire sidewalls, thus causing trapped air to float the 'mattress during the flooding. Arrow indicates direction of streamflow. - .D Figure 47. Concrete check dam. v vxs? . *xuwTrM?' "'Y '7"" "hYlYd lY a S ?^ a ? F :E??i, ?? ?{• ? ?",• 4r , , - n f? fir; ?k 1, m ? u ; .R VRW? f sF, x w Y }? ,? F try; ?, Figure 48. The bed and lower bank of this channel were lined with blocks to retard active bed scour. Openings in the blocks allow grass to grow through: J 41 4 N,y.,;g h.a "? aa? w2+' 1'?7St, i 1 " k r'd? Y??y. J?1? W ?? t ,9 P y xr , 4' y , ? f 1 _ ' t' ,y 4 ? MP i -1 .? 4 ? ? M1 r 1' '? y T,. t t , 1 i {, LI u ? r 1 r 4 l L 1? 1 1 t tr , r' r r? j i!S r ti j1 L ? J ? } i ? ? r 1 ? ` ? 4? yy r ' 1 ?ti _ w r i . 1