Loyall, Kentucky Flow-Through Ponding Area Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment

April 2019

Nashville District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Figures ...... 3 Tables...... 3 Acronyms ...... 4 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 5 1.1 Project Location and Background ...... 5 1.2 Project Authority ...... 6 1.3 Statement of Purpose and Need ...... 6 1.4 Proposed Federal Action ...... 6 2.0 PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES ...... 8 2.1 Alternative 1: Weir Modification ...... 8 2.2 Alternative 2: Close Inlet ...... 8 2.3 Alternative 3: Partial Fill-In Channel ...... 9 2.4 Alternative 4: Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel ...... 9 2.5 Alternative 5: Outlet Pump Station and Re-grade Channel ...... 9 2.6 Alternative 6: No Action Alternative ...... 10 2.7 Alternatives Eliminated from Consideration ...... 10 2.7.1 Effectiveness ...... 10 2.7.2 Efficiency (Construction Costs/O&M Costs) ...... 11 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND CONSEQUENCES ...... 12 3.1 Location/Land Use ...... 12 3.2 Soils ...... 12 3.3 Climate ...... 13 3.4 Floodplain ...... 14 3.5 Water Quality ...... 16 3.5.1 Historic Watershed Data ...... 16 3.5.2 Sewage Considerations Within the FTPA ...... 18 3.5.3 Water Quality Monitoring In/Above/Below the FTPA ...... 19 3.5.4 Water Quality Sampling Summary ...... 20 3.6 Wetlands...... 21 3.7 Wild and Scenic Rivers ...... 22 3.8 Terrestrial Vegetation and Wildlife ...... 22 3.9 Aquatic Resources ...... 23 3.10 Federally Threatened and Endangered Species ...... 24 3.11 Hazardous, Toxic, or Radioactive Waste ...... 26 3.12 Cultural and Historic Resources ...... 26 3.13 Air Quality ...... 27 1 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment 3.14 Noise ...... 28 3.15 Socioeconomics ...... 28 3.16 Prime Farmland Protection Policy Act ...... 30 3.17 Traffic ...... 30 3.18 Health and Safety ...... 31 3.19 Navigation...... 32 3.20 Recreation and Scenic Resources ...... 32 4.0 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ...... 33 5.0 STATUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE...... 40 5.1 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) ...... 41 5.2 Executive Order 11990-Wetlands ...... 41 5.3 Farmland Policy Protection Act ...... 41 5.4 Executive Order 11988-Floodplain Management ...... 41 5.5 Clean Water Act ...... 41 5.6 Kentucky Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (KPDES) Permit ...... 41 5.7 Endangered Species Act and Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act ...... 41 5.8 Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act ...... 42 5.9 National Historic Preservation Act ...... 42 5.10 Executive Order 13514 – Environmental Justice ...... 42 5.11 Executive Order 13563- Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change 42 5.12 Clean Air Act ...... 42 5.13 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act ...... 43 5.14 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ...... 43 6.0 PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION ...... 43 6.1 Scoping Letter and Responses ...... 43 6.1.1 EPA Comments ...... 43 6.1.2 State of Kentucky Comments ...... 44 6.1.3 USFWS Comments ...... 44 6.2 Notice of Availability (NOA) ...... 44 7.0 PERMITS REQUIRED ...... 45 8.0 CONCLUSIONS ...... 45 9.0 LIST OF INFORMATION PROVIDERS AND PREPARERS ...... 46 10.0 REFERENCES ...... 47

2 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Draft Environmental Assessment Design Deficiency Determination Figures Figure 1: Vicinity Map for Loyall, Kentucky 7 Figure 2: Aerial View of the Loyall Flow Through Ponding Area 7 Figure 3: Original Design Drawing of Inlet Culvert 8 Figure 4. Original Design Drawing of Outlet Culvert 9 Figure 5: Fill Footprint Proposed Under Alternative 4 10 Figure 6. Eastern Coal Fields, Ecoregion 69e, and Harlan, Kentucky Locations 13 Figure 7. 100 year FEMA Floodplain 15 Figure 8. River/ Stream Assessments in the Wallins Creek Watershed (KDMP, 2013) 17 Figure 9. CSO and Water Quality Sampling Locations 20 Figure 10. Borrow Area and Traffic Route to FTPA area 31 Figure 11. Map of the Wallins Creek Watershed (KDMP, 2013) 34 Figure 12. Past, Present and Pending Future Mining Projects (from 2013) in the Wallins Creek Watershed (KDMP, 2013) 38 Figure 13. Mining Production in Eastern and Western Kentucky (2000-Q4, 2017) 39 Figure 14. Historic Water Quality Monitoring Sites from KDNR (KDMP, 2013) 40

Tables Table 1. Impaired Stream Reaches in the Wallins Creek Watershed ...... 16 Table 2. Chad Street CSO overflow events ...... 18 Table 3. Green Street CSO overflow events ...... 18 Table 4. Federally Listed Species in Harlan County, Kentucky ...... 25 Table 5. Demographics for City of Loyall, Harlan County and Kentucky ...... 28 Table 6. Land Use Cover in the Wallins Creek Watershed ...... 36

3 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Draft Environmental Assessment Design Deficiency Determination

Acronyms APE – Area of Potential Affect dB – decibels BMP’s – Best Management Practices CEQ – Council on Environmental Quality CFR – Code of Federal Regulations CWA – Clean Water Act DAQ – Kentucky Division of Air Quality EA – Environmental Assessment EIS – Environmental Impact Statement EPA – Environmental Protection Agency ER – Engineer Regulation ESA – Endangered Species Act ESA – Environmental Site Assessment FPPA – Farmland Protection Policy Act FTPA – Flow-Through Ponding Area FONSI – Finding of No Significant Impact HEC-RAS – Hydrologic Engineering Center River Analysis System HTRW – Hazardous, Toxic or Radioactive Waste IPAC – Information for Planning and Consultation KDFWR – Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources KDOW – Kentucky Division of Water KDNR – Kentucky Department of Natural Resources KIA – Kentucky Infrastructure Authority KPDES – Kentucky Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NAAQS – National Ambient Air Quality Standards NEPA – National Environmental Policy Act NHPA – National Historic Preservation Act NRHP – National Register of Historic Places NWI – National Wetland Inventory PVC – polyvinyl chloride USACE – U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USCB – U.S. Census Bureau USFWS – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

4 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment

1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1.1 Project Location and Background As part of the Harlan, Loyall, and Rio Vista Flood Damage Reduction (FDR) Project under Section 202 of Public Law 96-367 (October, 1980), the Cumberland River channel was diverted around Loyall, Kentucky in the mid-1990’s to reduce flood damages in the town and surrounding areas. This Environmental Assessment (EA) is being prepared to assess the impacts of potential actions to correct a design deficiency in the historic Cumberland River channel, referred to in this document as the Flow-Through Ponding Area (FTPA) between Cumberland River miles 690.8 and 692.0, in Loyall (Harlan County), Kentucky (Figure 1). The area is in Kentucky’s 5th Congressional District and represented by Kentucky Senate District 29 and House District 84.

The Loyall Diversion Channel re-routed the Cumberland River around the City of Loyall via a 3,800 foot open cut channel. The cut required the excavation of 2.5 million cubic yards of material during construction. Two 3-ft. (Horizontal) x 4-ft (Vertical) culverts serve as the Gravity Inlet and Gravity Outlet, intended to allow water to flow through the bypassed stretch of the Cumberland River, commonly referred to as the FTPA, to prevent septic conditions during low river condition. This channel also collects Loyall interior runoff. The Loyall interior flood control system includes an interceptor pipe and ditches along the line of protection on the upstream end of the project.

There is a total of 8,700 linear feet of levee and 1,752 linear feet of floodwall constructed to protect the Community of Rio Vista and the City of Loyall. The levee system is divided into two parts. The downstream segment extends from the downstream closure structure at Rio Vista up to the downstream end of the diversion channel, cutting off the downstream end of the original channel.

The structural features of the project were designed to provide flood protection from a Standard Project Flood (SPF). The original channel also serves to provide ponding volume to protect structures interior to the levee system from the SPF. The primary reason for providing SPF level of protection was that catastrophic consequences could result from the overtopping of levees/floodwalls constructed at a lower level of protection. The SPF will produce a discharge nearly twice that of the flood of record (April 1977 Flood) at the nearby Harlan gage, which is 122,300 cubic feet per second (cfs) compared to 64,500 cfs.

On July 14, 2017, approval was granted by Brigadier General R. Mark Toy to initiate study of a potential design deficiency in accordance with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) policy. Several factors associated with the design of the FTPA area, have led to flows through the waterbody which are far below the originally intended volume of 20 cubic feet per second (cfs). The low flows have contributed to increased sedimentation in the upper end of the FTPA, which compromises the ability of the local sponsor to operate the upstream inlet. In 2016, maintenance was performed by Harlan County to clean out sediment build-up in the inlet and FTPA to increase flow through the ponded area; however, the

5 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment maintenance did not result in long-term improvements to flow and associated sedimentation based on discussions with the local sponsor and observations by USACE personnel during inspections.

1.2 Project Authority This EA is prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as implemented by the regulations promulgated by the President’s Council on Environmental Quality (40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 1500-1508), and the USACE implementing regulation, Engineer Regulation 200- 2-2, 1988. This EA analyzes the potential environmental and human impacts of potential measures to address low-flow problems at the project site and will determine whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).

1.3 Statement of Purpose and Need Following the completion of the Loyall diversion channel in 1999, the project sponsor and local stakeholders have complained of odors and an increase in mosquito population connected with low flow velocity in the original Cumberland River channel. Low flow in the original channel has been observed. Lack of flow could be contributing to the issues conveyed by the local citizens, such as excessive mosquitos and odors. The purpose of the design deficiency study is to investigate the possibility of a design deficiency in the project and to explore whether corrective measures are necessary. An aerial image of the diversion channel and FTPA area is shown in Figure 2. There is also a concern that unforeseen sediment associated with low flow velocity accumulates in the inlet and original channel, preventing the project from operating as intended, especially during flood events when the inlet should be closed to prevent flooding.

1.4 Proposed Federal Action As stated in the project scoping letter dated May 10, 2018, this EA is to evaluate conditions in the ponding area and assess potential alternatives to address conditions in the FTPA area due to the lack of flow and to determine whether Federal involvement in corrective measures is warranted.

6 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment

Figure 1: Vicinity Map for Loyall, Kentucky

Figure 3

Figure 2: Aerial View of the Loyall Flow Through Ponding Area 7 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment 2.0 PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES

2.1 Alternative 1: Weir Modification Alternative 1 involves modifying an existing weir that extends across the Cumberland River between the gravity Inlet and the beginning of the diversion channel. The weir was constructed above the gravity inlet to provide a pool at the inlet location and divert water through the inlet into the FTPA. The current top of weir is 1141.5 feet, above mean sea level (MSL). The current upstream invert for the gravity Inlet is 1140.20 feet, NAVD88, placing the top of the Gravity Inlet at 1144.20 feet, NAVD88. If the weir were raised by one foot, the top of the structure would be elevated to 1142.5 feet, MSL. The extension to the weir would need to be keyed into the existing weir and designed to not create a safety hazard to the general public, although, it would, in effect, create a small, low-head dam. The raised weir would serve to create higher “head” pressure upstream of the inlet to help push water through the FTPA at a higher flow rate, therefore reducing sedimentation in the inlet. Annual O&M costs associated with the project are not expected to increase significantly with this alternative.

2.2 Alternative 2: Close Inlet Alternative 2 involves permanently closing and decommissioning the inlet from the Cumberland River to the FTPA to restrict water from entering the FTPA. The inlet culvert would be cleaned out to remove any sediment and filled with ready mix concrete. This alternative would not involve re-grading of the channel but would include removal of the existing weir from the Cumberland River as it would no longer be needed since the inlet would be permanently closed. The FTPA would remain as an open-water ponded area for internal drainage but closure of the inlet would eliminate the risk of inlet closure malfunction due to accumulated sediment. Flood waters from the Cumberland River would no longer be able to enter the FTPA through the inlet. The flap gate at the inlet would be rehabilitated to allow for easier operation of the inlet valve during routine O&M inspections.

Figure 3: Original Design Drawing of Inlet Culvert

8 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment

Figure 4. Original Design Drawing of Outlet Culvert

2.3 Alternative 3: Partial Fill-In Channel Alternative 3 involves partially filling in the ponded area to form a narrow channel to convey local runoff for proper flow. In order to minimize impacts to flood storage capacity, the majority of fill would be limited to maximum elevation of 1138’, the current elevation of the ponded water, although a slight cross-sectional slope would be necessary to direct surface flow into the constructed channel. The narrower channel would reduce the large volume of open water currently in the FTPA area and ensure a higher rate of flow from the existing inlet to outlet. Under Alternatives 3 and 4, the FTPA would be filled with local material from Rio Vista that was excavated during construction of the Cumberland River Diversion Channel in the 1990’s. The upland borrow area in Rio Vista is approximately 1.33 miles away from the upstream inlet (by road). Another source of fill material for Alternatives 3 and 4 is rock that is removed from a failing slope in the nearby Cumberland River Diversion Channel, which would be stored at an adjacent upland disposal site in Loyall, approximately 0.34 mile away (by road) (See Figure 10, Section 3.17). Material from both sites would be tested for potential pollutants or geologic properties that could cause water quality impairments.

2.4 Alternative 4: Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel Alternative 4 involves permanent closure and decommissioning of the inlet from the Cumberland River to the FTPA to restrict water from entering. The inlet culvert would be cleaned out to remove any sediment and filled with ready mix concrete. The area would be partially filled and re-graded to create a narrow stream channel with a greater slope to ensure that flow from interior drainage is directed to the outlet. Fill material would be gathered from sources described in Section 2.3. This is a combination of Alternative 2 and Alternative 3. This alternative includes removal of the existing weir from the Cumberland River as it would no longer be needed since the outlet would be permanently closed. The flap gate at the inlet would be rehabilitated to allow for easier operation of the inlet valve during routine O&M inspections.

2.5 Alternative 5: Outlet Pump Station and Re-grade Channel Alternative 5 would require the FTPA be excavated to a lower elevation near the outlet and then re- graded in the upstream direction to eventually tie into the existing bed elevation of the channel. A pump station would then be constructed at the outlet of the FTPA area. The excavation and grading would occur at the lower end to serve to essentially make the outlet elevation lower by using a submersible pump to evacuate the water out through the culvert. The grade work would allow for 9 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment adequate slope in the FTPA to create positive flow between the inlet and outlet. The inlet would be closed to prevent flood water from entering the FTPA, reducing the risk for loss of life and property during flood events.

Figure 5: Fill Footprint Proposed Under Alternative 4

2.6 Alternative 6: No Action Alternative The No Action Alternative is evaluated in detail because it serves to establish a baseline or “without project conditions” that complies with NEPA. Under this alternative, no federal action would be taken. This alternative avoids additional Federal monetary investment and environmental impacts related to construction, but does not satisfy the authorized project objectives.

If no action is taken, current flow patterns and sedimentation rates would continue, resulting in continued sedimentation and higher likelihood that the existing inlet structure would not be able to close during flood events.

If USACE determines that design deficiencies are present, the Federal Government has the authority to rectify the problems in order to make the project function in a safe and reliable manner as intended. The No Action Alternative would be the basis against which the other alternatives are evaluated.

2.7 Alternatives Eliminated from Consideration

2.7.1 Effectiveness Alternative 1 (Weir Modification) was eliminated from consideration because it is not anticipated to be effective. Although it would initially create a higher rate of flow through and reduce sediment

10 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment deposition in the inlet, the sediment would be deposited slightly further downstream in the FTPA channel causing slack water which would eventually reduce effectiveness of the measure. The weir would also be prone to collecting debris and silt at the upper (diversion channel end) of the inlet, also reducing head pressure and effectiveness of the measure. The increase in flow velocity through the inlet would be reduced in effectiveness due to the sharp angle of the inlet in relation to the Cumberland River Diversion Channel and the lack of slope through the original channel. Also, creation of a higher weir in the mainstem Cumberland River would also reduce upstream flood storage by inundating approximately one foot of flood storage with water. From an environmental perspective, the weir would create a barrier limiting passage of aquatic species and potentially create a safety hazard for boaters floating the river in canoes or kayaks.

Alternative 3 (Partial Fill of the Channel) was eliminated from consideration due to the fact that it is not anticipated to correct the sedimentation issue in the FTPA area inlet. This alternative would reduce the size of the channel, from just upstream of the Wilkerson Street Bridge to the FTPA outlet. Reducing the dimensions of the channel would, in theory, allow inflows to maintain velocity and energy that is dissipated as the stream flow opens into a large open water above the aforementioned bridge. However, given that the inlet and outlet are at the same elevation and the area downstream of the inlet is already a confined channel, the measure would not be expected to increase velocities at the upper end of the FTPA enough to prevent sediment deposition within the inlet. Environmental impacts would be the same as Alternative 4. The majority of the existing open waters in the FTPA would be filled to create a smaller stream channel. However, the cross-sectional slope would be relatively flat since the fill could not substantially exceed existing water elevations in order to preserve flood storage. The filled areas would be planted with trees to provide a more robust riparian buffer and the gradients within the fill areas should be flat enough to develop wetlands as runoff from the internal watershed would settle in the FTPA basin.

2.7.2 Efficiency (Construction Costs/O&M Costs) Alternative 5 (Outlet Pump and Re-grade Channel) was eliminated from consideration due to excessive operation and maintenance (O&M) costs that would be borne by the local sponsor (Harlan County) in operating pumps and periodic dredging that would be required as the excavated area at the FTPA outlet filled with silt. Although construction costs associated with construction of the pumps and excavation/grading of the channel would be high, the construction costs would be the responsibility of the Federal government through Section 202 of Public Law 96-367 (Section 202) and would not be excessive to the point that it would cause the alternative to be eliminated. Under the Section 202 program, Harlan County is responsible for all O&M costs with no Federal contributions to maintain the pumps or assist with dredging. Harlan County has very limited funds as the county has a poverty level of 38% and the median household income level is approximately 46% below the median level for the State of Kentucky (See Table 6, Section 3.15). From an environmental standpoint this alternative would result in extensive excavation and grading within the FTPA channel. The closed upstream inlet would eliminate the primary source of hydrology from the FTPA and pumps would keep the water level below the bed elevation of the majority of the channel, in effect, draining the open water FTPA. However,

11 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment local internal drainage after rain events would likely create wetlands in the upper portion of the FTPA. The lower, outlet portion of the channel would be ponded, resulting in a smaller, localized ponding area with characteristics similar to the existing feature. Given the hydrologic modifications from inlet closure, pump installation and excavation/grading, environmental impacts to aquatic resources would be similar to Alternatives 3 and 4.

Alternative 2 (Close Inlet), Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel) and Alternative 6 (No Action) were carried forward for consideration.

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND CONSEQUENCES

3.1 Location/Land Use Existing Condition: Harlan County is located in southeastern Kentucky, on the border with Virginia in the Eastern Coal Field physiographic region. The City of Loyall is located in the Cumberland Mountain Thrust Block Ecoregion 69e (Woods et. al. 2002) and shown in Figure 6. The area is characterized by mountainous terrain, high, steep ridges, hills, coves, narrow valleys, and rapid surface runoff. Elevations in Harlan County range from 980 to 4,139 feet above sea level (Woods et. al. 2002). Pine Mountain runs along the county line from the northeast to the southwest. Martins Fork and Poor Fork converge in the City of Harlan, approximately 3.5 miles upstream of the project site to form the Cumberland River. Land cover consists of forests, extensive coal mines, and pasture (See Section 4 for more detailed description of land use). The land use adjacent the project consists of urban and residential areas that are mowed.

No Action, Alternative 2 (Close Inlet) and Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel) : Regardless of whether the FTPA area is filled and planted or remains as an open water impoundment, the area would remain as a flood storage basin for internal drainage. No development would occur in the FTPA. Neither of the three alternatives would affect land use.

3.2 Soils Existing Condition: The City of Loyall project lies within the Eastern Kentucky Coal Field geologic and physiographic province, also known as the Eastern Coal Fields (EPA Ecoregion 69e). The city lies approximately 1.5 miles due south of the Pine Mountain Thrust Fault, which has a major influence on the structural geology of the region. The topography of the area is characterized by steep ridges and narrow valley bottoms, ranging in elevation from approximately 1,140 feet at the Cumberland River up to approximately 2,800 feet along the crest of Pine Mountain. The town of Loyall sets along the banks of the Cumberland River, which flows from the northeast to the southwest thru the Cumberland Valley in a repetitive meander pattern of left-right horseshoe bends.

More specifically, the City of Loyall is situated on sedimentary rocks of the Lower Breathitt Group of Pennsylvanian Age. The specific rock formation is called the Hance Formation, a siltstone which occurs from an upper elevation of approximately 1600 feet down to a level below the Cumberland River. The base of the formation is not exposed in the project work.

12 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment

Loyall, KY

Project Area

Figure 6. Eastern Coal Fields, Ecoregion 69e, and Harlan, Kentucky Locations

No Action: No soil would be mechanically disturbed under the No Action Alternative. However, the current low flow patterns would continue, resulting in the deposition of silt and sediment from the Cumberland River into the upper end of the FTPA area.

Alternative 2 (Close Inlet): Under this alternative, the inlet would be filled with concrete and there would be no substantial soil disturbance.

Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel): Under Alternative 4, the inlet to the FTPA area would be permanently closed and the FTPA would be filled with local material from Rio Vista (See Figure 10, Section 3.17). During construction of the Cumberland River Diversion Channel in the 1990’s the excavated material was placed in an upland area in Rio Vista, approximately 1.33 miles away from the upstream inlet (by road). The same local soil would be excavated from the placement area and used to fill and re-grade the FTPA. After permanent grading has occurred, the site would be sown with a native seed mix and planted with native tree species to prevent erosion of the soil material during rainfall events.

3.3 Climate Existing Condition: The Upper Cumberland River Basin has a temperate moist climate with moderate temperatures. The average January minimum temperature is 20 degrees Fahrenheit (OF), and the average maximum is 47 OF. The average July minimum temperature is 62 OF, and the average maximum is 89 OF (Woods et. al. 2002). The average growing season is about 170 days and annual precipitation ranges between 45 and 55+ inches (Woods et. al. 2002).

Climate Change: Climate change is a topic to be considered along with project area activities and factored into discussions for resource availability and potential impacts and consequences. Federal 13 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment agencies should consider how potential climate change would affect the function of proposed projects. The basis of this analysis is the USACE report titled “Recent US Climate Change and Hydrology Literature Applicable to US Army Corps of Engineers Missions – Ohio Region 05”.

In the Design Deficiency Study Report for this project, a climate change analysis was conducted using the Climate Hydrology Assessment Tool and the Nonstationarity Detection Tool. The analysis concluded that the Cumberland River watershed, where Loyall, KY is located, is a region where the risk due to climate change is relatively low compared to other areas (such as coastal regions or arid regions). According to the USACE screening and analysis tools, there may be an increase in the intensity and magnitude of flooding events in the future. There is not enough data to determine whether or not this will increase the risk to the project.

No Action: When considering the possibility of increased magnitude of flood events, due to climate change, effective operation of the inlet control structures would become even more important. If sedimentation in the upper end of the FTPA area continues at the current rate and the inlet structure is unable to be closed, the safety of the citizens of Loyall would be compromised during the flood events. There would be no emissions associated with construction work to contribute to climate change.

Alternative 2 (Close Inlet): Closure of the inlet would ensure that flood waters from the Cumberland River did not enter the FTPA site, thus protecting citizens from flood events, which could become more intense due to climate change. There would be no loss of internal flood storage associated with this project. Emissions associated with construction work would be negligible, therefore this alternative would not contribute to climate change.

Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel): The proposed work would permanently close the upstream inlet and partially fill the FTPA area, protecting citizens from flood events in the main stem Cumberland. The fill would not greatly exceed the current water elevation in the FTPA in order to preserve the internal flood storage for the immediate drainage basin in the City of Loyall. Loss of internal flood storage associated with this alternative would not be excessive, the project would still protect the City of Loyall from a 500-year flood event. The work under this alternative would result in minor, temporary emissions from construction equipment and haul trucks but the emissions would have a negligible effect on climate change given the temporary nature of the project.

3.4 Floodplain Existing Condition: Executive Order (EO) 11988 requires federal agencies to avoid adverse impacts associated with the occupancy and modification of flood plains, to the extent possible. The EO considers if the proposed action is in the base floodplain, which is the area that has a one percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year. Proposed alternatives would be within the FTPA, which occurs within the 100- year floodplain. Therefore a Kentucky Floodplain Construction Permit would be required.

No Action: The No Action Alternative would result in the current low flow levels through the FTPA, which would continue to fill in the inlet and upper portion of the waterbody with sediment from the Cumberland

14 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment River. The increased sedimentation would eventually render the inlet structure without the capability to close, which would allow floodwater from the Cumberland River to enter the FTPA and flood the City of Loyall.

Alternative 2 (Close Inlet): Under Alternative 2, the FTPA inlet would be filled, preventing any flood water from the Cumberland River from entering the City of Loyall. Since the FTPA would serve to store water from only the local drainage basin, the channel would have adequate flood storage to protect structures from flood events.

Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel): Although Alternative 4 would partially fill and therefore take away a portion of the flood storage volume within the FTPA, it would also eliminate the risk of flooding inside the floodwalls of the city by eliminating the inlet from the Cumberland River. During a design of the project, a cut/fill analysis would be conducted to quantify the net loss of internal flood storage associated with the project. The fill would then be designed to protect the structures within the floodwalls against a 500-year flood event. Figure 7 shows the 100-year floodplain in relation to the project site.

Current FEMA Floodplain

Figure 7. 100 year FEMA Floodplain

15 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment 3.5 Water Quality

3.5.1 Historic Watershed Data Existing Condition: The Clean Water Act (CWA), as amended in 1977, established the basic framework for regulating discharge of pollutants into the waters of the United States. The project is located in the Wallins Creek HUC-12 watershed identified as Hydrologic Unit Code 051301010203. According to the 2016 Kentucky 305(b) List for Impaired Waters there are four reaches listed as impaired for the watershed, shown in Table 1. The reaches are numbered and labeled on a map of the watershed, listed in this section as Figure 8. The primary impairment within the watershed is listed as siltation, with 7.6 miles of the Cumberland River downstream of the project site (river mile 668.2 to 675.8) listed as impaired for specific conductivity in the 2016 305 (b) list from Kentucky Division of Water (KDOW). The main source of the impairments is listed as surface coal mining or barren land left over from past surface mine projects. This is consistent with impairments in the larger, Upper Cumberland watershed (17,914 sq. miles), including the three primary tributaries of the Cumberland River above the project site (Martin’s Fork, Poor Fork and Cloverfork), which all have reaches listed in the 305 (b) report for a variety of impairments including: specific conductivity, sediment, temperature and fecal coliform (KDOW, 2016). Figure 8 also shows the permitted mine boundaries, which comprise a large portion of the watershed.

In addition to impairments listed in the 2016 303 (d) report, a Total Maximum Daily Load document (TMDL) was prepared in 1998 by the KDOW to address impairments in 218 miles of the Upper Cumberland River and tributaries in Kentucky for fecal coliform bacteria. The source of the impairment was listed as point source pollution from “straight pipes”, meaning sewage from residences is piped directly into waterways with no septic system present. The river segment, between Cumberland River Mile (CRM) 684.9 and CRM 694.2 (9.3 miles) was listed in the TMDL report as not supporting primary contact recreation (swimming) due to fecal coliform (KDOW, 1998). In subsequent reports, including the 2016 Kentucky 305 (b) report, the reach of the Cumberland listed as “not supporting” primary contact recreation due to fecal coliform had changed to CRM 677.0 -687.3.

Table 1. Impaired Stream Reaches in the Wallins Creek Watershed

Waterbody & Total Reach # Pollutant Suspected Source(s) Segment Size Cumberland Specific Package Plant or Other Permitted Small 1 River 668.2 to 7.6 miles Conductance Flows Discharges, Surface Mining 675.8 Wallins Creek 4.25 Sedimentation/ Channelization, Coal Mining, Erosion 2 0.0 to 4.25 miles Siltation from Derelict Land (Barren Land) Ewing Creek 2.85 Sedimentation/ 3 Surface Mining 0.1 to 2.95 miles Siltation Cumberland 10.3 Fecal Coliform Point Source/ Straight Pipe Sewer 4 River miles Bacteria Discharge

16 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment 4

1 2 3

Project Site

Figure 8. River/ Stream Assessments in the Wallins Creek Watershed (KDMP, 2013)

17 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment 3.5.2 Sewage Considerations Within the FTPA Flows through the waterbody are far below the originally intended volume of 20 cubic feet per second. An examination of the “Upper Cumberland River Basin Local Protection Project”, Harlan, Kentucky (Loyall and Rio Vista Areas); Feature Design Memorandum No. 9, Interior Flood Control” revealed the basis for proposing 20 cfs in the original design was to prevent untreated sewage in the Loyall drainage area from creating septic conditions in the ponding area. Septic conditions occur when waterbodies are devoid of dissolved oxygen and harmful anaerobic bacteria become abundant.

Loyall now has a separate sewage treatment plant that can treat solid wastes. City of Loyall Annual Status Reports indicate that all citizens within the City of Loyall are connected to the sewer system (100% compliance) and there are no “straight pipe” systems discharging sewage directly into the ponding area. This statement was confirmed by theCity of Loyall Wastewater Superintendent in conversations on May 15, 2018 and August 2, 2018. During design and construction of the project, Annual Reports also indicated only sewage inflows to the ponded area are heavy storm events that overwhelm the combined stormwater and sewer system, causing backup in the lines and flow of combined stormwater and sewage in overflow pipes (CSO). Two CSO discharge lines are located in the ponding area (one was eliminated in March 2018). The City of Loyall Wastewater Superintenent indicated the city has applied for grants to eliminate the CSO’s and the city is proposing to do so, but the timeframe is unclear. CSO overflow events are listed below and CSO locations are shown in Figure 9.

Table 2. Chad Street CSO overflow events Year # of overflow events Summer Winter 2011 17 7 10 2012 6 4 2 2013 9 3 6 2014 2 0 2 2015 2 0 2 2016 0 0 0 2017 0 0 0 2018 0 0 0 TOTAL 36 14 22

Table 3. Green Street CSO overflow events Year # of overflow events Summer Winter 2011 17 5 12 2012 4 0 4 2013 1 0 1 2014 3 2 1 2015 4 3 1 2016 6 1 5 2017 7 3 4 2018 1 0 1 TOTAL 43 14 29

The Green Street CSO was eliminated in Spring 2018 but minor sewer discharges will still come out of manhole (not reported) as line goes from 24” at old CSO down to 15” and then down to 8” before routed to sewer station. Bottleneck results in periodic discharges during storm events.

Maprother Street: The Maprother Street CSO had 0 events from 2011-2017. However, now the main downstream discharge since Green St. has been eliminated. Three events in 2018 (March-June).

18 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment 3.5.3 Water Quality Monitoring In/Above/Below the FTPA USACE performed two cursory water quality sampling events in, above and below the FTPA (September 6, 2017 and May 15, 2018). USACE also contracted with McCoy and McCoy Laboratories to sample during summer months for temperature, dissolved oxygen, specific conductance, pH, E. coli, and fecal coliform. The results are listed below.

Site No./Date Temp. D.O. S. Cond. pH E. Coli Fecal Col. Site 1 9/6/2017 19.5°C 8.9 mg/l 613 umho/cm 8.5 160 mpn/100 ML 230 mpn/100 ML 5/15/2018 20.7° C 8.16 mg/l 565 umho/cm 8.13 ------5/22/2018 19.4° C 8.1 mg/l 529 umho/cm 6.98 1,986 mpn/100 ML 2,420 mpn/100 ML 6/4/2018 18.1° C 8.7 mg/l 315 umho/cm 6.98 770 mpn/100 ML 1,414 mpn/100 ML 6/18/2018 23.7° C 7.2 mg/l 537 umho/cm 7.19 387 mpn/100 ML 435 mpn/100 ML 7/6/2018 24.6° C 7.4 mg/l 538 umho/cm 8.65 291 mpn/100 ML 1,046 mpn/100 ML 7/19/2018 23.1° C 8.3 mg/l 605 umho/cm 7.42 70 mpn/100 ML 461 mpn/100 ML Site 2 9/6/2017 20.9°C 8.3 mg/l 572 umho/cm 7.6 230 mpn/100 ML 460 mpn/100 ML 5/15/2018 23.2° C 9.62 mg/l 421 umho/cm 7.78 ------5/22/2018 20.3° C 6.2 mg/l 266 umho/cm 6.71 >2,420 mpn/100 ML >2,420 mpn/100 ML 6/4/2018 22.1° C 4.9 mg/l 403 umho/cm 6.62 365 mpn/100 ML 365 mpn/100 ML 6/18/2018 26.1° C 6.2 mg/l 416 umho/cm 6.76 52 mpn/100 ML 107 mpn/100 ML 7/6/2018 26.3° C 7.0 mg/l 365 umho/cm 7.69 272 mpn/100 ML 980 mpn/100 ML 7/19/2018 24.0° C 8.8 mg/l 370 umho/cm 7.06 179 mpn/100 ML 261 mpn/100 ML Site 3 9/6/2017 ------5/15/2018 24.8° C 6.61 mg/l 387 umho/cm 7.42 ------5/22/2018 24.3° C 4.2 mg/l 413 umho/cm 6.67 >2,420 mpn/100 ML >2,420 mpn/100 ML 6/4/2018 24.2° C 8.0 mg/l 357 umho/cm 6.68 108 mpn/100 ML 162 mpn/100 ML 6/18/2018 27.1° C 5.7 mg/l 307 umho/cm 6.73 9 mpn/100 ML 18 mpn/100 ML 7/6/2018 27.6° C 7.6 mg/l 289 umho/cm 8.83 488 mpn/100 ML 411 mpn/100 ML 7/19/2018 26.9° C 4.7 mg/l 362 umho/cm 7.01 39 mpn/100 ML 162 mpn/100 ML Site 4 9/6/2017 22.4°C 8.8 mg/l 522 umho/cm 7.8 Invalid sample Invalid sample 5/15/2018 24.6° C 8.06 mg/l 390 umho/cm 7.7 ------5/22/2018 24.3° C 6.9 mg/l 433 umho/cm 6.76 1,553 mpn/100 ML >2,420 mpn/100 ML 6/4/2018 23.5° C 7.7 mg/l 384 umho/cm 6.75 49 mpn/100 ML 124 mpn/100 ML 6/18/2018 27.2° C 6.0 mg/l 344 umho/cm 6.73 18 mpn/100 ML 104 mpn/100 ML 7/6/2018 27.1° C 7.2 mg/l 516 umho/cm 7.50 579 mpn/100 ML 816 mpn/100 ML 7/19/2018 25.3° C 7.3 mg/l 491 umho/cm 7.22 40 mpn/100 ML 133 mpn/100 ML Site 5 9/6/2017 ------5/15/2018 21.4° C 8.48 mg/l 546 umho/cm 8.14 ------5/22/2018 21.0° C 7.5 mg/l 453 umho/cm 6.95 2,420 mpn/100 ML 2,420 mpn/100 ML 6/4/2018 22.3° C 7.8 mg/l 355 umho/cm 6.89 189 mpn/100 ML 461 mpn/100 ML 6/18/2018 25.4° C 6.4 mg/l 435 umho/cm 7.13 111 mpn/100 ML 152 mpn/100 ML 7/6/2018 27.4° C 7.2 mg/l 507 umho/cm 7.79 649 mpn/100 ML 1733 mpn/100 ML 7/19/2018 25.8° C 6.7 mg/l 423 umho/cm 7.18 31 mpn/100 ML 91 mpn/100 ML Bold type indicates sampling events conducted by McCoy and McCoy Labratories, Inc. Regular type indicates sampling events conducted by Travis Wiley (PM-P) using Hydrolab unit (lab work for E. Coli and Fecal Coliform done by Microbac lab (Johnson City, TN) Blue fill cells indicate samples taken in Cumberland River Bypass Channel Orange fill cells indicate samples taken in Loyall Ponding Area Rain events in previous 72 hours and gauge readings over 4’ (brown font)

19 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment 3.5.4 Water Quality Sampling Summary The sampling efforts revealed that E. coli and fecal coliform readings were consistently higher in the free flowing Cumberland River Diversion channel than in the FTPA area due to impairments listed earlier in this section. This data is consistent with water quality sampling efforts performed in the Cumberland River Diversion Channel by the City of Loyall in 2016 which showed E.coli and fecal coliform readings were higher at above the FTPA inlet than below the outlet, indicating that water from the FTPA had lower levels of the pathogen and diluted the higher upstream readings. Water quality readings also showed that dissolved oxygen was consistently over 6.0 milligrams per liter (mg/l) in the FTPA area and only fell below 5.0 mg/l in three (3) of 21 samples; no samples indicated that water in the FTPA was approaching septic conditions, even during summer months, which include lower river flows and higher temperatures.

Figure 9. CSO and Water Quality Sampling Locations

No Action: The No Action Alternative would allow existing water quality conditions to be carried forward. There would be no new impacts to water quality

Alternative 2 (Close Inlet): Closing the upstream inlet would permanently block out flow from the Cumberland River Diversion channel. Blocking flow would likely result in higher water temperatures in ponded areas of the FTPA since cooler water inputs from the free-flowing river would be restricted. 20 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment Higher water temperatures could lead to lower levels of dissolved oxygen and increased algae growth. The other water quality parameters tested (specific conductance, pH, E. coli, and fecal coliform) would be likely be lower in the FTPA under this alternative since hydrology would be generated by rainfall in the local basin rather than from the Cumberland River, which has watershed impairments as discussed earlier in this section. Closure of the inlet would also restrict the ability of the city to flush sewage out of the FTPA in the event of a CSO overflow. Local runoff would be the only driver available to push the material through the FTPA outlet and depending on the length and timing of the precipitation event, this could create a public health issue.

Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel): Using the same rationale listed in the Alternative 2 discussion, closure of the inlet and fill of the FTPA would create a smaller feature with hydrology driven totally from local runoff without the chronic impairments listed earlier in the Wallins Creek watershed. However, water in the smaller channel, when constructed on a gradient built to create positive flow would not be as susceptible to the same temperature increases and dissolved oxygen decreases as the water would be expected to pass through the FTPA in a shorter time period than an open water impoundment. Also, wetlands that would be created on the fill areas adjacent to the channel would retain water and provide some amount of groundwater recharge, which would help filter pollutants that wash in the FTPA area from local runoff and help regulate water temperatures. CSO discharges would only occur during periods of heavy flooding within the City of Loyall, which would mean that the entire, modified FTPA area would be inundated. The combination of interior drainage through the FTPA area and the gradient of the channel and floodplains should be sufficient to flush the discharges through the outlet.

3.6 Wetlands Existing Condition: EO 11990, Protection of Wetlands, requires federal agencies to evaluate and minimize impact to wetlands. The goal of the policy is to ensure that there is no net loss of wetlands. Inspections of the project site and aerial imagery shows that the FTPA channel is a riverine feature which has been converted to an open water impoundment due to construction of the aforementioned flood control measures. There appears to be a small wetland at the upper end of the FTPA, directly adjacent to the lower end of the inlet, created by hydrologic inputs from a local drainage pipe. However, the boundaries of the wetland have not been determined.

No Action: If no action is taken, current hydrologic patterns would continue and the majority of the FTPA would remain as an open water feature with steeply sloping banks, with the exception of the upper portion (approximately 950 linear feet) which has previously been filled into a narrow channel with and adjacent wetland in the upper portion of the riparian area.

Alternative 2 (Close Inlet): Under Alternative 2, flow from the Cumberland River would be blocked and hydrologic inputs to the FTPA would be limited to drainage from the local basin. The small wetland in the upper portion of the FTPA would be permanently filled. Although there would not be a steady input of water flowing into the area, it is anticipated that the majority of the channel would still experience ponding below the outlet elevation (particularly during wet winter and spring months) with some

21 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment shallower areas of the FTPA potentially drying to allow growth of wetland vegetation during drier months.

Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel): This alternative would create wetlands in the FTPA area by filling the open waters slightly above the current standing water elevation to create a narrow stream channel. The small wetland in the upper portion of the FTPA would be permanently filled. The relatively flat slopes of the filled portion would retain water from local drainage. Native, hydrophytic grass, forb and tree species would be planted in the fill areas to promote the ecological health of the created wetlands and to prevent erosion within the FTPA area. The Rio Vista borrow area would be surveyed for presence of wetlands before excavation begins.

3.7 Wild and Scenic Rivers Existing Condition: No designated State Wild and Scenic Rivers are present within the project area. There are no State Special Use Waters in the project area.

No Action, Alternative 2 (Close Inlet) and Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel): Neither of the three alternatives would affect Wild and Scenic Rivers.

3.8 Terrestrial Vegetation and Wildlife Existing Condition: The terrestrial areas surrounding the majority of the FTPA are steeply sloping banks with a narrow band of tree cover below residential structures and train tracks on the right descending bank (RDB). The left descending bank (LDB) consists of manicured lawns with sparse tree cover. The upper portion of the FTPA area that was filled to a narrower channel is dominated by kudzu (Pueraria montana) and emergent forbs such as common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia). During a site visit on September 27, 2017, an assessment of the FTPA was performed by USACE Biologist, Travis Wiley in three locations of the FTPA using the Environmental Protection Agency Rapid Bioassessment Protocol for Low Gradient Streams (RBP). Due to the disturbed nature of the riparian vegetation on both banks of the channel from previous riprap placement after construction of the FTPA and existing railroad disturbance, the RBP score was determined to be “marginal” for the “Vegetative Protection” and “Riparian Vegetative Zone Width” categories. The most common tree species present in the riparian area consisted of silver maple (Acer saccharinum), sycamore (Platanus occidentalus), and green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica). Examples of wildlife species that can inhabit urban terrestrial conditions similar to those that exist on the site are: American robins (Turdus migratorius), American crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos), blue jays (Cyanocitta cristata), northern cardinals (Cardinalis cardinalis), Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana), striped skunks (Mephitis mephitis), raccoons (Procyon lotor), eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus), and white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus).

No Action: The No Action Alternative would not disturb the existing terrestrial areas.

Alternative 2 (Close Inlet): Closing the inlet and allowing the FTPA to function as a local flood storage basin would not disturb terrestrial vegetation with the exception of the kudzu dominated uplands directly adjacent to the project inlet that would be disturbed to allow access for equipment.

22 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel): This alternative would primarily take place within the footprint of the existing open water impoundment rather than adjacent terrestrial areas. However, it is anticipated that the work would require temporary terrestrial disturbances for equipment staging, ingress/egress of construction vehicles, etc. However, fill and planting of the FTPA would provide a vegetated buffer between the narrower stream channel and residential areas/railroad. Much of the created stream buffer is expected to become wetland area due the relatively flat slopes along the channel but would not be inundated for prolonged periods of time. Emergent vegetation would eventually give way to later-successional tree species to create a forested buffer and some areas of the buffer may become terrestrial uplands if hydrologic inputs are not sufficient to create wetlands along the entire fill footprint. This alternative would also require terrestrial disturbances up to 10 acres associated with excavation at the Rio Vista Borrow Area (Figure 10, Section 3.17) although aerial imagery from April 9, 2017 (Google Earth) shows that the borrow area is mostly covered in grass with an estimated 20% in early successional tree cover.

3.9 Aquatic Resources Existing Condition: The condition of aquatic resources was assessed at two locations in the FTPA on September 26, 2017 with the Eastern Kentucky Stream Assessment Protocol (EKSAP) which assigns a score to riverine resources within an Ecological Integrity Index (EII) range between 0.1 and 1.0. The index is multiplied with the linear footage of stream impacts to calculate Ecological Integrity Units (EIUs). The EKSAP assessments indicated an EII of 0.21 for the open water feature in the FTPA, which is a relatively low resource value. No submerged aquatic vegetation was evident below the water surface during the survey and the site. Specifically the open water feature exhibited poor conditions for the “Epifaunal Substrate/Available Cover” category due to years of siltation smothering any cobble and boulder substrate on the bottom of the channel. The heavy siltation is not suitable habitat to support macroinvertebrate and substantial fish populations. Only sparse woody habitat was available on the banks to serve as fish habitat due to the poor riparian vegetation described above. The FTPA also demonstrated high values in specific conductance. Aquatic fauna found in the upper reaches of the Cumberland River and tributaries (Martin’s Fork, Poor Fork and Cloverfork) including macroinvertebrates from the Decapoda, Ephemeroptera, Odonata, Hemiptera, Megaloptera, Trichoptera and Coleoptera orders. Fish present in the upper reaches of the Cumberland River include a variety of species from the Cyprinidae, Catostomidae, Centrarchidae, and Percidae families based on biological monitoring conducted by USACE in 1981 (USACE, 1981). Historic and current surface coal mining, logging and the absence of adequate septic systems, along with other factors that impaired water quality, as described in Section 3.5, have likely had a substantial effect on the aquatic fauna in the Cumberland River Diversion Channel.

No Action: The No Action Alternative would not result in any fill being placed in the FTPA, thus having no beneficial or detrimental effect on what is currently a degraded aquatic resource.

Alternative 2 (Close Inlet): Closure of the inlet would eliminate the input of water flowing into the area, and it is anticipated that the majority of the FTPA channel would still experience ponding below the outlet elevation. Fish in the Cumberland River Diversion Channel would benefit from removal of the

23 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment existing weir barrier above the inlet. The FTPA site would be mostly restricted to access by fish species in the Cumberland River, although fish could still access the FTPA from the downstream outlet during flow events that force water through the outlet gate. Inconsistent flows and high summer water temperatures that would result from inlet closure, the feature would likely not provide suitable habitat for isolated populations of fish. The absence of fish could likely make mosquito larvae populations more abundant and provide a nuisance to local residents. Draining of the FTPA would result in impacts to aquatic resources that would likely require compensatory mitigation. Aquatic resources would be assessed using EKSAP after design plans were completed and mitigation would be performed, either through on-site planting or purchase of credits from a mitigation bank or certified in-lieu fee program. The scale of required compensatory mitigation would be calculated by determining net loss of EIUs (using EKSAP) after considering the projected condition of the aquatic resource after implementation of Alternative 2 and comparing to the baseline EKSAP scores taken on September 26, 2017.

Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel): Closure of the upstream inlet and partial filling of the FTPA would restrict fish access at the upstream inlet to the FTPA and substantially change the nature of the aquatic resource. The narrow channel and increase in gradient from upstream to downstream is associated with this alternative would change the type of aquatic species that would inhabit the FTPA from lentic to more lotic species. The adjacent wetlands and increased vegetated riparian buffer would provide additional protection to transitional (aquatic/terrestrial) amphibious species, such as frogs and salamanders that inhabit the modified channel. Although fill and grading of the FTPA would create a lotic stream resource, it could result in a net loss to aquatic resources that would require compensatory mitigation, pending final design of the project. Aquatic resources would be assessed using EKSAP after design plans were completed and mitigation would be performed, either through on-site planting or purchase of credits from a mitigation bank or certified in-lieu fee program. The scale of required compensatory mitigation would be calculated by determining net loss of EIUs (using EKSAP) after considering the projected condition of the aquatic resource after implementation of Alternative 4 and comparing to the baseline EKSAP scores taken on September 26, 2017. Development of a mitigation plan would not be feasible until final design of the project, which would include fill gradients, channel design, planting rates, etc.

3.10 Federally Threatened and Endangered Species Existing Condition: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Ecological Services Field Office Information for Planning and Consultation (iPac) website was accessed on March 6, 2018 and reviewed for federally listed species in the project areas, as drawn on the iPac interactive map. The results of the search are listed below in Table 4. In addition to the iPac search, USFWS submitted comments on June 7, 2018 in response to the project scoping notice, stating that the project area is within known Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) maternity habitat and known northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) habitat. USFWS indicated the EA should consider the potential impacts that could occur if trees greater than 3" dbh need to be removed and that the project area is also within the range of the federally- threatened blackside dace (Chrosomus cumberlandensis). The nearest known occurrence of blackside

24 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment dace is several miles from Loyall in Watts Creek, however, USFWS indicated other suitable habitat could occur within close proximity.

Potential effects to the Indiana bat and Northern long-eared bat considered the presence of suitable habitat trees on the project site that would require removal. This includes forests and woodlots containing potential roosts (i.e., live trees and/or snags ≥3 inches diameter at breast height that have exfoliating bark, cracks, crevices, and/or hollows), as well as linear features such as fencerows, riparian forests, and other wooded corridors. Although a formal habitat survey has not been performed, visits to the project site (September 6, 2017, September 26, 2017 and May 15, 2018) by USACE Biologists, revealed that woody vegetation in the riparian area of the FTPA is limited to a narrow band of trees, most commonly silver maple, sycamore and green ash with very limited suitable bat habitat. No caves would be affected by the project, so the project would have “no effect” on the Gray bat, a cave obligate.

The blackside dace inhabits small upland headwaters and creeks 2-5 meters wide where riffle and pool areas are about equal, and substrates are sand, sandstone, and shale (Natureserve, 2018). Although the species was noted as potentially present in the area by USFWS correspondence, the FTPA is a relatively large open water impoundment and the substrate consists of thick layers of fine sediment. Site visits by USACE Biologists revealed that no suitable habitat for the species is present within the project footprint.

Table 4. Federally Listed Species in Harlan County, Kentucky *Not shown in iPac but identified in USFWS comments (Section 6.1) Common Name Scientific Name Status Determination Indiana bat Myotis sodalis Endangered Not likely to adversely affect Gray bat Myotis grisescens Endangered No effect Northern long-eared bat Myotis septentrionalis Threatened Not likely to adversely affect Blackside dace* Chrosomus cumberlandensis* Threatened Not likely to adversely affect

No Action: The No Action Alternative would have “no effect” to federally listed species as no work, including earth disturbance or excavation within the FTPA would occur.

Alternative 2 (Close Inlet): Closure of the upstream inlet would have “no effect” to federally listed species as no impacts to trees would occur and the blackside dace does not have suitable habitat in the FTPA (See discussion in Alternative 4 section below).

Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel): Potential effects to the Indiana bat and Northern long- eared bat considered the presence of suitable habitat trees on the project site that would require removal. The work associated with Alternative 4 would take place below the ordinary high water mark of the FTPA channel, however some trees may need to be removed in order for construction vehicles to access the area or for equipment staging. Additionally, this alternative would also require terrestrial disturbances up to 10 acres associated with excavation at the Rio Vista borrow area (Figure 10, Section 3.17) although aerial imagery from April 9, 2017 (Google Earth) shows that the borrow area is mostly covered in grass with an estimated 20% in early successional tree cover. A survey for forest-dwelling bat habitat would be conducted at the Rio Vista borrow area to determine if any potential habitat is present. Based on site visits, and the probability that a small number of trees would need to be removed, USACE has determined the project is “not likely to adversely affect” the Indiana bat and 25 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment Northern long-eared bat. No caves would be affected by the project, so the project would have “no effect” on the Gray bat, a cave obligate. Given the lack of suitable habitat for the blackside dace described in this section, USACE has determined the project is “not likely to adversely affect” the species. A copy of this EA, including determinations for federally listed threatened and endangered species would be sent to USFWS for their comment (See Section 6.2).

3.11 Hazardous, Toxic, or Radioactive Waste Existing Conditions: A Hazardous, Toxic or Radioactive Waste (HTRW) Phase Ia Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was prepared on several dates by USACE personnel qualified in HTRW procedures for the nearby Wix Howard Cemetery, Resthaven Cemetery, and an upland disposal area in City of Loyall for a slide remediation project on the opposite side of the Cumberland River Diversion channel from the FTPA. HTRW includes any material listed as a "hazardous substance" under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act. The purpose of this Phase Ia ESA was to obtain and evaluate data about the environmental condition, or potential for a recognizable environmental condition (REC) which could pose a liability to the government as a result of acquisition, easement or cost share. A Phase Ia is an abbreviated Phase I ESA that fulfills many components of the regulation 40 CFR 312 Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries.

No Action and Alternative 2 (Close Inlet): Neither alternative would affect HTRW as neither alternative would require excavation, grading or other earth disturbance.

Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel): Although no ESA investigations have occurred for the FTPA area, a survey would be required for the footprint of the project and for any sources of fill material that would be placed into the channel. The purpose for these surveys would be to identify any contaminants currently present in the FTPA or in the fill material that could potentially degrade water quality.

3.12 Cultural and Historic Resources Existing Condition: The project is located in the Town of Loyall, Harlan County, Kentucky. Prehistoric and historic period archaeological sites exist along the banks of Cumberland River which reveal activities by Native Americans and early European-American descendants that lived in Harlan County, Kentucky. There are four historic districts and a school house listed in the NRHP that are located within Harlan County, Kentucky. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (NHPA), and its implementing regulations at 36 CFR 800 require consideration of cultural resources prior to a federal undertaking and requires consultation with the Kentucky State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), Federally recognized tribes with a connection to the project location and other consulting parties defined at §800.3. The NHPA only affords protection to sites, buildings structures, or objects listed in or determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). In addition, under the Archaeological Resources Protection Act and section 110 of the NHPA, the USACE has responsibilities to protect and preserve significant archaeological sites. Archival research for this project involved consulting the NRHP, and eliciting information from previous archaeological survey reports.

26 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment No Action: Under the No Action Alternative, no historic properties, listed or eligible for listing would be affected.

Alternative 2 (Close Inlet): Under Alternative 2, no historic properties, listed or eligible for listing would be affected since there would be no earth disturbance or visible impacts to the existing FTPA.

Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel): The USACE defined the Area of Potential Effects (APE) as the proposed project area footprint (the FTPA Channel) and came to the determination of “no historic properties affected” as per 36 CFR 800.4(d) . Consultation with the Kentucky Heritage Council (KHC) and Native American Tribes was initiated in a letter dated March 28, 2019. USACE recommended additional archaeological testing of a known archaeological site to determine its National Register of Historic Places status eligibility. Upon completion of the evaluation the Corps would make a final determination on effects to historic properties. Consultation with Native American Tribes and the KHC is still ongoing but will be completed prior to the FONSI being signed.

3.13 Air Quality Existing Condition: Under the Clean Air Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) establishes primary and secondary air quality standards. Primary air quality standards protect the public health, including the health of “sensitive populations, such as people with asthma, children, and older adults.” Secondary air quality standards protect public welfare by promoting ecosystems health, preventing decreased visibility, and damage to crops and buildings. EPA has set national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for six of the following criteria pollutants; ozone (O3), particulate matter (PM 2.5 and 10), nitrogen dioxide (NO 2), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead (Pb).

The Kentucky Division of Air Quality (DAQ) - Ambient Air Quality 2014 Annual Report was reviewed to determine if Harlan County has any air quality problems based on the DAQ data. No problems with any of the parameters monitored by the DAQ were observed in Harlan County. Harlan County is classified as in attainment, meaning criteria for air pollutants do not exceed the NAAQS.

No Action: No impacts to the existing air quality would occur as no work would be done under this alternative.

Alternative 2 (Close Inlet): No impacts would occur as no construction work would be performed aside from permanent filling of the inlet with concrete.

Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel): The TSP would have temporary, localized, and negligible impacts on air quality from vehicle and equipment exhaust and from fugitive windborne dust. These effects would be minimized by ensuring vehicle and equipment exhaust systems are in good repair. On project completion, air quality would return to ambient conditions.

27 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment 3.14 Noise Existing Condition: Major contributors of outdoor noise come from transportation (railroads and highways) construction, and human and animal sources. The daily noise exposure of people depends on how much time they spend in different outdoor locations and on the noise levels in these places. Noise levels are not a single "peak" level. Instead, they represent averages of sound measured in decibels (dB) over short (8 hours or 24 hours), and long (years) periods of time. A 24-hour exposure level of 70 dB is considered the level that would prevent any measurable hearing loss over a lifetime. Occasional higher noise levels (greater than 70 dB) in a 24-hour period occurs, however, this is not considered problematic so long as a sufficient amount of relative quiet is experienced for the remaining period of time. Generally 55 dB is identified for outdoor areas where human activity takes place (EPA, 2014). Existing sources of ambient noise comes from CSX Railroad and residential traffic on Highway 840. The Loyall neighborhood is sandwiched between CSX Railroad and Highway 840.

No Action: Under the No Action Alternative, no work would occur and no construction equipment would contribute to existing noise levels.

Alternative 2 (Close Inlet): Only negligible impacts would occur as no construction work would be performed aside from permanent filling of the inlet with concrete.

Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel): Under Alternative 4, additional noise levels from construction equipment operations would be short-term and localized, and would be confined to weekdays during daylight hours. Additional noise levels would be minor and temporary in nature while construction is taking place.

3.15 Socioeconomics Existing Condition: According to the Kentucky Home Town Locator, (2014) the Rio Vista community is located within the City of Loyall. U.S. Census Bureau (USCB) data was reviewed to identify the major industries in the Cities of Harlan and Loyall. Coal mining was once the dominant industry. The current dominant industries for both cities are education services, health care, and social assistance. For Harlan, the second important group of industries were in agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining, followed by a third group comprised of arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation and food services. For Loyall, the second important industry was in retail trade, followed by a third group of industries comprised of agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining. Table 5. Demographics for City of Loyall, Harlan County and Kentucky Parameter* Loyall** Harlan Harlan County Kentucky Population Estimate 1,461 1,725 29,012 4,454,189 Unemployment Rate 10.1% t 8.2% 10.0% 9.8% Median Household Income $23,409 $30,257 $25,906 $43,036 Percent Minorities 3.0% 8.2% 4.2% 12.2% Percent Below Poverty in past 12 Months 38.4% 27.8% 31.3% 18.8% Percent under 18 years old 22.4% 20.7% 22.8% 23.4% * Source: U.S. Census Bureau FactFinder – 2009-2013 5 -Year American Community Survey ** Source: 2014 Kentucky Home Town Locator: Rio Vista is located within the City of Loyall 28 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment t Source: 2014 Homefacts

A review of Table 5 revealed that the Loyall unemployment rate was slightly higher than the county and state rates. Median income for both Loyall was lower than both the county and state median income. Both Loyall and Harlan County have higher rates of unemployment than the state.

EO 12898:– Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations: EO 12898 requires Federal agencies to identify and address any disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority and low-income populations. As defined by the document, “Environmental Justice, Guidance under the National Environmental Policy Act” (CEQ, 1997), a minority population exists where the percentage of minorities in an affected area either exceeds 50% or is significantly greater than in the general population. A review of Table 5 shows that the Cities of Harlan and Loyall, and Harlan County do not have minority populations that exceed 50% of the general population.

The poverty rate for Harlan (27.8), Loyal (38.4), and Harlan County (31.3) were higher than the poverty rate for Kentucky (18.8%). Low-income populations are identified using the USCB’s statistical poverty threshold. The USCB defines a “poverty area” as a Census tract with 20% or more of its residents below the poverty threshold. As shown in Table 5, the Cities of Harlan and Loyall, and Harlan County have 20% or more of their residents that are higher than the poverty threshold (20%) and therefore can be defined as “poverty areas”.

EO 13045 – Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks: EO 13045 requires federal agencies to identify and assess health risks and safety risks that may disproportionately affect children. As with EO 12898, federal agencies determine impacts to children as part of the NEPA compliance process. Agencies must ensure that its policies, programs, activities, and standards address disproportionate risks to children that results from environmental health risks or safety risks.

No Action: The No Action Alternative would allow the existing siltation problem to exacerbate, resulting in potential flood risk associated with inlet malfunction for local residents, including children. In order to minimize these risks, Harlan County government, which is shown in Table 6 to have high poverty rates, would have to perform extensive, costly maintenance in order to keep the inlet structure free of silt.

Alternative 2 (Close Inlet): This alternative would eliminate a potential flood risk to local citizens and benefits would be localized to the City of Loyall, a financially disadvantaged area, with no required operations or maintenance from the local sponsor (Harlan County).

Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel): This alternative would also eliminate a potential flood risk to local citizens with no additional operations or maintenance from Harlan County. Construction associated with fill of the FTPA would have a minor, temporary beneficial effect to the community by creating employment opportunities for local citizens.

29 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment 3.16 Prime Farmland Protection Policy Act Existing Condition: The Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) of 1981 directs federal agencies to evaluate impact to prime farmland. The FPPA requires federal agencies to complete Form AD 1006, “Farmland Conversion Impact Rating” for impacting prime farmland areas larger than a 10-acre threshold.

No Action: No disturbance to prime farmland would occur under this alternative. The ground has been previously disturbed during construction of the Cumberland River Diversion Channel.

Alternative 2 (Close Inlet) and Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel): The area impacted by implementation of Alternatives 2 and 4 is the historic Cumberland River channel surrounded by steeply sloping mountains and directly adjacent to a residential community and a train track. No farmlands exist in the proposed stabilization area or disposal site, therefore neither action alternative would not result in any impacts to prime farmland from the proposed project.

3.17 Traffic Existing Condition: Traffic patterns within the proposed project area are located along Kentucky Highway 840 and secondary roadways and driveways. Construction laydown areas for materials and equipment would be stored within the fenced areas surrounding pump stations.

No Action: No impacts and no work would occur under this alternative.

Alternative 2 (Close Inlet): No impacts would occur as the only work under this alternative would be the permanent fill of the inlet with concrete.

Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel): Traffic impacts resulting under Alternative 4 would be minimal, short-term and limited. A map of the traffic route that would be used by construction workers to deliver fill material from Rio Vista borrow area and the Loyall slide rock disposal site to the FTPA is shown in Figure 10. Any potential impacts would be coordinated with Kentucky Transportation Cabinet officials to further minimize disruption to traffic flow, and to address completion of work along road right- of-ways. During construction, the contractor would furnish, erect and maintain barricades, warning signs, flaggers and pilot cars in such a manner that all local and through traffic would be adequately accommodated. Emergency vehicle access would be maintained.

30 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment Rio Vista Borrow Area

Loyall Loyall Slide Disposal Area

Traffic Routes

Rio Vista

Figure 10. Borrow Area and Traffic Route to FTPA area 3.18 Health and Safety Low flows entering the FTPA from the Cumberland River have contributed to increased sedimentation in the upper end of the channel, including the inlet, which compromises the ability of the local sponsor to close the upstream inlet. CSO locations and overflow events are discussed in detail in Section 3.5 (Water Quality).

No Action: The increased sedimentation at the inlet structure leaves the town vulnerable to flood risks as flood waters from the diverted Cumberland River channel can enter the inlet if it is stuck in an open position. From a water quality perspective, the limited suite of parameters included in water quality sampling (Section 3.5) did not show unsafe levels of specific conductance, fecal coliform or E. coli bacteria when compared to the Cumberland River samples. In summary, the No Action Alternative would have a negative impact on health and safety of local residents by presenting the risk associated with failure to close the upstream inlet during flood events.

Alternative 2 (Close Inlet): Closure of the inlet would prevent safety hazards associated with flooding as a result of siltation described earlier in this section. Since the FTPA area would only store local runoff, there are no flooding concerns under this alternative. Given the presence of two existing CSO’s in the FTPA, closure of the inlet would prevent additional inflow from the Cumberland River from flushing out sewage during heavy rainfall periods in the event of a CSO overflow event, presenting potential human health issues. This alternative would have an overall beneficial effect to health and safety by preventing flood hazards.

31 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel): Closure of the inlet would prevent safety hazards associated with flooding as a result of siltation described earlier in this section. Contractors would be required to comply with all Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations. The project would provide a long-term, beneficial effect to health and safety by reducing instability at the Wix Howard Cemetery and improving flood storage capacity of the Cumberland River Diversion Channel. This alternative would have a beneficial effect to health and safety by preventing flood hazards.

3.19 Navigation The Cumberland River (Diversion Channel) was listed as a navigable water in Nashville District Public Notice #86-23, dated May 8, 1986. The listing was based on a study in 1986 by the USACE Navigation Branch. The site is too shallow for commercial navigation and does not appear to experience frequent boat traffic due to shallow depths. However, the site is accessible with canoes and kayaks.

No Action: The No Action Alternative would have a slightly detrimental effect on recreational navigation as the current weir across the Cumberland River Diversion Channel would remain in place to provide a small pool and head pressure for water to enter the upstream FTPA inlet.

Alternative 2 (Close Inlet) and Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel): Both of these alternatives would have a slightly beneficial effect on recreational navigation as the weir that is in place laterally along the Cumberland River Diversion Channel would no longer be necessary and would be removed.

3.20 Recreation and Scenic Resources There are no federal or state recreation areas in the vicinity of the project footprint. However, there is a small park owned by the city in Loyall, which is a bare gravel lot with sparse herbaceous vegetation cover. Discussions with residents during the scoping and public meeting associated with this project indicates there is at least some minor fishing activity in the FTPA by a small number of local residents, although the channel does not appear to be heavily fished due to adjoining private property on the LDB and steep slopes directly below train track on the RDB

No Action: The No Action Alternative would have no impact to current recreational or scenic resources in proximity to Loyall, Kentucky.

Alternative 2 (Close Inlet): Closure of the inlet would cut off inflow from the Cumberland River to the FTPA and would therefore eliminate fish migration. Recreational fishing in the FTPA would be negatively affected.

Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel): Recreational fishing in the FTPA would be negatively affected under this alternative. Construction associated with Alternative 4 would have a short-term, negative impact on scenic resources during construction. Long term impacts on scenic resources are subjective depending on the preference of residents between a smaller channel with a vegetated buffer or an open water impoundment.

32 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment 4.0 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS USACE must consider the cumulative effects of the project on the environment as stipulated in the NEPA. Cumulative effects are “the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such actions”. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor, but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time (40 CFR Part 1508.7 CEQ Regulations). Cumulative impacts are defined as “the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the (proposed) action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency or person undertakes such other actions (40 CFR 1508.7).” CEQ guidance identifies an 11-step process for evaluating cumulative effects.

Step 1: Identify the significant cumulative effects issues associated with the proposed action and define the assessment goals. Harlan County was established in 1819, at a time when the area had been sparsely populated and defined by subsistence farming. Since the mid 1800’s coal mining has been a driving force in the growth and development as people poured into Harlan County for work. With growth came a greater access to material goods, doctors and schools (Lexington Herald-Leader 2015). The mountains in Harlan County, Kentucky have been mined for well over 100 years. Mining activities before the 1980’s were unregulated and resulted in un-reclaimed mine sites, destruction of stream and riparian habitat, and impaired water quality. Areas within the Eastern Kentucky Coalfield activities were typically clear cut to harvest timber, and then burned to allow mining, utility construction, oil/gas exploration. These activities resulted in adverse impacts to both terrestrial and aquatic resources. Residential and commercial development has occurred within the floodplains of Harlan County, as the land outside the floodplains is very steep and rocky. A network of roads have been constructed over several decades to facilitate the movement of coal reserves to market as well as to serve the transportation needs of local residents and the general public. This cumulative effects analysis will focus on aquatic resources and floodplains as those are the resources that will experience the majority of temporary impacts and greatest long-term benefits.

Step 2: Establish the geographic scope for the analysis (project impact zone). The geographic scope of the analysis is confined to the Wallins Creek HUC-12 watershed, which is approximately 53.5 square miles in size (USACE, 2012). The project site is located in the northeast (upstream) portion of the Wallins Creek watershed as shown in Figure 11.

33 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment Project Site

Figure 11. Map of the Wallins Creek Watershed (KDMP, 2013)

Step 3: Establish the time frame for the analysis. Based on available data including previous mining permit data under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) and information from the USACE Operations Maintenance Business Information Link- Regulatory Module (ORMS) database, the time frame for the analysis is a period beginning forty years into the past (1977) and extending into the future forty years until February, 2058. This would cover past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the Wallins Creek watershed.

Step 4: Identify other actions. The watershed is prone to flooding due to steep topography and confined valleys. Several large flood events causing extensive damage have been documented in the past 100 years (1927, 1946, 1957, 1963, 1977 and 1984). Widespread and intense rainstorm of April 3-6, 1977 produced flooding on nearly all streams in the Upper Cumberland River Basin. The storm produced the flood of record at all main stem

34 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment Cumberland River cities upstream of Cumberland Falls. In addition to construction of the diversion channel discussed in this document, earthen embankments, floodwalls, and closure structures near Loyall and Rio Vista, KY were constructed and completed as part of the Section 202 Harlan Flood Protection Project in 1999. The Rio Vista levee is approximately 6,100 feet long, beginning at State Highway 840 (river station 690.9) and extending along the banks of the Cumberland River to the community of Loyall (river station 692.0). The beginning elevation of the levee is located at 1183.5 feet with an ending elevation of 1186.9 feet. A gravity outlet and pump station are located at the downstream end of the levee to discharge runoff from the communities of Rio Vista and Loyall to the Cumberland River. At Loyall, a second levee located at the confluence of the diversion channel with the existing Cumberland River. This second levee is approximately 4,000 feet long, beginning at the community of Loyall (river station 691.8) and extended along the newly defined banks of the Cumberland River to State Highway 413 (river station 692.7). The beginning elevation of the second levee is located at 1193.4 feet (NGVD 29) with an ending elevation of 1198.0 feet (USACE, 2003).

Upstream of the Wallins Creek watershed, a local flood protection project was designed and constructed for the City of Harlan by the USACE. The project included the construction of the Harlan Diversion Tunnels, the Cumberland Avenue levee/floodwall, the Clover Fork pumping plant, and related appurtenances. The Harlan Diversion Tunnels, consisting of four tunnels along with a diversion embankment, re-route Clover Fork away from the City of Harlan. Clover Fork previously flowed to the southwest to the confluence with Martins Fork and then to the northeast around the City of Harlan. As a result of the Harlan flood reduction measures, a small portion of the drainage area contributing directly into the City of Harlan is now discharged into Martins Fork (USACE, 2003).

A search of the ORMS database revealed 47 approved actions in waters of the U.S. within the Wallins Creek watershed between March 21, 1992 and present time (October 15, 2018). Approximately 96% (45) of the actions were Nationwide Permit verifications for activities with minimal impacts to waters of the U.S, such as road crossings or minor impacts from surface coal mining projects. There was one (1) Individual Permit Action and two Letter of Permission (transportation projects) for impacts to waters of the U.S. determined to be more than minimal. Thirty-six (36) of the 47 total actions were associated with surface coal mines (including linear transportation crossings for haul road construction), seven (7) actions were associated with road improvements, two (2) impacts were authorized for minor bank stabilization, and two (2) of the impacts were associated with oil/natural gas exploration.

Step 5: Characterize the resources, ecosystems and human communities in terms of the responses to change and capacity to withstand stresses. The land cover in the Wallins Creek watershed is heavily forested (83.7) based on National Land Cover Dataset information from 2006. The next most common land use is defined as “Developed Open Space” which comprised 4.9% of the watershed (USACE, 2012). The land use change between 2001 and 2006 indicates very little change with only a 1.3% decrease in forested area and a 1.0% increase in grassland/herbaceous area, which is very likely clearing of a surface coal mine site and subsequent reclamation after mining (See Table 6). The categories of “development” and “developed open spaces”

35 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment remained constant, indicating that development within floodplains has not substantially increased in recent times.

Table 6. Land Use Cover in the Wallins Creek Watershed

HUC Land Cover (mi2& %) 2001 2006

Open Water 0.2 (0.4%) 0.2 (0.4%)

Developed Open Space 2.6 (4.9%) 2.6 (4.9%)

Development 1.7 (3.1%) 1.7 (3.1%)

Barren 0.2 (0.4%) 0.3 (0.5%)

Forested 45.5 (85%) 44.8 (83.7%)

Shrub 0.1 (0.1%) 0.1 (0.2%)

Grassland/Herbaceous 2.8 (5.3%) 3.4 (6.3%)

Pasture/Hay 0.4 (0.7%) 0.4 (0.7%)

Cultivation 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Woody Wetlands 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Herbaceous Wetlands 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Approximately four (4) reaches of stream, comprising 24 miles, or approximately 29.6% of the streams (USACE, 2012) in Wallins Creek watershed are listed as impaired under the 2016 Kentucky 305 (b) lists as described in Section 3.5. Given the existing water quality impairments in the Wallins Creek watershed, further impairments should be avoided where possible to eliminate further stresses to aquatic ecosystems. The proposed stabilization measures would prevent further siltation below the project site and restore pre-slide flood conveyance in the vicinity of Loyall, Kentucky for many years into the future.

Step 6: Characterize stresses affecting these resources, ecosystems and human communities. Existing terrestrial conditions in the project area consists of moderately sloped banks with a narrow line of trees with marginal wildlife habitat value to serve as riparian buffer. The fill of the FTPA would result in a narrow channel with a low-gradient riparian area that would be planted after construction and form wetlands in some areas due to settling of water from the local drainage basin following rain events. The No Action Alternative and Alternative 2 (Close Inlet) would not result in any earth disturbance or clearing of riparian vegetation associated with construction. However, Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel) would place approximately 80,000 cubic yards of fill material in the FTPA. The work would help protect citizens from future flood impacts (up to a 500 year event) by closing off inflows from the Cumberland River and modify the current open water impoundment water body in the FTPA to a narrower, flowing stream with greater slope, designed to convey internal runoff to the outlet. 36 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment Siltation and elevated specific conductance levels from surface coal mining and fecal coliform from “straight pipe” point source discharges are primary pollution sources that currently affect water quality and will continue to impair the watershed into the future.

Step 7: Define a baseline condition for the resources, ecosystems and communities. The forested land cover in the watershed, as well as stressors to terrestrial resources, aquatic resources and water quality have been documented in previous sections of this document.

Step 8: Identify the important cause and effect relationships between human activities and resources, ecosystems, and human communities. The State of Kentucky has taken several steps in previous decades to reduce flooding hazards by regulating construction and fill in floodplains. Chapter 151 of the Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS), approved in 1966 addresses development of floodplain areas. The most pertinent sections of KRS 151 are listed below (KEEC, 2018):  KRS 151.250, which establishes the requirements for obtaining a floodplain development permit;  KRS 151.125, which establishes the authority and powers of the secretary of the Energy and Environment Cabinet to administer KRS 151;  KRS 151.320, which requires the judge executive of each county or the mayor or chief executive officer of each city to concurrently enforce with the Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet, within their respective counties and cities, the provisions of KRS 151.250;  KRS 151.310 prohibition to deposit in water without a permit.

As described in this section and in Section 3.15, the Wallins Creek basin in Harlan County, Kentucky is heavily wooded and sparsely populated. However, the watershed has been heavily impacted by surface coal mining. Figure 12 below, shows dozens of past mining projects (shown as “released”) that have occurred since SMCRA was passed in 1977. The figure also shows seven (7) projects that were still actively producing coal in February, 2013 and four (4) projects that were pending in 2013. This type of activity is generally representative of the Upper Cumberland watersheds in the Eastern Kentucky coalfields and explains how past mining activities have contributed to siltation and specific conductance impairments to the water quality described in Section 3.5.

However, Figure 13 shows that coal production in Eastern Kentucky has declined from approximately 28 million tons per quarter in January of 2000 to approximately 4.6 million tons for the fourth quarter of 2017. Coal mining has substantially declined in most watersheds in Appalachian Kentucky, therefore current impacts to terrestrial resources and water quality are likely far less than in previous decades (KEEC, 2017).

Step 9: Determine the magnitude and significance of cumulative effects. The Wallins Creek watershed has been heavily impacted by past activities, including surface coal mining, inadequate sewer facilities and floodplain development associated with the communities of Harlan and Loyall, Kentucky. Currently there are no pending Section 404 Clean Water Act permit applications in the 37 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment

Figure 12. Past, Present and Pending Future Mining Projects (from 2013) in the Wallins Creek Watershed (KDMP, 2013)

ORMS database within the watershed. Also, a search of the Kentucky Department of Transportation interactive webpage for future planned projects (6 years) http://maps.kytc.ky.gov/photolog/?config=ActiveHighwayPlan shows one small road project (construction of a left turn lane at intersection Hwy 119 to onto KY 3152) proposed in the Wallins Creek HUC-12 watershed. Current and reasonably foreseeable future development has slowed given the rural nature of the watershed, the downward trend in coal production in Eastern Kentucky, the lack of currently pending applications for impacts to aquatic resources in the ORMS Regulatory database. The proposed work would help to minimize siltation that would contribute to existing water quality impairments by preventing soil and rock from washing into the Cumberland River at the project site. Therefore, magnitude and significance of cumulative effects, when combined with the slide remediation project are considered minimal within the Wallins Creek watershed.

38 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment

Report produced by Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet (KEEC) Figure 13. Mining Production in Eastern and Western Kentucky (2000-Q4, 2017)

Step 10: Modify and add alternatives to avoid, minimize, or mitigate significant cumulative effects. Aside from Alternate 2 (Close Inlet), Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel) and Alternative 6 (No Action), three other alternatives (Alternatives 1, 3 and 5) were considered to remedy the low-flow conditions. A discussion of those alternatives is included in Section 2.5. Under Alternative 4, BMPs would be used during construction to minimize adverse impacts to the environment associated with siltation and turbidity from water flowing through the FTPA area outlet.

Step 11: Monitor the cumulative effects of the selected alternative and adapt management. Enforcement of development in the floodplains by KEEC as described in Step 8 would limit the unauthorized fill or impediments within regulated floodplains. The Kentucky Department of Natural Resources (KDNR) continues to monitor the quality of water in the Cumberland River (See Figure 14 14). Any cumulative effects to the environmental condition in the Wallins Creek watershed portion of the Cumberland River would likely be caused by other activities in the drainage basin, which would be subject to regulations and preventative measures of other programs such as Clean Water Act, Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (Coal Mining), Food Securities Act (agriculture), etc. In many cases, environmental impacts to aquatic resources would be offset through compensatory mitigation.

39 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment

Figure 14. Historic Water Quality Monitoring Sites from KDNR (KDMP, 2013) 5.0 STATUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE Based on the information provided above, full compliance with all local, state, and federal statutes and Executive Orders would be met prior to project implementation.

40 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment 5.1 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) This EA is prepared to analyze the potential environmental and human impacts of the potential measures to correct low flow velocity in the FTPA. A project scoping letter was sent to the public on May 10, 2018 (Section 6.0). A Notice of Availability will be sent to advertise the preparation of the Draft EA to interested parties, including federal/state/local government representatives and members of the public will have a chance to review and comment on the document. Public comments are considered in Section 6.1.

5.2 Executive Order 11990-Wetlands The project complies with this Executive Order as documented in Section 3.6 and considers all impacts and potential benefits to wetlands associated with the project.

5.3 Farmland Policy Protection Act No private agricultural lands or prime and unique farmlands are located in the proposed work or disposal area. See Section 3.16.

5.4 Executive Order 11988-Floodplain Management Portions of the proposed project are located within the 100-year floodplain and falls under the purview of Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management. This executive order requires federal agencies to evaluate and minimize to the extent possible, impacts and modifications to the floodplain. A discussion of potential impacts to the floodplain associated with project alternatives is included in Section 3.4. This project complies with EO 11988.

5.5 Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S. (WOUS) are present within the proposed project footprint. Therefore, coordination with State and Federal Agencies regarding Clean Water Act compliance is required. Specifically, an Individual Water Quality Certification (WQC) under Section 401 CWA would be required by KDOW. USACE would apply for the WQC after the initial project designs have been completed.

Under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the project is required to comply with 404(b)(1) Guidelines (Guidelines). The Corps completed an evaluation of the project under the design deficiency investigation for this project and found that it complies with the Section 404 (b) (1) Guidelines.

5.6 Kentucky Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (KPDES) Permit Construction projects disturbing over one acre of land require a storm water permit. A KPDES permit is required prior to construction for all alternatives except No Action. The project contractor would be responsible for coordinating with KDOW Water Pollution Control Section in order to obtain the permit.

5.7 Endangered Species Act and Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act The Endangered Species Act requires the determination of possible effects on or degradation of habitat critical to federally-listed endangered or threatened species. After a review of the proposed work and the iPac report downloaded from the USFWS website, and the condition of terrestrial vegetation

41 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment described in this section, the USACE has concluded the project would have “no effect” on the Indiana bat and Northern long-eared bat. No caves would be affected by the project, so the project would have “no effect” on the Gray bat, a cave obligate. See Section 3.10.

5.8 Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act The USACE is required to coordinate with the USFWS and Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.). The USFWS and Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife were notified of the project with a Scoping Notice on May 10, 2018. KDFWR stated they had no comment on the project and USFWS comments are discussed in Section 6.1 of this document.

5.9 National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires Federal agencies to take into account the effects of their actions on historic properties and afford the Advisory Council of Historic Preservation the opportunity to comment on undertakings. The USACE defined the Area of Potential Effects (APE) as the proposed project area footprint (the FTPA Channel) and came to the determination of “no historic properties affected” as per 36 CFR 800.4(d) . Consultation with the Kentucky Heritage Council (KHC) and Native American Tribes was initiated in a letter dated March 28, 2019. Consultation with Native American Tribes and the KHC is still ongoing but will be completed prior to the FONSI being signed.

5.10 Executive Order 13514 – Environmental Justice Executive Order 12898: “Federal Actions to address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations” was signed by President Clinton on February 11, 1994, to focus Federal attention on the environmental and human health conditions of minority and low-income populations, with the goal of achieving environmental protection for all communities. As defined by the “Draft Guidance for Addressing Environmental Justice under NEPA” (CEQ, 1996), a minority population exists where the percentage of minorities in an affected area either exceeds 50% or is significantly greater than in the general population. The project complies with this Executive Order (See Section 3.15)

5.11 Executive Order 13563- Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change Executive Order 13563 was signed by President Barack Obama on November 1, 2013, to improve climate preparedness and resilience; help safeguard the U.S. economy, infrastructure, environment, and natural resources; and provide for the continuity of executive department and agency (agency) operations, services, and programs. The implications of climate change on the project are discussed in Section 3.3. By eliminating the risk of inlet closure failure, Alternatives 2 and 4 would reduce risk of damages associated with the projected increases in flood events as a result of climatic changes.

5.12 Clean Air Act Alternative 4 could result in minor increases in motor emissions from construction vehicles. However, given the minor scale of construction on this project, additional increases in emissions would not cause NAAQS to be exceeded (See Section 3.13). 42 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment 5.13 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act No Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) sites were identified within the proposed project boundaries.

5.14 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act All alternatives would be in compliance with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). 6.0 PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION

6.1 Scoping Letter and Responses On May 10, 2018, a Scoping Notice was sent to interested parties, including Federal, State and local government representatives and public news/information outlets, including radio, television and newspaper outlets. The public comment period expired on May 14, 2018. Three comments (Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), State of Kentucky and USFWS) were received and summarized below.

6.1.1 EPA Comments EPA comments dated May 14, 2018, stated that they had not identified significant environmental impacts associated with the project and requested five items:

1) An in-depth scientific, environmental and engineering analysis to evaluate project design deficiencies; 2) A robust Section 106 National Historic Preservation Act discussion defining the relationship between the flood control project with the potential impacts to the local community; 3) A discussion of how “flood control” structures would affect the migration of terrestrial aquatic species; 4) USACE collaboration with the Kentucky Department of Environmental Protection (KDEP) to determine any potential impacts from the hydraulic and hydrological design associated with placement of control structures that might result in impacts to terrestrial aquatic species, both flora and fauna; and 5) USACE provide the CWA 404(b)(1) Guideline documents for this project in an appendix to the final NEPA document(s) in support of any wetland and stream mitigation decisions and to help the KDEP evaluate stream impact requirements for the KDEP Section 401 Water Quality permit.

USACE Response: 1) An in-depth scientific, engineering and environmental analysis of proposed measures is included in this EA and associated Design Deficiency Decision Document; 2) A detailed discussion of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act is included in Section 3.12; 3) There are no new flood control structures proposed for this project, impacts to the flood storage capacity of the FTPA was considered 3.4 and impacts to migration of terrestrial and

43 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment aquatic species were considered in Sections 3.8 and 3.9 respectively. Although closure of the FTPA inlet would eliminate fish migration from the Cumberland River, there would be no new permanent structures in the channel or along the immediate riparian area that would limit the migration of transitional species such as salamanders. Also, an existing weir that was placed in the Cumberland River Diversion Channel to direct flow into the FTPA would be removed after closure of the inlet, thereby removing an existing barrier to transitional species; 4) An application for Individual WQC would be submitted under Alternative 4, before final project design. 5) A 404 (b) (1) Guidelines Analysis was completed for this project. KDOW and other agencies would have the opportunity to review the analysis after the Draft EA and unsigned FONSI were posted on the Nashville District website and circulated to public and agencies for a 30- day review (See Section 6.2).

6.1.2 State of Kentucky Comments The State of Kentucky submitted consolidated comments on May 22, 2018. KDOW stated that prior approval must be obtained before construction can begin. The applicant must cite the State Application Identifier (SAI #KY201805100591). KDFWR stated that they had no comments concerning the project.

USACE Response: USACE discusses the need for an Individual WQC from KDOW in Section 7.0 and the comments from KDFWR are noted.

6.1.3 USFWS Comments USFWS submitted comments on June 7, 2018, stating that the project area is within known Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) maternity habitat and known northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) habitat. Therefore, the EA should consider the potential impacts that could occur if trees greater than 3" dbh need to be removed. The project area is also within the range of the federally-threatened blackside dace (Chrosomus cumberlandensis). The nearest known occurrence is several miles from Loyall in Watts Creek; however, other suitable habitat could occur within close proximity.

USACE Response: USACE determined the project was “not likely to adversely affect” the species listed in USFWS comments. A full discussion of the potential impacts to federally listed threatened and endangered species in included in Section 3.10. 6.2 Notice of Availability (NOA) A NOA including draft EA and unsigned FONSI will be released to the public, including federal, state and local government representatives and public news/information outlets, including radio, television and newspaper outlets. The public will have an opportunity to review the draft EA and unsigned FONSI for 30 days and submit comments to USACE for consideration.

44 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment 7.0 PERMITS REQUIRED The No Action Alternative and Alternative 2 (Close Inlet) would not require any permits. Under Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel) the USACE would apply for an Individual WQC and Floodplain Construction Permit from KDOW after initial permit designs have been completed. The WQC would be required since Alternative 4 specifies that the FTPA area, which is currently an open water impoundment of the Cumberland River and therefore considered a “water of the U.S.” be partially filled. The Floodplain Construction Permit would be required since fill associated with Alternative 4 would occur below the 100 year floodplain and would result in a net loss of flood storage capacity.

Also, under Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel) the contractor selected to perform the work would have the responsibility to prepare a site-specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for both the FTPA and the project borrow site, detailing the proposed means by which erosion and sediment loss at the site would be controlled. The SWPPP, submitted to USACE shall contain all information required by the State Kentucky Pollution Discharge Elimination System (KPDES) permit, including a site map showing all areas to be disturbed, any areas of erodible soils, and best management practices proposed for temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control, stabilization, ground cover, maintenance and inspections. In addition to the actual project site, the SWPPP would cover ancillary areas such as contractor work limits, roads, staging areas, contractor trailer, buildings, waste containers, fuel storage, stock piles, disposal area, and drill water and cofferdam dewatering treatment and discharge. Upon USACE approval of the SWPPP, the selected contractor would submit the Notice of Intent (NOI) for the KPDES Construction General Permit for Storm Water Discharges to the State. The KPDES Permit for Storm Water Discharges must be approved by KDOW before construction can begin at the project site.

8.0 CONCLUSIONS The Cumberland River Diversion Channel at Loyall, Kentucky was completed in the mid-1990s as part of the Harlan, Loyall, and Rio Vista Flood Damage Reduction (FDR) Project under Section 202 of Public Law 96-367 (October, 1980). The diversion channel, earthen levees, floodwalls and closure structures near Loyall were constructed as part of the Upper Cumberland River Basin, Harlan Project (Phase 3), Loyall Diversion Channel Project. The original channel of the Cumberland River, which formed an oxbow within Loyall, is now being utilized as a FTPA area and was designed to maintain a minimum flow of 20 cubic feet per second. However, it has not performed as designed since the completion of the project. The low flows have resulted in increased sedimentation at the upper end of the FTPA channel and within the upstream inlet. Sediment deposition in the inlet is effecting the operation of the inlet gate making it more difficult to close. If the sedimentation continues, the citizens of Loyall are vulnerable to safety risks and potential major property loss as the gate could potentially be stuck in the open position during a large flood event in the area, when Cumberland River levels are high, creating inflow volumes that exceed the flood storage capacity of the FTPA area. Additionally, the lack of flow through the abandoned channel has been attributed by local citizens as contributing to issues such as foul odors and excessive mosquito populations.

45 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment Alternative 2 (Close Inlet), Alternative 4 (Close Inlet and Re-grade Channel) and Alternative 6 (No Action) were carried forward for consideration. After evaluating available alternatives, Alternative 4 was selected as the Tentatively Selected Plan (TSP) for the following reasons:

- Alternative 4 was selected as preferable to Alternative 6 as the No Action Alternative would not rectify an unacceptable safety risk associated with a potential gate closure malfunction during a flood event.

- Alternative 4 was selected as preferable to Alternative 2 since narrowing and re-grading the existing channel would provide positive drainage for runoff to flow out of the FTPA area following rain events to increase flow and limit long-term ponding of water. Further, the creation of a more robust riparian area and adjacent wetlands would provide a buffer to filter pollutants in surface runoff from reaching the constructed FTPA channel.

Alternative 4 provides the necessary solution to and result in no significant adverse environmental impacts. All practicable means to avoid and minimize adverse environmental effects would be incorporated into the TSP. The TSP would not result in any significant direct or indirect impacts, causing only minor adverse impacts to floodplains, water quality, aquatic wildlife, aquatic resources, air quality*, noise*, traffic* recreation/scenic resources. The project was determined to have beneficial effects to wetlands, terrestrial resources, socioeconomics*, health/safety. USACE would verify during the pre- construction meeting that contractors obtained coverage under all applicable federal, state, and local permits related to this project.

*Asterisk indicates impacts or benefits would be temporary in nature.

9.0 LIST OF INFORMATION PROVIDERS AND PREPARERS The following people and agencies were consulted or involved in preparation of this EA.

Dana Sexton, Project Manager Travis Wiley, Biologist Tim Higgs, Chief, Environmental Section Jordan McIntyre, Archaeologist Cathy Keith, Real Estate Representative Mary Lu Noah, Attorney

46 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment 10.0 REFERENCES

Council for Environmental Quality 1996 Draft Guidance for Addressing Environmental Justice under NEPA. 1996.

Federal Emergency Management Agency 2014 Floodplain Maps Website: http://fema.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=cbe088e7c8704464aa0fc3 4eb99e7f30

Home Facts 2014 Website: http://www.homefacts.com/unemployment/Kentucky/Harlan-County/Loyall.html

Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources 2015 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources website: http://app.fw.ky.gov/speciesinfo/quadList.asp?strGroup=1

Kentucky Division of Air 2014 Kentucky Division for Air Quality, 2014 Annual Report

Kentucky Division of Mine Permits 2013 Cumulative Hydrologic Impact Analysis (CHIA) dataset http://minepermits.ky.gov/Pages/CHIA.aspx

Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet, Division of Water (KDOW) 1998 Removing Fecal Pollution from the Upper Cumberland River

Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet, Division of Water (KDOW) 2000 Cumberland River Basin and Four Rivers Region Status Report

Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet, Division of Water (KDOW) 2016 Integrated Report to Congress on the Condition of Water Resources in Kentucky, 2016. Volume I, 305(b) Assessment Results

Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet, Division of Water (KDOW) 2017 Kentucky Quarterly Coal Report, Fourth Quarter of 2017 http://energy.ky.gov/Pages/CoalFacts.aspx

Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet, Division of Water (KDOW) 2018 Floodplain Management in Kentucky (website) http://water.ky.gov/floodplain/Pages/default.aspx

Kentucky Home Town Locator 47 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment 2014 KY Home Town Locator Website: http://kentucky.hometownlocator.com/maps/boundary- map,mode,place,geoid,2148288.cfm

Kentucky Infrastructure Authority 2014 Water Resource Information System Internet Mapping Website: http://kygeonet.ky.gov/kia/cw/

Lexington Herald-Leader 2015 100 years of coal mining in Harland County. Website: http://www.kentucky.com/2011/08/21/1852406/100-years-of-coal-in-harlan-county.html

National Climate Assessment. US Global Change Research Program. 2014 https://www.globalchange.gov/explore/southeast-caribbean

Natureserve 2018 Species Profile for Blackside Dace. Website: http://explorer.natureserve.org/servlet/NatureServe?searchName=Phoxinus+cumberlandensis

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2015 Recent US Climate Change and Hydrology Literature Applicable to US Army Corps of Engineers Missions-Ohio Region 5. Civil Works Technical Report, CWTS 2015-05, USACE, Washington, DC.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers February, 2003 Harlan County Kentucky Flood Damage Reduction Study Final Detailed Project Report

U.S. Census Bureau 2014 State and County Quick Facts Website: www.quickfacts.census.gov

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2014 Noise Information Website: http://www2.epa.gov/aboutepa/epa-identifies-noise-levels- affecting-health-and-welfare

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2017 Listed species listed by Kentucky County, website: http://www.fws.gov/frankfort/pdf/KY_te_list_by_county.pdf

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 2014 Noise Abatement and Control Website: https://www.hudexchange.info/environmental- review/noise-abatement-and-control

Woods, A.J., Omernik, J.M., Martin, W.H., Pond, G.J., Andrews, W.M., Call, S.M, Comstock, J.A., and Taylor, D.D. 2002 Ecoregions of Kentucky (color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs): Reston, VA., U.S. Geological Survey (map scale 1:1,000,000).

48 Loyall, KY Flow-through Ponding Area Appendix A: Final Design Deficiency Determination Environmental Assessment