Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT

PL 84-99 TOWN OF GREYBULL FLOOD PROTECTION LEVEE CERTIFICATION – FINAL DESIGN OF LEVEE IMPROVEMENTS AT BIGHORN RIVER AND DRY CREEK. BIG HORN COUNTY WYOMING

Prepared by:

Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 4600 East Washington St., Suite 600, Phoenix, AZ 85034

Prepared For: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Northwest Division Omaha District

June 2016 Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT

PL 84-99 TOWN OF GREYBULL FLOOD PROTECTION LEVEE CERTIFICATION – FINAL DESIGN OF LEVEE IMPROVEMENTS AT BIGHORN RIVER AND DRY CREEK. BIG HORN COUNTY WYOMING

June 2016

In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and implementing regulations, an Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared to evaluate the effects of the proposed Greybull Levee System Improvements Project along Bighorn River and Dry Creek, in Greybull, Big Horn County, Wyoming. The EA was prepared to determine if the proposed scope of work and associated impacts would result in any significant impacts to the human, environmental or cultural environment. The Greybull Levee was designed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) in the mid-1950s to protect the Town of Greybull, Wyoming from flood events. The earth-berm levee was constructed on the west bank of the Bighorn River and on the south bank of Dry Creek. The original design memorandum was prepared by the USACE in September 1955.

The purpose of the Proposed Action is to restore the project erosion protection features and remove unwanted vegetation at the levee bend and to raise the levee along Dry Creek to ensure flood damage protection in compliance with Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 65.10 certification criteria in support of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) accreditation of the Greybull Levee. Furthermore, this would allow the Town of Greybull to remain enrolled in the Public Law (PL) 84-99 Emergency Rehabilitation Program.

The need stems from identified levee deficiencies along the Dry Creek Right Bank (RB) levee section of the levee system and at the Big Horn River Left Bank (LB) levee at the river bend. Levee improvements to mitigate identified levee deficiencies are needed to ensure flood damage protection. This project is necessary to ensure flood damage protection and attain FEMA accreditation of the Greybull Levee System. The levee system is currently assigned as Provisionally Accredited Levee Status by FEMA. The Provisionally Accredited Levee Status agreement between the Town and FEMA subsequently expired in February of 2013. FEMA is aware of the certification efforts that have been undertaken by the Town that culminate in design and construction of the projects described in this EA. If the studies and/or construction projects are not completed, FEMA would remap the Town of Greybull as if the levee does not provide protection, resulting in most of the Town of Greybull being mapped within the regulatory floodplain.

Two alternatives were considered in the EA: the Preferred Alternative and the No-Action Alternative. Under the Preferred Alternative (Structural Repairs – Preferred Alternative), the necessary repairs to the Greybull Levee System would be performed in order to provide flood damage reduction. The No-Action Alternative was considered and not selected because it would not meet the project purpose and need, which is to repair the flood control system in order to provide flood damage reduction. The proposed project consists of two distinct proposed improvements (i.e., Preferred Alternative) to the Greybull Levee System as follows: 1. Dry Creek RB Levee Raise - A 1-to 3-foot raise of an approximately 1,250-foot-long

Greybull PL 84-99 i U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

section of the existing Dry Creek RB Levee (part of the Town of Greybull, Big Horn River LB and Dry Creek RB Levee System). The Dry Creek Levee begins at levee station 111+20 near Highway 20/16/14 and ends at levee station 123+75 near the intersection with 14th Avenue. The levee raise is intended to provide freeboard as required in 44 CFR §65.10 of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Regulations for levee accreditation. Due to the configuration of this levee system, computed water surface elevations that exceed the 1% chance recurrence interval by more than 1 foot would flank the levee. 2. Big Horn River LB - A repair of 1,050 linear feet of existing embankment protection, from levee station 0+50 to station 11+00, along the bend in the existing Big Horn River LB Levee (part of the Town of Greybull, Big Horn River LB and Dry Creek RB Levee System). This section of the levee pre-dates the USACE improvements constructed in the mid 1950’s and the extent and nature of embankment protection through this reach is unknown. The project calls for removal of existing vegetation and embankment within the project limits, re-grading of the embankment slope to as-built conditions and construction of new 12-inch average diameter riprap to a thickness of 24 inches. The embankment repairs are intended to provide embankment protection as required in 44 CFR §65.10 of the NFIP Regulations for levee accreditation.

The environmental consequences of the proposed action on the human, environmental, and cultural resources were evaluated in the EA. The factors that were influential in the review included (a) the proposed project would repair the existing levee system and allow normal operation of the flood control works; (b) no significant adverse impacts to cultural or historical resources are anticipated to occur; (c) federally endangered and threatened species would not be impacted by the proposed project; (d) all applicable federal and state regulations would be met prior to contract award; and (e) resource agencies and the public have no objections to the proposed action nor are there significant unresolved issues.

In addition, Best Management Practices would be incorporated into the project description to reduce construction-related air quality, aquatic resources/water quality, and noise, wildlife, and vegetation impacts.

Based upon my review of the facts and analyses contained in the attached EA, conducted in accordance with the provisions of NEPA and implementing regulations, it is my finding that, the Greybull Levee System Improvements Project would not have any significant adverse impacts on the environment and would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement would not be prepared.

Date John W. Henderson, P.E. Colonel, Corps of Engineers District Commander

Greybull PL 84-99 ii U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Project History ...... 4 1.2 Proposed Action ...... 6 1.3 Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action ...... 6 1.4 Authority for the Proposed Action ...... 7 1.4.1 Existing Reports ...... 7 1.5 NEPA Scoping ...... 8 2.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ...... 8 2.1 Alternatives ...... 8 3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ...... 17 3.0.1 Environmental Setting...... 17 3.0.2 Description of the Watershed...... 18 3.0.3 Climate ...... 18 3.0.4 Geology and Seismology ...... 19 3.1 Resources Eliminated From Environmental Consequences Analysis ...... 20 3.2 Relevant Resources ...... 21 3.2.1 Air Quality ...... 21 3.2.2 Noise ...... 22 3.2.3 Wetlands ...... 23 3.2.4 Aquatic Resources/Fisheries ...... 26 3.2.5 Vegetation ...... 28 3.2.6 Wildlife ...... 29 3.2.7 Threatened and Endangered Species ...... 32 3.2.8 Cultural Resources ...... 33 3.2.9 Recreational Resources ...... 36 3.2.10 Economics ...... 36 3.2.11 Cumulative Impacts ...... 37 4.0 COORDINATION...... 39 5.0 MITIGATION ...... 40 6.0 COMPLIANCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS ...... 42 7.0 CONCLUSION ...... 46 8.0 PREPARERS ...... 47 9.0 REFERENCES ...... 48

Greybull PL 84-99 iii U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Summary of Potential Effects By Alternative ...... 15 Table 2: Cultural Resources Literature Review Results ...... 35 Table 3: Applicant’s Best Management Practices (BMPs) ...... 40

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Vicinity Map ...... 2 Figure 2 Project Areas ...... 3 Figure 3 Proposed Action ...... 11 Figure 4 Wetlands ...... 25

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Public Outreach Appendix B Agency Correspondence Letters Appendix C Biological Evaluation Appendix D Aquatic Resources Report and Correspondence

Greybull PL 84-99 iv U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

LIST OF ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS

AIS – Aquatic invasive species AMSL – Above mean sea level APE – Area of Potential Effect ARI – Aquatic Resources Inventory BGEPA - Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act BMPs – Best Management Practices CERCLA – Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act CEQ - Council on Environmental Quality CFR – Code of Federal Regulations cfs – cubic feet per second DFIRM - Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map EA – Environmental Assessment EIS – Environmental Impact Statement EPA – United States Environmental Protection Agency ESA – Endangered Species Act FEMA – Federal Emergency Management Agency FIRM – Flood Insurance Rate Map FONSI – Finding of No Significant Impact FR – Federal Register GIS - Geographic Information System HEC-RAS – Hydrologic Engineering Center’s River Analysis System HEC-SSP – Hydrologic Engineering Center’s Statistical Software Package IPAC – Information, Planning, and Conservation LB – Left Bank MBTA - Migratory Bird Treaty Act mm - millimeters NEPA – National Environmental Policy Act NFIP – National Flood Insurance Program NLD – National Levee Database NRCS – Natural Resources Conservation Service NWD-NWO – Northwest Division, Omaha District PL – Public Law RB – Right Bank SHPO – State Historic Preservation Office U.S. – United States USACE – United States Army Corps of Engineers U.S.C. – United States Code USDA – United States Department of Agriculture USFWS – United States Fish and Wildlife Service USGS – United States Geological Survey WGFD - Wyoming Game and Fish Department WSGS – Wyoming State Geological Survey WYDOT – Wyoming Department of Transportation

Greybull PL 84-99 v U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

PL 84-99 TOWN OF GREYBULL FLOOD PROTECTION LEVEE CERTIFICATION – FINAL DESIGN OF LEVEE IMPROVEMENTS AT BIGHORN RIVER AND DRY CREEK BIG HORN COUNTY, WYOMING

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Amec Foster Wheeler, Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. (Amec Foster Wheeler) has prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Northwest Division, Omaha District (NWD-NWO) to evaluate the potential impacts of improving the flood protection levee of Bighorn River and Dry Creek in Greybull, Big Horn County, Wyoming. This EA has been prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 and the Council on Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) Regulations (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 1500-1508), as reflected in the USACE Engineering Regulation (ER): 200-2-2. This EA provides sufficient information on the potential adverse and beneficial environmental effects to allow the District Commander, USACE, NWD-NWO, to make an informed decision on the appropriateness of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). The finding of this EA determines whether an EIS is required. If this EA indicates that no significant impact is likely, then the agency can release a FONSI and carry on with the proposed action.

This action is being completed in accordance with the CEQ regulations in Section 1506.5(a) and 1506.5(b), which allows an applicant to prepare an EA for a federal action. The Corps has independently evaluated and verified the information and analysis undertaken in the EA and takes full responsibility for the scope and content contained herein.

Project Location

The Greybull Levee System is located in the Town of Greybull (Town) in Big Horn County, Wyoming (Figure 1). Cadastral location information for the Greybull Levee System is: Sections 3 and 17, Township 52 North, Range 93 West. The Greybull Levee System is located immediately east of and adjacent to the Town, and is generally aligned north-south along the west bank of the Bighorn River. The northernmost section of the Greybull Levee System is aligned west-east along the south bank of Dry Creek (Figure 2).

Greybull PL 84-99 1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

Figure 1 Vicinity Map

Greybull PL 84-99 2 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

Figure 2 Project Areas

Greybull PL 84-99 3 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

The levee system is approximately 2.6 miles long and starts adjacent to the railroad at the south edge of town, about 2,000 feet north of the confluence with the Greybull River, and follows the left bank of the Bighorn River around town to a point about 300 feet north of the 13th Avenue N. alignment, where it is co-incident with the highway embankment for a length of about 750 feet to a point about 430 feet north of the 14th Avenue N. alignment (Levee Bend project area; Figure 2). The levee then turns westward and follows the right bank of Dry Creek for about 900 feet where it turns due south and ties to 14th Avenue (Dry Creek project area; Figure 2).

1.1 Project History

The Greybull Levee was designed by the USACE in the mid-1950s to protect the town of Greybull, Wyoming from flood events. The earth-berm levee was constructed on the west bank of the Bighorn River and on the south bank of Dry Creek. The original design memorandum was prepared by the USACE in September 1955.

Ice Jams

The Greybull Levee System is located in the north-central/west portion of the State of Wyoming and provides flood protection benefits to the Town of Greybull. The system is located in a mountainous region in which historical records have shown that flood impacts have been caused by ice jams along the Bighorn River. The existing Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) study of the Greybull Levee System includes hydrology and hydraulic analyses of the Bighorn River. The hydrology was developed from a statistical gage analysis using Bulletin 17B procedures, while the hydraulic analysis was developed using a steady-state Hydrologic Engineering Center’s River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) model. Upon review of the existing FEMA study, it was determined by FEMA, the State of Wyoming, and ICON (the State of Wyoming contractor) that the study of potential impacts of ice jams on water surface elevations was not necessary. The existing hydrologic and hydraulic analysis of the Bighorn River is currently approved by FEMA.

Since historical records have shown that ice jams have occurred on the Bighorn River, further research by Amec Foster Wheeler was warranted in order to validate the risk associated with ice jams. Amec Foster Wheeler, as part of this levee certification project, evaluated various flow, temperature, and historical ice jam records and then performed a seasonal hydrology analysis corresponding to an ice jam season in order to provide justification that a detailed ice jam analysis was not necessary.

Effective Project Hydrology

ICON Engineering, Inc. was contracted by FEMA to prepare a hydrologic analysis for the Special Flood Hazard Area within the Town of Greybull in 2009. The purpose of their analysis was to develop the 1%-annual-chance hydrologic peak flow for the Bighorn River and Dry Creek at Greybull as part of a Flood Insurance Study and Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) update. A 1% annual chance flood is a flood event that has a 1% chance of occurring any given year. The longer the period of time spent in a flood prone area the higher the probability that a 1% chance flood will occur. For example, the probability of a 1% chance flood occurring over a 10 year period is nearly 10%.

Greybull PL 84-99 4 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

In order to develop the 1%-annual-chance peak flow, data from U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) stream flow gages located near Basin, Wyoming (USGS Gage 06274300; approximately 7.5 miles upstream of Greybull) and near Kane, Wyoming (USGS Gage 06279500; approximately 24 miles downstream of Greybull) were analyzed. The USACE Hydrologic Engineering Center’s Statistical Software Package (HEC-SSP) was used in the analysis. Peak flow data for the Bighorn River at Greybull was then determined based on adjustments from the publication Peak Flow Characteristics of Wyoming Streams – Water Resources Investigations Report 03-4107. The peak flow data for Dry Creek at Greybull was determined based on regional regression equations from the aforementioned report.

Drainage basin areas for the Bighorn River and Dry Creek at Greybull were determined using USGS 1:500K and 7.5’ scale topographic maps and USGS basin delineation information. The drainage area contributing to the Bighorn River at Greybull was calculated at 14,405 square miles, while the drainage area contributing to Dry Creek at Greybull was calculated at 436 square miles.

Based on the gage analysis completed for the Bighorn River at Greybull and the drainage area calculated above, the 1%-annual-chance peak flow was calculated at 29,185 cubic feet per second (cfs). Based on the regression analysis completed for Dry Creek at Greybull and the drainage area calculated above, the 1%-annual-chance peak flow was calculated at 5,663 cfs. As a point of reference, normal flow in the Big Horn River (developed as the average of the reported mean daily discharge at USGS Gage 06279500 near Kane, WY from the years 1952 to 2013) is 2,142 cfs and the normal flow in Dry Creek (developed as the average of the reported mean daily discharges at USGS Gage 06278000 near Greybull, WY from the years 1951 to 1959) is 27 cfs.

Effective Project Hydraulic Analysis

ICON G&O Joint Venture was contracted by FEMA to prepare a hydraulic analysis for the Special Flood Hazard Area within the Town of Greybull in 2009 as part of a Flood Insurance Study. The purpose of the project was to perform a hydraulic evaluation of the Bighorn River at the Town of Greybull and to assess the hydraulic impacts to the Greybull Levee as part of a Flood Insurance Study and DFIRM update.

The hydraulic analysis was performed using the USACE HEC-RAS (version 4.0.0) computer program. Cross section and bridge data were obtained from topographic mapping within the study reach and as-built drawings of the Greybull Avenue Bridge. An important factor in developing flood elevations is the effect of surface roughness of flow. The smoother a surface the quicker and shallower the water will move. A term called Manning's "n" is used to define roughness. The smaller the Manning's "n" the smoother the surface. A Manning's "n" value between 0.037 to 0.085 was used for the rougher overbanks and a Manning's "n" value of 0.037 was used for the smoother channel.

2013 Hydraulic Analysis at Dry Creek for Levee Certification

Amec Foster Wheeler completed a hydraulic analysis for this project to include a hydraulic evaluation of Dry Creek from the end of the Greybull Levee on the south side of Dry Creek to its confluence with the Bighorn River. A description of the analysis performed at Dry Creek is

Greybull PL 84-99 5 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

provided below.

According to as-built documentation, the Greybull Levee system consists of a rolled-filled section covered with a minimum of 2 feet of bank-run gravel and shaped to provide drainage; the top six inches is composed of select material. A digital levee centerline from the National Levee Database (NLD) was acquired and used in the analysis. In order to establish levee stationing, hard copy as- built drawings were geo-referenced onto the best available topographic data and aerial mapping and aligned with the NLD centerline. The as-built levee stations extended from a station of -12+50 at the south end to 126+50 on the north end. The Greybull Levee System has 12 interior drainage structures.

Hydraulic models were used to determine the water elevation, flow depth and velocities that would occur along the levee during a 1% annual chance flood. The results of the hydraulic model were used to determine if the levee could be certified as-is or if mitigation was required. Based on the hydraulic models, Amec Foster Wheeler determined that there was a freeboard deficiency along Dry Creek.

1.2 Proposed Action

The Greybull Levee System is currently assigned as Provisionally Accredited Levee Status by FEMA. The Proposed Action is to bring the Town of Greybull Levee System into compliance with 44 CFR §65.10 of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) criteria for levee certification. The Greybull Levee System includes two project areas, the Dry Creek Right Bank (RB) levee and Big Horn River Left Bank (LB) levee.

1.3 Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action

The purpose of the Proposed Action is to restore the project erosion protection features and remove unwanted vegetation at the levee bend and to raise the levee along Dry Creek to ensure flood damage protection in compliance with CFR 65.10 certification criteria in support of FEMA accreditation of the Greybull Levee. Furthermore, this would allow the Town to remain enrolled in the Public Law (PL) 84-99 Emergency Rehabilitation Program.

The need for the Proposed Action stems from identified levee deficiencies along the Dry Creek RB levee and at the Big Horn River LB levee at the river bend. Levee improvements to mitigate identified levee deficiencies are needed to ensure flood damage protection. This project is necessary to ensure flood damage protection and attain FEMA accreditation of the Greybull Levee System. The levee system is currently assigned as Provisionally Accredited Levee Status by FEMA. The Provisionally Accredited Levee Status agreement between the Town and FEMA subsequently expired in February of 2013. FEMA is aware of the certification efforts that have been undertaken by the Town that culminate in design and construction of the projects described in this EA. If the studies and/or construction projects are not completed, FEMA would remap the Town of Greybull as if the levee does not provide protection, resulting in most of the Town of Greybull being mapped within the regulatory floodplain.

As part of the NFIP, FEMA develops Flood Insurance Studies and Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) to depict the floodplain for the base flood (also known as the 1%-annual-chance-flood or

Greybull PL 84-99 6 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

the 100-year recurrence interval flood). The Town of Greybull is protected from flooding by the Big Horn LB and Dry Creek RB Levee System as reflected on FIRM panel numbers 56003C0868D and 56003C1131D. In order for a levee to be accredited by FEMA, the levee owner must provide data and information certified by a licensed engineer demonstrating the levee meets, and would continue to meet, the minimum standards of 44 CFR §65.10. FEMA standards address hydrologic, hydraulic, geotechnical, operational, and maintenance aspects of levee performance. When a levee is accredited by FEMA, the levee is recognized as providing flood protection for the base flood. If a levee does not meet FEMA standards, or if the technical documentation is insufficient or incomplete, then FEMA would not accredit the levee and the FIRM is modified to show the 100-year floodplain as if the levee does not provide protection.

1.4 Authority for the Proposed Action

The proposed action would be considered in accordance with Section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 United States Code [U.S.C.] § 408, “Section 408” hereafter). Section 408 authorizes the Secretary of the Army, on the recommendation of the Chief of Engineers of the USACE, to grant permission for the alteration or occupation or use of a USACE civil works project if the Secretary determines that the activity will not be injurious to the public interest and will not impair the usefulness of the project. The Greybull Levee was constructed by the USACE in the mid-1950s and then turned over to the non-federal sponsor (the Town) to operate and maintain per the agreement with USACE. The Corps of Engineers has a congressionally mandated responsibility to ensure that the federal constructed federal flood risk reduction projects are appropriately operated and maintained. No improvement shall be passed over, under, or through walls, levees, improved channels or floodways, nor shall any excavation or construction be permitted within the limits of the project right of way, nor shall any change be made in any feature of the works without prior approval of the USACE.

Furthermore, the Town would apply for a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit and request concurrence from the USACE for the proposed levee improvements. The Town would be responsible for funding for the levee improvements under this permit as well as the management of the construction activities during levee improvements.

1.4.1 EXISTING REPORTS

Amec Foster Wheeler collected relevant data for use in this study from various sources including the Town of Greybull, the Town Engineer (Engineering Associates), Big Horn County, USACE – Omaha District, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the Wyoming Department of Transportation (WYDOT). Data collected for review and use in the EA included design reports/memorandums, hydrologic and hydraulic studies, floodplain delineations, current topographic mapping data, current and historic aerial photographs, pertinent correspondence, geographic information system (GIS) layers/databases, operation and maintenance documents, and information on permitted construction activity on and around the levee. The following reports have been incorporated by reference herein: • Final Conceptual Design and Cost Estimate for Potential Mitigation, Revision 1, Amec Foster Wheeler, June 19, 2014 • Flood Protection Levee Certification Final Report, Amec Foster Wheeler, May 2, 2014

Greybull PL 84-99 7 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

• DFIRM Mapping Update, Town of Greybull, Bighorn River Hydraulics Report, ICON Engineering, Inc., February 2010 • Final Periodic Inspection Report, Greybull - Big Horn LB & Dry Creek RB Levee System, Greybull, Wyoming, Affinis Corporation, September 16, 2010 • Continuing Eligibility Inspection Report, Greybull - Big Horn LB & Dry Creek RB Levee System, USACE, May 27, 2014 • Design and Construction of Levees (EM 1110-2-1913), USACE Engineering and Design, April 30, 2000 • Hydraulic Design of Flood Control Channels (EM 1110-2-1601), USACE Engineering and Design, June 30, 2014 • Riprap Design Criteria, Recommended Specifications and Quality Control, NCHRP Report 568, Transportation Research Board, 2006 • National Engineering Handbook, Technical Supplement 14B - Scour Calculations, August, 2007 • Toe-Scour Estimation in Stabilized Bendways, Stephen, T. Maynord, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, August, 1996

1.5 NEPA Scoping

On January 4, 2016, Amec Foster Wheeler, in cooperation with USACE, mailed an agency and landowner notice that detailed the proposed PL 84-99 Greybull Levee System Improvements Project. Additionally, a scoping meeting was held in the Town of Greybull on February 10, 2016. The meeting was announced in the local newspaper, the Greybull Standard. Display boards describing the project and NEPA process were available for review. Four people attended the meeting on February 10, 2016. Please see Appendix A for display boards, questions/concerns raised and addressed.

2.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED

One of the primary missions of the USACE is to provide emergency levee rehabilitation to levees enrolled in the PL 84-99 Program following disaster events. To be included in the PL 84-99 Program, levee sponsors must routinely inspect and meet construction and maintenance standards set by the USACE. All levee rehabilitation under the PL 84-99 program is limited to restoring the same level of flood risk management to the damaged levee that existed prior to any flood damage; thus, alternatives are limited and generally consist of a No-Action Alternative and Preferred Alternative.

2.1 Alternatives

No-Action Alternative

The No-Action alternative consists of two scenarios. The first is a true No-Action scenario where no repair would be done to the levee system at the Town of Greybull, and the Town would, in time, be mapped within the regulatory floodplain. The second No-Action scenario includes a

Greybull PL 84-99 8 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

“predictable action by others” as discussed in CEQ (1981). This “predictable action” would consist of the public sponsor repairing the levee and project features without assistance through the PL 84-99 program.

The USACE believes that it is not unreasonable to assume that a private entity would work towards rehabilitation of the levee system. It is almost always in the sponsor’s best economic interest to repair the damaged flood control works, with or without assistance through the PL 84-99 program, because of the value of infrastructure that the levee system protects. In addition, the need to protect life provides further reasoning as to why repairs would likely occur in the absence of assistance through the PL 84-99 program. It is understood, however, that in some circumstances levee systems may not be repaired due to lack of funds or other reasons, which in this case would result in increased flood risk to the community of Greybull.

Because the levee sponsor has been active in the PL 84-99 program, has maintained the levee and project features in accordance with that program, and has received letters of “good standing” from the USACE signifying that the sponsor is eligible for PL 84-99 assistance, the No-Action alternative was not selected as the Preferred Alternative. However, the No-Action alternative has been carried forward in the planning process in order to provide a comparison between it and the impacts of implementing the Preferred Alternative, the primary difference being the No-Action Alternative presents a Sponsor-related action with no Federal oversight.

Alternative 2 – Structural Repairs (Preferred Alternative)

The Preferred Alternative consists of repairs and rehabilitations to the levee system at the Town of Greybull with funding and construction oversight actions by the Town with concurrence and permitting from the USACE. This would include two project areas: Dry Creek and Levee Bend that are described in more detail below. The project areas that would be rehabilitated under the Preferred Alternative are shown in Figure 3 and in Photos 1-4. The photos presented include a description of the damage as well as a description of the proposed improvements.

Levee Raise at Dry Creek:

Structural improvements to the Dry Creek RB levee would include raising the levee along the 1,255-foot length of the levee. Improvements to the existing Dry Creek RB levee would begin at levee station 111+20 near Highway 20/16/14 (see Photo 1) and end at levee station 123+75 near 14th Avenue. Structural modifications to the levee would consist of a 1-foot raise from levee station 115+05 to 119+43, a 2-foot raise from levee station 111+20 to 115+05 and 119+43 to 122+18 and a 3-foot raise from levee station 122+18 to 123+75. The raise would consist of compacted earth fill placed in 8-inch loose lifts. The levee surface would be covered with a 6-inch layer of gravel to resist erosion. The levee crest would have a width of 10 feet with a 6-inch layer of gravel driving surface. One levee penetration at levee station 112+70 would be improved by the replacement of the existing flared end section. Minimal regrading of the interior drainage ditch would also be required. All levee raise improvements would occur on the Town (“dry”) side of the levee with the exception of the road improvements at 8th Street and the new ramp construction near levee station 121+50.

The levee improvements would have no impact on the computed water surface elevations in Dry

Greybull PL 84-99 9 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

Creek. The Dry Creek Levee improvements would be contained within existing Town right-of-way so no new land acquisition would be required for the Preferred Alternative.

Embankment Protection Repair at Levee Bend:

Structural improvements to the existing Big Horn River LB at the Levee Bend project area would begin at levee station 0+50 (see Photo 2) at the end of the embankment protection installed by the USACE and end at levee station 11+00, for a total project length of 1,050 feet. Structural modifications to the levee within this reach would consist of removal of existing vegetation (including trees) and embankment, re-grading of the embankment slope to as-built conditions and construction of new 12-inch average diameter riprap to a thickness of 24 inches. From levee station 0+50 to 4+00 (see Photos 3 and 4), the riprap embankment protection would have a thickened edge at the upstream and downstream limits and would have a launchable riprap toe section designed to provide protection exceeding calculated potential scour depth at the river bend. From levee station 4+00 to 11+00, existing levee toe protection would be protected in place.

Greybull PL 84-99 10 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

Figure 3 Proposed Action

Greybull PL 84-99 11 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

Photo 1. Dry Creek Levee Raise, near station 111+00. Photo taken facing west along dry side of existing levee. The levee would be raised from 0.0’ to 2.0’ from this location of the 8th Street crossing to provide required freeboard per NFIP design criteria.

Photo 2. Embankment Riprap Repair at Levee Bend, near station 0+50. Looking northeast across project limits. The large tree on the left edge of the photo would be removed. Several of the smaller trees near the east edge of the photo would also be removed as part of this project

Greybull PL 84-99 12 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

Photo 3. Embankment Riprap Repair at Levee Bend, near station 1+50. Looking northeast across project limits. Area in foreground would be returned to as-built grades, over excavated and prepared to receive new riprap embankment protection to meet NFIP design criteria.

Photo 4. Embankment Riprap Repair at Levee Bend, near station 2+75. Looking southwest across project limits. Area in foreground would be returned to as-built grades, over excavated and prepared to receive new riprap embankment protection to meet NFIP design criteria.

Greybull PL 84-99 13 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

Tree and vegetation removal from station 4+00 to 11+00 is required to address unwanted vegetation growth and minimize the risk of damage to the levee resulting from winter ice jams that have the potential to forcibly remove or tear out trees and vegetation, damaging the embankment. The tree removal would necessitate rebuilding the slope and placement of riprap, but allows for the existing levee toe protection to remain in place.

The proposed improvements to the Dry Creek RB levee would provide the minimum freeboard required to meet 44 CFR §65.10 of the NFIP criteria. Likewise, the proposed improvements to the Big Horn River LB levee would provide embankment protection required to meet NFIP criteria. Both projects when constructed will satisfy the documentation requirements for levee certification and result in FEMA accreditation of the Greybull Levee System.

The levee improvements at both Dry Creek and Levee Bend project areas would have no impact on the computed water surface elevations in Dry Creek or the Bighorn River. The levee improvements would be contained within existing Town right-of-way so no new land acquisition would be required for the proposed project.

Construction of the Greybull Levee System Improvements Project is proposed for the winter months when Dry Creek and Bighorn River flows are low and to ensure repairs are made prior to the anticipated spring high flows. Construction would utilize excavators, loaders, bulldozers, and other similar equipment. Proposed activities would result in temporary ground disturbance during construction and vegetation removal. Areas disturbed during construction and not otherwise hard- surfaced would be seeded or have sod placed following completion of construction activities. No long-term disturbances would be anticipated to occur as a result of the proposed construction.

Table 1 provides a summary of the effects of implementing the No-Action Alternative and Alternative 2 – Structural Repairs (Preferred Alternative). Chapter 3, Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences, discusses in detail the resources in the affected area and the potential impacts on those resources from implementation of the No-Action Alternative and the Preferred Alternative.

Greybull PL 84-99 14 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

Table 1: Summary of Potential Effects By Alternative Resource Alternative 1 - No-Action Alternative Alternative 2 – Structural Repairs (Preferred (Sponsor-related Action, No Federal Alternative) Oversight) (Action with Federal Oversight) Air Quality Potentially high (but not significant), Minor temporary increases in construction temporary increases in construction- related dust and exhaust would be minimized related dust and exhaust – Assuming with implementation of BMPs. No long-term no best management practices impacts. (BMPs) are implemented. Could be minor short-term impacts with BMPs. No long-term impacts. Noise Minor and temporary construction- Minor construction-related noise. BMPs would related increases in noise, that may be implemented to minimize noise impacts. No or may not be reduced with BMPs. long-term impacts. No long-term impacts. Wetlands Temporary (but likely not significant) Temporary impacts from construction and impacts during construction – vegetation removal activities would occur Assuming all BMPs are not within and adjacent to existing wetlands. Clean implemented. Assuming Clean Water Water Act Section 404 permitting requirements Act Section 404 permitting would be would be adhered to (i.e., NWP 3) as well as adhered to (i.e., NWP 3). implementation of BMPs to further minimize surface and sediment runoff. Aquatic Potentially high (but not significant) Minor and short-term increases in turbidity Resources/ temporary increases in turbidity and from site runoff and stockpiled materials. BMPs Fisheries runoff, including the potential for fuel and storm water construction permit measures and oil spills from construction would be implemented to minimize these and equipment – Assuming no BMPs are to prevent oil and fuel spills. Construction- implemented. Minor short-term related impacts causing species to temporarily impacts if BMPs and storm water flee the area. Following completion of construction permit measures are construction species could return to the area, implemented. Construction-related and disturbed ground not otherwise hard impacts causing species to temporary surfaced would be seeded or have sod placed flee the area. No long-term impacts. to minimize surface erosion. No long-term impacts. Vegetation Construction-related disturbances to Construction-related disturbances to maintained grasses. Tree removal maintained grasses and tree removal would may not occur and would retain the impact a minor amount of riparian vegetation risk of ice-scour damage to the levee. along the Bighorn River. Some vegetation Vegetated areas disturbed during (trees) would be permanently removed from a construction may or may not be portion of the levee embankment to provide reseeded following completion of protection against winter ice jams. Vegetated construction. areas disturbed during construction would be reseeded following completion of construction. Wildlife Construction-related disturbances Construction-related disturbances causing causing temporary avoidance of the temporary avoidance of the area. No impacts area. Impacts to migratory birds or to migratory birds or bald eagles as pre- bald eagles could occur if appropriate construction surveys would be conducted if avoidance measures are not construction is within the nesting season. No implemented during the nesting long-term impacts. season. No long-term impacts. Threatened No impact. No Impact. and Endangered Species

Greybull PL 84-99 15 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

Greybull PL 84-99 16 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

This chapter presents an analysis of each resource topic that was identified as having a potential to be affected by implementation of the Proposed Action. Each section describes the environmental setting as it relates to that specific resource topic; the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects that could result from implementation of the Proposed Action; and mitigation measures that would avoid, reduce, or compensate for potential adverse effects of the Proposed Action on the human, natural and cultural environments.

The relevant resources section of this chapter presents the adverse and beneficial environmental effects of the No-Action Alternative and the Preferred Alternative. The section is organized by resource category, and presents the existing conditions of the resource and effects of each of the alternatives on the resource. Impacts are quantified whenever possible. Qualitative descriptions of impacts are explained by accompanying text where used.

“Significance” has been analyzed in this document in terms of both context and intensity as follows: • Context - Minor – noticeable impacts to the resource in the project area, but the resource is still mostly functional - Moderate – the resource is impaired, so that it cannot function normally - Major – the resource is severely impaired so that it is no longer functional in the project area • Intensity - Short-term – temporary effects caused by the construction and/or implementation of a selected alternative - Long-term – caused by an alternative after the action has been completed and/or after the action is in full and complete operation

Reader’s Note: For the purposes of describing the environmental setting and evaluating potential environmental consequences of the proposed project, the Dry Creek LB levee segment and Big Horn River RB levee segment will be referred to as the Dry Creek and Levee Bend project areas in this and subsequent sections of the EA.

3.0.1 Environmental Setting

Elevations within the project areas range from approximately 3,810 feet above mean sea level (amsl) on the levee at the Levee Bend project area, to 3,770 feet amsl near the western extent of the Dry Creek project area. The project areas are located within the Bighorn Salt Desert Shrub Basins ecoregion of Wyoming. This region is characterized by dry, alkaline basins that are surrounded by mountains, drained by large rivers, and contain alkaline or gypsum soils. The proposed project area is in an arid climate, averaging approximately five to six inches of rain per year. Common plant species in this region include greasewood (Sarcobatus vermiculatus), saltbush (Atriplex spp.), alkali sacaton (Sporobolus airoides), and saltgrass (Distichlis spicata) (USGS 2004).

Greybull PL 84-99 17 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

The Dry Creek project area contains vegetation typical of this community and is dominated by rubber rabbitbrush (Ericameria nauseosa), greasewood, and perennial grasses. The Levee Bend project area is located in a riparian setting, with a variety of riparian trees such as American elm (Ulmus americana), eastern cottonwood (Populus deltoides), willow (Salix sp.), and non-native Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia). The lower terrace riverbank is dominated by dense stands of prairie cordgrass (Spartina pectinata), interspersed with common reed (Phragmites australis) and non-native barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli). Vegetation nomenclature follows the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) PLANTS Database (USDA 2015).

3.0.2 Description of the Watershed

The Greybull Levee System Improvements Project is located in the Bighorn Basin physiographic province in Northern Wyoming (Wyoming State Geological Survey [WSGS] 2015). The Bighorn River is the major drainage system within the Bighorn Basin, and Dry Creek is a smaller tributary of the Bighorn River drainage system.

Bighorn River Watershed

The Bighorn River at the Town of Greybull has a contributing watershed area of 14,405 square miles (WSGS 2015). Approximately half of the contributing drainage area (7,706 square miles) drains to Boysen Reservoir, which is approximately 75 miles upstream of the project area. Elevations within the watershed range from about 13,800 feet amsl at Gannet Peak to about 3,800 feet amsl at the Town of Greybull. The Bighorn River Watershed is generally bounded by the Wind River mountain range to the southwest and the Bighorn mountain range to the east.

Dry Creek Watershed

Dry Creek at the project area has a contributing watershed area of 436 square miles (WSGS 2015). The watershed elevations range from about 7,300 feet amsl at the Meeteetse Rim to about 3,780 feet amsl near the project area. The Dry Creek Watershed begins with a steep mountainous slope for about the first quarter, after which if flattens out within the Middle Rocky Mountains physiographic province until it reaches the project area (USGS 2003).

3.0.3 Climate

Temperatures in Greybull, Wyoming range from average January lows of 2 degrees Fahrenheit to average July highs of 90 degrees Fahrenheit. The county receives an average of approximately 5.04 inches of rain and 20 inches of snowfall per year (Western Regional Climate Center 2015). On average, the region experiences 207 sunny days per year. The comfort index, which is based on humidity during the hot months, is 90 out of 100, where higher numbers result in more comfortable conditions (Western Regional Climate Center 2015). The average comfort index for the U.S. is 44.

Greybull PL 84-99 18 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

3.0.4 Geology and Seismology

Geology

The Bighorn Basin is bounded by the Bighorn Mountains to the east, the Absaroka Volcanic Field to the west, and the Owl Creek Mountains to the south. The Bighorn River is the major drainage system within the Bighorn Basin; Dry Creek and the Greybull River are two smaller tributaries of the Bighorn River drainage system and are located directly north and south of the town of Greybull, respectively. The most common surficial deposit along the Greybull Levee and within the Town of Greybull is Quaternary-aged alluvial deposits. These deposits are found within and around the stream beds and stream valleys of the Bighorn River, Dry Creek and the Greybull River. The alluvial deposits are comprised primarily of unconsolidated silt, sand, gravel, and cobbles, but can include alluvial fan sediments and glacial outwash (Pierce 1997).

Below the alluvial deposits and exposed at the east bank of the Bighorn River are Upper Cretaceous-aged sandstone and shale deposits referred to as the Frontier Formation and the Cody Shale. The Frontier Formation is comprised of a thick-bedded gray and light brown sandstone and gray and brown shale. The Cody Shale is comprised of an upper layer of thinly laminated light brown to gray fine-grained sandstone and shale. The lower layer is comprised of thinly-bedded dark-gray to black marine shale (Kozimko 1986; Pierce 1997).

Seismology

The nearest Quaternary fault (Stagner Creek fault) is located approximately 75 miles south of the project area. This fault is considered to be a normal fault, with a length of approximately 17 miles. Dip is the acute angle that a rock surface makes with a horizontal plane. Strike is the direction of the line formed by the intersection of a rock surface with a horizontal plane. Strike and dip are used to identify direction in a geological context. The strike is N77W with a dip direction due south with a slip rate of <0.2 millimeters (mm) per year. Most recent deformation along the fault occurred in the late Quaternary period (less than 15 thousand years before present). No maximum magnitudes have been calculated or reported for this fault (USGS 2015a).

Three Quaternary faults are located approximately 100 miles west of the project area. These faults are the Mirror Plateau, Upper Yellowstone Valley, and Brimstone Basin Area faults. All three faults are considered to be normal faults, with the latest deformational occurrence in the late Quaternary period, with the exception of the Mirror Plateau fault. The Mirror Plateau fault consists of two normal faults, divided into a younger section and an older section. The two segments combined are considered to have a length of approximately 14 miles, a strike of N39W and a dip direction of northeast/southwest. The older section of the Mirror Plateau fault shows evidence of movement within the middle and late Quaternary (less than 750 thousand years before present), and movement within the younger fault section has occurred within the late Quaternary (less than 15 thousand years before present). The Upper Yellowstone Valley fault has a length of approximately 15 miles, a measured strike of N9W, and a dip direction due east/west. The Brimstone Basin Area fault has a length of 5 miles, a strike of N17W and a dip direction due east/west. No maximum magnitudes have been calculated or reported for any of the faults within this area (USGS 2015a).

Greybull PL 84-99 19 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

Shear wave velocities are the speed through which transverse seismic waves travel through a medium. The shear wave velocity is directly related to elastic modulus of the medium and may be used for seismic design of structures. According to the USGS seismic hazard mapping, there is a 3 to 4 percent probability of an earthquake exceeding magnitude 5.0 within 31 miles of the project areas within 50 years, and between 3 and 4 percent probability of exceeding magnitude 7.5 within the same distance and time period (USGS 2009). Based on the seismic evaluation, soil properties in the upper 100 feet of the project areas justify selecting a Site Class C due to the shallow bedrock (USGS 2015b). Therefore, the default Site Class C should be used for this site as defined in Chapter 20 of the American Society of Civil Engineers publication 7-10 (American Society of Civil Engineers 2013) which defines Site Class C as having average shear wave velocities between 1,200 to 2,500 feet per second.

3.1 Resources Eliminated From Environmental Consequences Analysis

The following resources have been considered and found not to be affected by the proposed alternatives. Where there were no potential effects identified, the resource itself has been eliminated from further evaluation and analysis. A summary of eliminated resources follows.

Prime Farmland

Prime Farmlands were not identified within the project area. Therefore no impacts on prime farmland would occur.

Environmental Justice

Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, directs federal agencies to incorporate environmental justice in their decision making process. Federal agencies are directed to identify and address as appropriate, any disproportionately high and adverse environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority or low- income populations.

No minority or low-income populations would be disproportionately displaced or negatively affected by the proposed project. Flood protection benefits provided by the proposed project would equally benefit people of all ethnic backgrounds and income levels residing and working in the flood protected area; therefore, no environmental justice issues exist.

Floodplains

Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management Guidelines, outlines the responsibilities of Federal agencies in the role of floodplain management. Each agency shall evaluate the potential effects of actions on floodplains and should avoid undertaking actions that directly or indirectly support floodplain development.

Floodplains consist of the relatively flat land along one or both sides of a river channel. Floodplains serve critical roles if allowed to work without alteration. These roles consist of storing water when a river overflows its banks, slowing water velocity which reduces erosion, allowing groundwater recharge, creating fish and wildlife habitat, and most importantly, reducing the overall power of the flood which better protects downstream areas from flooding. Modified floodplains minimize or

Greybull PL 84-99 20 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

completely eliminate the natural functions of the floodplain and often change land use. Structures added to the floodplain incrementally reduce its ability to store water. In many areas, flood control projects, bank stabilization, and channelization of rivers have either completely or partially removed the connectivity of rivers with the floodplain. The majority of the floodplains are now used for either agriculture or urban development. It is expected that over time, more agricultural areas would be converted to urban/suburban uses, as urban populations continue to grow. Because the PL 84-99 Program is a form of maintenance designed to repair flood control works back to their original project purposes, no modification of the floodplain would occur.

3.2 Relevant Resources

This section contains a description of relevant resources that could be impacted by each alternative. The important resources described in this section are those recognized by laws, executive orders, regulations, and other standards of National, state, or regional agencies and organizations; tribes; technical or scientific agencies, groups, or individuals; and the general public.

3.2.1 Air Quality

Existing Conditions

The Clean Air Act requires the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards (40 CFR part 50) for pollutants considered harmful to public health and the environment. The Clean Air Act identifies two types of national ambient air quality standards. Primary standards provide public health protection, including protecting the health of “sensitive” populations such as asthmatics, children, and the elderly. Secondary standards provide public health welfare protection, including protection against decreased visibility and damage to animals, vegetation, and buildings.

The EPA has set National Ambient Air Quality Standards for six principal pollutants, which are called “criteria pollutants”. These include: ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, and lead. Big Horn County, Wyoming is in attainment with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for all criteria pollutants (U.S. EPA 2015). Attainment means that an area is meeting or is below a given safe standard set by the U.S. EPA for the particular criteria pollutant.

No-Action Alternative

In the No-Action Alternative the proposed project would not be constructed under the PL 84-99 Program. If the project isn’t constructed under PL-84-99, the Town would likely repair the levee and the associated impacts would be short-term, minor construction-related air quality impacts similar to those already occurring in the area from common urban practices (i.e., vehicular traffic, light construction, and industry). It is possible that management measures to reduce minor impacts to air quality (e.g., not idling equipment when not in use or preparing the project area to minimize dust) would not be implemented. This could result in a higher amount of particulate matter and sulfur dioxide during construction than necessary; however, it is likely that those increased amounts would not reach significant levels that would cause health concerns to

Greybull PL 84-99 21 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

humans or the environment. Because construction would be a short-term activity, and operations and maintenance of the levee improvements would not require a large number or amount of emission-generating equipment, no long-term or major impacts to air quality would be anticipated to occur following implementation of the No-Action Alternative. Therefore, under the No-Action alternative, the impacts to air quality would be short-term and minor.

Preferred Alternative

The Preferred Alternative would result in a Federal action where the damaged flood control works would be structurally rehabilitated. Construction-related contributions to particulate matter and sulfur dioxide stemming from the operation of construction equipment would be minor and short- term in duration. These impacts would be similar to those that occur from existing urban sources such as vehicular traffic, road work, and industry. Projects constructed under Federal programs require implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs). BMPs are techniques aimed at minimizing adverse effects to trust resources. BMPs that would be implemented under the Preferred Alternative include preparing the construction area before grading activities to minimize dust, mulching or covering imported earthen material used for levee repair to prevent wind-blown dust, and avoiding or minimizing idling of construction equipment when not performing necessary tasks in order to minimize sulfur dioxide. With implementation of these BMPs, the construction- related impacts to air quality would be minor and short-term to the project area. No long-term or major impacts to air quality would occur from implementation of the Preferred Alternative because operations and maintenance of the levee improvements would not require a large number or amount of emission-generating equipment. Therefore, under the Preferred Alternative, the impacts to air quality would be short-term and minor.

3.2.2 Noise

Existing Conditions

Noise is defined as unwanted sound that interferes with normal activities or in some way reduces the quality of the environment. Under the Noise Control Act of 1972 and its amendments (Quiet Communities Act of 1978; U.S.C. Title 42, Parts 4901-4918), states have the authority to regulate environmental noise by which governmental agencies must comply with in addition to community noise policies and regulations. The proposed project area consists of primarily rural and low- density residential areas, with Dry Creek and Bighorn River running through the middle of the Town of Greybull. Sources of noise in the proposed project area consist of automobiles, light construction activities (e.g., road work), and industry.

No-Action Alternative

In the No-Action Alternative, the proposed project would not be constructed under the PL 84-99 Program. If the project isn’t constructed under PL-84-99, the Town would likely repair the levee and impacts associated are short-term, minor construction-related noise that would be generated. There is a potential that the noise from project construction could disturb surrounding residential and commercial areas near the project areas. BMPs to reduce noise may not be implemented, so an increase of noise, both in intensity and duration, could occur. However, the amount of noise generated likely would not be deemed major given the scope of construction activities that would

Greybull PL 84-99 22 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

be likely to occur. Impacts from noise associated with the No-Action Alternative would be considered short-term and minor, and no long-term or major impacts from noise would occur from its implementation.

Preferred Alternative

The Preferred Alternative would result in minor, short-term construction-related noise impacts. These impacts would result from the operation of heavy machinery during project construction. These noise levels would be in addition, but similar, to noise produced by rural activities which routinely occur in the project area. There is potential that noise from project construction could disturb surrounding residences. BMPs, such as not idling machinery when not in use and conducting work during normal business hours would be implemented throughout the project area to reduce noise. Impacts from noise associated with the Preferred Alternative would be considered short-term and minor, and no long-term or major impacts from noise would occur from its implementation.

3.2.3 Wetlands

Existing Conditions

Amec Foster Wheeler prepared an Aquatic Resources Inventory (ARI) for the project areas (Amec Foster Wheeler 2015; see Appendix D). The inventory identified approximately 0.128 acre of fringe wetlands along the Bighorn River in the Levee Bend project area. The wetlands were located along the lower terrace riverbank and were dominated by prairie cordgrass. No wetlands were identified within the Dry Creek project area. The USACE Wyoming Regulatory Office reviewed the ARI report and provided a letter on January 26, 2016, concurring with wetland delineation results documented in the report (Appendix D).

No-Action Alternative

In the No-Action Alternative, the proposed project would not be constructed under the PL 84-99 Program. If the project isn’t constructed under PL-84-99, the Town would likely repair the levee However, the local drainage district would likely rehabilitate the flood control works through other means because it is likely in their best economic interest to do so. This could result in temporary minor construction-related impacts to fringe wetlands along the levee at the Levee Bend project area or long-term impacts to the fringe wetlands if they are converted to upland as a result of construction activities.

Preferred Alternative

In the Preferred Alternative, approximately 0.09 acre of fringe wetlands along the Bighorn River would be impacted via construction, fill, or vegetation removal activities at the Levee Bend project area (Figure 4). Construction activities that would impact wetlands include replacement of riprap embankment protection at the Levee Bend and associated vegetation and tree removal. Trees lining the embankment at the Levee Bend project area from levee station 4+00 to station 11+00 are located in a high-risk area for winter ice flows that have potential to rip the trees from the embankment, resulting in damage that could warrant levee repairs that exceed the size and scope

Greybull PL 84-99 23 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

proposed for maintenance activities. Therefore, addressing the risk posed by ice flows during this project would prevent or minimize future risk of damage from ice flows and associated cost of repairs. Tree removal in this segment would include removal of the rootball and replacement with compacted fill material and riprap to ensure levee embankment protection is maintained. Based on field reconnaissance and background research performed for the project areas, fringe wetlands along the banks of the Bighorn River appear extensive within the project vicinity. It is anticipated that fringe wetlands that have developed along the levee would re-develop over time following completion of levee rehabilitation construction activities.

Greybull PL 84-99 24 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

Figure 4 Wetlands

Greybull PL 84-99 25 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

The proposed construction and vegetation removal activities have been refined to minimize the amount and duration of activities within jurisdictional Waters of the U.S., while accommodating the level of work necessary to adequately rehabilitate the levee system. Given the proposed project location of a levee system along a river with vegetated banks and fringe wetlands, it was not practicable to design the levee rehabilitation activities in such a way to completely avoid wetlands while performing the necessary repairs.

In addition to adhering to the nationwide permit general conditions, BMPs and sediment controls would be implemented and storm water permit conditions would be adhered to in order to further minimize and control ground disturbance, soil erosion and surface runoff within the project areas, in addition to mitigation that may be required by the USACE. Therefore, impacts to wetlands would be anticipated to be minor and short-term in nature; no long-term or major impacts to wetlands would occur as a result of the Preferred Alternative.

3.2.4 Aquatic Resources/Fisheries

Existing Conditions

Historically, the Bighorn River watershed experienced high seasonal flow fluctuations. It supported catfish (Ictalurus spp.), sauger (Sander canadensis), and other native species. Construction of the Yellowtail Dam, approximately 50 miles downstream from Greybull, in the 1960’s drastically changed the ecological makeup of the watershed by stabilizing its flow. Currently, over 38 species of fish occur in the Bighorn River, many of which are introduced sportfish. Common fish species in the watershed include trout (Oncorhynchus spp.), flathead chub (Platygobio gracilis), common carp (Cyprinus carpi), catfish, bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), northern pike (Esox lucius), and longnose dace (Rhinichthys cataractae). In the 1990’s, shovelnose sturgeon (Caphirhynchus platorynchus) was reintroduced to the watershed. The Bighorn River downstream from the Yellowtail Dam is considered one of the best sport trout fisheries in the country (National Park Service 2016a, 2016b). The Levee Bend project area abuts the western and northern banks of the Bighorn River. Fringe wetlands along the riverbank terrace in the project area could provide suitable spawning habitat for a wide variety of fish species.

The project areas, particularly near the Levee Bend, have the potential to support amphibians such as frogs and salamanders. These species likely use the riverbank terrace area or may occur in moist crevices such as under rocks. Amphibians known to occur in the general area include tiger salamander (Ambystoma mavortium), Woodhouse’s toad (Anaxyrus woodhousii woodhousii), northern leopard frog (Lithobates pipiens), and Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris) (Wyoming Game and Fish Department [WGFD] 2012). The streams and rivers of Wyoming also support thousands of species of aquatic invertebrates such as caddisflies, mayflies, stoneflies, dragonflies, bivalves, snails, worms, leaches, and water mites. These invertebrates are a primary food source for many fish and provide a base to support higher trophic levels of local wildlife (birds, reptiles, amphibians, etc.) (University of Wyoming 2016).

Several aquatic invasive species (AIS) have been identified in the waterways of Wyoming, such as Asian clam (Corbicula fluminea), curly pondweed (Potamogeton crispus), and New Zealand mudsnail (Potamopyrgus antipodarum). These species drastically reduce biodiversity in a

Greybull PL 84-99 26 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

waterbody by outcompeting native species, altering water chemistry, and clogging waterways. While New Zealand springsnails and curly pondweed has been introduced to the Bighorn River watershed, none of these species is known to have established in the Greybull area (WGFD 2014a, 2014b, and 2014c).

No-Action Alternative

In the No-Action Alternative the proposed project would not be constructed under the PL 84-99 Program. If the project isn’t constructed under PL-84-99, the Town would likely repair the levee and impacts associated are short-term, moderate construction-related impacts to fish and other aquatic resources such as amphibians and macroinvertebrates. Construction-related noise and vibrations from machinery and rock placement as well as human presence could cause fish and mobile aquatic species to flee the immediate areas where construction would be occurring. Temporary discharge such as soil erosion and runoff could occur during construction activities. Fuel and oil spills from construction equipment could occur and may not be properly contained or mitigated if appropriate BMPs are not implemented and/or adherence to storm water permitting is not performed. Immobile aquatic species could be covered by rock and other fill materials. These impacts would last only as long as construction occurs, and those mobile species that fled the area could return upon project completion.

Additionally, if proper precautions were not taken, construction could result in the introduction of AIS. This impact has the potential to be moderate and long-term if an AIS becomes established. Therefore, the impacts to aquatic resources from implementation of the No-Action alternative have the potential to be moderate and long-term if proper precautions are not taken.

Preferred Alternative

The Preferred Alternative would result in potentially short-term, minor construction-related impacts to fish, amphibians, and macroinvertebrates. The potential impacts to these resources are primarily related to noise and vibrations from machinery, rock placement and human presence. These disturbances would cause mobile species to flee the site while construction is taking place. Those aquatic species incapable of fleeing the site would be covered with rock and other related fills. Ground disturbing activities, including tree removal, may result in temporary surface runoff and soil erosion, but would be controlled through the use of BMPs and sediment erosion control methods and adherence to storm water permit conditions. Upon completion of construction, aquatic species that may have dispersed from construction-related activities could return to the area. The Preferred Alternative consists of rehabilitation of an existing levee system and would not include significant new facilities or extension of the levee.

In the Preferred Alternative, the work plan would contain previsions to ensure that the project would not pollute or introduce invasive species to the Bighorn River, nor would trap or entangle wildlife. With the proper precautions taken, the impacts to aquatic resources from implementation of the Preferred Alternative would be short-term and minor. It is anticipated following construction, fisheries and aquatic resources conditions would return to those existing currently, and no long- term or major impacts to fisheries and aquatic resources would occur from implementation of the Preferred Alternative.

Greybull PL 84-99 27 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

3.2.5 Vegetation

Existing Conditions

Generally, the project areas are located in the historic floodplain of the Bighorn River, within a large arid valley situated between the Absaroka Range (to the west) and the Bighorn Range (to the east). The project areas are located within the Bighorn Salt Desert Shrub Basins ecoregion of Wyoming. This region is characterized by dry, alkaline basins that are surrounded by mountains, drained by large rivers, and contain alkaline or gypsum soils. It is in an arid climate, averaging approximately six inches of rain per year. Common plant species in this region include greasewood, saltbush, alkali sacaton, and saltgrass (USGS 2004).

The Dry Creek project area contains vegetation typical of this community and is dominated by rubber rabbitbrush, greasewood, and perennial grasses. The Levee Bend project area is located in a riparian setting, with a variety of riparian trees such as American elm, eastern cottonwood, willow, and non-native Russian olive. This riparian vegetation complex is abundant throughout the Bighorn River floodplain in the local area. The Bighorn River is lined by a narrow two- to three- foot-wide sliver of fringe wetland, dominated by dense stands of prairie cordgrass, interspersed with common reed, and non-native barnyardgrass.

Some invasive/nonnative vegetation exists within the project area, particularly Russian olive and barnyard grass. Russian olive particularly decreases local diversity by outcompeting native riparian vegetation such as cottonwood and willow, interfering with the natural nitrogen cycle, and choking marshlands. Efforts to remove Russian olive and tamarisk (Tamarix spp.) in the Greybull area have been undertaken by the South Big Horn Conservation District beginning in 2008. Mechanical removal and chemical treatment techniques have been successful in removing Russian olive along the Greybull River, Big Horn River, Paintrock, Nowood, Shell Creek, Dry Creek, and Dorsey Creek watersheds, although individual plants persist (South Big Horn Conservation District 2016).

No-Action Alternative

Vegetation clearing often results in disturbance that provides the potential for opportunistic invasive/non-native species’ to colonize an area. Areas disturbed during construction and not otherwise hard-surfaced would most likely be re-seeded upon completion of construction activities to mitigate this potential. However, because the project sponsor would not be federally overseen, it is uncertain if these measures would be taken. Therefore, it is difficult to determine the potential for this scenario to facilitate the spread of invasive/non-native species. In addition, tree removal may be performed to mitigate the high ice flow risk near the Levee Bend project area and reduce

Greybull PL 84-99 28 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

the risk of future damage to the levee. Implementation of the No-Action alternative may have minor, short-term impacts to existing vegetation on the levees; however, no long-term or major impacts to vegetation would occur from operation of the No-Action alternative.

Preferred Alternative

The trees currently lining the embankment at the Levee Bend project area are at high risk for winter ice flows that have the potential to rip out the trees from the embankment, which could result in extensive damage to the levee. Damage to the levee caused by this forcible tree removal could result in levee repairs that exceed the size and scope proposed for maintenance activities.

The Preferred Alternative would result in short-term, minor impacts to existing vegetation, particularly removal of trees lining the embankment in the Levee Bend Project area. Vegetation removal may also occur from grading, haul road construction, staging of materials, and through other construction activities. Previously disturbed lands would most likely be used as equipment and material staging areas. Areas disturbed during construction and not otherwise hard-surfaced would be re-seeded with appropriate seed mix upon completion of construction activities to reduce the spread of invasive species.

Therefore, implementation of the Preferred Alternative would have short-term, minor impacts to existing vegetation on the levees. BMPs would be implemented to reduce the risk of introduction or spread of invasive/non-native species. No long-term or major impacts to vegetation would occur from implementation and operation of the Preferred Alternative.

3.2.6 Wildlife

Existing Conditions

Historically, the arid shrub habitat in the vicinity of Greybull would have supported herds of large grazing herbivores such as American bison (Bison bison), pronghorn (Antilocapra americana), mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), and elk (Cervus canadensis). The interface of arid plains and the dense riparian habitat along the Bighorn River have also provided habitat for large predators such as gray wolf (Canis lupus), mountain lion (Puma concolor), Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis), brown bear (Ursus arctos), and black bear (Ursus americanus). Additionally, the Bighorn River likely supported riverine mammals such weasel (Mustela spp.), river otter (Lontra canadensis), and beaver (Castor canadensis).

As the project area is located in a developed portion of Greybull, mammals that may occur in the project area are those typically associated with the presence of humans, such as raccoon (Procyon lotor), fox squirrel (Sciurus niger), eastern cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus floridanus), and opossum (Didelphis virginiana). It is likely that the riparian vegetation along the Bighorn River could also provide cover for coyote (Canis latrans), beaver, and deer (WGFD 2012).

The northwestern portion of Wyoming is known to support a variety of reptile species. More reptiles are anticipated to be found in the Dry Creek project area due to its arid vegetation and upland setting; however, aquatic-oriented reptiles such as turtles or aquatic snakes are still likely to be found in the vicinity of Levee Bend. Reptile species that would be anticipated to occur in the

Greybull PL 84-99 29 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

general vicinity include spiny softshell turtle (Apalone spinifera), common snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina), sagebrush lizard (Sceloporus graciosus), greater short-horned lizard (Phrynosoma hernandesi), plains hog-nosed snake (Heterodon nasicus), bullsnake (Pituophis catenifer sayi), gartersnake (Thamnophis spp.), and prairie rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis) (WGFD 2012).

A wide variety of bird species occur in the vicinity of the project area. Due to its location in a previously developed portion of Greybull, the project area likely supports species accustomed to human proximity, such as blue jay (Cyanocitta cristata), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), American robin (Turdus migratorius), and white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys). However, the nearby Bighorn River may attract riparian/woodland species such as northern flicker (Colaptes auratus), hairy woodpecker (Picoides villosus), swallows (Hirundo spp.), orioles (Icterus spp.), and water birds such as great blue heron (Ardea herodias), snowy egret (Egretta thula), Canada goose (Branta canadensis), and mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) (eBird 2016; WGFD 2012). Many of these species are likely to nest in the riparian vegetation along both sides of the Bighorn River.

Raptor species that may occur within or near the project include red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), Cooper’s hawks (Accipiter cooperii), American kestrel (Falco sparverius), and bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). These raptors are most likely to nest in the dense riparian habitat along the eastern and southern banks of the Bighorn River; however, individuals may nest in some of the trees within the project area. The majority of bird species that occur in the project area are migratory, present only in spring, summer, and fall (eBird 2016; WGFD 2012).

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA; 16 U.S.C. § 703-712) protects native migratory bird species in the U.S. by prohibiting the hunting, killing, capturing, possession, sale, transportation, and exportation of birds, feathers, eggs, and nests. The majority of bird species in the U.S. fall under the regulatory protection of the MBTA. While any direct harm to a migratory bird is considered “take” and prohibited under the MBTA, the highest risk for construction activities to result in take is during the breeding season. This is because a bird’s young and/or eggs are restricted to an immobile nest that can be easily destroyed by construction equipment. The generally accepted breeding season for birds in the project area occurs between March 1 and July 30 for songbirds and from January 15 to September 15 for raptors. Any bird nests being constructed or containing eggs or young during this period are be considered “active”.

Amec Foster Wheeler performed field reconnaissance in November 2015 in support of a biological evaluation conducted for the project (Amec Foster Wheeler 2016a; see Appendix B). No songbird or raptor nests were identified in the proposed project areas during field reconnaissance; however, the vegetation within the project limits, particularly trees within the Levee Bend project area, provides high quality nesting habitat for a wide variety of migratory birds. Three raptor nests were identified within the vicinity of the project areas during the biological evaluation, two American kestrel nests and one red-tailed hawk nest. All nests were outside the USFWS-recommended construction buffer distances for these species (Amec Foster Wheeler 2016a).

Greybull PL 84-99 30 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA)

The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA; 16 U.S.C. § 668-668d) protects bald eagles and golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos), including their parts, nests, or eggs, by prohibiting similar actions as the MBTA. The Act defines "take" as "pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb." This definition also covers impacts that result from human induced alterations initiated around a previously used nest site during a time when eagles are not present; if, upon the eagle's return, such alterations agitate or bother an eagle to a degree that interferes with or interrupts normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering, and causes injury, death or nest abandonment.

No bald or golden eagles or their nests were identified in, or adjacent to the proposed project areas during the biological evaluation. However, suitable for nesting habitat for the bald eagle occurs in the riparian habitat within and in the vicinity of the Levee Bend project area (Amec Foster Wheeler 2016a).

No-Action Alternative

However, any disturbed wildlife could return to the area upon project completion. As such, construction-related impacts would not be considered long-term or major to area wildlife.

Removal of vegetation within the project areas could cause direct harm to nesting birds and violation of the MBTA or BGEPA if not performed in accordance with regulations. If construction could be completed within the winter months, impacts to migratory birds would be avoided. However, because the sponsor would have to generate their own funds for the flood control works repair and this might take some time, construction may not be able to commence prior to the arrival of migratory birds. If construction occurs within the primary nesting season of migratory birds, take of migratory birds could result. It would be difficult to determine if migratory birds were disturbed under this alternative because avian surveys may not be conducted. Additionally, it would be difficult to estimate potential migratory bird take under this scenario.

The project areas account for a small fraction of the suitable nesting habitat in the region. As such, it is believed that potential impacts to avian species, while major, would not be long-term. No impacts to bald eagles or their nests would be anticipated since none were identified in the proposed project areas.

Preferred Alternative

In the Preferred Alternative, vegetation removal would occur within both project areas. Similarly to the No-Action Alternative, local wildlife would likely avoid the project areas during construction. The wildlife impacts associated with the Preferred Alternative are short-term, minor, construction-

Greybull PL 84-99 31 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

related impacts. No long-term or major impacts to the project areas would occur and wildlife would be anticipated to return to the project areas following completion of construction.

Under the Preferred Alternative, the construction work plan would contain a provision that pre- construction surveys be conducted for migratory birds within the project areas and for raptors within line-of-sight of the project areas, in order to prevent direct impacts to migratory birds and eagles.

For the reasons listed above, no long-term or major impacts to wildlife species, including migratory birds and eagles, would be anticipated to occur from implementation of the Preferred Alternative.

3.2.7 Threatened and Endangered Species

Existing Conditions

In order to evaluate the potential for species protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA; 16 U.S.C. § 1531-1544, et seq.) to occur within the project area, the USFWS online Information, Planning and Conservation (IPaC) system was queried. This system generates a list of critical habitats and threatened, endangered, proposed, or candidate species for listing under the ESA that may occur within one or more delineated USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles that intersect the project area. The IPaC report (Consultation Code 06E13000-2016-SLI-0079; generated 05/10/2016) identified two species listed as “experimental population, non-essential” as occurring within the vicinity of the project area: gray wolf and black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes). No critical habitat for any species was identified within the project areas on the IPaC report.

Gray wolf

The gray wolf is a member of the canine family, with fur color which may be white, red, brown, black, and many variations in between. The species reaches an approximate length of six feet, weighs approximately 100 pounds, and typically lives up to five years (USFWS 1987). The gray wolf was listed as endangered in 1978 (42 Federal Register [FR] 9607 9615, March 9, 1978). It has since been divided into a number of distinct populations, with the Wyoming population being down-listed to an experimental population in 2012 (77 FR 55530 55604, September 10, 2012). The species’ distribution ranges from Canada to the American southwest and Mexico. The existing range of North American gray wolf extends from northern Michigan to Washington and northern California. Within Wyoming, it is found in the northwestern portion of the state, generally to the northwest of Lander (USFWS 2015). Critical habitat for the species was designated in 1978 (43 FR 9607 9615, March 9, 1978) in Michigan and Minnesota. Currently no established critical habitat for gray wolf occurs in Wyoming (USFWS 2016a).

Habitat for the gray wolf includes dense woodlands in mountainous regions where large ungulate species (hoofed mammals) are found, typically adjacent to higher-elevation grasslands. This species is a top predator and keystone species in many ecosystems, feeding on deer, elk, small mammals and livestock (USFWS 1987). Key components to quality wolf habitat include abundant prey, secluded sites for denning, and low presence of humans. Since protection, gray wolf populations have flourished in Wyoming and exceeded USFWS recovery goals (USFWS 2015). The primary threat to the gray wolf is habitat destruction via human population increase and

Greybull PL 84-99 32 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

expansion (USFWS 2012).

Black-footed ferret

The black-footed ferret is a member of the weasel family; it is a “slender, wiry animal with black feet, a black face mask, and black-tipped tail” that ranges from 19 to 24 inches in length and generally weighs between 1.4 to 2.5 pounds (USFWS 2016b). The ferret was first listed as endangered under early endangered species legislation in 1967 (32 FR 4001, March 11, 1967) and was grandfathered into the ESA of 1973 (USFWS 2013). In 1986, only 18 individuals were known to exist within its range. The last remaining individuals in the wild were captured near Meeteetse, Wyoming, and were used to develop experimental populations in Arizona, Colorado, Montana, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. Based on 2001 USFWS population estimates,

there were “more than 1,000 black-footed ferrets in the wild, and another 280 living in breeding facilities” (USFWS 2010).

Suitable habitat for the black-footed ferret consists of native grasslands inhabited by prairie dogs. The survival of black-footed ferrets is directly related to prairie dog abundance and habitat, as prairie dog burrows are used for shelter as well as dens to rear their young. In addition, over 90 percent of the black-footed ferret’s diet is composed of prairie dogs. The primary causes for this species’ near extinction was the loss of habitat and prey resulting from conversion of prairies to agriculture or other uses and prairie dog eradication programs (USFWS 2010, 2013).

The project is located in close proximity to human development, which is unlikely to support foraging or denning wolves, nor is it likely to support prairie dog colonies or black footed ferret. The nearest suitable habitat for these species likely occurs in the open grassland habitat surrounding the Town. In preparation for this project, scoping letters were sent to the USFWS on January 4, 2016, which detailed the proposed project’s scope of work and location. The USFWS responded on January 8, 2016, with a letter stating that the project was in compliance with the ESA. Agency coordination letters are provided in Appendix B.

No-Action Alternative

Because no threatened or endangered species or suitable habitat are known to occur within the proposed project areas, no impacts to threatened or endangered species or their habitat would be anticipated to occur from the No-Action alternative.

Preferred Alternative

3.2.8 Cultural Resources

Existing Conditions

The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (PL 89-665), as amended, and other applicable

Greybull PL 84-99 33 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

laws and regulations require Federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertaking on significant cultural resources within the project area of the proposed undertaking, as well as its area of potential effect (APE). Typically, these studies require archival searches and field surveys to identify any cultural resources. When significant sites are recorded in an area of proposed activities, efforts are made to avoid the resource, then minimize adverse effects and preserve the site(s) in place. If any significant sites cannot be avoided and would be adversely impacted, an appropriate mitigation plan would be implemented to recover data that would be otherwise lost due to the undertaking.

A formal literature search was conducted at the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Cultural Records Office. The results of the literature search showed that seven archaeological investigations have been previously conducted in the vicinity of the proposed Dry Creek project area, but not within the project area itself. In addition, eight previous archaeological investigations were conducted near, but not within the proposed Levee Bend project area (Table 2). No archaeological sites or isolated artifacts have been recorded within the proposed Dry Creek and Levee Bend project areas.

A search was also conducted of National Register of Historic Places database. No historic properties were found within the proposed Dry Creek or Levee Bend project areas; however, one historic property is located within one mile of the Levee Bend project area. The Greybull Main Post Office was built in 1939 as part of the New Deal Public Works of Art Program. It was intended to shift artists from local relief roles to projects involving the decoration of federal buildings, and the program had little impact in Wyoming. The Greybull Main Post Office is listed as significant under Criterion A (Event) for its historic association with the Federal government New Deal Public Arts programs. This site is located more than one mile away from the Dry Creek project area.

A cultural resource survey was conducted for both the Dry Creek and Levee Bend project areas on February 9, 2015 by Amec Foster Wheeler. No archaeological features, or historic or prehistoric sites were identified (Amec Foster Wheeler 2016b).

No-Action Alternative

The USACE determined that no historic properties were located within the project’s APE. Therefore, under the No-Action Alternative, there would be no impacts to historic properties.

The Preferred Alternative

The USACE determined that no historic properties were located within the project’s APE. Therefore, under the Preferred Alternative, no historic properties would be impacted. There is always potential for an unanticipated discovery of cultural resources during construction activities. It is recommended that cultural resources awareness slides be included in the pre-construction worker’s safety and/or environmental training. In the event that historic resources or human remains are uncovered, work would be halted immediately and a District archeologist would be notified. The work would not continue in that location until the area is inspected by a staff archeologist. If he or she determines that the resources require further consultation, he or she would notify the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office.

Greybull PL 84-99 34 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

Table 2: Cultural Resources Literature Review Results Accession Year Project Company Location Type # Greybull Lateral High Country Vicinity of Class III 0-577-0 2000 Pipeline Archaeology Dry Creek Survey S Big Horn Co Airport Vicinity of Class III 8-829-0 2008 Terra Alta Archaeology Water Line Dry Creek Survey Yellowstone Reservoir Vicinity of Class II 46-2-0 1946 Smithsonian Institution Appraisal Dry Creek Survey Archaeological Vicinity of Class II 90-663-0 1990 Reconnaisance of Site Frontier Archeology Dry Creek Survey 48BH1554 Greybull Airport Bench Vicinity of Class III 91-762-0 1991 Frontier Archeology H20 Supply Dry Creek Survey Tri County Telephone Vicinity of Class III 95-984-2 1995b Terra Alta Archaeology System (Phase 2) Dry Creek Survey Little Dry Creek Vicinity of Class III 96-1176-0 1996 Terra Alta Archaeology Reroute Dry Creek Survey Fourteenmile Tap New Horizons Vicinity of Class III 96-1134-0 1996 Pipeline Archaeology Levee Bend Survey Vicinity of Class III 1-195-0 2001 Greybull Water Project LTA, Inc. Levee Bend Survey S & WR Peters, Basin- Office of the WY State Vicinity of Class III 4-2126-0 2004 Greybull, GB Archeologist Levee Bend Survey Bureau of Land Vicinity of Class III 81-150-0 1981 Land Sale Management/Worland Levee Bend Survey Field Office Klaenhammer 1-B Well Vicinity of Class III 89-908-0 1989 Frontier Archeology & Pipeline Levee Bend Survey USFSBH, Admin Bldgs Vicinity of Class III 91-1189-0 1991 Fraser Design & Structures Levee Bend Survey Tri County Telephone Vicinity of Class III 95-984-0 1995a Terra Alta Archaeology System (Phase 1) Levee Bend Survey Greybull Contractor's TRC Environmental Vicinity of Class III 96-453-0 1996 Yard Corporation Levee Bend Survey

Greybull PL 84-99 35 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

3.2.9 Recreational Resources

Existing Conditions

The primary recreational resource present within in the vicinity of the proposed project is the Greybull Walk/Bike Path. The concrete path runs along the top of the levee on the western bank of the Bighorn River, beginning near 13th Avenue and U.S. Highway 14 and terminating at the Levee Bend Project area. Additional recreational uses in the vicinity include off-path hiking along the river, shore fishing, boating, and birdwatching.

No-Action Alternative

Under the No-Action Alternative, the proposed project would not be constructed under the PL 84-99 Program. If the project isn’t constructed under PL-84-99, the Town would likely repair the levee and impacts associated are short-term, minor construction-related impacts to fishing. Construction-related noise from machinery, dust from construction activities, and restrictions to certain parts of the Dry Creek and Bighorn River trail during construction would cause recreationalists to avoid active construction areas and for some distance both up- and downstream. These impacts would be considered short-term and minor and thus, non-significant. Recreationalists would likely return to the area upon project completion to enjoy similar conditions to those that existed prior to the project. There are no long-term or major impacts to recreation that would occur from implementation of the No-Action Alternative.

The Preferred Alternative

The Preferred Alternative would result in a Federal action where the damaged flood control works are definitely rehabilitated. The Preferred Alternative would result in potentially short-term and minor construction-related impacts to recreation similar to those described above for the Sponsor- related No-Action Alternative. Similar to the No-Action Alternative, impacts to recreation from the Preferred Alternative would be short-term and minor. No long-term or major impacts to recreation would occur from implementation of the Preferred Alternative.

3.2.10 Economics

Existing Conditions

Repairing damaged flood control works is typically in the sponsor’s best financial interest, with or without Federal assistance. As demonstrated by past repairs through the PL 84-99 Emergency Levee Rehabilitation Program, the benefit to cost ratios for levee repair are almost always greater than one, meaning that the proposed project is justified or economically feasible. It is almost always more economical to repair damaged flood control works than to construct larger facilities that provide higher levels of flood risk management or leave critical infrastructure exposed to future high flow events.

No-Action Alternative

This alternative would likely result in the project Sponsor seeking funding to repair the levee from some other source or the project sponsor repairing the levee at their own expense. This would

Greybull PL 84-99 36 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

result in a larger portion of local financial resources being used for flood control works repairs and potential financial hardships to local community if these resources are not available.

Preferred Alternative

The Preferred Alternative would maintain the same level of flood risk management that existed prior to the flood damage, as required by ER 500-1-1. This would result in long-term changes in economic conditions as a result of the flood control works repair. Public and private infrastructure protected by the flood control works prior to the flood damage would continue to have the same protection that existed prior to the flood control works being damaged. Minor short-term benefits to the local communities could occur from the Preferred Alternative as a result of increased expenditures by construction workers for gasoline, food, and other incidentals. Long-term and major economic benefits would occur with the protection of a levee in compliance with federal regulation, as it maintains businesses and residences out of the floodplain.

3.2.11 Cumulative Impacts

The CEQ Regulations defines cumulative impacts as “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 other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time” (CEQ 1997). These actions include on- or off-site projects conducted by government agencies, businesses, communities, or individuals that are within the spatial and temporal boundaries of the current action being considered. The geographic area of consideration is located within/along the floodplain of Dry Creek and Bighorn River and its tributaries.

Dry Creek and Bighorn River and its tributaries have been altered by past actions such as bank stabilization, construction of grade control structures, roads/bridges, agricultural and urban levees, channelization, water withdrawal for human and agricultural use, urbanization and other human uses. These activities have substantially altered the terrestrial and aquatic ecosystem within the watershed under consideration. Some examples of the alterations that have occurred include: wetland losses, development in the floodplain, conversion of riparian habitat to agriculture and urban development, and disconnecting the floodplain from the river.

The Preferred Alternative would provide flood control works rehabilitation assistance to the levee sponsor because they participate in the PL 84-99 Program. The Preferred Alternative would not involve increased obstructions to the floodway. The rehabilitation of the flood control works consists of repairing existing structures to their previous condition. These types of projects typically result in minor short-term construction-related impacts to wetlands, fish, wildlife, and the habitats upon which they depend; however, there would be no collectively significant cumulative environmental impacts of the Preferred Alternative primarily because it restores the existing flood control works back to its pre-damaged condition. Potential adverse effects would be construction- related (e.g., increased noise, turbidity, and dust) and would be of a minor and temporary nature.

It is likely, even without assistance from the USACE’s PL 84-99 Program, that these flood control works would be repaired either using some other source of public funding or with private funds

Greybull PL 84-99 37 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

from the sponsor. If private funds were used, there would be greater risk of adverse impacts to terrestrial habitat, fish and wildlife, water resources, floodplains, cultural resources, and other resources because permits and BMPs may purposefully or inadvertently be overlooked or otherwise not implemented.

Of the reasonably foreseeable projects and associated impacts that would be expected to occur, future PL 84-99 projects would continue to have minor effects on the environment as floods continue to damage or destroy the flood control works. Because the PL 84-99 projects would, at most, merely restore the flood control works to their pre-existing state, they should not induce development in any substantial way. The possibility of wetland conversion and the clearing of riparian habitat are ever-present, and such activities tend to impact those resources. Most of the floodplain is already protected by either agricultural levees in rural areas or urban levees in metropolitan areas.

The cumulative impacts of the proposed action, when added to other present and future actions to include past degradation actions on Dry Creek and Bighorn River and its tributaries, do not result in a net increase in impacts because the proposed action does not result in an addition to flood heights or reduced floodplain area. The proposed action is a form of maintenance to the existing flood risk management capability. Thus, no significant negative cumulative impacts associated with the Preferred Alternative have been identified.

Greybull PL 84-99 38 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

4.0 COORDINATION

Flood control works rehabilitation projects completed by the USACE under authority of PL 84-99 generally do not require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement. These projects typically result in long-term social and economic benefits and the adverse environmental effects are typically minor/short-term construction-related. The minor impacts associated with these projects are typically outweighed by the overall long-term social and economic benefits of these projects. The recommended plan is consistent with this assessment of typical flood control works rehabilitation completed by the USACE under authority of PL 84-99 of the Flood Control Act of 1944. Coordination with the resource agencies was conducted to ensure compliance with NEPA regulations. Federal and state agency comment letters are included in Appendix B.

Preparation of this EA and draft FONSI was coordinated with the following federal and state agencies: 1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (initial email dated December 22, 2015; response email and coordination letter dated January 26, 2016) 2. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (initial letter dated January 4, 2016; response dated January 14, 2016) 3. Wyoming Game and Fish Department (initial letter dated January 4, 2016; response letter dated January 28, 2016; email with additional information dated February 8, 2016) 4. Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office (initial letter dated March 9, 2016; response dated March 17, 2016)

Greybull PL 84-99 39 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

5.0 MITIGATION

Best Management Practices, as described within this EA (Table 3), would be employed to minimize impacts to trust resources. With implementation of these measures, no significant impacts would be anticipated. The impacts to fish and wildlife from construction-related activities would be self-mitigating once the construction ceases; fish and wildlife would simply return to the area and have the ability to resume normal activities upon project completion.

Table 3: Applicant’s Best Management Practices (BMPs) AIR QUALITY The following Best Management Practice (BMP) would be implemented during the construction of the Preferred Alternative to reduce the exhaust emissions of CO, NOX, VOC, SOX, and PM10. 1) Would avoid idling construction vehicles and/or equipment for long periods of time when not performing needed tasks to minimize sulfur dioxide. The following BMPs would be implemented for the Preferred Alternative to reduce fugitive dust emissions (including PM10): 1) Preparing the construction area before grading activities to minimize dust. 2) Mulching or covering imported earthen material used for levee repair to prevent wind-blown dust. NOISE The following BMP would be implemented during the construction of the Preferred Alternative to reduce noise when in noise-sensitive areas. 1) Would avoid idling construction vehicles and/or equipment for long periods of time when not performing needed tasks to minimize noise. EAGLES AND MIGRATORY BIRDS The following BMP would be implemented during the construction of the Preferred Alternative to avoid impacts to eagles and migratory birds. 1) No more than five days prior to construction, a qualified biologist should conduct a survey for nesting birds within the project areas and for nesting raptors (including bald eagle) within line-of-sight of the project areas. All non-raptor nests should be flagged and given a 100- foot buffer until nestlings have fledged. If any raptor nests are identified within line-of-sight of construction, the US Fish and Wildlife Service’s Wyoming Ecological Services Office should be contacted at (307) 772-2374 for recommendations regarding seasonal restrictions and construction buffers. VEGETATION 1) Vegetation removal would be kept to the smallest extent possible and existing roads and disturbed areas will be used for access and staging whenever possible. 2) Areas disturbed during construction and not otherwise hard-surfaced would be re-seeded with appropriate seed mix upon completion of construction activities to reduce the spread of invasive species. AQUATIC RESOURCES (including Water Quality) The following BMPs would be implemented during the construction of the Preferred Alternative to reduce the construction-related impacts to vegetation and short-term effects of site runoff and increased turbidity. These would include: 1) Using previously disturbed land as construction staging areas. 2) After Project construction is complete, ground surfaces within the Levee areas that are disturbed during project construction would be re-seeded with like grasses. 3) Accepted BMPs be implemented to ensure that all sediments and other pollutants are contained within the boundaries of the work area. Disturbed areas that are contributing sediment to surface waters as a result of project activities should be promptly re- vegetated to maintain water quality. 4) The use of erosion control fences.

Greybull PL 84-99 40 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

5) Requiring that all construction equipment be clean, free of leaks, and refueled in designated areas with containment berms. 6) Fill would be covered, stabilized or mulched, and silt fences would be used as required. Environmentally friendly erosion control blankets (jute or coir/natural fiber) is recommended rather than plastics or polypropylene materials. Mesh size should be large enough to minimize entrapment of birds and other wildlife. 7) Equipment should be serviced and fueled away from streams and riparian areas. Equipment staging areas should be at least 500 feet from riparian areas. 8) Preventing the spread of aquatic invasive species (AIS) is a priority for the State of Wyoming, and in many cases, the intentional or unintentional spread of organisms from one body of water to another would be considered a violation of State statute and Wyoming Game and Fish Commission Regulation. To prevent the spread of AIS, the following is required: a. If equipment has been used in a high risk infested water [a water known to contain Dreissenid mussels (zebra/quagga mussels)], the equipment must be inspected by an authorized aquatic invasive species inspector recognized by the state of Wyoming prior to its use in any Wyoming water during all times of year. b. Any equipment entering the state by land from March through November (regardless of where it was last used), must be inspected by an authorized aquatic invasive species inspector prior to its use in any Wyoming water. c. If aquatic invasive species are found, the equipment would need to be decontaminated by an authorized aquatic invasive species decontaminator. d. Any time equipment is moved from one 4th level (8-digit Hydrological Unit Code) watershed to another within Wyoming, the following guidelines are recommended: DRAIN: Drain all water from watercraft, gear, equipment, and tanks. Leave wet compartments open to dry. CLEAN: Clean all plants, mud, and debris from vehicle, tanks, watercraft, and equipment. DRY: Dry everything thoroughly. In Wyoming, we recommend drying for 5 days in summer (June-August); 18 days in Spring (March-May) and Fall (September- November); or 3 days in Winter (December-February) when temperature are at or below freezing. e. Any equipment used in a Wyoming water that contains AIS, must be inspected before use in another water. Species currently found in Wyoming waters include New Zealand mudsnail, Asian clam, and curly pondweed. Information on currently affected waters can be found at: http:/wgfd.wyo.gov/web2011/Departments/Fishing/pdfs/AIS_WYWATER_MONITOR 130005236.pdf. A list of high risk infested waters and locations in Wyoming to obtain an AIS inspection can be found at: wgfd.wyo.gov/AIS CULTURAL RESOURCES While no cultural resources were discovered pre-construction, there is always potential for an unanticipated discovery of cultural resources during construction activities. The following BMPs would be implemented during the construction of the Preferred Alternative to address Unanticipated Discoveries: 1) Cultural resources awareness slides be included in the pre-construction worker’s safety and/or environmental training. 2) Should historic resources or human remains be uncovered, work would be halted immediately and a District archeologist would be notified. The work would not be continued in that location until the area is inspected by a staff archeologist.

Greybull PL 84-99 41 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

6.0 COMPLIANCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS

Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA), 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668, 668 note, 669a-668d. In compliance. This Act prohibits the taking or possession of and commerce in bald and golden eagles, with limited exceptions for the scientific or exhibition purposes, for religious purposes of Indian Tribes, or for the protection of wildlife, agriculture or preservation of the species. No bald or golden eagle nests where identified within the proposed project area. Suitable habitat for bald eagle was identified within and surrounding the Levee Bend Project area. If project construction is to be performed within the typical breeding season for raptors (January 15 to September 15), a qualified biologist would conduct a nest search before vegetation removal. Because potential take would be mitigated by seasonal restrictions, no bald or golden eagles or their nests would be impacted by the proposed project.

Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 185711-7. et seq. In compliance. Air quality is not expected to be significantly impacted to any measurable degree by construction or operation of the proposed project. No long-term impacts to air quality would result from the proposed project.

Clean Water Act, as amended. (Federal Water Pollution Control Act) 33 U.S.C. 1251. et seq. In compliance. The objective of this Act is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters. The USACE regulates activities that result in discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States in accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Waters of the United States have been broadly defined by statute and judicial interpretation to include most streams, canals, reservoirs, lakes and adjacent wetlands in accordance with procedures defined at 33 CFR 328. The proposed project includes placement of clay material and rock riprap along the banks of the Bighorn River. Placement of this material is necessary to maintain the as-built condition of the levee preventing erosion of the embankment. Maintenance would be used for this project. This permit authorizes repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of any previously authorized, currently serviceable structure, or fill, provided that the structure or fill is not to be put to uses differing from those originally authorized.

The permittee (Town of Greybull) must comply with all terms and conditions of the permit for the authorization to be valid. All current nationwide permits expire on March 18, 2017, but up to one year is allowed to complete activities that have commenced or are under contract prior to the expiration date in accordance with 33 CFR 330.6(b).

Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1341) establishes a requirement for certification of any permit issued by the USACE for discharges into waters of the United States. The Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality certified use of Nationwide Permit 3 in Class 2 waters such as the Bighorn River in a letter dated March 16, 2012.

Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). In compliance. Typically CERCLA is triggered by (1) the release or substantial threat of a release of a hazardous substance into the environment; or (2) the release or substantial threat of a release of any pollutant or contaminant into the environment which presents an imminent threat to the public health and welfare. To the extent such knowledge is available, 40 CFR Part 373 requires notification of CERCLA hazardous substances in a land transfer. This project would not involve

Greybull PL 84-99 42 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

any real estate transactions and no hazardous substances are known to occur on site.

Endangered Species Act, as amended. 16 U.S.C. 1531, et seq. In compliance. A biological evaluation for the project was conducted by Amec Foster Wheeler in February 2016, which found no potential for threatened or endangered species to be impacted by the project. The USFWS was coordinated with on January 4, 2016 by mail. The USFWS responded January 14, 2016 with a letter stating that the project was in compliance with the ESA.

Environmental Justice (EO 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 1994). In compliance. Federal agencies shall make achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the U.S. The project does not disproportionately impact minority or low -income populations.

Farmland Protection Policy Act (Subtitle I of Title XV of the Agriculture and Food Act of 1981), effective August 6, 1984. In compliance. Compliance with this Act also would satisfy the requirements set forth in CEQ Memorandum of August 11, 1981, Analysis of impacts on Prime or Unique Agricultural Lands in Implementing NEPA. There is no prime farmland within the project area; therefore, this project is not subject to the Farmland Protection Act.

Federal Water Project Recreation Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 460-1(12), et seq. In compliance. The rehabilitation of the damaged flood control works would have no long term impacts on recreational use in the project area.

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq. In compliance. A letter dated January 4, 2016 was prepared by Amec Foster Wheeler for the Corps and sent to the USFWS and the WGFD to solicit comments on the proposed project. No further action under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act is required.

Floodplain Management (Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, 1977). In compliance. The rehabilitation of damaged flood control works under the PL 84-99 Program would maintain the same level of flood risk management which existed prior to the high flow event. Thus, the preferred alternative does not support additional development in the floodplain nor encourage additional occupancy and/or modify the base floodplain.

Invasive Species (E.O. 13112). In compliance. E.O. 13112 requires federal agencies to identify actions, to the extent practicable and permitted by law, that affect the status of invasive species. This includes utilization of relevant programs and authorities to 1) prevent the introduction of invasive species, 2) detect and respond rapidly to control populations of such species in a cost- effective and environmentally sound manner, 3) monitor invasive species populations, 4) provide for restoration of native species and habitat conditions in ecosystems that have been invaded, 5) conduct research and develop technologies to prevent introduction and 6) promote public education on invasive species and a means to address them. BMPs to avoid the introduction of AIS and invasive plant species would be implemented into the work plan, as detailed in Table 3.

Greybull PL 84-99 43 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 as amended, 16 U.S.C. 703-711, et seq. In compliance. The MBTA is the domestic law that affirms, or implements, the U.S.’ commitment to four international conventions with Canada, Japan, Mexico and Russia for the protection of shared migratory bird resources. The MBTA governs the taking, killing, possession, transportation, and importation of migratory birds, their eggs, parts and nests. The take of all migratory birds is governed by the MBTA's regulation of taking migratory birds for educational, scientific, and recreational purposes and requiring harvest to be limited to levels that prevent over utilization. Executive Order 13186, Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds, (2001) directs executive agencies to take certain actions to implement the act.

Migratory birds or their nests would not be impacted during construction of the proposed project. Construction is slated to occur during the winter months before the onset of potential high flows in the following year. If the construction date changes and falls within the typical breeding season for birds (March 1 through July 30 for songbirds and January 15 through September 15 for raptors), a qualified biologist would be hired to conduct a nest search not more than five days prior to construction. Additionally, if any raptor nests are identified within a one-mile radius of the project area, the USFWS would be contacted to determine their recommended construction and seasonal buffers based on species.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq. In compliance. This EA has been prepared for the proposed action and to satisfy the NEPA requirement. An Environmental Impact Statement is not required.

National Historic Preservation Act, as amended. 16 U.S.C. 470a, et seq. In compliance. The literature review revealed that there are no historic properties listed in or determined eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places in the project's APE. No additional cultural resources investigations are recommended prior to the project's implementation. The Wyoming SHPO has had the opportunity to comment on the Greybull Class III report, and concurs with the recommendations for unanticipated discoveries of cultural resources during construction activities presented below and in Appendix B.

There is always potential for an unanticipated discovery of cultural resources during construction activities. In the event that historic resources are uncovered, work would be halted immediately and a District archeologist would be notified. The work would not be continued until the area is inspected by a staff archeologist. If he or she determines that the resources require further consultation, he or she would notify the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office.

Noise Control Act of 1972, 42 U.S.C. 4901 et seq. In compliance. While there would be an initial noise disturbance during construction, there would be no long-term noise disturbances associated with this project.

Protection of Wetlands (Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands, 1977). In compliance An Aquatic Resources Inventory conducted by Amec Foster Wheeler in December 2015 identified fringe wetlands along the Bighorn River in the study area at Levee Bend. Per Section 2 of Executive Order 11990, there is “no practicable alternative” to construction within this wetland area and the proposed action includes “all practicable measures to minimize harm to wetlands.” In addition, the fringe wetlands within the project area have developed in a man-made

Greybull PL 84-99 44 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

environment and would be likely to recover after construction.

Rivers and Harbors Act, 33 U.S.C. 401, et seq. In compliance. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulates activities in, under, or over navigable waters under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 U.S.C 401 et seq.). Navigable waters must be designated by the USACE Division Commander in accordance with procedures defined at 33 CFR 329. The Bighorn River has not been designated as a navigable water.

Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act, 16 U.S.C. 1101, et seq. In compliance. The contractor would provide the USACE with an erosion and sedimentation control plan prior to the start of construction. BMPs would be implemented to minimize erosion and sedimentation potential.

Greybull PL 84-99 45 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

7.0 CONCLUSION

The proposed action consists of repairs and alterations to meet 44 CFR §65.10 criteria for FEMA accreditation of the flood control works along Dry Creek and Bighorn River in Big Horn County, Wyoming. The repairs would consist of raising sections of the Dry Creek RB levee from 1 to 3 feet and re-grading the Big Horn River LB levee banks back to as-built conditions and construction of new 12-inch average diameter riprap to a thickness of 24 inches. The levee improvements would have no impact on the computed water surface elevations in the Bighorn River. The Big Horn River LB levee improvements would be contained within existing Town right-of-way so no new land acquisition would be required for the proposed project.

USACE has assessed the environmental impacts of the proposed action and has determined that the proposed action would have no impacts on Prime Farmlands, Environmental Justice, Floodplains, Threatened and Endangered Species, or Cultural Resources. Minor, short-term, and construction-related impacts would occur to Air Quality, Noise, Wetlands, Aquatic Resources/Fisheries, Vegetation, Wildlife, and Recreational Resources. Minor short-term beneficial impacts to the Economic Resources of the local community would be anticipated. There would be no adverse cumulative impacts associated with the Preferred Alternative.

Greybull PL 84-99 46 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

8.0 PREPARERS

This EA and the associated draft FONSI were prepared by Patricia Powless, Amec Foster Wheeler Environmental Resources Specialist, with relevant sections prepared by: Richard Knox Environmental Resources Specialist, Reed Kraemer Biological Resources Specialist, Theresa Price, Environmental Planner and Wetlands Specialist, Alex Coronel Civil Engineer, and Pancho Garza Geotechnical Engineer. The address of the preparers is as follows: Amec Foster Wheeler, Environment & Infrastructure, Inc., 4600 East Washington Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85034.

The USACE takes ownership of this EA and incorporates findings within as part of stipulations to issue a permit to the Town of Greybull, Wyoming for repairs and alterations of the flood control works along Dry Creek and Bighorn River in Big Horn County, Wyoming. This action is being completed in accordance with CEQ regulations in Section 1506.5(a) and 1506.5(b), which allow an applicant to prepare an EA for federal actions. The USACE has independently evaluated and verified the information and analysis undertaken in this EA and takes full responsibility for the scope and content contained herein.

Prepared By: Date:______Patricia Powless Amec Foster Wheeler Environmental Resources Specialist

Reviewed By: Date: Rebecca L. Podkowka U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Resources Specialist

Approved By: Date: Eric A. Laux U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Chief, Environmental Resources and Missouri River Recovery Program Plan Formulation Section

Greybull PL 84-99 47 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

9.0 REFERENCES

Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. (Amec Foster Wheeler), 2015. Aquatic Resources Inventory Report for the Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification. Prepared for the Town of Greybull. December 22, 2015.

Amec Foster Wheeler, 2016a. Biological Evaluation for the Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification, Big Horn County, Wyoming. Prepared for the Town of Greybull. March 2016.

Amec Foster Wheeler, 2016b. Cultural Resources Survey for the Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification, Big Horn County, Wyoming. Prepared for the Town of Greybull. February, 2016.

American Society of Civil Engineers, 2013. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures. Standard ASCE 7. Available online at http://ascelibrary.org/doi/book/10.1061/asce7. Accessed March 2016.

Bureau of Land Management, Worland Field Office, 1981. Class III Survey for Land Sale, City of Greybull. Report on file at the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office.

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), 1981. Memorandum to Agencies: Forty Most Asked Questions Concerning CEQ’s National Environmental Policy Act Regulations. Available online at http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/G-CEQ- 40Questions.pdf. Accessed March 15, 2016.

CEQ, 1997. Considering Cumulative Effects Under the National Environmental Policy Act. January 1997. Available online at http://energy.gov/nepa/downloads/considering- cumulative-effects-under-national-environmental-policy-act. Accessed March 15, 2016. eBird, 2016. Explore Hotspots website. Available online at http://ebird.org/ebird/hotspots. Accessed February 2016.

Fraser Design, 1991. Site Testing and NRHP Evaluation for the U.S. Forest Service Big Horn, Admin Buildings and Structures Project. Report on file at the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office.

Frontier Archaeology, 1989. Class III Survey the Klaenhammer 1-B Well & Pipeline Project. Report on file at the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office.

Frontier Archaeology, 1990. Archaeological Reconnaissance of Site 48BH1554. Report on file at the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office.

Frontier Archaeology, 1991. Class III Survey for the Greybull Airport Bench H2O Supply Project. Report on file at the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office.

Greybull PL 84-99 48 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

High Country Archaeology, 2000. Class III Survey of the Greybull Lateral Pipeline Project. Report on file at the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office.

Kozimko, Michael L., 1986. “Geologic Map of Greybull North Quadrangle, Wyoming”. Laramie, Wyo.: Geological Survey of Wyoming.

LTA, Inc., 2001. Class III Survey for the Greybull Water Project. Report on file at the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office.

National Park Service, 2016a. Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area: Fish. Available online at http://www.nps.gov/bica/learn/nature/fish.htm. Accessed March 2016.

National Park Service, 2016b. Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area: Checklist Of Bighorn Canyon Fish. Available online at: http://www.nps.gov/bica/learn/nature/checklist-of-bighorn-canyon-fish.htm. Accessed March 2016.

New Horizons Archaeology, 1996. Class III Fourteenmile Tap Pipeline Project. Report on file at the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office.

Pierce, William G., 1997. “Geologic Map of the Cody 1-Degree by 2 Degree Quadrangle, Northwestern Wyoming”: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations I-2500, Scale 1:250,000.

Smithsonian Institution, 1946. Class II Survey for the Yellowstone Reservoir Appraisal. Report on file at the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office.

South Big Horn Conservation District, 2016. “Russian Olive Program”. Available online at http://www.sbhcd.org/russian-olive-program.html. Accessed April 2016.

Terra Alta Archaeology, 1995a. Class III Survey for the Tri County Telephone System Project (Phase 1). Report on file at the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office.

Terra Alta Archaeology, 1995b. Class III Survey for the Tri County Telephone System Project (Phase 2). Report on file at the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office.

Terra Alta Archaeology, 1996. Class III Survey for the Little Dry Creek Reroute Project. Report on file at the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office.

Terra Alta Archaeology, 2008. Class III Survey for the South Big Horn County Airport Water Line Project. Report on file at the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office.

TRC Environmental Corporation, 1996. Class III Survey for the Greybull Contractor’s Yard Project. Report on file at the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office.

Greybull PL 84-99 49 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

University of Wyoming, 2016. Wyoming’s Stream Macroinvertebrates. Available online at http://wyostreammacroinvertebrates.com/stoneflies/forestflies-spring-stoneflies- nemouridae/. Accessed April 2016.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), 2015. “The PLANTS Database”. National Plant Data Team, Greensboro, NC 27401-4901 USA. Available online at http://plants.usda.gov. Accessed December 8, 2015.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2015. Current Nonattainment Counties for all Criteria Pollutants. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Green Book. Current as of October 1, 2015. Available online at https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/ancl.html. Accessed March 2016.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 1987. Northern Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery Plan. Available online at https://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/870803.pdf. Accessed February 2016.

USFWS, 2010. Black-footed Ferret Fact Sheet. Available online at http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/factsheets/Black-Footed-Ferret.pdf. Accessed May 2016.

USFWS, 2012. 5-Year Review: Lower 48-State and Mexico Gray Wolf (Canis lupus) Listing. Available online at: https://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_year_review/doc3978.%20lupus%205- YR%20review%20PDF.pdf. Accessed February 2016.

USFWS, 2013. Black Footed Ferret Recovery Plan. Available online at http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/20131108%20BFF%202nd%20Rev.%20 Final%20Recovery%20Plan.pdf. Accessed May 2016.

USFWS, 2015. Gray Wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountains. Available online at http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/wolf/. Accessed February 2016.

USFWS, 2016a. Species Profile for Gray wolf (Canis lupus). Available online at: https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=A00D#crith ab. Accessed February 2016.

USFWS, 2016b. Species Profile for Black-Footed ferret (Mustela nigripes). Available online at: http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=A004. Accessed May 2016.

Greybull PL 84-99 50 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 2003. Peak-flow characteristics of Wyoming Streams. Prepared by Kirk A. Miller. Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4107. Prepared in cooperation with the Wyoming Department of Transportation. Available online at http://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/wri034107/pdf/wri034107.pdf. Accessed March 2016.

USGS, 2004. “Ecoregions of Wyoming” (color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs; map scale 1:1,400,000). Available online at ftp://ftp.epa.gov/wed/ecoregions/wy/wy_front.pdf. Accessed on December 8, 2015.

USGS, 2009. “National Seismic Hazard Maps Project (NSHMP), Earthquake Probability Mapping”. Available online at http://geohazards.usgs.gov/eqprob/2009/index.php. Accessed November 5, 2015.

USGS, 2015a. “Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States – Interactive Fault Map”. Available online at http://earthquakes.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults. Accessed November 5, 2015.

USGS, 2015b “Seismic Design Maps & Tools”. Available online at http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/. Accessed November 5, 2015.

Western Regional Climate Center, 2015. Climatological Summary: Greybull South Big Horn County Airport. Available online at http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/summary/gey.wy.html. Accessed December 8, 2015.

Wyoming Game and Fish Department (WGFD), 2012. Atlas of Birds, Mammals, Amphibians, and Reptiles in Wyoming. Available online at https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/PDF/Wildlife/Nongame/WILDLIFE_A NIMALATLAS.pdf. Accessed February 2016.

WGFD, 2014a. Asian Clam Information. Available online: https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/PDF/Fishing/AIS_ASIANCLAM_INFO .pdf Accessed February 2016.

WGFD, 2014b. Curly Pondweed Information. Available online: https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/PDF/Fishing/AIS_CURLYPONDWEE D_INFO.pdf. Accessed February 2016.

WGFD, 2014c. New Zealand Mudsnail Information. Available online: https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/PDF/Fishing/AIS_NZMUDSNAIL_INF O.pdf. Accessed February 2016.

Office of Wyoming State Archaeologist, 2004. Class III Survey of the S & WR Peters, Basin-Greybull Project. Report on file at the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office.

Greybull PL 84-99 51 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact PL 84-99 Town of Greybull Levee System Improvements Project

Wyoming State Geological Survey (WSGS), 2015. “Wyoming’s Uplift and Basins Map”. Available online at http://www.wsgs.wyo.gov/wyoming-geology/geologic-history. Accessed November 5, 2015.

Greybull PL 84-99 52 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 2016 Omaha District

APPENDIX A

PUBLIC OUTREACH

PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING

Improvements to the Town of Greybull Bighorn River Left Bank and Dry Creek Right Bank Local Flood Protection

TODAY, 6 to 8 pm The Project What is happening? Dry Creek Levee Raise Ź The project would raise the existing levee 1 to 3 feet along a 1,250-foot-long section (Station 111+02 to Station 123+74). The Dry Creek Levee ends near the intersection with 14th Avenue.

Embankment Repair at Bighorn Levee Bend Ź The project would repair 350 linear feet of existing embankment protection (Station 0+50 to Station 4+00) along the bend in the existing Bighorn River Left Bank Levee. Ź This section of the levee pre-dates the U.S Army Corps of Engineers improvements constructed in the mid 1950s, and extent and nature of embankment protection through this reach is unknown. Ź The project would remove existing vegetation and embankment within the project limits, re-grade the embankment slope to as-built conditions and construct new 12-inch average diameter riprap to a thickness of 24 inches. Bighorn Left Bank Levee Dry Creek Right Bank Levee

Legend

Project Area

0250 500 Feet Dry Creek Levee The Preferred Alternative 1. Raise the existing levee along Dry Creek to provide required freeboard. Ź 1 to 3 feet along a 1,250-foot-long section Bighorn Levee Bend The Preferred Alternative 1. Reevaluate the existing embankment protection and size to protect the levee. Ź Remove existing vegetation, re-grade the embankment slope to as-built conditions and construct new 12-inch average diameter riprap to a thickness of 24 inches.

A number of alternatives were considered before selecting the preferred alternative above: 2. Realign the main river channel to eliminate the existing sharp bend configuration. 3. Provide an overflow channel that would follow historic Bighorn River meanders while allowing more frequent flows to continue through the existing sharp bend configuration. The Schedule

Environmental Levee Certification Initial Alternatives for Field Surveys & Assessment, 408 Analysis & Reports Mitigation Technical Studies Permitting, and CLOMR

• Prepare Preliminary Draft EA for • Study to determine if levee • Developed initial alternatives for USACE review could be certified per CFR5.10 mitigation of levee deficiencies. • 60% Plans and analysis at • Prepare 408 Applications for Criteria o 30% Plans and analysis at Bend USACE Review o Hydrology and Hydraulics Bend • 90% Plans and analysis at • Prepare technical documentation o Geotechnical o 60% Plans and Analysis at Levee Raise (CLOMR) for FEMA review o Field Inspections Levee Raise • Conduct jurisdiction delineation, • Final Plans, Specs , Cost Contractor o O&M cultural and biological surveys Estimates at Bend and Raise for the Town • Two deficiencies identified • Track / Respond to Agency Comments

• USACE review of the Draft EA • Conference calls with Corps to before public comment period • Coordination with Town discuss 408 permitting and EA • Coordination with Town • USACE review of the 408 • Coordination with FEMA • Conference calls with FEMA to • Coordination with FEMA Applications • Initiated coordination with discuss Conditional Letter of • FEMA review of the CLOMR / Corps due to mitigation projects Map Revision (CLOMR) / Study Technical documents Agency process for Levee Accreditation Involvement

• Regular updates to Town via monthly project progress • Analyze and incorporate public • Regular updates to Town via reports • Facilitate public scoping meeting comments monthly project progress • Presentation of Draft • Collect public comments • 30-day public review of the reports Certification Study Results to Draft EA Interaction Town Council on Feb. 20, 2014 with the Town and Public Final Design Jan 2013 to May 2014 May 2014 to May 2015 Jun 2015 to Feb 2016 Feb 2016 to Aug 2016 AMECFW INTERNAL ONLY

Summary of Greybull EA Scoping Meeting Questions - 2/10/2016

What triggered the FEMA certification process? (3)

Flooding in 2005 in Louisiana and Mississippi caused FEMA and USACE to take a closer look at the state of the nation’s levee systems and put certain actions in motion that require levee certification on a particular time table.

Do you know what would happen if the Town doesn’t comply with the requirements, in terms of flood insurance and mortgage costs?

Will the Town have to re-certify the levee after the completion of this project and what would that time table be?

There is no set timetable for recertification once the project is complete, unless major changes are made to the levee or a deficiency is identified during periodic USACE inspections.

Can you clarify the scope of the Dry Creek project, specifically related to how many feet you’ll raise the levee and how/where? (2)

Will there be armament/protection added to the floodplain side of the Dry Creek Levee? Yes

What do you do to prevent seepage? Do you prep the existing levee before you put more soil down (M)? A notched/stepped method is used when adding fill to tie the additions into the existing levee.

Are the FEMA cross sections of the river bottom at the Levee Bend project available? (3)

ACTION ITEM: Alex promised to send these to the Town

When will the project be over? (B) Alex gave a summary of the rest of the project process, Reed highlighted the NBEPA/EA process, including the 30-day review of the Draft EA.

Was there ever any indication of where the pipe they found comes out [at the Dry Creek site]? (3)

No, but we have a plan in place if any surprises are encountered, e.g. concrete fill.

Have you identified any sources of funding for the project? Do you have any idea of the total cost (1)? How do you put together your cost estimates (M)?

All currently compiled cost estimates are out of date because of the changes to the project scope and design. The costs have come down and a new estimate will be put together in the next month or two. Amec has been working with Paul Thur to identify sources of funding, looking into MPG funds or county consensus funds, but the Town indicated these may no longer be available.

ACTION ITEM: Alex to re-send funding memo to the Town and determine if identifying funding is still part of the scope.

M - Myles Foley (Mayor) B - Beverly Jacobs (Clerk) 1 - Clay Collingwood (Council) 2 - Scott Mattis (Council) 3 - Marvin Hunt (Council) -:-c~'J'/N or GRFYPl~ l

PUBUC MEE11NG N(Opc)9ed lmpl'OYeme:ntt to the Town of~ projects will brinJf lhe Bighorn Left Bank and Dry Creek Riiht Bank B~ RiYer' Left:~ and Ory Creek IUQbt Bi1nk into full compliance with the requirements of 44 CFR§ 6.5.10 for levee toc,1 Flood Prolecdoo certification. February 10, 2016 from 6 to 8pm The Town of Greybull tncourages public comment during the public scoping period from February 10,2016throughMarc:h 11, 2016. The next11ep in~ Fl'Jdenl EmCf'lleOCYMMage=entAtJeocy Accreditadoo ol the Greybull Levee $y8tem... Row to Parti~1e: • l AUend the Public Meeting to learn more The Town of Greybull, in cooperation with the US Anny Corps and provide verbal or written comments. of Engii:ieers. ill planning improvements to the Bighorn Rive{ LB and -Of· Drr Cceelt RB local flood J)l'Ot:cction (GreybuTI Levee Systcoi)•at two Email your comments to locdlions in Greybull, Big Hom County, Wyoming. Kalie.MurphyOamedw.com . Along the Dry Creek Levee, at the intersection of 151.b by March 11, 2016. · Avenue North and North 8th Street Along the Bighorn Left Bank Levee, on the northwest Public MeetinQ Tune and Location: bank of the Bighorn River, near rhe inten!ection of South" February 10, 2016 from 6 to Spm 601 Street and 9th Avenue South Town Hall 24 ~ 5th Sr.reet ' Project activities at the Dry Creek site would raise an approxirilate QreYbull, Wyoming 82426 1.2~foot 9ectJon of the existing Dry Creek Levet byone-t~ feet Activities at ~ Levee Ben4 site would install embankment protection Published: January 28 and February 4, 2016

APPENDIX B

AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE LETTERS

Price, Theresa L

From: Johnson, Thomas B NWO Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 3:05 PM To: Kraemer, Reed Cc: Knox, Richard; Coronel, Alex; [email protected]; Happold, Mike T NWO Subject: RE: Greybull Aquatic Resources Inventory Report, USACE Verification Attachments: USACE to Greybull 2014-01203.pdf

All: AttachedisanadvancecopyofourlettertoMayorFoley.Pleasegivemeacallifyouhaveanyquestions. ThomasB.Johnson,P.E. U.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers WyomingRegulatoryOffice 2232DellRangeBoulevard,Suite210 Cheyenne,Wyoming82009 (307)772Ͳ2300 ͲͲͲͲͲOriginalMessageͲͲͲͲͲ From:Kraemer,Reed[mailto:[email protected]] Sent:Tuesday,December22,20154:08PM To:Johnson,ThomasBNWO Cc:Knox,Richard;Coronel,Alex;[email protected] Subject:[EXTERNAL]GreybullAquaticResourcesInventoryReport GoodAfternoonThomas, PleaseseetheattachedAquaticResourcesInventoryReportfortheGreybullLeveeCertificationproject.Weaskforyour concurrencewithourfindingsandaskthatyouprovideuswithadeterminationontheextentoftheCorps’jurisdiction intheproject’sstudyareas. Pleasedonothesitatetocontactmewithanyquestions. Sincerely, ͲReed

1 ReedKraemer Biologist/EnvironmentalPlanner AmecFosterWheeler 4600E.WashingtonStreet,Suite600 Phoenix,AZ85034 D+16027336137 M+17609649254 [email protected] ThismessageisthepropertyofAmecFosterWheelerplcand/oritssubsidiariesand/oraffiliatesandisintendedonlyfor thenamedrecipient(s).Itscontents(includinganyattachments)maybeconfidential,legallyprivilegedorotherwise protectedfromdisclosurebylaw.Unauthoriseduse,copying,distributionordisclosureofanyofitmaybeunlawfuland isstrictlyprohibited.Weassumenoresponsibilitytopersonsotherthantheintendednamedrecipient(s)anddonot acceptliabilityforanyerrorsoromissionswhicharearesultofemailtransmission.Ifyouhavereceivedthismessagein error,pleasenotifyusimmediatelybyreplyemailtothesenderandconfirmthattheoriginalmessageandany attachmentsandcopieshavebeendestroyedanddeletedfromyoursystem.Thisdisclaimerappliestoanyandall messagesoriginatingfromusandsetoutabove.Ifyoudonotwishtoreceivefutureunsolicitedcommercialelectronic messagesfromus,pleaseforwardthisemailto:[email protected]andinclude“Unsubscribe”inthesubject line.Ifapplicable,youwillcontinuetoreceiveinvoices,projectcommunicationsandsimilarfactual,nonͲcommercial electroniccommunications. PleaseclickBlockedhttp://amecfw.com/emailͲdisclaimerfornoticesandcompanyinformationinrelationtoemails originatingintheUK,ItalyorFrance.

2 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, OMAHA DISTRICT WYOMING REGULATORY OFFICE 2232 DELL RANGE BOULEVARD, SUITE 210 CHEYENNE WY 82009-4942

January 26, 2016

Myles Foley, Mayor Town of Greybull P.O. Box 271 Greybull, Wyoming 82426

Dear Mayor Foley:

This letter is in response to a request we received from Amee Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. on December 22, 2015, to review the Aquatic Resources Inventory Report, Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification, Big Horn County, Wyoming dated December 22, 2015. The study area includes the Dry Creek site covering 3.7 acres in the SW 'l:I SE 'l:I of Section 5 and the Levee Bend site covering 2.0 acres in the NW 'l:I SE 'l:I of Section 17, Township 52 North, Range 93 West, Big Hom County, Wyoming.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulates discharges of dredged and fill material into waters of the United States in accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). The term "waters of the United States" has been broadly defined by statute, regulation, and judicial interpretation to include most streams, canals, reservoirs, lakes and adjacent wetlands. The Corps regulations are published in the Code of Federal Regulations as 33 C.F.R. Parts 320 through 332. Information on the regulatory program in Wyoming can be found at http://www.nwo.usace.anny.mil/Missions/RegulatoryProgram/Wyoming.aspx

The report contains sufficient documentation to conclude that methods used to identify wetlands in the study area are consistent with requirements of the Regional Supplement to the Corps ofEngineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0). Therefore, Figures 7 and 9 in the report provide accurate depictions of boundaries for all aquatic resources within the study area. This verification of delineation results is valid for a period of 5 years, until January 26, 2021, unless new information warrants a modification.

The results confirm that there are no wetlands or other aquatic resources present within the Dry Creek site, which is consistent with my own observations during a visit on March 10, 2014. The Levee Bend site contains a portion of the Bighorn River and 0.13 acre of adjacent wetland. The Bighorn River is a traditional navigable water so the river channel and adjacent wetlands are the only aquatic resources within the study area and both are likely to be waters of the United States as defined at 33 CFR Part 328.3(a)(l) and (7).

The purpose of this letter is to verify the accuracy of an aquatic resources inventory only, which does not constitute an approved jurisdictional determination. A formal determination is not necessary prior to undertaking activities authorized by nationwide permits such as levee maintenance. Nationwide permits were published in the Federal Register on February 21, 2012 (Vol. 77, No. 34). Those permits are available for a period of 5 years and will expire on March 18, 2017. Information on nationwide permits is available from our web site.

Thank you for your interest in complying with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' regulatory program. Please contact me by e-mail at [email protected] or by telephone at (307) 772-2300 and reference our file NW0-2014-01203 if you have any questions about permit requirements.

Sincerely, ~tb Project Manager Wyoming Regulatory Office

Copies Furnished:

Reed Kraemer Amee Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 4600 East Washington Street, Suite 600 Phoenix, Arizona 85034

Eric Laux U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Omaha District, CENWO-PM-AC 1616 Capitol Avenue Omaha, Nebraska 68102

The Omaha District, Regulatory Branch. Wyoming Regulatory Office is comnutted to providing quality and timely service to our customers. Please take a moment to complete a Customer Service Survey found on our web site at http://vrww.nwo.usace.army.mil/Missions/RegulatoryProgram/Wyoming.aspx Paper copies of the survey are also available upon request for those without Internet access.

2 RECEIVED Janurary 4, 2015 ZGl6 JAN -8 AH 11: 09 Mark Sattelberg amec US Fish and Wildlife Service US FISH & WILDLIFE SVC foster Wyoming Ecological Services Field Office CHEYENNE. \VY 5353 Yellowstone Road , Suite 308A wheeler Cheyenne, Wyoming 82009

Re: Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification Job No. 37-2015-2002

Dear Mr. Sattelberg:

The Town of Greybull, in cooperation with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE), is planning improvements to the Bighorn River Local Flood Protection Project (Greybull Levee System) at two locations in Greybull, Big Horn County, Wyoming (see enclosed Figures 1-3):

• Dry Creek - along the Dry Creek Levee, at the intersection of 15th Avenue North and North 8th Street • Levee Bend - along the Bighorn Left Bank Levee, on the northwest bank of the Bighorn River, near the intersection of South 6th Street and 9th Avenue South

The purpose of this project is to provide final construction documents, certification documentation, and final design for levee modification, in support of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) accreditation of the Greybull Levee System.

As part of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP}, FEMA develops Flood Insurance Studies (FISs) and Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) to depict the floodplain for the base flood (also known as the 1%-annual-chance-flood or the 100-year recurrence interval flood). In order for a levee to be accredited by FEMA, the levee owner must provide data and information certified by a licensed engineer demonstrating the levee meets, and will continue to meet, the minimum standards of Title 44, Code of Federal Regulations Section 65.10 (44 CFR §65.10). FEMA's standards address hydrologic, hydraulic, geotechnical, operational, and maintenance aspects of levee performance. When a levee is accredited by FEMA, the levee is recognized as providing flood protection for the base flood . If a levee does not meet FEMA standards, or if the technical documentation is insufficient or incomplete, then FEMA will not accredit the levee and the FIRM is modified to show the 100-year floodplain as if the levee does not exist.

Project activities at the Dry Creek site would consist of a one-to-three foot raise of an approximate 1,250-foot section of the existing Dry Creek Levee. Activities at the Levee Bend site would consist of installing embankment protection where required and removal of vegetative overgrowth for an approximate 350-foot section of the existing Bighorn Left Bank Levee. Once constructed, these projects will bring the Town of Greybull - Bighorn Left Bank and Dry Creek Right Bank Flood Risk Reduction Project into full compliance with the requirements of 44 CFR § 65. 10 for levee certification.

In preparation for this project, an official species list was generated via the US Fish and Wildlife Service's online Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) tool on January 4, 2015 (Consultation Code: 06E13000-2016-SLl-0079). One protected species, grey wolf (Canis lupus; Experimental Population, Non Essential) was identified on the list. If you or others in your

4600 East Washington Street, Suite 600 Phoenix, Arizona 85034 Tel (602) 733-6000 Fax (602) 733-61 00 www.amecfw.com Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification

department have any specific concerns, suggestions, or recommendations pertaining to this specific project, please let us know by responding to the address listed below. This can include information on wildlife movement, habitat issues, or seasonal concerns to name a few.

Please submit your comments or concerns by February 4, 2015 to Reed Kraemer, Amee Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc., 4600 East Washington Street, Suite 600, Phoenix, Arizona, 85034; by phone: (602) 733-6000; by fax: (602) 733-6100; or via e-mail: [email protected].

Your assistance in providing information is greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time and assistance.

Sincerely,

Reed Kraemer Biologist

Enclosures: • Figure 1. Overview Map • Figure 2. Dry Creek Map • Figure 3. Levee Bend Map

c: Myles Foley, Mayor, Town of Greybull, PO Box 271, Greybull, Wyoming 82426

U.I. FISH ANO WILDLIFE SERVICE

Based on the information provided, you may consider this project to be in compliance with the Endangered Species Ad of 1973, u amended. 1"' ! J S C. 1531 el seq The project should be reanalyzeu . 1 our office if any new informahon indicates there may b9 efteda to pmeected lpec:i9a OI "-JI... -i.,

Field Supervisor U.S. Filh and rvic.e • ing ES Office 5353 Yellowstone Road, Suite 308A Cheyenne, WY 82009 Phone: (307) 772-2374 Fax: (307) 772-2358

------··--·-·------·------·------·-----·-·------··- -·- -·-·------·-···-- Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming January 4, 2014 Page 2 Janurary 4, 2015

Nancy Stange Habitat Protection Branch Wyoming Game and Fish Department 5400 Bishop Blvd Cheyenne, Wyoming 82006

Re: Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification Job No. 37-2015-2002

Dear Ms. Stange:

The Town of Greybull, in cooperation with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), is planning improvements to the Bighorn River Local Flood Protection Project (Greybull Levee System) at two locations in Greybull, Big Horn County, Wyoming (see enclosed Figures 1-3):

x Dry Creek – along the Dry Creek Levee, at the intersection of 15th Avenue North and North 8th Street x Levee Bend – along the Bighorn Left Bank Levee, on the northwest bank of the Bighorn River, near the intersection of South 6th Street and 9th Avenue South

As part of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), FEMA develops Flood Insurance Studies (FISs) and Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) to depict the floodplain for the base flood (also known as the 1%-annual-chance-flood or the 100-year recurrence interval flood). In order for a levee to be accredited by FEMA, the levee owner must provide data and information certified by a licensed engineer demonstrating the levee meets, and will continue to meet, the minimum standards of Title 44, Code of Federal Regulations Section 65.10 (44 CFR §65.10). FEMA’s standards address hydrologic, hydraulic, geotechnical, operational, and maintenance aspects of levee performance. When a levee is accredited by FEMA, the levee is recognized as providing flood protection for the base flood. If a levee does not meet FEMA standards, or if the technical documentation is insufficient or incomplete, then FEMA will not accredit the levee and the FIRM is modified to show the 100-year floodplain as if the levee does not exist.

Project activities at the Dry Creek site would consist of a one-to-three foot raise of an approximate 1,250-foot section of the existing Dry Creek Levee. Activities at the Levee Bend site would consist of installing embankment protection where required and removal of vegetative overgrowth for an approximate 350-foot section of the existing Bighorn Left Bank Levee. Once constructed, these projects will bring the Town of Greybull – Bighorn Left Bank and Dry Creek Right Bank Flood Risk Reduction Project into full compliance with the requirements of 44 CFR § 65.10 for levee certification.

If you or others in your department have any specific concerns, suggestions, or recommendations pertaining to this specific project, please let us know by responding to the address listed below. This can include information on wildlife movement, habitat issues, or seasonal concerns to name a few.

4600 East Washington Street, Suite 600 Phoenix, Arizona 85034 Tel (602) 733-6000 Fax (602) 733-6100 www.amecfw.com Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification

Please submit your comments or concerns by February 4, 2015 to Reed Kraemer, Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc., 4600 East Washington Street, Suite 600, Phoenix, Arizona, 85034; by phone: (602) 733-6000; by fax: (602) 733-6100; or via e-mail: [email protected].

Your assistance in providing information is greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time and assistance.

Sincerely,

Reed Kraemer Biologist

Enclosures: x Figure 1. Overview Map x Figure 2. Dry Creek Map x Figure 3. Levee Bend Map c: Myles Foley, Mayor, Town of Greybull, PO Box 271, Greybull, Wyoming 82426

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming January 4, 2014 Page 2 GOVERNOR MATTHEW H, MEAD DlREC'lOR WYOMI NG GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT sconTALSOTI COMMtsSION:ERS CHARLES PRICE - President 5400 Bishop Blvd. Cheyenne, WY 82006 T. CARA:tE LITTLE- Vioe Presklent MARK ANSELMI Phone: (307) 777-4600 Fax: (307) 777-4699 PATRICI( CRAN!< KEJTM CULVER wgfd.wyo.gov RICHARD KLOUDA OAVIORAEL

J anua1y 28, 20 I 6

WER 13772.00 Amee Foster Wheeler Enviroruncnt and Infrastructure, Inc. Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification Job Number 37-2015-2002 Big Hom County

Reed Kramer Amee Foster Wheeler Environment and Infrastructure, Inc. 4600 East Washjngton Street, Suite 600 Phoenix, Arizona 85034

Dear Mr. Kramer:

The staff of the Wyoming Game and Fisl1 Department (WGFD) has reviewed the Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification, Project Number 37-2015-2002. We offer the following comments fo r your consideration.

Terrestrial Considerations:

The proposed project location on the south side of Greybull is within close prox11111ty to documented raptor nests. We recommend contacting the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for recommendations on buffer distance and seasonal use.

Aguntic Considerntions:

To minimize impacts to the aquatic resources of the Greybull River, we recommend the following:

• Accepted best management practices be implemented to ensure that all sediments and other pollutants are contained within the boundaries of the work area. Disturbed areas that aJe contributing sediment to surface waters as a result of project activities should be promptly re-vegetated to maintain water quality.

"Conscr.-lng Wi/dlife - &rvlng Peoptc• Reed Kramer January 28, 2016 Page 2 of 3 - WER 13772.00

• Equipment should be serviced and fueled away from streams and riparian areas. Equipment staging areas should be at least 500 feet from riparian areas.

• Preventing the spread of aquatic invasive species (A TS) is a priority for the State of Wyoming, and in many cases, the intentional or unintentional spread of organisms from one body of water to another would be considered a violation of State statute and Wyoming Game and Fish Commission Regulation. To prevent the spread of AIS, the following is required: I. lf equipment has been used in a high risk infested water [a water known to contain Oreissenid mussels (zebra/quagga mussels)], the equipment must be insp<.'Ctcd by an authorized aquatic invasive species inspector recognized by the state of Wyoming prior to its use in any Wyoming water during all times of year.

2. Any equipment entering the state by land from March through November (regardless of where it was last used), must be inspected by an authorized aquatic invasive species inspector prior to its use in any Wyoming water.

3. If aquatic invasive species are found, the equipment will need to be decontaminated by an authorized aquatic invasive species decontaminator.

4. Any time equipment is moved from one 4•h level (8-digit Hydrological Unit Code) watershed to another within Wyoming, the following guidelines are recommended: DRAIN: Drain all water from watercraft, gear, equipment, and tanks. Leave wet compartments open to dry. CLEAN: Clean all plants, mud, and debris from vehicle, tanks, watercraft, and equipment. DRY: Dry everything thoroughly. In Wyoming, we recommend drying for 5 days in summer (June - August); 18 days in Spring (March - May) and Fall (September - November); or 3 days in Winter (December - February) when temperatures are at or below freezing.

5. Any equipment used in a Wyoming water that contains /\1S, must be inspected before use in another water. Species currently found in Wyoming waters include New Zealand mudsnail, Asian clam, and curly pondweed. lnfom1ation on currently affected waters can be found at: http://wgfd.wyo.gov/wcb2011/Dcpartmcnts/Fishinglpdfs/AIS _ WYWATER _ MONIT OR 130005236.pdf. *A list of high risk infested waters and locations in Wyoming to obtain an AIS inspection can be found at: wgfd.wyo.gov/AIS. Reed Kramer January 28, 20I 6 Page3 of3-WER 13772.00

Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Leslie Schreiber, Greybull Wildlife Biologist, at (307) 25 1-9870 or Sam Hochhalter, Cody Region Fisheries Supervisor, at 307-527-7125 Ext. *816.

cc: USFWS Leslie Schreiber, WGFD, Cody Region Tim Woolley, WGFD, Cody Region Sam Hochhalter, WGFD, Cody Region Chris Wichmann, Wyoming Department of Agriculture, CheyerUle .UDHPHU5HHG

)URP /HVOLH6FKUHLEHU OHVOLHVFKUHLEHU#Z\RJRY! 6HQW 0RQGD\)HEUXDU\30 7R .UDHPHU5HHG 6XEMHFW *UH\EXOO)ORRG3URWHFWLRQ5DSWRU1HVWV $WWDFKPHQWV MSJ

5HHG , YHDWWDFKHGDPDSRIUDSWRUQHVWVLQWKHDUHDRIWKHSURSRVHGIORRGSURWHFWLRQSURMHFW IRUWKHWRZQRI*UH\EXOO:<7KHUHGSRO\JRQLVWKHVRXWKHUQSDUWRIWKHSURMHFWDQG WKHRUDQJHWULDQJOHVDUHUDSWRUQHVWVLQWKHYLFLQLW\ ([DFWFRRUGLQDWHVVKRXOGEHDYDLODEOHIURPWKH:RUODQG%/0RIILFH 3OHDVHOHWPHNQRZRIDQ\PRUHTXHVWLRQV &KHHUV

-- /HVOLH6FKUHLEHU

:LOGOLIH%LRORJLVW :\RPLQJ*DPH )LVK'HSDUWPHQW %HDU&UHHN5DQFK5RDG 6KHOO:<

E-Mail to and from me, in connection with the transaction of public business, is subject to the Wyoming Public Records Act and may be disclosed to third parties.

amec 4$' foster wheeler

Patricia Powless. M.A., RPA Project Archaeologist 4600 East Washington Street. Suite 600 Phoenix, AZ 85034-I 917 USA March 9. 2016

Mary Hopkins Srate Historic Preservation Officer Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office 230 I Central Ave., Barrett Bui ldi ng. Third Floor Cheyenne. WY 82002

RE: Section 106 Review of the Cultural Resources Survey Rcpo11 for the Town of Greybull Flood Protecti on Levee Certification Project.

Dear Ms. Hopkins:

Tbe proposed Greybull Levee System Project is a PL 84-99 project and its purpose is to restore the levee features to ensure flood damage protection. The Greybull Levee System Project area is located immediately east of, and adjacent to, the town of Greybull, Wyoming and is generally a]jgned north-south along the west bank of the Bighorn River with the no1thernmost section aligned east-west along the south bank of Dry Creek. The earth-berm levee was constructed in the mid- I950 s and serves to protect the town of Greybull from flood events.

The Town of Greybull is protected from flooding by the Big Horn and Dry Creek Levee System as reflected on Flood Insurance Rate Map panel numbers 56003C0868D and 56003C I I 3 ID. The levee system was placed under Provisionally Accredited Levee (PAL) Status by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The PAL agreement between the Town and FEMA subsequently expired in Febmary of 2013. FEMA is aware of the certification efforts that have been undertaken by the Town, that cu lminate in design and construction of the projects that are being analyzed in an U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Assessment. If the studies and/or construction projects are not completed then FEMA will remap the Town of Greybull as if the levee did not exist resulting in most of the Town of Greybull being mapped within the regulatory floodplain.

A search was also conducted of the National Register of Historic Places. None were found within the proposed Dry Creek and Levee Bend project areas; however, there is one historic property within one mile of the Levee Bend project area. Tbe Greybull Main Post Office was built in 1939 as part of the New Deal Public Works of Art Program. It is not within one mile of the Dry Creek project area.

The Dry Creek and Levee Bend project areas were surveyed by Amee Foster Wheeler archaeologist, Serelle E. Laine, and no archaeological features, or historic or prehistoric sites were identjfied.

The Amee Forest Wheeler cultural inventory within the Proposed Dry Creek and Levee Bend Project areas did not identified any sites considered eligible for the National Register. However, there is a potential for buried deposits, as with most riverine locations. I have recommended standard cultural resource construction training module included in the constn1ction workers safety/environmental training prior to construction. If you find the report adequate and the finding of project effect, please indicate your concurrence by signing below. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at 480-479-9021, or [email protected].

Sincerely, %Tu.cLa._ f&wu..u_ Patricia Powless

Signature for SHPO Concurrence Date

Enclosures State Historic Preservation Office ARTS. PARKS. Barrett Building , 3rd Floor 2301 Central Avenue HISTORY. Cheyenne, WY 82002 Wyoming State Parks & Cultural Resources Phone: (307) 777-7697 Fax: (307) 777-6421 http://wyoshpo.state.wy.us

March 17, 2016

Patricia Powless, M.A, RPA Project Archaeologist 4600 East Washington St., Suite 600 Phoenix, AZ 85034-1917 re: Town of Greybull, Flood Protection Levee Certification Project, Dry Creek and Levee Bend (SHPO File # 03 l 6RLC005)

Dear Ms. Powless:

Thank you for consulting with the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) regarding the above referenced undertaking. We have reviewed the associated report and find the documentation meets the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Archaeology and Historic Preservation (48 FR 44716-42). We concur with your finding that no historic properties, as defined in 36 CFR § 800.16(1)(1), will be affected by the undertaking as planned.

We recommend the U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers allow the undertaking to proceed in accordance with state and federal laws subject to the following stipulation:

Ifany cultural materials are discovered during construction, work in the area shall halt immediately, the federal agency must be contacted, and the materials evaluated by an archaeologist or historian meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards (48 FR 22716, Sept. 1983).

This letter should be retained in your files as documentation of a SHPO concurrence on your finding of no historic properties affected. Please refer to SHPO project #03 l 6RLC005 on any future correspondence regarding this undertaking. If you have any questions, please contact me at 307-777-5497.

Richard L. Currit Senior Archaeologist

Matthew H. Mead, Governor . ' Milward Simpson, Director amec 1$~ foster wheeler

Patricia Powless, M.A., RPA Project Archaeologist 4600 East Washington Street, Suite 600 Phoenix , AZ 85034-191 7 USA May 11, 201 6

Mr. Yufna Soldier Wolf. Tribal Historic Preservation Officer Nonhern Arapaho Tribe P.O. Box 67 St. Stevens. Wyoming 82524

RE: Review of the Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Town of Greybu ll Flood Protection Levee Certification Project.

Dear Mr. Soldier Wolf:

The proposed Greybull Levee System Project is a levee repair project and its purpose is to restore the levee features to ensure flood damage protection. The Greybull Levee System Project area is located immediately east of, and adjacent to, the town of Greybull, Wyoming and is generally aligned north-south along the west bank of the Bighorn River with the no1thernmost section aligned east-west along the south bank of Dry Creek. The earth-berm levee was constructed in the mid- I 950s and serves to protect the town of Greybull from flood events.

The Town of Greybull is protected from flooding by the Big Horn and Dry Creek Levee System as reflected on Flood Insurance Rate Map panel numbers 56003C0868D and 56003C I I 3 ID. The levee system was placed under Provisionally Accredited Levee (PAL) Status by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The PAL agreement between the Town and FEMA subsequently expired in February of 2013. FEMA is aware of the certification effons that have been undertaken by the Town, that culminate in design and construction of the projects that are being analyzed in an U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Assessment. If the studies and/or construction projects are not completed then FEMA will remap the Town of Greybull as if the levee did not exist resulting in most of the Town of Greybull being mapped within the regulatory floodplain.

A formal literature search was conducted for this project at the Wyoming SHPO Cultural Records Office, which showed that archaeological investigations have been previously conducted in the vicinity of both proposed project areas, but not within them. In addition, no archaeological site or isolated artifacts have been recorded within tbe proposed Dry Creek and Levee Bend project areas. amec 11'~ foster wheeler A search was also conducted of the National Register of Historic Places. None were found within the proposed Dry Creek and Levee Bend projec1 areas; however, !here is one his1oric propeny within one mile of 1he Levee Bend projecl area. The Greybull Main Post Office was buih in 1939 as pan of 1he New Deal Public Works of Art Program. h is not within one mile of the Dry Creek project area.

The Dry Creek and Levee Bend project areas were surveyed by Amee Fosler Wheeler archaeologist, Serelle E. Laine, and no archaeological features, or historic or prehistoric Siles were ideniified.

The Amee Forest Wheeler cultural inventory within the Proposed Dry Creek and Levee Bend Projec1 areas did not identified any sites considered eligible for the National Register. However, 1here is a poteniial for buried deposits. as with most riverine locations. l have recommended standard cuhural resource construction training module included in the construclion workers safe1y/environmencal training prior to construc1ion. lf you find the report adequate and lhe finding of projec1 effec1, please indicate your concurrence by signing below. If you have any quesiions or concerns, please feel free 10 conlact me at 480-479-9021, or patricia.oowle;,;,@amecfw.com.

Si ncerely, itt-uu.;.a__, !fnu1.1 6' Pa1ricia Powless

Signature for Nonhern Arapaho Tribe Concurrence Date

Enclosures: Greybull Cu l1ural Resources Report (2016) ]ff amec f. foster wheeler

Patricia Powless. M.A., RPA Project Archaeologist 4600 East Wa~ h ingt0n Street, Suite 600 Phoenix, AZ 85034-1917 USA May I I , 2016

Mr. Emerson Bull Chief Crow Tribal Historic Preservation Officer P.O. Box 159 Crow Agency. Montana 59022

RE: Review of the Cultural Resources Survey Repo11 for the Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification Project.

Dear Mr. Bull Chief:

The proposed Greybull Levee System Project is a levee repair project and its purpose is to restore the levee features to ensure flood damage protection. The Greybull Levee System Project area is located immediately east of, and adjacent to, the town of Greybull, Wyoming and is generally aligned north-south along the west bank of the Bighorn River with the northernmost section aligned east-west along the south bank of Dry Creek. The earth-berm levee was constructed in the mid-l 950s and serves to protect the town of Greybull from flood events.

The Town of Greybull is protected from flooding by the Big Horn and Dry Creek Levee System as reflected on Flood Insurance Rate Map panel numbers 56003C0868D and 56003C 113 ID. The levee system was placed under Provisionally Accredited Levee (PAL) Status by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The PAL agreement between the Town and FEMA subsequently expired in February of 2013. FEMA is aware of the certification efforts that have been undertaken by the Town, that culminate in design and construction of the projects that are being analyzed in an U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Assessment. lf the studies and/or construction projects are not completed then FEMA will remap the Town of Greybull as if the levee did not exist resulting in most of the Town of Greybull being mapped with in the regulatory floodplain.

A formal literature search was conducted for this project at the Wyoming SHPO Cultural Records Office, which showed that archaeological investigations have been previously conducted in the vicinity of both proposed project areas, but not within them. In addition, no archaeological site or isolated artifacts have been recorded within the proposed Dry Creek and Levee Bend project areas. amec 1$,., foster wheeler A search was also conducted of the National Register of Historic Places. None were found within the proposed Dry Creek and Levee Bend project areas; however, there is one historic property within one mile of tbe Levee Bend project area. The Greybull Main Post Office was built in I 939 as part of the New Deal Public Works of Art Program. It is not within one mile of the Dry Creek project area.

The Dry Creek and Levee Bend project areas were surveyed by Amee Foster Wheeler archaeologist, Serelle E. Laine, and no archaeological features, or historic or prehistoric sites were identified.

The Amee Forest Wheeler cultural inventory within the Proposed Dry Creek and Levee Bend Project areas did not identified any sites considered eligible for the National Register. However, there is a potential for buried deposits, as with most riverine locations. I have recommended standard cultural resource construction training module included in tbe construction workers safety/environmental training prior to construction. If you find the report adequate and the finding of project effect, please indicate your concurrence by signing below. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at 480-479-902 I . or [email protected].

Sincerely, {6.,~PewLLI+ Patricia Powless

Signature for Crow THPO Concurrence Date

Enclosures: Greybull Cultural Resources Report (2016) amec 1$~ foster wheeler

Patricia Powless. M.A .. RPA Project Archaeologist 4600 East Washington Street, Suite 600 Phoenix, AZ 85034-1917 USA May 1 l, 2016

Mr. Wilfred Ferris, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer Shoshone Tribe of the Wind River Reservation P.O. Box 538 Fort Washakie, Wyoming 82514

RE: Review of the Cultural Resources Survey Report fo r the Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification Project.

Dear Mr. Ferris:

The proposed Greybull Levee System Project is a levee repair project and its purpose is to restore the levee features to ensure flood damage protection. The GreybuJJ Levee System Project area is located immediately east of, and adjacent to, the town of Greybull, Wyoming and is generally aligned north-south along the west bank of the Bighorn River with the northernmost section aligned east-west along the south bank of Dry Creek. Tbe earth-berm levee was constructed in the mid-I 950s and serves to protect the town of Greybull from flood events.

The Town of Greybull is protected from flooding by the Big Horn and Dry Creek Levee System as reflected on Flood Insurance Rate Map panel numbers 56003C0868D and 56003CI 13 JD. The levee system was placed under Provisionally Accredited Levee (PAL) Status by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The PAL agreement between che Town and FEMA subsequently expired in February of 20 I 3. FEMA is aware of tbe certification efforts that have been undertaken by the Town, that culminate in design and construction of the projects that are being analyzed in an U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Assessment. If the studies and/or construction projects are not completed then FEMA will remap the Town of Greybull as if the Jevee did not exist resulting in most of the Town of Greybull being mapped within the regulatory floodplain.

A formal literacure search was conducced for this project at the Wyoming SHPO Cultural Records Office, which showed that archaeological investigations have been previously conducted in the vicinity of both proposed project areas, but not within them. In addition, no archaeological site or isolated artifacts have been recorded within the proposed Dry Creek and Levee Bend project areas. amec 1$~ foster wheeler A search was also conducted of the National Register of Historic Places. None were found within the proposed Dry Creek and Levee Bend project areas; however, there is one historic property within one mile of the Levee Bend project area. The Greybull Main Post Office was built in 1939 as part of the New Deal Public Works of Art Program. It is not within one mile of the Dry Creek project area.

The Dry Creek and Levee Bend project areas were surveyed by Amee Foster Wheeler archaeologist, Serelle E. Laine, and no archaeological features, or historic or prehistoric sites were identified.

The Amee Forest Wheeler cultural inventory within the Proposed Dry Creek and Levee Bend Project areas did not identified any sites considered eligible for the National Register. However, there is a potential for buried deposits, as with most riverine locations. I have recommended standard cultural resource consuu ction training module included in the construction workers safety/environmental training prior to construction. If you find the report adequate and the finding of project effect, please indicate your concurrence by signing below. lf you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at 480-479-9021, or [email protected].

Sincerely, ~~ii!..&!J Patricia Powless

Signature for Eastern Shoshone Tribe Concurrence Date

Enclosures: Greybull Cultural Resources Report (2016)

APPENDIX C

BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION

Biological Evaluation

Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification Big Horn County, Wyoming

Prepared for:

Town of Greybull, Wyoming PO Box 271 Greybull, Wyoming 82426

Prepared By:

Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 4600 East Washington Street, Suite 600 Phoenix, Arizona 85034

May 10, 2016

Amec Foster Wheeler Project No. 37-2015-2002

May 10, 2016 Job No. 37-2015-2002

Town of Greybull PO Box 271 Greybull, Wyoming 82426

Attn: Mayor Myles Foley

Re: Draft Biological Evaluation Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification Big Horn County, Wyoming

Submitted herein is our Biological Evaluation for the planned levee improvements at Dry Creek and Levee Bend located in the Town of Greybull, Big Horn County, Wyoming. The purpose of this report is to evaluate of the potential for protected biological resources to occur within the study areas and/or be impacted by project activities.

Should you have any questions concerning the recommendations presented in this report, please do not hesitate in contacting us.

Respectfully submitted,

Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Reviewed by:

Reed Kraemer Theresa Price Biologist Senior Biologist

cc: Addressee (PDF)

\\PHX4-FS1\Data\Infrastructure\Drainage\Projects\2015 Projects\3720152002 Town of Greybull\03-DESIGN\09-Environmental\07-Resource Files\Biology\Greybull_BE_Final_20160510.docx

Draft Biological Evaluation

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION...... 1 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ...... 5 4.0 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES ...... 6 5.0 MIGRATORY BIRDS AND EAGLES ...... 8 6.0 AGENCY COORDINATION...... 8 7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS ...... 9 8.0 SUMMARY ...... 11 9.0 REFERENCES ...... 11

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Vicinity Map ...... 2 Figure 2. Study Areas Map ...... 3 Figure 3. Raptor Nest Map ...... 4

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Study Area Photographs Appendix B USFWS IPaC Official Species List Appendix C Agency Correspondence Appendix D WGFD Aquatic Invasive Species Information Sheets

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming May 10, 2016 Page i Biological Evaluation

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Town of Greybull (Town), in cooperation with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), is planning improvements to the Bighorn River Local Flood Protection Project (Greybull Levee System) at two locations in Greybull, Big Horn County, Wyoming (Figures 1-3):

x Dry Creek – along the Dry Creek Levee, at the intersection of 15th Avenue North and North 8th Street x Levee Bend – along the Bighorn Left Bank Levee on the northwest bank of the Bighorn River, near the intersection of South 6th Street and 9th Avenue South

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

As part of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), FEMA develops Flood Insurance Studies (FISs) and Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) to depict the floodplain for the base flood (also known as the 1%-annual-chance-flood or the 100-year recurrence interval flood). In order for a levee to be accredited by FEMA, the levee owner must provide data and information certified by a licensed engineer demonstrating the levee meets, and will continue to meet, the minimum standards of Title 44, Code of Federal Regulations Section 65.10 (44 CFR § 65.10). FEMA’s standards address hydrologic, hydraulic, geotechnical, operational, and maintenance aspects of levee performance. When a levee is accredited by FEMA, the levee is recognized as providing flood protection for the base flood. If a levee does not meet FEMA standards, or if the technical documentation is insufficient or incomplete, FEMA will not accredit the levee and the FIRM is modified to show the 100-year floodplain as if the levee does not exist.

Project activities at the Dry Creek site would consist of a one-foot to three-foot raise of an approximate 1,250-foot section of the existing Dry Creek Levee. Activities at the Levee Bend site would consist of installing embankment protection where required and removal of vegetative overgrowth for an approximate 350-foot section of the existing Bighorn Left Bank Levee. Once constructed, these projects will bring the Town of Greybull – Bighorn Left Bank and Dry Creek Right Bank Flood Risk Reduction Project into full compliance with the requirements of 44 CFR § 65.10 for levee certification.

In accordance with Task 3 – Environmental Permitting/Technical Studies of the project scope of work, dated April 10, 2015, this report presents the results of a supplemental Biological Evaluation report completed by Amec Foster Wheeler for the proposed levee improvements. This report evaluates of the potential for protected biological resources to occur within study areas and/or be impacted by project activities.

Amec Foster Wheeler biologist, Reed Kraemer, conducted a site visit for the study areas on November 11 and 12, 2015. The site visit included an analysis of native vegetation, wetlands, and suitable habitat for protected species.

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming May 10, 2016 Page 1 Greybull, Big Horn County

Dry Creek Study Area

k Dry Cree

Levee Bend Study Area

0512.5 0 Miles Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification Big Horn County, Wyoming Job No.: 3720152002 The map shown here has been created with all due and reasonable care and is strictly for use with Amec Foster Wheeler Project Number 3720152002. PM: RK This map has not been certified by a licensed land surveyor, and any third party Date: 2/19/2016 use of this map comes without warranties of any kind. Amec Foster Wheeler FIGURE assumes no liability, direct or indirect, whatsoever for any such third party or Vicinity Map Scale: 1 inch = 2.5 miles ± unintended use. 1 Dry Creek Study Area Levee Bend Study Area ¤£14

Bighorn River

Dry Creek

7TH ST 7TH ¤£20 8TH ST 8TH

14TH AVE

7TH ST

8TH

ST 9TH ST

Levee Bend Study Area

6TH ST

8TH AVE

¤£16

9TH AVE

Bighorn River

¤£20

Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, LegendLegend and the GIS User Community

ProjectStudy Areas Areas

0 300 600 Feet Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification Big Horn County, Wyoming Job No.: 3720152002 The map shown here has been created with all due and reasonable care and is strictly for use with Amec Foster Wheeler Project Number 3720152002. PM: RK This map has not been certified by a licensed land surveyor, and any third party Date: 3/16/2016 use of this map comes without warranties of any kind. Amec Foster Wheeler FIGURE assumes no liability, direct or indirect, whatsoever for any such third party or Study Areas Map Scale: 1 inch = 200 feet ± unintended use. 2 ¤£16 Bighorn River

¤£20 b[

Levee Bend Study Area

Legend

Study Area

Raptor Nests (WGFD Data) b[ ( American kestrel (with 0.125 mi. buffer) Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, b[ and the GIS User Community ( Red-tailed hawk (with 0.250 mi. buffer)

0 1,000 2,000 Feet Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification Big Horn County, Wyoming Job No.: 3720152002 The map shown here has been created with all due and reasonable care and is strictly for use with Amec Foster Wheeler Project Number 3720152002. PM: RK This map has not been certified by a licensed land surveyor, and any third party Date: 3/16/2016 use of this map comes without warranties of any kind. Amec Foster Wheeler FIGURE assumes no liability, direct or indirect, whatsoever for any such third party or Raptor Nest Map Scale: 1 inch = 500 feet ± unintended use. 3 Biological Evaluation

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

The Greybull Levee System is located immediately east of and adjacent to the Town, and is generally aligned north-south along the west bank of the Bighorn River. The northernmost section of the Greybull Levee System is aligned west-east along the south bank of Dry Creek. Two study areas are proposed for construction for this project: Dry Creek near the northern boundary of the Town, and Levee Bend along the northwest bank of the Bighorn River in the southern portion of the Town.

The cadastral location of Dry Creek is Township 52 North, Range 93 West, Section 3, as shown on the Greybull North, Wyoming, United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic map. Levee Bend is located in Section 17 and is shown on the Greybull South, Wyoming USGS 7.5-minute topographic map (Figure 2). The geographic coordinates near the middle of Dry Creek are 44.4792° North latitude and 108.0548° West longitude; coordinates near the center of Levee Bend are 44.5049° North latitude and 108.0587° West longitude.

Generally, the study areas are located in the historic floodplain of the Bighorn River, within a large arid valley situated between the Absaroka Range (to the west) and the Bighorn Range (to the east). Specifically, the study areas are located on an existing levee system, on mostly developed land within the Town. Surrounding land includes urban development related to the town of Greybull, open pasture land, and the Bighorn River and Dry Creek.

Elevations within the study areas range from approximately 3,810 feet above mean sea level (amsl) on the levee at the Levee Bend study area, to 3,770 feet amsl near the western extent of the Dry Creek study area. The average precipitation for Greybull is 5.04 inches per year (Western Regional Climate Center 2015).

Vegetation

The study areas are located within the Bighorn Salt Desert Shrub Basins ecoregion of Wyoming. This region is characterized by dry, alkaline basins that are surrounded by mountains, drained by large rivers, and contain alkaline or gypsum soils. It is in an arid climate, averaging approximately six inches of rain per year. Common plant species in this region include greasewood (Sarcobatus vermiculatus), saltbush (Atriplex spp.), alkali sacaton (Sporobolus airoides), and saltgrass (Distichlis spicata) (USGS 2004).

The Dry Creek study area contains vegetation typical of this community and is dominated by rubber rabbitbrush (Ericameria nauseosa), greasewood, and perennial grasses. The Levee Bend study area is located in a riparian setting, with a variety of riparian trees such as American elm (Ulmus americana), eastern cottonwood (Populus deltoides), Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia), and willow (Salix sp.). The lower terrace riverbank is dominated by dense stands of prairie cordgrass (Spartina pectinata), interspersed with barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli), and common reed (Phragmites australis). Vegetation nomenclature follows the United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA) PLANTS Database (USDA 2015a).

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming May 10, 2016 Page 5 Biological Evaluation

Soils

The USDA online Web Soil Survey (based on the Big Horn County Area, Wyoming) (USDA 2015b) was consulted to determine the soil types mapped within the study area. The study areas cross one soil type:

x Heapo-like-Scooby-like complex (1A) – These well drained soils occur on stream terraces with 0 to 2 percent slopes. They are composed of silty loams and the parent material is alluvium derived from igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary rock.

Wetlands

The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) was accessed to identify any potential wetlands in the study areas. While no NWI wetlands are mapped in the study areas themselves, the Levee Bend study area sits adjacent to the Bighorn River, which is classified as a riverine, lower perennial, unconsolidated bottom, permanently flooded water (R2UBH). Three types of palustrine wetland areas are mapped along the Bighorn River in the local area: palustrine, scrub-shrub, temporarily flooded (PSSA); palustrine, forested, temporarily flooded (PFOA); and palustrine, emergent, seasonally flooded (PEMC). Wetland categories were based on Cowardin Classification (Cowardin et al. 1979).

Additionally, Amec Foster Wheeler prepared an Aquatic Resources Inventory in preparation for this project (Amec Foster Wheeler 2015). The inventory identified fringe wetlands in the Levee Bend study area. The wetlands were located along the lower terrace riverbank and were dominated by prairie cordgrass (Amec Foster Wheeler 2015). 0.93 acres of wetlands are anticipated to be disturbed during project activities.

4.0 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES

In order to evaluate the potential for species protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to occur within the project area, Amec Foster Wheeler accessed the USFWS’s online Information, Planning and Conservation (IPaC) system. This system generates a list of critical habitats and threatened, endangered, proposed, or candidate species for listing under the ESA that may occur within one or more delineated USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles that intersect the study area. The IPaC report (Consultation Code 06E13000-2016-SLI-0079; generated 05/10/2016) identified two species listed as “experimental population, non-essential” as occurring within the vicinity of the study area: gray wolf (Canis lupus) and black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes). No Critical Habitat for any species is located within the study areas. The IPaC report is included in Appendix B of this report. The project’s potential to impact the gray wolf is discussed below.

Gray wolf

The gray wolf is a member of the dog (canine) family, with fur color which may be white, red, brown, black, and many variations in between. The species reaches an approximate length of 6 feet, weighs approximately 100 pounds, and typically lives up to five years (USFWS 1987). The gray wolf was listed as endangered in 1978 (42 FR 9607 9615, March 9, 1978). It has since been divided into a number of distinct populations, with the Wyoming population being down-listed to

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming May 10, 2016 Page 6 Biological Evaluation an experimental population in 2012 (77 FR 55530 55604, September 10, 2012). The species’ distribution ranges from Canada to the American southwest and Mexico. The North American gray wolves’ existing range extends from northern Michigan to Washington and northern California. Within Wyoming, it is found in the northeastern portion of the state, generally to the northwest of Lander (USFWS 2015a). Critical habitat for the species was designated in 1978 (43 FR 9607 9615, March 9, 1978) in Michigan and Minnesota. There is currently no established critical habitat for gray wolf in Wyoming (USFWS 2016a).

Habitat for the gray wolf includes dense woodlands in mountainous regions where large ungulate species (hoofed mammals) are found, adjacent to higher-elevation grasslands. As a top predator and keystone species in many ecosystems, the species feeds on deer, elk, small mammals and livestock (USFWS 1987). The key components to quality wolf habitat include abundant prey, secluded sites for denning, and low presence of humans. Since protection, gray wolf populations have flourished in Wyoming and exceeded USFWS recovery goals (UWFWS 2015a). The primary threat to the gray wolf is habitat destruction via human population increase and expansion (USFWS 2012).

The project is located in close proximity to human development, which is unlikely to support foraging or denning wolves. The nearest suitable habitat for the species likely occurs in the open grassland habitat surrounding the Town. Additionally, the proposed levee developments are relatively minor and would not present significant impacts to the local ecosystem. Therefore, this project is not anticipated to negatively impact gray wolves.

Black-Footed Ferret

The black-footed ferret is a member of the weasel family; it is a “slender, wiry animal with black feet, a black face mask, and black-tipped tail” that ranges from 19 to 24 inches in length and 1.4 to 2.5 pounds (USFWS 2016b). The ferret was first listed as endangered under early endangered species legislation in 1967 (32 FR 4001, March 11, 1967) and was grandfathered into the ESA of 1973 (USFWS 2013). In 1986, only 18 individuals were known to exist within its range. The last remaining individuals in the wild were captured near Meeteetse, Wyoming, and were used to develop experimental populations in Arizona, Colorado, Montana, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. Based on 2001 USFWS population estimates, there were “more than 1,000 black- footed ferrets in the wild, and another 280 living in breeding facilities” (USFWS 2010).

Suitable habitat for the black-footed ferret consists of native grasslands inhabited by prairie dogs. The survival of black-footed ferrets is directly connected to prairie dog abundance and habitat, as prairie dog burrows are used for shelter as well as dens to rear their young. In addition, over 90 percent of the black-footed ferret’s diet is composed of prairie dogs. The primary causes for this species’ near extinction was the loss of habitat and prey resulting from conversion of prairies to agriculture or other uses, and prairie dog eradication programs. (USFWS 2010, 2013)

No prairie dog colonies were observed within the project areas. Because the project is located in close proximity to human development, it is unlikely that black-footed ferrets would reside in the vicinity of the project. Additionally, the proposed levee developments are relatively minor and would not present significant impacts to the local ecosystem. Therefore, this project is not anticipated to negatively impact black-footed ferrets.

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming May 10, 2016 Page 7 Biological Evaluation

5.0 MIGRATORY BIRDS AND EAGLES

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) protects native migratory bird species in the US by prohibiting the hunting, killing, capturing, possession, sale, transportation, and exportation of birds, feathers, eggs, and nests. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act protects bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos), including their parts, nests, or eggs, by prohibiting similar actions as the MBTA. Local bird counts have found over 150 species of migratory birds in the vicinity of Greybull, Wyoming, including bald and golden eagles (eBird 2016). During the site visit conducted in November 2016, Amec Foster Wheeler did not observe any songbird or raptor nests in or near the study areas. However, trees and shrubs suitable for nesting substrate are present in both study areas. In addition, the Levee Bend Study Area contains some riparian vegetation, which is suitable nesting habitat for bald eagles.

In preparation for this project, Amec Foster Wheeler corresponded with the USFWS and Wyoming Game and Fish Department (WGFD), as described further in Section 6. The WGFD provided Amec Foster Wheeler with locations of known raptor nests in the project’s vicinity: two American kestrel (Falco sparverius) nests and one red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) nest. The USFWS Wyoming Ecological Services Office recommends construction activities maintain a 0.125-mile buffer from American kestrel nests and a 0.250-mile buffer from red-tailed hawk nests, if construction is taking place during the species’ breeding season (USFWS 2015b). All nests identified by the WGFD for this project are outside of the USFWS recommended buffer distances, as depicted in Table 1 and Figure 3.

Table 1. Special Status Species within Project Vicinity

USFWS Nesting Species Coordinates Recommended Buffer* Distance from Study Limits 44.4790° North latitude, American kestrel 0.125 mile 0.136 mile east of Levee Bend 108.0490° West longitude 44.4694° North latitude, American kestrel 0.125 mile 0.649 mile south of Levee Bend 108.0537° West longitude 44.4795° North latitude, 0.336 mile southeast of Levee Red-tailed hawk 0.250 mile 108.0493° Bend West longitude *(USFWS 2015b)

Because project activities will remove vegetation that could support migratory birds, including raptors and bald eagles, Amec Foster Wheeler has included a measure in Section 7 below to survey for migratory birds and eagles within five days of construction.

6.0 AGENCY COORDINATION

In preparation for this project, scoping letters were sent to the USFWS and the WGFD on January 4, 2016. The USFWS responded January 8, 2016 with a letter stating that the project was in

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming May 10, 2016 Page 8 Biological Evaluation compliance with the ESA. The WGFD responded on January 28, 2016 asking that the project minimize impacts to the Big Horn River, reduce potential to introduce invasive species, and consider the project’s proximity to raptor nests. Per their request, environmental considerations have been included in this report for the Big Horn River and invasive species.

Amec Foster Wheeler asked the WGFD for more information on raptor nests near the project area. The WGFD responded with a map of local raptor nests, which are shown on Figure 3. These nests are discussed further in Section 5. All agency correspondence is included in Appendix C.

7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS

The following environmental considerations are recommended to be incorporated into the project specifications, and reflect the findings in Section 5 as well as requests from the WGFD:

x No more than five days prior to construction, a qualified biologist should conduct a survey for nesting birds within the project areas and for nesting raptors (including bald eagle) within line-of-sight of the project areas. All non-raptor nests should be flagged and given a 100-foot buffer until nestlings have fledged. If any raptor nests are identified within line-of-sight of construction, the US Fish and Wildlife Service’s Wyoming Ecological Services Office should be contacted at (307) 772-2374 for recommendations regarding seasonal restrictions and construction buffers.

x Vegetation removal would be kept to the smallest extent possible and existing roads and disturbed areas will be used for access and staging whenever possible.

x Areas disturbed during construction and not otherwise hard-surfaced would be re- seeded with appropriate seed mix upon completion of construction activities to reduce the spread of invasive species.

x Using previously disturbed land as construction staging areas.

x After Project construction is complete, ground surfaces within the Levee areas that are disturbed during project construction would be re-seeded with like grasses.

x Accepted BMPs be implemented to ensure that all sediments and other pollutants are contained within the boundaries of the work area. Disturbed areas that are contributing sediment to surface waters as a result of project activities should be promptly re- vegetated to maintain water quality.

x The use of erosion control fences.

x Requiring that all construction equipment be clean, free of leaks, and refueled in designated areas with containment berms.

x Fill would be covered, stabilized or mulched, and silt fences would be used as required. To minimize the entanglement and entrapment of wildlife, environmentally friendly erosion control blankets (jute or coir/natural fiber) biodegradable mesh is recommended. Mesh size should be large enough to minimize entrapment of birds and other wildlife.

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming May 10, 2016 Page 9 Biological Evaluation

x Equipment should be serviced and fueled away from streams and riparian areas. Equipment staging areas should be at least 500 feet from riparian areas.

x Preventing the spread of aquatic invasive species (AIS) is a priority for the State of Wyoming, and in many cases, the intentional or unintentional spread of organisms from one body of water to another would be considered a violation of State statute and Wyoming Game and Fish Commission Regulation. To prevent the spread of AIS, the following is required:

o If equipment has been used in a high risk infested water [a water known to contain Dreissenid mussels (zebra/quagga mussels)], the equipment must be inspected by an authorized aquatic invasive species inspector recognized by the state of Wyoming prior to its use in any Wyoming water during all times of year.

o Any equipment entering the state by land from March through November (regardless of where it was last used), must be inspected by an authorized aquatic invasive species inspector prior to its use in any Wyoming water.

o If aquatic invasive species are found, the equipment would need to be decontaminated by an authorized aquatic invasive species decontaminator.

o Any time equipment is moved from one 4th level (8-digit Hydrological Unit Code) watershed to another within Wyoming, the following guidelines are recommended: DRAIN: Drain all water from watercraft, gear, equipment, and tanks. Leave wet compartments open to dry. CLEAN: Clean all plants, mud, and debris from vehicle, tanks, watercraft, and equipment. DRY: Dry everything thoroughly. In Wyoming, we recommend drying for 5 days in summer (June-August); 18 days in Spring (March-May) and Fall (September- November); or 3 days in Winter (December-February) when temperature are at or below freezing.

o Any equipment used in a Wyoming water that contains AIS, must be inspected before use in another water. Species currently found in Wyoming waters include New Zealand mudsnail, Asian clam, and curly pondweed. Information on these species in Wyoming can be found in Appendix D. Information on currently affected waters can be found at: http:/wgfd.wyo.gov/web2011/Departments/Fishing/pdfs/AIS_WYWATER_MONIT OR130005236.pdf. A list of high risk infested waters and locations in Wyoming to obtain an AIS inspection can be found at: wgfd.wyo.gov/AIS.

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming May 10, 2016 Page 10 Biological Evaluation

8.0 SUMMARY

This Biological Evaluation found no evidence that federal threatened or endangered species occur in the study areas. The project does have the potential to impact migratory birds, including raptors and bald eagles. Correspondence with the WGFD identified that raptor nests are present in the vicinity of the Levee Bend study area. As such, Amec Foster Wheeler recommends the environmental considerations in Section 7 of this report regarding migratory birds be implemented to avoid violation of the MBTA and/or BGEPA. Additionally, at the request of the WGFD, Amec Foster Wheeler recommends the project implement environmental considerations regarding AIS, as outlined in Section 7 of this report. Information regarding AIS identification and distribution in Wyoming has been included in Appendix D.

9.0 REFERENCES

Amec Foster Wheeler. 2015. Aquatic Resources Inventory Report for the Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification. Prepared for the Town of Greybull.

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Department of the Interior.

eBird. 2016. Explore Hotspots website. Available online at http://ebird.org/ebird/hotspots. Accessed February 2016.

US Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2015a. The PLANTS Database. National Plant Data Team, Greensboro, NC 27401-4901 USA. Available online: http://plants.usda.gov. Accessed December 2015.

USDA. 2015b. Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Web Soil Survey. Available online at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/ WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed December 2015.

US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1987. Northern Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery Plan. Available online at https://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/870803.pdf. Accessed February 2016.

USFWS. 2010. Black-footed Ferret Fact Sheet. Available online at http://www.fws.gov/mountain- prairie/factsheets/Black-Footed-Ferret.pdf. Accessed May 2016.

USFWS. 2012. 5-Year Review: Lower 48-State and Mexico Gray Wolf (Canis lupus) Listing. Available online at https://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_year_review/doc3978.%20lupus%205- YR%20review%20PDF.pdf. Accessed February 2016.

USFWS. 2013. Black Footed Ferret Recovery Plan. Available online at http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/20131108%20BFF%202nd%20Rev.%20Final%20R ecovery%20Plan.pdf. Accessed May 2016

USFWS. 2015a. Gray Wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountains. Available online at http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/wolf/. Accessed February 2016.

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming May 10, 2016 Page 11 Biological Evaluation

USFWS. 2015b. Species of Concern: Raptors in Wyoming. Available online at http://www.fws.gov/ wyominges/Species/Raptors.php. Accessed February 2016.

USFWS. 2016a. Species Profile for Gray wolf (Canis lupus). Available online at https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=A00D#crithab. Accessed February 2016.

USFWS. 2016b. Species Profile for Black-Footed ferret (Mustela nigripes). Available online at http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=A004. Accessed May 2016.

US Geological Survey (USGS). 2004. Ecoregions of Wyoming (color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs; map scale 1:1,400,000). Available online: ftp://ftp.epa.gov/wed/ecoregions/wy/wy_front.pdf. Accessed on December 2015.

Wyoming Game and Fish Department (WGFD). 2014a. Asian Clam Information. Available online: https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/PDF/Fishing/AIS_ASIANCLAM_INFO.pdf. Accessed February 2016.

WGFD. 2014b. Curly Pondweed Information. Available online: https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/ media/content/PDF/Fishing/AIS_CURLYPONDWEED_INFO.pdf. Accessed February 2016.

WGFD. 2014c. New Zealand Mudsnail Information. Available online: https://wgfd.wyo.gov/ WGFD/media/content/PDF/Fishing/AIS_NZMUDSNAIL_INFO.pdf. Accessed February 2016.

Western Regional Climate Center. 2015. Climatological Summary: Greybull South Big Horn County Airport. Available online at: http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/summary/gey.wy.html. Accessed December 2015.

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming May 10, 2016 Page 12

APPENDIX A PROJECT AREA PHOTOGRAPHS

Draft Biological Evaluation Photographic Log

Photograph 1. Dry Creek study area facing north from the southwestern study area boundary. Taken November 2, 2015.

Photograph 2. Dry Creek study area facing west from near the eastern study area boundary. Taken November 2, 2015.

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming May 10, 2016 Page A-1 Draft Biological Evaluation Photographic Log

Photograph 3. Riparian vegetation along Dry Creek (outside study area), facing north from near the center of the study area. Taken November 2, 2015.

Photograph 4. Fringe wetlands along the Bighorn River, facing southwest from the bend in the river. Taken November 3, 2015.

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming May 10, 2016 Page A-2 Draft Biological Evaluation Photographic Log

Photograph 5. Levee Bend study area facing northeast from the west bank of the Bighorn River. Taken November 3, 2015.

Photograph 6. Levee Bend study area, facing east from near the bend in the Bighorn River. Taken November 3, 2015.

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming May 10, 2016 Page A-3

APPENDIX B: USFWS IPAC OFFICIAL SPECIES LIST

to use 1heir authorilk8 to carry out programs for the couscrvation of 1hmltened and endangered United States Department of the Interior '"'\\~ii"'" specie& and to defttmiDe whether projectl may affect threatened and endaogtzed specie• and/or dc&ignatcd crldcaJ. habitat. FISH AND WILDLIPB SERVICE Wyom!Da Ecologlcal Services Field Oft'ice A biological U!le811111eDt is required for construction projecta (or other undertakinga having 5353 YELLOWSTONE ROAD, SUlTE 308A similar physical impactll) that are Inlljol: Federal actiOllll irlgoificantly affecting the qwili1y of the CHBYBNNB, WY 82009 human envimmnr:nt u defined in the National Envimnmenlal Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) PHONE: (YrT'{11'2,-2374 FAX: (307)'n2-23S8 (c)). For projecu other than major COll8tnlction activitie1, the Service mggeeu that a biological URL; www.fwB.SoV/wyominaa/ evaluation similar to a biologic.al asaesamcnt be prepared to determine whether the project may affect lismd or proposed species and/or designated or propaied critical habilal. Recommmded CODleDl8 of a biol.ogical USCSlll!lllDt are described at so CPR 402.12.

Ifa F~ agency~. based on the biologic.al asses&mmll or biological evaluation, that Consultation Code: 06El3000-2016-SU-0079 May 10, 2016 listed 1peciea and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by lhe proposed project, lhe Bvmt Code: 06El3000-2016-E-01004 agency i1 required to comul.t with lhc Service pursuant to ~o CFR 402. In addition, the Service Project Name: Cheybull, Big Hom County m:ommendl that candidale species, proposed species, and propo&ed critical habitat be addressed within the comul.tation. More information on lhe regulatiom and procedures for section 7 Subject Updamd list ofthreatmed and llllliangared species 1ha1 may occur in your propoHd consultation, lncluding the role ofpermit or license applicants, can be found in the "F.ndangered project location, and/or may be affected by your propoged project Species Consultalion Handbook" at: btlp://www.fw1.gov/endangered.lesa-library/pd£TOCGLOS.PDF

To Whom I1 May Concern: We also reoomJlllllDd that you corurlder the following information when assessing impacts to federally lisll.ld apeciea, u well u migralmy birdJ. and other lrult IelOlll'Cell: The enclosed species list idmtifies tmalmed, ~proposed and c:amiidam species, as wcll u proposed and final deaignated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of Colorado Rlftl' and Platte Rh·a Systmui: Consultation under section 7 of the Act is required your proposed project and/or may be affilcted by your proposed project. The species list fuUilb for pmjectB in Wyoming that may lead to Wll1er dcpletions or have the potential to impact waler lhe requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) ofthe quality in the Cokndo River system or the Platte Riva: syscan, because these actions may Bndangezed Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et aeq.). affect threatened and endange.red speciet inhabiting the downstream reachea of1hese river ponds, under 50 CPR 402.12(e) ofthe regulations implementing section 7 ofthe Act, the accuracy of lakes. and l1l8eIVOirB (e.g., for dl!tmdion, recreal.im, in:iga1ion, storage, stock watering, this species list should be verified afta 90 days. This verification can be completed fmmally m municipal storage, and powa-generation); hydrostatic testing of pipelines; wclla; dust informally u desired. The Service l'CCClllllDmda that verification be completed by visiting the abatement; diversion stJ:uctnres; and water tteatment facilities. Environmental Conservation Online Syltf:m-lnformation, l'lannins· and Comel'vlltion System (ECOS-IPaC) website al regular intavabi during project pbmning and implementalion for Species 1ha1 may be affected in the Colorado River system include the~ bonytail ( updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested through the Gila ekgant). Colorado pikeminnnw (PrychocMilul hlcllu), humpback chub (Gila cypha), and BCOS-IPaC system by completing the same process med to receive the enclosed list mzorback sucker (XymucMn taanm) and their desi.gnamd critical habitalll. ProjecCs in the Platte Rive£ syst=n may impact the endangezed interior popublion of the least =:n (Stema Please feel free to contact111 ifyou DCCd more information or assiJtance regarding thc potential tllltlllarum), lhe eadangered pallid sturgeon (Scaphirhyncluu albu.r), the threatened piping impacts to federally proposed, lismd, and candidate species and :federally designated and plove£ (Charadrill.r melodw), the 1hreatimed western prairie fringed on:hid (Plalrmllrua proposed c:ritical hahitat. We also encourage you to visit the Wyoming Eoologic:al Smvic:es pra«laro), a11well1111 the endangem:I whooping crane (Oms americona) and its designamd website at hllp·/lwww fnpnrfw;ynmin~cslSpcclc• Hndanam=d html for IDOl'C critical habitat Far more information on consaltation requirements fur the Platb: River l!pCCiet, information about specita ooourrence and designated critical habitat. please visit http://www.fws.govlpla1teriver.

The purpose ofthe Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangeted species and Migratory Blrd.9: The Migratory Bird TrWy Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712), prohibits the taking of the ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Unde.r sections 7(a)(I) and 7(a)(2) any migratory birda, their parts, nests, or ew except as permitted by regulations, and does not of the Act and its imp1emmting regula1ioos (~O CPR 402 et 1111q.), Federal ~are required require intent to be proven. Bxcept fur introduced specie& and 110111C uplmd game bmls, almost

2 UDiled Slllh:I Departmi:nl oflDlcrim allbirds ~in the wild in the United States are protected (50 CPR 10.13). Guidance fur Filh an4 Wildlife ~ minimizing impacts ID migratory birds for projectll that include communications towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcaat) can be fmmd at Project name: Greybull. Big Born Counly btlp://www.fws.gov/migxatolybiIIWCul:mllBirdlsa~wen.htm.

The Bald llDd Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668d) prohibWi knowingly taking. or Officlal Species List taking with wanlDn disregazd fur the cxmsequences ofan activity, any bald or golden eagles or their body parta. nests, or eggs, which includes colleetion, moh:station, distmbance, or killiog. ProWtedby: Bagle nests are protected whether they are active or lnaciivc. Removal or destruclion of nests, or Wyoming l!cologlcal Senicel l'lllld Oflice callfiing abomdonment of a nest could constitute a violation ofooe or bo1h ofthe above stalut=I. S3S3 YBILOWSTONB ROAD, SUITB 308A Projects affecting eagles may require developmem of an eagle consavation plan CllEYl!NNB, WY 82009 (http:l/www.fw&.gov/windenergy/eagle_guldance.html). Addilionally, wind energy projectll (307) 772-2374_ should follow the wind encrgy guidelines (http://www.fw&.gov/windenmgy/) fur minimizing impacts to~ birds and bats. hllp:/fwww.fws.gov/wyomillp!/

If nesting migralmy birds are pesent on or near the project area, timing ofactivities ill an Conmltadon Code: 06El3000-2016-SU-0079 important consideration and llhould be addreaaed in project planning. Activities 1hat could le.ad EYent Code: 06Bl3000-2016-E-01004 to the take ofmigratory birds or eagles, their young. eggs, or neata, should be coordinated with our office prior to project implementation. If nest manipulation (mcluding removal) is prqioed ProJed Type; •• OTIIHR •• fur the project, 1he project proponem should con!Bct the Migratory Bird Office in Denver at 303-236-8171 to see ifa permit can be issued for the project. Ifa permit cannot be i1&ued, the Project Name: Greybull, Big Hom County project may need to be modified ID protect migralmy birds, eagles, their young, eggs, and nests. Project Deacrtpllon: Greylmll Wyoming

We appreciate your concern fur threatened and c:ndangaed specie&. The Service encourages l'Jeue Note: The FWS ofike may have !llDdified the Project Name and/or Project Descripcion. so it Federal agencies to include cooservalion of lhrealenal and endangered species into their project may be different from what was submiUed in your pevious r=i,ucst. Ifthe Consultation Code planning to further the p1ll'pD5Cll ofthe Al;t Plcue include the Consultation Tracking Number in matd!es, the FWS considall this to be lhe same project. Coo.lact the office in lhe 'Provided by' the headC'z of 1hi1 letter with any request fur oonsultation or correspondence about your project section of yonr previous Official Species list ifyou have any questions or concerns. 1hat you submit to our office..

Attachment

hllp:l/CCOLf\n.p/ipac, OS/Lot2016 11 :54 AM 3 1 UDiled Stllll:l Departmi:nl oflDlcrim UDiled Stllll:l Departmi:nl oflDlcrim Filh mlWi1dlit:e SeMi::. Filh mlWi1dlit:e SeMi::.

Projoctname: Greybull. Big Born Counly Projoctname: Greybull. Big Born Counly

Project Location Map: Endangered Species Act Species List

Time are a total of2 threallllOd or cadaDgered spocles Oii your spedos lilt. SpedM on Ibis lilt lhould bcCOllaldncl In an etfticu anaiylls for your pojectand llOUlcl lnc1u.de spocles 1bat exist In anccbel' geographlc area. Pot llQlllPle, Clll'lain ft.oh may 8£lll8"I" an the ll(ll!ICleo liltbecause a pmjocc oould affioct dawutmam ll(ll!lcleo. N.,.., llw 1 al.*-ll(ll!lcleo lhoald be c:onaid.=d only under ccmin c:onditionl. O:itil:a1 habilllll lillrld mdcr die Bu Crtlla1 llabltat c:olumn msy OI' nm:y DDt lie wilhin. your pmjcc:t -.... Sec lho Clilklll bblln wllblm ,..,.... (U'qject ...oa:ticm fmtha below fur rmica1 habilld: 111111 lica within your pmja:t. PkueCODtact lhe dc8ignall:d FWS office ify

Mmmmll S&ldlll 11.-Crilbl e.blbit Ccllldlikm(I)

BIW:-Fooll:d lim:t (Mll&/a .U,rlpu) Expcrimclltal l!spc:limmbll, DOD- ..,.-:U.S.A. (WY ad !plllHlo ,..,- Pupu1alion. Ncn- ...... w.l papulldion of ofAZ, CO, ICI, Sil, mllfl) Bocnlill. bladc-!Ootal fmell establlihed purlUIDI IO -~ / Secticn 10(j) oflhe .BSA. Se.:UOll 7 consabdon not mquired om:ept m Project Coonlinllta: MULTIPOLYOON (((-108.068346073 44.4637448760001, -108.068340104 llllds admini9f.c:rcd by 44A63412S600001, -108.068831053 44.463762952, -108.068346073 44.4637448760001)), ((- 11¥ U.S. Filh md 108.068346073 44.4637448760001, -108.069157214 44.508900334, -108.ll48068618 Wildlilc Service or the 44.508666514, -108.050028988 44.4630621700001, -108.068346073 44.4637448760001))) Nlllional Pllllr. Service.

Project Countlls: Big Hom. WY Clmy 'W

hllp:l/CCOl.f\n.p/ipllc, OS/LOl20L6 11 :54 AM hllp:l/CCOl.f\n.p/ipllc, OS/LOl20L6 11 :54 AM 2 3 UDiled Stllll:l Departmi:nl oflDlcrim Filh mlWi1dlit:e SeMi::.

Projoctname: Greybull. Big Born Counly

Critical habitats that lie within your project area 1'heno me DO ailical. Juibilatl widaiD ,vurpmjm llml.

hllp:l/CCOl.f\n.p/ipllc, OS/LOl20L6 11 :54 AM 4

APPENDIX C AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE

RECEIVED Janurary 4, 2015 ZGl6 JAN -8 AH 11: 09 Mark Sattelberg amec US Fish and Wildlife Service US FISH & WILDLIFE SVC foster Wyoming Ecological Services Field Office CHEYENNE. \VY 5353 Yellowstone Road , Suite 308A wheeler Cheyenne, Wyoming 82009

Re: Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification Job No. 37-2015-2002

Dear Mr. Sattelberg:

4600 East Washington Street, Suite 600 Phoenix, Arizona 85034 Tel (602) 733-6000 Fax (602) 733-61 00 www.amecfw.com Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification

Your assistance in providing information is greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time and assistance.

Sincerely,

Reed Kraemer Biologist

Enclosures: • Figure 1. Overview Map • Figure 2. Dry Creek Map • Figure 3. Levee Bend Map

c: Myles Foley, Mayor, Town of Greybull, PO Box 271, Greybull, Wyoming 82426

U.I. FISH ANO WILDLIFE SERVICE

Field Supervisor U.S. Filh and rvic.e • ing ES Office 5353 Yellowstone Road, Suite 308A Cheyenne, WY 82009 Phone: (307) 772-2374 Fax: (307) 772-2358

------··--·-·------·------·------·-----·-·------··- -·- -·-·------·-···-- Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming January 4, 2014 Page 2 GOVfRNOR MATTHEW H. ME.AO DlREC'TOR W YOMING GAME AND FISH D EPARTMENT sconrALSon COMMISSIONERS CHARI.ES PRICE - Pnlsldent 5400 Bishop Blvd. Cheyenne, WY 82006 T. CARA.IE LITTLE-Vice President MARK ANSELMI Phone: (307) 777-4600 Fax: (307) 777-4699 PATRIO<. CRAN!< KElTM CULVER wgfd.W)'O.gov RM:HARD )(LOUOA OAVIORAEL

J anua1y 28, 20 J 6

WER 13772.00 Amee Foster Wheeler Enviromnent a11d Infrastructure, Inc. Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification Job Number 37-2015-2002 Big Hom County

Reed Kramer Amee Foster Wheeler Environment and Infrastnicture, Inc. 4600 East Washington Street, Suite 600 Phoenix, Arizona 85034

Dear Mr. Kramer:

The staff of the Wyoming Game and Fish Department (WGFD) has reviewed the Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification, Project Number 37-2015-2002. We offer the following comments for your consideration.

Terrestrial Considerations:

The proposed project location on the south side of Greybull is within close proximity to documented raptor nests. We recommend C-Ontacting the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for recommendations on buffer distance and seasonal use.

Aquntic Considerations:

To minimize impacts to the aquatic resources of the Greybull River, we recommend the following:

• Accepted best management practices be implemented to ensure that all sediments and other pollutants are contained w ithin the boundaries of the work area. Disturbed areas that are contributing sediment to surface waters as a result of project activities should be promptly re-vegetated to maintain water quality.

"Co11scrdng Wildlife - &rvlng People• Recd Kramer January 28, 2016 Page 2 of 3 - WER 13772.00

• Equipment should be serviced and fueled away from streams and riparian areas. Equipment staging areas should be at least 500 feet from riparian areas.

• Preventing the spread of aquatic invasive species (A TS) is a priority fo r the State of Wyoming, and in many cases, the intentional or unintentional spread oforgan isms from one body of water to another would be considered a violation of State statute and Wyoming Game and Fish Commission Regulation. To prevent the spread of AIS, the following is required: I. If equipment has been used in a high risk infested water (a water known to contain Oreisseni d mussels (zebra/quagga mussels)], the equipment must be inspt.-ctcd by an authorized aquatic invasive species inspector recognized by the state of Wyoming prior to its use in any Wyoming water during all times of year.

3. If aqualic invasive species are fo und, the equipment will need to be decontaminated by an authorized aquatic invasive species decontaminator.

4. Any time equipment is moved from one 4•h level (8-digit Hydrological Unit Code) watershed to another within Wyoming, the following guidelines are recommended: DRAIN: Drain al l water from watercraft, gear, equipment, and tanks. Leave wet compartments open to dry. CLEAN: Clean all plants, mud, and debris from vehicle, tanks, watercraft, and equipment. DRY: Dry everything thoroughly. In Wyoming, we recommend drying for 5 days in summer (June - August); I 8 days in Spring (March - May) and Pall (September - November); or 3 days in Winter (December - February) when temperatures are at or below freezing.

5. Any equipment used in a Wyoming water that contains A1S, must be inspected before use in another water. Species currently found in Wyoming waters include New Zealand mudsnail, Asian clam, and curly pondweed. lnfonnation on currently affe.cted waters can be fo und at: http://wgfd.wyo.gov/web20J I/Departments/Pishinglpdfs/AIS _ WYWA T ER_MONIT OR 130005236.pdf. *A list of high risk infested waters and locations in Wyoming to obtain an AIS inspection can be found at: wgfd.wyo.gov/AIS. Reed Kramer January 28, 20 I 6 Page3 of3-WER 13772.00

Jvfh.tui Ke nedy J ~epu Director JK/mfi'ns

cc: USFWS Leslie Schreiber, WGFD, Cody Region Tim Woolley, WGFO, Cody Region Sam Hochhalter, WGFD, Cody Region Chris Wichmann, Wyoming Department of Agriculture, Cheyenne .UDHPHU5HHG

)URP /HVOLH6FKUHLEHU OHVOLHVFKUHLEHU#Z\RJRY! 6HQW 0RQGD\)HEUXDU\30 7R .UDHPHU5HHG 6XEMHFW *UH\EXOO)ORRG3URWHFWLRQ5DSWRU1HVWV $WWDFKPHQWV MSJ

-- /HVOLH6FKUHLEHU

:LOGOLIH%LRORJLVW :\RPLQJ*DPH )LVK'HSDUWPHQW %HDU&UHHN5DQFK5RDG 6KHOO:<

E-Mail to and from me, in connection with the transaction of public business, is subject to the Wyoming Public Records Act and may be disclosed to third parties.

APPENDIX D WGFD AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES INFORMATION SHEETS

The Asian clam (Corbicula fluminea) is native to Asia, Africa, the Mediterranean, and Australia and is believed to have been introduced intentionally as food or accidentally imported with the

Pacific oyster. It was initially discovered in 1938 in the Columbia Hawaii River and now occurs in 38 states. Much like zebra and quagga

mussels, the Asian clam can clog pipes at power generation and Puerto Rico water supply facilities, causing millions of dollars in damage. In 2010, Asian clam were confirmed in the Laramie River near the town of Laramie subsequent sampling has identified populations in the upper and lower Laramie watershed. In 2013, a population was found on the North Platte River below Guernsey Reservoir.

Asian clams are spread through bait bucket introductions, accidental introductions with aquaculture species, illegal introductions for food, and through water currents.

If you are using Asian clam infested waters please remember to: 9 DRAIN all water from your gear and equipment. This includes all types of watercraft, waders, boots, clothing, buckets – anything that comes into contact with the water. 9 CLEAN all equipment and gear of plants, mud and debris. Never move a plant or animal from one location to another. 9 DRY everything thoroughly. In Wyoming we recommend drying for 5 days in the summer, 18 days in the spring or fall, or 3 days at freezing temperatures.

Updated 12/14 Curly Pondweed Wyoming Distribution A"

oir

Curly pondweed (Potomogmn c:rlspus) Is native to Eurasia, Afrfca and Australia and was introduced into the United States in the mid 1800's. It Is now found In almost every state In the conUnental U.S. aside from Maine and South Carolina. New populations are being discovered In Wyoming each year. It was found In Lake Desmet In 2011. In 2012, it was discovered on the North Platte River between semlnoe Reservoir and Pathfinder Reservoir (an area referred to as the "Mlracle Mlle") and also at New F<>rk Lake. It was found In Boysen Reservoir and Keytiole Reservoir In 2013, and In the Shoshone River near Cody In 2014. Curly pondweed competes with native plants reducing plant diversity and forms dense mats that Impact water-based recreation.

Curly pondweed reproduces by seed which can be easily truuferred In mud or water. It has been Introduced into new areas by aa:idental introductions and as an onnamental plant.

If you are using curlv pondweed infested waters please remember to: "' DRAIN all water from your gear and equipment. Tiiis Includes all types of watercraft, waders, boots, c:lothln& buc:kets-anyUilng that comes Into c:ontac:t with the water. ~ CLEAN all equipment and gear of plants, mud and debris. Never move a plant or animal from one location to another. ~ DRY everything thorousflly. In Wyoming we recommend drying for s days In the summer, 18 days In the spring or fill, or 3 days at freezing temperatures.

Updated 12/14

The New Zealand mudsnail (Potamopyrgus antipodarum) is native to mainland New Zealand and adjacent small islands. It was probably introduced into the United States through transoceanic ships or transported with live game fish. The species was first discovered in the Snake River, Idaho in 1987 and has since spread to Oregon, Montana, California, Arizona, Washington, Wyoming, Colorado, and Lake Ontario, Lake Erie, and Lake Superior. The mudsnail is parthenogenic (female clones) and densities have been recorded over 300,000 per square meter. Impacts of introduction include outcompeting native species and altering water chemistry. Currently, populations in Wyoming occur in Yellowstone National Park, Grand Teton National Park and in the Bighorn, Shoshone, and Snake rivers. In 2014, a new population was discovered in Lake Cameahwait (Bass Lake).

New Zealand mudsnail are spread by fish and birds, natural downstream dispersal, upstream through rheotactic behavior, and by humans on fishing gear.

If you are using New Zealand mudsnail infested waters please remember to: 9 DRAIN all water from your gear and equipment. This includes all types of watercraft, waders, boots, clothing, buckets – anything that comes into contact with the water. 9 CLEAN all equipment and gear of plants, mud and debris. Never move a plant or animal from one location to another. 9 DRY everything thoroughly. In Wyoming we recommend drying for 5 days in the summer, 18 days in the spring or fall, or 3 days at freezing temperatures.

Updated 12/14

APPENDIX D

AQUATIC RESOURCES REPORT AND CORRESPONDENCE

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, OMAHA DISTRICT WYOMING REGULATORY OFFICE 2232 DELL RANGE BOULEVARD, SUITE 210 CHEYENNE WY 82009-4942

January 26, 2016

Myles Foley, Mayor Town of Greybull P.O. Box 271 Greybull, Wyoming 82426

Dear Mayor Foley:

This letter is in response to a request we received from Amee Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. on December 22, 2015, to review the Aquatic Resources Inventory Report, Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification, Big Horn County, Wyoming dated December 22, 2015. The study area includes the Dry Creek site covering 3.7 acres in the SW l;4 SE l;4 of Section 5 and the Levee Bend site covering 2.0 acres in the NW l;4 SE ~ of Section 17, Township 52 North, Range 93 West, Big Hom County, Wyoming.

Sincerely, ~tb Project Manager Wyoming Regulatory Office

Copies Furnished:

Reed Kraemer Amee Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 4600 East Washington Street, Suite 600 Phoenix, Arizona 85034

Eric Laux U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Omaha District, CENWO-PM-AC 1616 Capitol Avenue Omaha, Nebraska 68102

The Omaha District, Regulatory Branch. Wyoming Regulatory Office is committed to providing quality and tnnely service to our customers. Please take a moment to complete a Customer Seryice Survey found on our web site at http://vtww.nwo.usace.army.mil/Missions/RegulatoryProgram/Wyoming.aspx Paper copies of the survey are also available upon request for those without Internet access.

Aquatic Resources Inventory Report

Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification Big Horn County, Wyoming

Prepared for:

Town of Greybull, Wyoming PO Box 271 Greybull, Wyoming 82426

Prepared By:

Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 4600 East Washington Street, Suite 600 Phoenix, Arizona 85034

December 22, 2015

Amec Foster Wheeler Project No. 37-2015-2002

December 22, 2015 Job No. 37-2015-2002

Town of Greybull PO Box 271 Greybull, Wyoming 82426

Attn: Mayor Myles Foley

Re: Aquatic Resources Inventory Report Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification Big Horn County, Wyoming

Submitted herein is our Aquatic Resources Inventory Report for the planned Levee improvements at Dry Creek and Levee Bend located in the Town of Greybull, Big Horn County, Wyoming. The purpose of this delineation is to determine the extent of federal jurisdiction within the study area, which may be subject to regulation by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA).

Should you have any questions concerning the recommendations presented in this report, please do not hesitate in contacting us.

Respectfully submitted,

Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Reviewed by:

Reed Kraemer Theresa Price Biologist Senior Biologist

cc: Addressee (PDF)

G:\Infrastructure\Drainage\Projects\2015 Projects\3720152002 Town of Greybull\03-DESIGN\09-Environmental\07-Resource Files\JD\Report\Greybull_Aquatic Resource Inventory_Final_20151222.docx

Aquatic Resources Inventory Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Project Description ...... 1 1.2 Location Description ...... 2 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ...... 2 2.1 Existing Conditions ...... 2 2.2 Hydrology ...... 2 2.3 Vegetation...... 3 2.4 Soils ...... 3 2.5 National Wetlands Inventory ...... 3 3.0 REGULATORY SETTING ...... 4 3.1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) / Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Jurisdiction ...... 4 3.1.1 Waters of the U.S...... 4 3.1.2 Wetlands and Other Special Aquatic Sites ...... 5 3.1.3 Supreme Court Decisions ...... 5 4.0 METHODS ...... 6 4.1 Preliminary Investigation ...... 6 4.2 Field Survey of Waters of the U.S...... 7 4.2.1 Wetland Assessment ...... 7 4.2.2 Delineation of “Other” Waters of the U.S...... 8 5.0 RESULTS ...... 8 5.1 Dry Creek Study Area ...... 9 5.2 Levee Bend Study Area ...... 9 6.0 SUMMARY ...... 10 7.0 REFERENCES ...... 11

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Vicinity Map Figure 2 Topographic Map Figure 3 Watershed Map Figure 4 Soils Map Figure 5 National Wetlands Inventory Map – Dry Creek Figure 6 National Wetlands Inventory Map – Levee Bend Figure 7 Blank Aerial Map – Dry Creek Figure 8 Blank Aerial Map – Levee Bend Figure 9 JD Map – Levee Bend

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Figures Appendix B Wetland Data Form Appendix C Photo Log

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming December 22, 2015 Page i Aquatic Resources Inventory Report

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report presents regulatory framework, methods, and results of an inventory of aquatic resources potentially impacted by the implementation of the proposed project, in Greybull, Bighorn County, Wyoming. The purpose of the inventory is to determine the extent of aquatic resources within the study area, which may be subject to regulation by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA).

1.1 Project Description

The Bighorn River Local Flood Protection Project (Greybull Levee System) is an earth-berm levee that was constructed in the mid-1950’s and serves to protect the Town of Greybull (Town) from flood events. The purpose of this project is to provide final construction documents, certification documentation, and final design for levee modification, in support of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) accreditation of the Greybull Levee System.

The Dry Creek and Levee Bend projects were identified as the preferred alternatives to mitigate deficiencies listed in the Final Levee Certification Report, prepared by AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. (now known as Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. [Amec Foster Wheeler]) and submitted to the Town on May 2, 2014. The scope of work includes the development of bid-ready Project Manuals for the proposed projects. Once constructed, these projects will bring the Town of Greybull – Bighorn Left Bank and Dry Creek Right Bank Flood Risk Reduction Project into full compliance with the requirements of 44 CFR § 65.10 for levee certification.

In accordance with Task 3 – Environmental Permitting/Technical Studies of the project scope of work, dated April 10, 2015, this report presents the results of a supplemental aquatic resources inventory completed by Amec Foster Wheeler for the proposed levee improvements. This report consists of an inventory of aquatic resources within the study area which have potential to be considered jurisdictional waters of the United States (WUS).

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming December 22, 2015 Page 1 Aquatic Resources Inventory Report

1.2 Location Description

The Greybull Levee System is located immediately east of and adjacent to Greybull, Bighorn County, Wyoming and is generally aligned north-south along the west bank of the Bighorn River. The northernmost section of the Greybull Levee System is aligned west-east along the south bank of Dry Creek. Two study areas are proposed for constructible activities for this project: Dry Creek near the northern boundary of Greybull, and Levee Bend along the northwest bank of the Bighorn River in the southern portion of Greybull (Figure 1, Appendix A).

The cadastral location of Dry Creek is Township 52 North, Range 93 West, Section 3, as shown on the Greybull North, Wyoming, United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic map. Levee Bend is located in Section 17 and is shown on the Greybull South, Wyoming USGS 7.5-minute topographic map (Figure 2, Appendix A). The geographic coordinates near the middle of Dry Creek are 44.4792° North latitude and 108.0548° West longitude; coordinates near the center of Levee Bend are 44.5049° North latitude and 108.0587° West longitude.

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

2.1 Existing Conditions

2.2 Hydrology

Drainage for the study vicinity is provided by the north-flowing Bighorn River. The Town is located at the convergence of the Bighorn Lake Watershed (USGS Hydrologic Unit Code [HUC] 10080010) and the Dry Creek Watershed (USGS HUC 10080011) (University of Wyoming 2015). Dry Creek and Bighorn River converge immediately north of the Town and flow north towards Bighorn Lake. The Dry Creek study area is located in portions of both watersheds, while the Levee Bend study area is located entirely within the Bighorn Lake Watershed (Figure 3, Appendix A).

The Dry Creek study area is situated on a slight uplands area, located approximately 225 feet west of the Bighorn River and approximately 200 feet south of Dry Creek. Local site drainage at the Dry Creek study area consists primarily of upland surface flow, which collects in a municipal stormwater ditch that drains stormwater flows from the Town. The stormwater ditch includes a

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming December 22, 2015 Page 2 Aquatic Resources Inventory Report

corrugated steel culvert that directs stormwater flows underneath the levee towards the Bighorn River.

The Levee Bend study area is centered around a levee adjacent to the Bighorn River. The study area includes the levee, a river-bank terrace along the Bighorn River, and the Bighorn River itself, which receives all surface flow drainage from the study area. Land to the north and west of the levee is flat and a part of the historic floodplain. Because this land is now protected by the levee, it is more characteristic of an upland area and receives little, if any, flooding.

2.3 Vegetation

2.4 Soils

The USDA online Web Soil Survey (based on the Big Horn County Area, Wyoming) (USDA 2015b) was consulted to determine the soil types mapped within the study area. The study areas cross one soil type (Figure 4, Appendix A):

Heapo-like-Scooby-like complex does not appear on the National List of Hydric Soils (USDA 2014).

2.5 National Wetlands Inventory

The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is the principal federal agency that provides information to the public on the extent and status of the nation’s wetlands. The USFWS has developed a series of maps, known as the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), to show wetlands and deepwater habitat. This geospatial information is used by Federal, State, and local agencies,

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming December 22, 2015 Page 3 Aquatic Resources Inventory Report academic institutions, and private industry for management, research, policy development, education, and planning activities. The NWI program was neither designed nor intended to produce legal or regulatory products; therefore, wetlands identified by the NWI program are not the same as wetlands defined by the USACE.

No NWI wetlands are mapped in the study areas themselves. However, the Levee Bend study area sits adjacent to the Bighorn River, which is classified as riverine, lower perennial, unconsolidated bottom, permanently flooded water (R2UBH). Three types of palustrine wetland areas are mapped along the Bighorn River in the local area: palustrine, scrub-shrub, temporarily flooded (PSSA); palustrine, forested, temporarily flooded (PFOA); and palustrine, emergent, seasonally flooded (PEMC) (Figures 5 and 6, Appendix A). Wetland categories were based on Cowardin Classification (Cowardin et al. 1979).

3.0 REGULATORY SETTING

3.1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) / Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Jurisdiction

The USACE regulates the discharge of dredged or fill material in WUS pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA. The USACE and EPA are responsible for making all final jurisdictional determinations. Under Section 404 of the CWA, the USACE and EPA reserve the right to determine jurisdiction on a case-by-case basis (CFR, Volume 41, Number 219).

3.1.1 Waters of the U.S.

CWA regulations (33 CFR 328.3(a)) define WUS as follows:

1. All waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;

2. All interstate waters including interstate wetlands;

3. All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters: (i) Which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes; or (ii) From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce; or (iii) Which are used or could be used for industrial purpose by industries in interstate commerce;

4. All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as WUS under the definition;

5. Tributaries of WUS;

6. The territorial seas;

7. Wetlands adjacent to WUS (other than waters that are themselves wetlands).

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming December 22, 2015 Page 4 Aquatic Resources Inventory Report

The USACE delineates non-wetland waters in the Arid West Region by identifying the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) in ephemeral and intermittent channels (USACE 2008a). The OHWM is defined in 33 CFR 328.3(e) as:

“…that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as clear, natural line impresses on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas.”

Identification of OHWM involves assessments of stream geomorphology and vegetation response to the dominant stream discharge. Determining whether any non-wetland water is a jurisdictional WUS involves further assessment in accordance with the regulations, case law, and clarifying guidance as discussed below.

3.1.2 Wetlands and Other Special Aquatic Sites

Wetlands are defined in 33 CFR 328.3(b) as:

“those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.”

Special aquatic sites are geographic areas, large or small, possessing special ecological characteristics of productivity, habitat, wildlife protection, or other important and easily disrupted ecological values. These areas are generally recognized as significantly influencing or positively contributing to the general overall environmental health or vitality of the entire ecosystem of a region. Special aquatic sites include sanctuaries and refuges, wetlands, mud flats, vegetated shallows, coral reefs, and riffle and pool complexes. They are defined in 40 CFR 230 Subpart E.

3.1.3 Supreme Court Decisions

3.1.3.1 Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County

On January 9, 2001, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a decision on Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, et al. with respect to whether the USACE could assert jurisdiction over isolated waters. The Solid Waste Agency of North Cook County (SWANCC) ruling stated that the USACE does not have jurisdiction over “non- navigable, isolated, intrastate” waters.

3.1.3.2 Rapanos/Carabell

In the Supreme Court cases of Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. United States (herein referred to as Rapanos), the court attempted to clarify the extent of USACE and EPA jurisdiction under the CWA. The nine Supreme Court justices issued five separate opinions (one plurality opinion, two concurring opinions, and two dissenting opinions) with no single opinion commanding a majority of the Court. In light of the Rapanos decision, the agencies have issued a revised joint

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming December 22, 2015 Page 5 Aquatic Resources Inventory Report guidance memorandum (USACE and EPA 2008) for implementation of the Rapanos decision. In summary, the agencies will assert jurisdiction over:

x Traditional navigable waterway (TNW)

x Wetlands adjacent to TNWs

x Non-navigable tributaries of TNWs that are a relatively permanent waterway (RPW) where the tributaries typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically three months)

x Wetlands that directly abut such tributaries

The agencies will decide jurisdiction over the following waters based on a fact-specific analysis to determine whether they have a significant nexus with a TNW:

x Non-navigable tributaries that are not relatively permanent

x Wetlands adjacent to non-navigable tributaries that are not RPWs

x Wetlands adjacent to but that do not directly abut a non-navigable RPW

The agencies generally will not assert jurisdiction over the following features:

x Swales or erosional features (e.g., gullies, small washes characterized by low volume, infrequent, or short duration flow)

x Ditches (including roadside ditches) excavated wholly in and draining only uplands and that do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water

The agencies will apply the significant nexus standard to assess the flow characteristics and functions of tributaries. Flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed by all wetlands adjacent to the tributary indicate whether they significantly affect the chemical, physical and biological integrity of downstream TNWs. Analysis of potentially jurisdictional streams includes consideration of hydrologic and ecologic factors. The consideration of hydrological factors includes volume, duration, and frequency of flow, proximity to traditional navigable waters, size of watershed, average annual rainfall, and average annual winter snow pack. The consideration of ecological factors includes the ability for tributaries to carry pollutants and flood waters to a TNW, the ability of a tributary to provide aquatic habitat that supports a TNW, the ability of wetlands to trap and filter pollutants or store flood waters, and maintenance of water quality.

4.0 METHODS

4.1 Preliminary Investigation

Prior to conducting the aquatic resources inventory fieldwork, the following literature and materials were reviewed:

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming December 22, 2015 Page 6 Aquatic Resources Inventory Report

x Aerial photographs (Google Maps) of the study areas at a scale of 1:2400 to determine locations of aquatic resources;

x USGS topographic map (Figure 2) to determine the presence of any “blue line” drainages or other mapped water features;

x USFWS NWI to identify areas mapped as wetland features (Figures 5 and 6); and

x USDA soil mapping data (Figure 4).

4.2 Field Survey of Aquatic Resources.

On November 2-3, 2015, Reed Kraemer, a biologist and CWA specialist with Amec Foster Wheeler, conducted the field investigation of the study areas. Data was collected using a Global Positioning System (GPS) unit and was imported into ArcGIS. The features were then overlaid on topographic and aerial imagery and adjusted using field notes and measurements. All figures were created in ArcGIS 10.2. All data layers were created in North American Datum 83, Zone 12 M; Linear Units: meters. The following describes the methodology utilized during the field survey.

4.2.1 Wetland Assessment

Wetlands were identified using the guidelines and criteria of the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987, 1987 Manual) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0) (USACE 2008a, Supplement), based on the project location.

According to the 1987 Manual and Supplement, wetlands are defined as areas inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances/conditions do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. A wetland is present if all three of the following parameters (hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, wetland hydrology) are observed (Environmental Laboratory 1987):

1. Hydrophytic Vegetation. Prevalent vegetation consists of macrophytes that are adapted to soils that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water. Hydrophytic species, due to morphological, physiological, and/or reproductive adaptation(s), have the ability to grow, effectively compete, reproduce, and/or persist in anaerobic soil conditions. The USACE has organized vegetation into five indicator classes to characterize their hydrophytic tendencies:

x Obligate (OBL). Almost always occur in standing water or saturated soil.

x Facultative Wet (FACW). Typically occur in wetlands, but occasionally occur outside of wetlands.

x Facultative (FAC). Likely to occur in both wetland and upland habitats.

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming December 22, 2015 Page 7 Aquatic Resources Inventory Report

x Facultative Upland (FACU). Typically occur outside of wetlands, but occasionally occur in wetlands.

x Upland (UPL). Almost never occur in wetland habitats.

2. Hydric Soils. Soils are classified as hydric and possess characteristics that are associated with reducing soil conditions.

3. Wetland Hydrology. Wetland hydrology indicators provide evidence that the site has a wetland hydrologic regime and that hydric soils and hydrophytic vegetation are not relicts of past conditions. Wetland hydrology encompasses all hydrologic characteristics of areas that are periodically inundated or have soils saturated to the surface at some point during the growing season.

4.2.2 Assessment of “Other” Potential Waters of the U.S.

All waters within the study areas that were identified as potentially traditional navigable waters, interstate waters, and/or impoundments of jurisdictional waters were recorded. In addition, tributaries, adjacent and neighboring waters and case-specific waters were also recorded.

Tributaries are identified as unvegetated waterways and other water bodies with a defined bed and bank, such as drainages, ponds, creeks, rivers, and lakes connected to a traditional navigable water. Tributaries typically lack wetland vegetation and may also lack hydric soils. Tributaries are identified as perennial, intermittent and ephemeral drainages either observed with flowing water or having characteristics of an active channel. The identification of tributary resources in the field is typically based upon the presence of an OHWM, observable “bed and bank,” and the presence of documented surface water connections to traditional navigable waters (TNWs).

According to 33 CFR 328.3, “the term ordinary high water mark” means “the line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas” (51 Fed. Reg. 1986). In general, the OHWM on a stream is usually determined through an examination of the recent physical evidence of surface flow in the stream channel. OHWM was delineated in accordance with the Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States (USACE 2008a)

The study areas, specifically at Levee Bend, are characterized with steep levees that descend directly into the Bighorn River. Given the treacherous nature of the levee sides, the characterization and mapping of water features was accomplished by a combination of field surveying, and utilizing high-resolution aerial photographs and spatial contour data for the levees.

5.0 RESULTS

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming December 22, 2015 Page 8 Aquatic Resources Inventory Report

5.1 Dry Creek Study Area

The Dry Creek study area includes approximately 3.7 acres of the Greybull Levee System, located approximately 200 feet south of Dry Creek and 225 feet east of the Bighorn River. The study area comprises the levee, a municipal stormwater ditch, and uplands area. The site topography is predominantly flat other than the levee and municipal stormwater ditch. The adjacent land is rurally developed with several homes and open pasture land. Vegetation in this area is characteristic of the Bighorn Salt Desert Shrub Basins ecoregion. Dominant plants noted during the site visit included rubber rabbitbush (UPL), greasewood (UPL), and perennial grasses. The study area also contains scattered mature trees, several of which are landscaped in residential yards. Tree species noted during the site investigation included American elm (FAC) and Russian olive (FAC).

The southern side of the levee is bordered by a municipal stormwater ditch that was designed to convey stormwater runoff from the Town uplands underneath the levee (through a corrugated steel culvert) towards the Bighorn River. At the time of the site visit, drainage flow of the ditch towards the Bighorn River was blocked by sediments/fill materials from routine maintenance activities. Vegetation in the ditch observed during the site visit was heavily disturbed and included a number of weedy species such as Russian thistle (Salsola tragus, UPL), barnyardgrass (FACW), and sunflower (Helianthus sp., wetland class dependent on species). No water was present in the ditch during site investigations. The ditch was typically 36-inches wide and showed some signs of occasional flow, such as cracked soil, water stains, and patches of moist soil, but did not exhibit a distinguished OHWM.

5.2 Levee Bend Study Area

The Levee Bend study area is comprised of approximately 2.0 acres of land immediately adjacent to the Bighorn River, along its north and west banks. The study area is surrounded by eroded bluffs along the edge of the historic floodplain. The topography within the study area itself is relatively is flat other than the levee, which rises approximately 15 feet above the river. The levee has a very steep slope that declines directly into the river. At the toe of this slope is a vegetated, terraced river-bank, which averages two to three feet in width. The terrace is wider at the bend in the river (up to 15 feet), likely due to sediment collection.

During the field investigation, vegetation along the riverbank was typical of a riparian environment, with a canopy of eastern cottonwood (FACW), American elm (FAC), willow, and Russian olive growing from the side of the levee. The riverbank terrace contained dense prairie cordgrass (OBL), which was thickest directly along the edge of the riverbank. Although the field investigation was conducted outside of the typical growing season in the region, the stands of prairie cordgrass were still very green. Other species noted along the terrace included barnyardgrass (FACW), common reed (FACW), and rough cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium; FACW). Fivestamen tamarisk (Tamarix chinensis; FAC) was also noted along the riverside, beyond the study area limits.

A representative vegetation plot was assessed along the terrace riverbank to determine if hydrophytic vegetation was present. A 20-foot by 5-foot plot was chosen to represent the linear character of this vegetation community and to avoid areas of trampling by foot traffic. Vegetation

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming December 22, 2015 Page 9 Aquatic Resources Inventory Report within the plot was entirely assigned FACW or OBL indicator status. Per the “Dominance Test” as described in 1987 Manual and Supplement, vegetation along the terrace was hydrophytic.

A 12-inch soil core was taken in the vegetation plot to determine if the terrace contained hydric soils. The soil core was comprised of fine silty sands, with one major layer observed from 0-12 inches. This layer was generally dark (10YR) with prominent reduced matrix redox features. The soils were moist but not saturated. Soils along the riverbank were the moistest, while soils away from the bank were dryer; however the same soil layer and redox features were observed on the terrace away from the riverbank. Soils in the terrace meet the criteria for Sandy Redox, which is considered a hydric soil per the Supplement.

Two indicators of riverine wetland hydrology were noted during the investigation. At the bend of the river, a large debris pile had accumulated. Drift deposits were noted at other locations along the terrace. Additionally, a large cottonwood at the riverbend showed distinct water marks, approximately three to four feet above ground level. As such, the terrace meets the criteria for wetland hydrology as defined in the Supplement.

Because the terrace exhibited wetland hydrology, hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils, it is proposed to be considered a wetland feature. No upland soil or vegetation data was taken during the site investigation because the terrace terminated abruptly into a steep man-made levee. Soils in the levee consisted of fill material, and the steep slope was devoid of wetland hydrology. Therefore, the meeting of the riverbank terrace and the levee was used to delineate the proposed wetland feature boundary. Where the terrace meets the Bighorn River forms the southern and eastern limit of the proposed wetland.

Blank aerials and maps of the aquatic resources are included in Appendix A (Figures 7-9), a wetland delineation datasheet is included in Appendix B, and a photographic log of the study areas and sample plots is included in Appendix C.

6.0 SUMMARY

During the November 2-3, 2015 aquatic resources inventory, Amec Foster Wheeler identified approximately 0.439-acre of aquatic features within the Levee Bend study area, which include approximately 0.311-acre of the Bighorn River and 0.128-acre of adjacent wetlands. A municipal stormwater ditch was identified within the Dry Creek study area, which did not exhibit a distinguished OHWM and served only to collect stormwater from uplands in the Town and divert it towards the Bighorn River.

The USACE, in combination with the EPA, when necessary, reserves the authority in making the final jurisdictional determinations of WUS. The USACE’s determination, based on the findings of this inventory, will be incorporated into planning and design documents in an effort to avoid and minimize impacts to jurisdictional waters, wherever practicable.

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming December 22, 2015 Page 10 Aquatic Resources Inventory Report

7.0 REFERENCES

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Department of the Interior.

Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Technical Report Y-8. 100 pp. + append. Available online: http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/elpubs/pdf/wlman87.pdf. Accessed December 17, 2015.

University of Wyoming. 2015. Watershed Boundaries HUC 8 (GIS Layer). Wyoming Geospatial Hub. Available online: https://wygiscservices- dev.wygisc.org/arcgis/rest/services/BaseServices/WSB_HUC_8/MapServer. Accessed December 18, 2015.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2008a. A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark in the Arid West Region of the Western United States. A Delineation Manual. Lichvar and McColley. August. Available online: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a486603.pdf. Accessed December 17, 2015.

USACE. 2008b. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region. September. Available online: http://www.usace.army.mil/Portals/2/docs/civilworks/regulatory/reg_supp/trel08-28.pdf. Accessed December 17, 2015.

USACE and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2008. Revised Guidance on Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Following the Supreme Court Decision in Rapanos v. U.S. and Carabell v. U.S. 2 December 2008. Available online: http://www.usace.army.mil/Portals/2/docs/civilworks/regulatory/cwa_guide/cwa_juris_2dec0 8.pdf. Accessed December 17, 2015.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA). 2014. List of Hydric Soils. Available online: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/use/hydric/. Accessed December 8, 2015.

USDA. 2015a. The PLANTS Database. National Plant Data Team, Greensboro, NC 27401-4901 USA. Available online: http://plants.usda.gov. Accessed December 8, 2015.

USDA 2015b. Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Web Soil Survey. Available online at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed December 8, 2015.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2004. Ecoregions of Wyoming (color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs; map scale 1:1,400,000). Available online: ftp://ftp.epa.gov/wed/ecoregions/wy/wy_front.pdf. Accessed on December 8, 2015.

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming December 22, 2015 Page 11 Aquatic Resources Inventory Report

Western Regional Climate Center. 2015. Climatological Summary: Greybull South Big Horn County Airport. Available online at: http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/summary/gey.wy.html. Accessed December 8, 2015.

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming December 22, 2015 Page 12

APPENDIX A FIGURES

Greybull, Big Horn County

Sheridan County, Wyoming

Big Horn County, Wyoming

Dry Creek Study Area

ek Cre Dry

Levee Bend Study Area

Big Horn County, Wyoming

Washakie County, Wyoming

Service Layer Credits: Content may not reflect ¨¦§15 National Geographic's current map policy. Sources: National Geographic, Esri, DeLorme, HERE, UNEP-WCMC, USGS, NASA, ESA, Hot Springs METI, NRCAN, GEBCO, NOAA, increment P Source:County, Oatman,Wyoming AZ USGS 7.5' topographic map

015 0 Aquatic Resources Inventory Miles Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification

Job No.: 3720152002 The map shown here has been created with all due and reasonable care and Big Horn County, Wyoming is strictly for use with Amec Foster Wheeler Project Number 3720152002. PM: RK This map has not been certified by a licensed land surveyor, and any third party Date: 12/21/2015 use of this map comes without warranties of any kind. Amec Foster Wheeler FIGURE assumes no liability, direct or indirect, whatsoever for any such third party or Vicinity Map Scale: 1:300,000 ± unintended use. 1 Dry Creek

Greybull North, WY Greybull South, WY

Levee Bend

USGS Quads

Source: Greybull North and South, WY USGS 7.5' topographic maps

021,000 ,000 Aquatic Resources Inventory Feet Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification

Job No.: 3720152002 The map shown here has been created with all due and reasonable care and Big Horn County, Wyoming is strictly for use with Amec Foster Wheeler Project Number 3720152002. PM: RK This map has not been certified by a licensed land surveyor, and any third party Date: 12/21/2015 use of this map comes without warranties of any kind. Amec Foster Wheeler FIGURE assumes no liability, direct or indirect, whatsoever for any such third party or Topographic Map Scale: 1:12,000 ± unintended use. 2 Little Bighorn Watershed HUC 10080016

Shoshone Watershed HUC 10080014 Uppper Tongue Watershed HUC 10090101 Bighorn Lake Watershed HUC 10080010

Dry Creek Study Area Dry Watershed HUC 10080011 Levee Bend Study Area

Greybull Watershed HUC 10080009

Nowood Watershed HUC 10080008

Upper Bighorn Watershed HUC 10080007

Legend

Study Areas Service Layer Credits: Content may not reflect National Geographic's current map HUC 8 Watershed Boundaries policy. Sources: National Geographic, Source: Esri, DeLorme, HERE, UNEP-WCMC, University of Wyoming. 2015. Wyoming Geospatial Hub Website

015 0 Aquatic Resources Inventory Miles Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification

Job No.: 3720152002 The map shown here has been created with all due and reasonable care and Big Horn County, Wyoming is strictly for use with Amec Foster Wheeler Project Number 3720152002. PM: RK This map has not been certified by a licensed land surveyor, and any third party Date: 12/21/2015 use of this map comes without warranties of any kind. Amec Foster Wheeler FIGURE assumes no liability, direct or indirect, whatsoever for any such third party or Watershed Map Scale: 1:300,000 ± unintended use. 3 102

315BD 45AB 43A 102

509A 371AD a9A

409A Dry Creek

71A

572CE NOTCOM a9A

72BC

W 572CE

42AC

NOTCOM

315BD 71BC Legend

Study Areas 45AB USDA Soil Codes 1A

102 45AB

112 72BC 1A 509A 42C 315BD

371AD 42B 572CE 409A

42AC

NOTCOM 42B 102 42B 42C

43A 509A 45AB

493BD 409A

509A 42C 572CE

71A

71BC 572CE 72BC 315BD

93AC

NOTCOM Levee Bend W

Source: USDA a7A Web Soil Survey

021,000 ,000Aquatic Resources Inventory Feet Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification

Job No.: 3720152002 The map shown here has been created with all due and reasonable care and Big Horn County, Wyoming is strictly for use with Amec Foster Wheeler Project Number 3720152002. PM: RK This map has not been certified by a licensed land surveyor, and any third party Date: 12/21/2015 use of this map comes without warranties of any kind. Amec Foster Wheeler FIGURE assumes no liability, direct or indirect, whatsoever for any such third party or Soils Map Scale: 1:12,000 ± unintended use. 4 PSSA

PFOA

PSSA R2USC

PEMC R2UBG

PSSA R2UBH PFOA

PSSA

R4USC

PABFh

Legend

Dry Creek Study Area NWI Wetland Types WETLAND_TY

Freshwater Emergent Wetland

Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland

Freshwater Pond

Lake Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, Other CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community Riverine Source: USFWS National Wetlands Inventory, 2015

0 250 500 Aquatic Resources Inventory Feet Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification

Job No.: 3720152002 The map shown here has been created with all due and reasonable care and Big Horn County, Wyoming is strictly for use with Amec Foster Wheeler Project Number 3720152002. PM: RK This map has not been certified by a licensed land surveyor, and any third party Date: 12/21/2015 use of this map comes without warranties of any kind. Amec Foster Wheeler FIGURE assumes no liability, direct or indirect, whatsoever for any such third party or National Wetlands Inventory Map - Dry Creek Scale: 1:2,400 ± unintended use. 5 PSSA

R2UBH

PEMC PSSA

Legend

Levee Raise Study Area

NWI Wetland Types PEMC WETLAND_TY

Freshwater Emergent Wetland

Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland R2USC Freshwater Pond

Lake Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, Other CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping,R2USC Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community Riverine

Source: PSSA USFWS National Wetlands Inventory, 2015

0 250 500 Aquatic Resources Inventory Feet Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification

Job No.: 3720152002 The map shown here has been created with all due and reasonable care and Big Horn County, Wyoming is strictly for use with Amec Foster Wheeler Project Number 3720152002. PM: RK This map has not been certified by a licensed land surveyor, and any third party Date: 12/21/2015 use of this map comes without warranties of any kind. Amec Foster Wheeler FIGURE assumes no liability, direct or indirect, whatsoever for any such third party or National Wetlands Inventory Map - Levee Bend Scale: 1:2,400 ± unintended use. 6 Stormwater Drainage Ditch Terminus

Stormwater Drainage Ditch

Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, Legend and the GIS User Community

Dry Creek Study Area

0 250 500 Aquatic Resources Inventory Feet Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification

Job No.: 3720152002 The map shown here has been created with all due and reasonable care and Big Horn County, Wyoming is strictly for use with Amec Foster Wheeler Project Number 3720152002. PM: RK This map has not been certified by a licensed land surveyor, and any third party Date: 12/21/2015 use of this map comes without warranties of any kind. Amec Foster Wheeler FIGURE assumes no liability, direct or indirect, whatsoever for any such third party or Blank Aerial Map - Dry Creek Scale: 1:2,400 ± unintended use. 7 Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, Legend and the GIS User Community

Levee Bend Study Area

0 100 200 Aquatic Resources Inventory Feet Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification

Job No.: 3720152002 The map shown here has been created with all due and reasonable care and Big Horn County, Wyoming is strictly for use with Amec Foster Wheeler Project Number 3720152002. PM: RK This map has not been certified by a licensed land surveyor, and any third party Date: 12/21/2015 use of this map comes without warranties of any kind. Amec Foster Wheeler FIGURE assumes no liability, direct or indirect, whatsoever for any such third party or Blank Aerial Map - Levee Bend Scale: 1:960 ± unintended use. 8 FLOW

S" FLOW

Legend

Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, Levee Bend Study Area DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Adjacent Wetland Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community Open Water

S" Wetland Data Point

0 100 200 Aquatic Resources Inventory Feet Town of Greybull Flood Protection Levee Certification

Job No.: 3720152002 The map shown here has been created with all due and reasonable care and Big Horn County, Wyoming is strictly for use with Amec Foster Wheeler Project Number 3720152002. PM: RK This map has not been certified by a licensed land surveyor, and any third party Date: 12/21/2015 use of this map comes without warranties of any kind. Amec Foster Wheeler FIGURE assumes no liability, direct or indirect, whatsoever for any such third party or Wetland Map - Levee Bend Scale: 1:960 ± unintended use. 9

APPENDIX B: WETLAND DATA FORM

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region

Project Site: Greybull Levee Certification City/County: Greybull/Big Horn County Sampling Date: 11/3/15 Applicant/Owner: Town of Greybull State: WY Sampling Point: 01 Investigator(s): Reed Kraemer Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Terrace/ River Bank Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): 0-5 Interior deserts NAD 83, Subregion (LRR): Lat: 44.47924 Long: -108.054785 Datum: (LRRD) Zone 12N Soil Map Unit Name: Heapo-like-Scooby-like complex 0-2% Slopes NWI classification: N/A Adjacent to R2UBH Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No

Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size:20'X5') Dominance Test Worksheet: % Cover Species? Status 1. Populus deltoides 75 yes FAC Number of Dominant Species 2 (A) 2. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:

3. Total Number of Dominant 2 (B) 4. Species Across All Strata:

75 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species 100% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:20'X5') That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1. N/A Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of : Multiply by: 3. OBL species 85 x1 = 85 4. FACW species 8 x2 = 16 5. FAC species 77 x3 = 231 0 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size:20'x5') UPL species x5 =

1. Spartina pectinata 85 yes OBL Column Totals: 170 (A) 332 (B) 2. Echinochloa crus-galli 8 no FACW Prevalence Index = B/A = 1.95 3. Xanthium strumarium 2 no FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. Dominance Test is >50%

5. Prevalence Index is <3.01 6. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting

7. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)

8. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 95 = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:20'X5') be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 1. N/A 2. Hydrophytic 0 = Total Cover Vegetation Yes No Present? % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 5 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0

Remarks: Vegatation was assessed in a 20'x5' plot to represent the linear nature of this vegetation zone. Plot was adjacent to an area disturbed by human foot traffic.

US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0

Project Site: Greybull Levee Certification

SOIL Sampling Point: 1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks Fine Silty 0-12" 10 YR 5/2 85 7.5 YR 5/8 15 RM M Soil Moist but not Saturated Sand

1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Reduced Vertic (F18) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Red Parent Material (TF2) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C) Depleted Matrix (F3) Other (Explain in Remarks) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Depressions (F8) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Vernal Pools (F9) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: N/A Depth (Inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Remarks: Soil was moist adjacent to the river and drier as they moved away from the river. Redox was observed in dry soils away from river as well.

HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Salt Crust (B11) Water Marks (B1) (Riverine) High Water Table (A2) Biotic Crust (B12) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine) Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Other (Explain in Remarks) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):

Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):

Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:

Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0

APPENDIX C PHOTO LOG

Aquatic Resources Inventory Report Photographic Log

Photograph 1. Dry Creek study area facing north from the southwestern study area boundary. Taken November 2, 2015.

Photograph 2. Dry Creek study area facing west from near the eastern study area boundary. Taken November 2, 2015.

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming December 22, 2014 Page C-1 Aquatic Resources Inventory Report Photographic Log

Photograph 3. Dry Creek drainage (outside study area) as seen from the levee in the Dry Creek study area, facing north from near the center of the study area. Taken November 2, 2015.

Culvert

Photograph 4. Stormwater drainage ditch south of the levee in the Dry Creek study area, facing west from near the eastern study area boundary. The ditch drains north underneath the levee through a culvert, towards the Bighorn River. Note the 2-foot scale bar in the ditch bed. Taken November 3, 2015.

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming December 22, 2014 Page C-2 Aquatic Resources Inventory Report Photographic Log

Photograph 5. Terrace riverbank in the Levee Bend study area, facing southwest from the bend in the Bighorn River. Taken November 3, 2015.

Photograph 6. Levee Bend study area facing northeast from the west bank of the Bighorn River. Note the dense prairie cordgrass (Spartina pectinata) along the terrace riverbank. Taken November 3, 2015.

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming December 22, 2014 Page C-3 Aquatic Resources Inventory Report Photographic Log

Photograph 7. Levee Bend study area, facing east from near the bend in the Bighorn River. Taken November 3, 2015.

Photograph 8. Water marks on a cottonwood near the center of the Levee Bend study area. Note the two-foot scale bar at the base of the tree. Taken November 3, 2015.

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming December 22, 2014 Page C-4 Aquatic Resources Inventory Report Photographic Log

Photograph 9. Large debris pile at in the Levee Bend study area, at the bend in the Bighorn River, facing west. Taken November 3, 2015.

Photograph 10. Vegetation plot at Levee Bend study area facing southwest. The vegetation plot was 20 feet by 5 feet. Taken November 3, 2015.

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming December 22, 2014 Page C-5 Aquatic Resources Inventory Report Photographic Log

Photograph 11. A 12-inch soil plug at the Levee Bend study area. Taken November 3, 2015.

Town of Greybull Big Horn County, Wyoming December 22, 2014 Page C-6