1st Ecosystem Restoration and Mitigation Planning Working Group Kickoff Meeting

August 2, 2000
USFWS Offices, Lacey

MINUTES

(Lou Ellyn's notes were graciously loaned for completion of these)

1. Individuals present at the meeting introduced themselves and Chris asked if any agencies or Tribes were not invited that should have been. Mention was made that someone from Pacificorp, and from the Quinault Tribe should be invited to future meetings. Copy of attendance list is attached.

• a. Chris agreed that the Quinault Tribe should be invited to participate.
• b. Chris stated that the intention of the working group was to involve public agencies and Tribes only. Attendance by members of private citizen groups or persons not representing a public agency or Tribe was not recommended because that would mean all persons and groups would need representation. Since the group may end up making recommendation for potential action, there are strict rules on how these recommendations can be reached.
• c. Chris took a moment to introduce Harry Gibbons and Merri Martz, both Corps contractor employees (Tetra Tech, Inc.) who have been assigned to perform restoration and geomorphology planning for the project. Tetra Tech will be attending all working group meetings, assembling data and study results, conducting some field examinations, and eventually preparing the restoration/mitigation conceptual plans for the project.

2. GRR/EIS Status<

• a. New PM. Forest Brooks has been replaced on an interim basis with Dennis Fischer.
• b. Mapping and Survey. Two-foot contour mapping is nearly complete, but cross-sections are incomplete. Boundaries of mapping is to be reported.
• c. Corps has set up a repository for GIS information for the project.
• d. Hydraulic studies being performed by the Corps. Hydraulic model is being developed by PIE. Modeling of existing conditions is nearing completion. Work is to begin shortly on modeling alternatives.
• e. (Norm) Engineering and design analysis has started with Lewis County already.
  • (1) Dam – inflatable weir (Corps) very early concept.
  • (2) Levee alternative – has a concept plan view – meeting with county and cities. Superfund issues.
  • (3) Lewis County Alternative
• f. Economic Studies For the Corps to recommend a project, has to have positive benefit/cost ratio. Considering costs associated with I-5 closures, benefit/cost ratio is likely to be positive. Corps also needs to show a B/C ratio on restoration and mitigation.

  Comments on Economics:

  • (1) Fisheries should be included in B/C.
  • (2) Need to extend benefits to beyond 50 years for fisheries.
  • (3) Aquifer recharge should be considered a benefit.
  • (4) Some alternatives would be more beneficial/costly to resources.
  • (5) WDFW – suggests use of HEP to assign Habital Units.
  • (6) How do you assign Hazard Mitigation money? Norman clarified that although fisheries and other benefits might add to the cost/benefit ratio for the project, these items are not likely to be necessary to calculate, given the weight of the I-5 closure issues. In order to proceed with a project, the Corps does not need to calculate all benefits, but rather only needs to show that the cost/benefit ratio would be positive.
• g. Real Estate – Corps and PIE are working on rights of entry. This is also pertinent for the working group and habitat studies.
• h. Geotechnical Studies i. Environmental Studies
  • (1) Wetland and Riparian studies are being completed by USFWS
  • (2) Fisheries and wildlife. Field work to begin this month.
  • (3) Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Report is being headed-up by Lou Ellyn j. HTRW (Toxic Hazards) Studies underway. GIS layer established (there is a toxic waste landfill next to Salzer Creek superfund sites) Discussion. WDFW – have there been groundwater investigations? Envirovision is doing some of this. State is working on 2514 watershed basin. Envirovision is coming out with report at end of the month. Also, limiting factors analysis data, gap analysis. Analysis of Lower Basin – 4 or 5 done. Upper Basin – South Fork done. Skokumchuck – not done. TMDL Study being done

3. Chehalis River Basin Study (Section 905 Expedited Reconnaissance analysis).

Chris is project manager for Recon Study. This study is not limited to a section of the watershed. The primary purpose of the 905 analysis is to show whether or not there is a federal interest in doing a larger study (i.e., a GI).

• a. There are currently 71 possible individual projects identified by local governments within the basin. The Corps is currently reviewing these to separate out which ones possibly have a federal interest and which ones likely do not. Each project is being screened against typical Corps authorities and programs to learn if there is federal interest by the Corps in additional investigation. Early results indicate that several identified projects have high likelihood of meeting Corps requirements for federal interest
  • Possible projects that may emerge from the 905 Analysis:
  • Ecosystem restoration Flood control Flood warning Items mentioned and comments regarding the 905 study:
  • Grays Harbor County is local sponsor. Other agencies may end up being parties together on multi-jurisdictional projects or studies, but a single local sponsor that serves as the clearing house for the Corps is preferred to several separate sponsors.
  • It is not a wish list Salmon Recovery Funding Board (SRFB) will be funding projects and needs to know that Corps projects won't flood out or destroy state funded projects. Corps needs to work with partnership (surfboard) to ensure this.
  • Discussion – concern raised by Mike McGinnis (Chehalis Tribe) that if Recon Study goes out with a laundry list of projects, mayors and locals will push for them, but projects might be detrimental to fish and wildlife. So it is crucial to fold Recon Study into 2514 planning so federal interest of funding projects goes through the strategy filter.

4. Schedule for GRR Study a. The current schedule for the issuance of the DEIS/GRR is September, 2001. The FEIS/GRR will follow in April, 2002.

5. Working Group Purpose and Procedures.
a. Chris read his working group purpose statement

This page created and maintained by Chehalis River Council
Send comments or questions to the: Chehalis River Council