environmental manual appendix adot.alaska.gov/nreg/projects/60911-daltonhwymp0-9... · project...

2 Project Name: Dalton Highway MP 0-9 Reconstruction Project Number: 60911/STP-0652(16)

Description The project involves reconstructing the Dalton Highway between mileposts 0-9 to improve substandard

sections. Relocation of the highway for the first 6.5 miles is being proposed due to the existing highway

alignment’s substandard vertical and horizontal geometry and the associated extensive effort to meet

reconstruction design criteria.

The existing Dalton alignment begins at MP 73 of the Elliott Highway. It crosses over three ridges and

through two creek valleys along the project length. The proposed realignment begins near MP 74 of the

Elliott Highway as shown on Figure 1. Unlike the existing alignment that traverses hills and valleys, the

proposed realignment follows the valley bottoms of West Fork Creek and Lost Creek. The proposed

realignment would require a new bridge crossing at Lost Creek and new culverts at unnamed tributaries

to West Fork and Lost Creek. See Figure 1 for crossing locations. Portions of the existing highway are

proposed to be obliterated. Coordination would be conducted with Alyeska Pipeline to ensure that the

proposed realignment provides adequate access to the pipeline as some of the existing access points may

be removed.

The Dalton Highway Dalton 6 Mile Pit (65-3-020-2) would likely be utilized to supply material for the

project. The existing and proposed alignments cut through this site. The site location is shown on

Figure 1. Material needs not supplied by the 6 Mile Pit are expected to be obtained from on-site

excavation within the proposed road right-of-way. Potential on-site material sources are shown on

Figure 2.

Resource Setting

Streams & Fish

A new bridge is proposed over Lost Creek and new culverts at unnamed tributaries of Lost Creek and

West Fork. See Figure 1. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (DFG) online fish database does

not identify these streams as supporting anadromous fish. The streams likely support resident fish. In

response to this agency scoping document, information is requested regarding knowledge of the fish-

bearing status of project area streams (West Fork, Lost Creek, and unnamed tributaries to Lost Creek

and West Fork) and any request to provide for fish passage at specific stream crossing locations. Work

within fish-bearing streams would be coordinated with the DFG. With implementation of DFG Fish

Habitat Permit provisions, no substantial impacts to fish or fish habitat are anticipated.

Wetlands

Shrub and forested-dominated wetlands occur throughout the project within creek and river valleys

bottoms. Forested uplands dominate the surrounding ridge tops. An estimated 41acres of low to

moderate value wetlands would be permanently impacted by the proposed project.

Right-of-Way

All lands surrounding the project appear to be state-owned by the Alaska Department of Natural

Resources (DNR). Up to 400 acres of new right-of-way acquisition are estimated to be needed from

DNR lands for the project. The DNR’s Tanana Basin Area Plan for State Lands (TBAP) notes that

DOT&PF has plans to reconstruct and realign much of the Dalton Highway into the future. The TBAP

states that DOT&PF will work with the DNR planning team to choose the routing that best meets the

land use objectives described in the TBAP and that complies with the appropriate highway standards

and project costs.

Cultural Resources

A cultural resources field survey was started by the State of Alaska Office of History and Archeology in

the fall of 2013 but was not completed due to poor weather conditions. This survey will begin again in

spring of 2014. The primary cultural resource potential is for archeological sites to be found on ridge

tops overlooking the creek valleys. Survey results would be coordinated with the State Historic

Preservation Officer and other consulting parties in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic

Preservation Act. We welcome any information from agencies concerning known cultural resources


sites in the project vicinity.

II. Purpose and Need of Project

The purpose of this project is to improve the safety and performance of the Dalton Highway from its

beginning (junction with Elliott Highway) to milepost 9. The Dalton Highway is part of the National

Highway System and provides the only vehicle access across Interior Alaska from Fairbanks to

Deadhorse, serving as a critical supply route between commerce and industrial centers. The original

roadway was built in 1974 as a private haul route to support the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System and was

constructed to the former State of Alaska Department of Highways secondary road standards. The

Dalton Highway was opened to the public in 1994 and is now designated as a rural principal arterial that

supports heavy truck and tourism traffic. DOT&PF anticipates an increase in future traffic with

continued industrial development, regional tourism, and renewed interest in the Alaska natural gas

pipeline.

There is need for the project corridor to be updated to current safety standards since more than a third of

the existing alignment has substandard grades and curves that need correction. The geometry of the

roadway makes truck travel difficult due to steep grades and sharp curves, which is considerable on a

route with truck traffic comprising 60% of its total traffic volume.

III. Environmental Consequences

A. Right-of-Way (ROW) Impacts:

1. ROW required:

a. Property required from a state or federal agency.

(1) State Park? Name: None

(2) State Refuge or Critical Habitat Area? Name: None

(3) Federal Park? Name: None

b. Property required from local government entity.

Type Property: None Anticipated, All properties appear to be State-owned.

c. Business or residential property required.

(1) Residential: (indicate number) None (2) Business: (indicate number) None

d. Property required from a Tribe or ANSCA corporation. Name: None

2. Describe:

An early estimate of up to 400 acres of permanent right-of-way acquisition would be needed

from State DNR-owned lands. B. Socio-Economic Impacts:

1. Project could affect community cohesion, neighborhoods, or other community facilities. No

2. Project could affect economic development, such as established area businesses. Adjacent lands

are undeveloped. The project could result in minor short-term traffic delays during

construction where the project occurs on existing alignment.

3. Project could affect travel patterns and accessibility. During construction short term traffic

delays could occur. In the long term the project would extend the service life of the highway

thereby maintain existing travel patterns and accessibility.

4. Project could disproportionately affect minorities or disadvantaged persons (E.O. 12898) No


C. Impacts to Historic Properties:

1. Historic properties listed on or potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Place

(NRHP) in project’s area of potential effect (APE). A cultural resources field survey was started by the State of Alaska Office of History and

Archeology in the fall of 2013 but was not completed due to poor weather conditions. This

survey will begin again in spring of 2014. The primary cultural resource potential is for

archeological sites to be found on ridge tops overlooking the creek valleys. Survey results

would be coordinated with the State Historic Preservation Officer and other consulting

parties in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. We

welcome any information from agencies concerning known cultural resources sites in the

project.

2. Places of traditional religious or cultural importance to Tribes are present in the project area.

None known. Tribal groups are requested to provide any information they may have

concerning places of traditional religious or cultural importance or other historic properties.

Further opportunity to comment and provide information will be provided when tribal

groups are consulted during the Section 106 process.

3. A historic properties survey may be required to identify if sites are present.

A cultural resources survey will be completed in spring of 2014. See question C1 above.

4. Possible adverse effect on historic properties. A determination will be made on the project’s affects historic properties after the cultural

resources survey has been completed and input has been solicited from consulting parties

(including the State Historic Preservation Officer, agencies, tribes, and the public).

D. Fish & Wildlife Impacts:

1. Project could affect anadromous or resident fishes.

A new bridge is proposed over Lost Creek and new culverts at the unnamed tributaries to Lost

Creek and West Fork. See Figure 1. The DFG online fish database does not identify these streams

as supporting anadromous fish. The streams likely support resident fish. In response to this agency

scoping document, information is requested regarding knowledge of the fish-bearing status of any

project area streams (West Fork, Lost Creek, unnamed tributary to Lost Creek and West Fork)

and any request to provide for fish passage at specific stream crossing locations. Work within fish-

bearing streams would be coordinated with the DFG. With implementation of DFG Fish Habitat

Permit provisions, no substantial impacts to fish or fish habitat are anticipated.

2. Problem fish pass culverts within the project area. The DFG Online fisheries database has information

on two stream crossings on the existing Dalton Highway alignment. The unnamed tributary to

West Fork is identified as not having a completed survey for fish pass conditions. Lost Creek is

identified as having likely impact to fish passage. DOT&PF is requesting additional information

agencies may have concerning the need for fish passage at specific stream crossing locations in the

project vicinity.

3. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) present in the project area. No essential fish habitat occurs in the project

area.


4. Wildlife Resources:

a. Project in area of high wildlife/vehicle accidents. No

b. Project could bisect migration corridors. No

c. Project could segment habitat. No

d. Species of concern to ADF&G in the project area None known

5. Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act: Information on the presence of active bald eagles in the

project vicinity is not known at this time. We request bald eagle activity information from the

database of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or any other agency with knowledge of current or

historic bald eagle activity in the project vicinity.

E. Threatened and Endangered (T&E) Species Impacts:

1. Listed T&E species present. No

2. T&E species migrate through the project area. None known

3. Proposed species present in project area. No

4. Candidate species present in the project area. No

5. Critical habitat in the project area. No

6. Describe:

No federally recognized threatened, endangered, proposed, or candidate species or critical habitat are

known to occur in the project vicinity.

F. Waters of the U.S and Water Bodies:

1. Project affects Waters of the U.S. (as defined by USACE), Section 404/10/103. Yes, the project is

expected to affect Lost Creek, unnamed tributaries to Lost Creek and West Fork, and

wetlands in the project area.

2. Project affects Navigable Waters of the U.S. (as defined by USACE), Sec. 10. No

3. Project affects a Cataloged Anadromous Fish Stream (i.e., 41.14.870). No

4. Proposed river or stream involvement:

a. Temporary

Riprap Culvert Work Cofferdam Fill Relocation Diversion

b. Permanent

Riprap Culvert Embankment Fill Relocation Diversion


G. Wetlands Impacts:

1. Project involves wetlands as defined by USACE. Yes

2. Acres: The estimated project permanent impact on wetlands is approximately 41 acres.

3. Fill: Fill quantity unknown at this time.

4. Dredge: Dredging is not proposed.

5. USACE authorization required: Corps of Engineers Section 404 Permit

Describe: Shrub and forested-dominated wetlands occur throughout the project within creek

valley bottoms. Forested uplands dominate the surrounding ridge tops. An estimated 41acres of

low to moderate value wetlands would be permanently impacted by the proposed project.

H. Hazardous Waste:

1. Known or potentially contaminated sites along the corridor. No

2. ROW required from, or extensive excavation adjacent to, a known hazardous waste site. No

3. The existing and/or proposed ROW is contaminated. None known

4. Potential for encountering hazardous waste during construction is high. No

5. Describe:

A review of the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) contaminated site

databases was completed on 11/19/13. Two sites were found located in the project vicinity: Tower

Hill Mines – Livengood Camp (DEC file #180.38.007) and the Dalton Highway Mile Post 7 Tanker

Rollover (DEC file #330.38.113).

The Tower Hill Mines Livengood Camp contains soil contaminated with heating oil from a leaking

pipe. The potential realignment passes adjacent to but not through the camp. No right-of-way

acquistion or excavation is anticipated within the limits of the camp where the contaminated occurs.

Dalton Highway Mile Post 7 Tanker Rollover site resulted when a tanker truck rolled over and

released 6685 gallons of diesel fuel into the roadside ditch. Cleanup actions were effective in

recovering some of the spilled product. The vertical and horizontal extents of contamination were

not reached during initial removal actions. On 3/28/07 additional excavation was performed to a

depth of 2.5 to 3.5 feet below the bottom of the ditch line. The cleanup contractor estimated there

were approximately 1,881.4 gallons of fuel remaining under or near the road. A 12-mil liner was

installed on the bottom of the excavation to prevent contamination of surface water runoff in areas

of remaining soil contamination. The site history notes that the remaining contamination, contained

within the roadway, will attenuate over time or shall be addressed when or if it is excavated during

road construction or maintenance activities. Based on the project’s early design there is potential

for encountering residual contamination at this site during road construction. This potential will be

assessed in more detail as the design phase progresses. If contamination is expected to be

encountered a plan would be developed in coordination with the DEC to property handle, treat,

and/or dispose of the encountered contaminated soil.

A review of Environmental Protection Agency National Atlas revealed no sites of concern for

encountering hazardous materials within the project area.


I. Air Quality Impacts (NEPA and Conformity):

1. NEPA (all projects):

a. The project is located in an air quality nonattainment or maintenance area (i.e. CO or PM-10). No

If yes, indicate CO or PM-2.5

b. The project is of the type exempt from an air quality analysis per 40 CFR 93.126 (Table 2 and

Exempt Projects).

Not Applicable. Project is not within an air quality nonattainment or maintenance area.

2. Conformity (projects in nonattainment areas only): Not Applicable

a. The project is identified in the approved STIP.

b. The project is in the most current air quality conformity (i.e., TIP).

c. Have there been any changes in the project design concept and scope, as described in the STIP and

TIP conformity analysis?

3. Describe: Not Applicable.

J. Floodplains Impacts (23 CFR Part 650, Subpart A):

Project encroaches onto a 100-year floodplain.

The project is not located within a FEMA-mapped 100-year floodplain.

1. Project involves a regulatory floodway. No

2. Project is located within an area protected by local flood hazard ordinances. No

3. Flood hazard permit is required from local government. No


K. Noise Impact (23 CFR Part 772):

1. There are noise-sensitive receivers/land uses adjacent to the proposed project? No

2. The project is located on new location, would result in substantial changes in vertical or horizontal

alignment, or would increase the number of through lanes?

The project does not reduce the roadway distance to a sensitive receptor by half or less. The

proposed vertical alignment does not remove visual shielding or open up a new line of sight to

sensitive receptors. The project would not increase the number of through lanes or add an

auxiliary lane.

L. Water Quality Impact:

1. Project could involve a public or private drinking source. No

2. Project could result in a discharge of storm water to Waters of the U.S. Runoff only

3. Project could affect a designated impaired water body. No

List name(s) and location(s): Not Applicable.


4. 4. Is there a municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) NPDES permit or will runoff be mixed with

discharges from an NPDES permitted industrial facility? No

5. If extensive dewatering (>250,000 gallons) is anticipated, is the area to be dewatered within 1 mile of a

contaminated site? Not Applicable

6. Describe:

It is anticipated that some storm water runoff will leave the constructions site and with it some sediment

may be transported to down gradient waters of the U.S. during construction. Off-site sedimentation is

expected to be minimal and best management practices will be implemented for the purpose of meeting

state and federal water quality standards. A project-specific erosion and sediment control plan will be

developed prior to construction initiation. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be

developed and implemented by the construction contractor. The SWPPP will comply with the Alaska

Pollution Discharge Elimination System (APDES) General Permit for Construction Activities.

M. Section 4(f)/6(f):

1. There would be a “use” of land from 4(f) properties. No

2. Section 6(f) properties affected by the proposed action. No

3. List agency(s) with jurisdiction: Not Applicable.


The project has Section 4(f) or 6(f) involvement. No Section 4(f) or 6(f) lands are located in the

project vicinity.

Lands surrounding the project and proposed for acquisition are within DNR management

Subunits 2J2 and 2J4 as shown on Map 3-6 of the Tanana Basin Area Plan (TBAP). The TBAP

land management plan (page 3-76) identifies the primary purpose of Unit 2J to be for multiple use

management. The TBAP (page 3-77) identifies the designated primary land use of Subunit 2J2 to

be fish and wildlife habitat and the secondary use to be forestry (personal use of low value timber).

The TBAP (page 3-77) identifies the primary land use of Unit 2J4 as low value resource

management. The TBAP does not identify park, refuge, or recreational uses as an emphasis or

primary use for Units 2J2 or 2J4 other than dispersed uses such as hunting, fishing, and trapping.

Based on the TBAP information, Section 4(f) does not apply to DNR lands in the vicinity of the

project. In accordance with the FHWA Section 4(f) Policy Paper (July 20, 2012) Part II, #4

regarding public multiple-use land holdings, Section 4(f) does not apply to those areas within a

multiple-use public property that function primarily for any purpose other than significant park,

recreation or refuge purposes. N. Permits and Authorizations

1. USACE, Section 404/10/103: Yes

2. USCG, Section 9: No

3. ADFG, Fish Habitat Permit: Yes

4. Flood Hazard: No

5. ADEC 401: Yes

6. ADEC Storm Non-domestic Storm Water Disposal Plan Approval: Yes

7. APDES: Compliance with ADEC’s APDES General Permit for Construction Activities

8. ADEC Dewatering: Possible

9. ADF&G Special Area: No

10. Other. If “yes,” list.

STATE OF ALASKA Department of Transportation and Public Facilities

Dalton Highway MP 0-9 Reconstruction STP-0652(16)/60911

DATE: 11/22/13 Figure 1

Livengood, Alaska

Lost

Potential New Bridge Proposed Realignment

Existing Alignment

Stream Crossings

Dalton 6-mile Pit (65-3-020-2)

NO SCALE

O JUNEAU

O NENANA

O HEALY

O FAIRBANKS RUBY O

TANANA O

ANCHORAGE O O VALDEZ O BETHEL

COLDFOOT O

CIRCLE O

O EAGLE

LOCATION MAP

O POINT BARROW

O TOK PROJECT LOCATION

O DEADHORSE

O NOME

O DELTA JCT.

1 inch ~ 1 mile

raeffinger

Text Box

FIGURE 2

environmental manual appendix adot.alaska.gov/nreg/projects/60911-daltonhwymp0-9... · project...

Documents