RD-A184 MISSISSIPPI RIVER SYSTEM ENVIRONMENTAL ROCK … · FOR CONSTRUCTION MONKEY CHUTE RESTORATION PROJECT POOL 21, UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER / MARION COUNTY, MISSO/R-cio D i s t

RD-A184 347 UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER SYSTEM - ENVIRONMENTAL i/IMANAGEMENT PROGRAM DEFINIT (U) ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICTROCK ISLAND IL FEB 87

UNCLASSIFIED F/G 13/2

smmmmmmmmm

,IolllsllllmiII

iii'i,_o , -

_ 2j.2

ii1ii ,___ _ l 611.8I1 111-- A 1

MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARD-1963-A

A4 V -7

le %~.w w-, . ~~-- - ~*

ILE I~ Copy

UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER SYSTEM-

'ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENTPROGRAM

00 ' DEFINITE PROJECT. REPORT (i

MONKEY CHUTE5

RESTORATION PROJEC.11

POOL 21UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER""

MARION COUNTY, MISSOURI'

FEBRUARY 1987,

This document hCza boon appxovWdoul lc.m J Idtribullon tu UxMIimStaidq,%Mm LET

NQ.SEP 0 11987

US Army CorpsEof Engineers

0Rock Island District 8 7 8 26 U 7 6

UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER SYSTEM -

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMDEFINITE PROJECT REPORT

FOR CONSTRUCTION

MONKEY CHUTE RESTORATION PROJECTPOOL 21, UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER

MARION COUNTY, MISSOURI

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Subject Page

Introduction 1Project Authority 1Project Location and Background IProject Purpose 1

Plan Formulation 2Existing Conditions 2Future Without-Project Condition 2Alternatives Considered 2Proposed Project 2Project Impact 3

Project Requirements 3

Land Acquisition 3Operation and Maintenance 4Engineering and Construction Costs 4Local Cooperation/Cost-Sharing Agreement 4Coordination 5Permit Requirements 5Monitoring 5

Re commendat ion 5

List of Plates

No. Title

1 Location Map, Site Map, Plan and Section SEP 0 1 187

List of Appendixes

A Environmental AssessmentB CorrespondenceC Comment Letters on the Environmental Assessment/Section

404(b)(1) Evaluation

DISTRIBUTION LIST -..... .. , ,-

E..A

:r " -- 1 I' I i ! , :, ] . I -L t l - - _- -- I. . . i - - > '

Ac.cztr'n or


ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMDEFINITE PROJECT REPORT - -

FOR CONSTRUCTION

MONKEY CHUTE RESTORATION PROJECTPOOL 21, UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER /

MARION COUNTY, MISSO/R-

cio D i s t S . u a

INTRODUCTION r

Project Authority

The 1985 Supplemental Appropriations Act (Public Law 99-98) providesauthorization and appropriations for an environmental management program

for the Upper Mississippi River system that includes fish and wildlifehabitat rehabilitation and enhancement. The proposed project would befunded and constructed under this authorization.

Project Location and Rackground

The Monkey Chute project area is in Pool 21 of the Tpper Mississippi Riverat the downstream end of an old Mississippi River side channel locatedJust upstream of Lock and Dam 21 at approximate river mile 326 (plate I).The chute occupies 88 acres of open water west of the navigation channelon Federal land managed by the State of Missouri.

The upstream end of the chute was cut off many years ago by deposition of

sediment. Sedimentation in the lower end of Monkey Chite is now becomingacute. In severe cases when Pool 21 is below normal, sediment depositsprevent access to the chute and can strand fish and cause stagnation byisolating the chute from the river. Continued sedimentation will increase

the frequency and severity of isolation, negatively impacting waterfowl,the fishery, and furbearers due to dissolved oxygen depletion, and resultin the conversion of open water into marsh and then lowland brush habitat.

Project Purpose

Monkey Chute is extensively used by waterfowl, particularly during thespring migration. Fishery studies have shown that it is a very productive

fish area as well. The purpose of this project is to retain AR acres of

backwater lake as year-round fish habitat, as well as to maintain its

66k

-suitability for waterfowl and furbearers. The project will help to main-tain the otherwise vanishing backwater habitat which is a critical part ofthe Upper Mississippi River system ecosystem. An incidental effect will beincreased recreational use of the chute.

PLAN PORMULATION

Existing Conditions

The Monkey Chute area consists primarily of forested bottomland and anopen backwater. This backwater provides excellent habitat for sport fishand fish reproduction. Bluegill, black and white crappie, buffalo, cat-fish, and largemouth bass have been collected during electrofishing sur-veys. Extensive use also is made of the area by migrating ducks and byfurbearers. The isolation of the chute during low pool periods, however,will reduce the habitat value of the area. The attached environmentalassessment (appendix A) contains additional information about theenvironmental setting of the project area.

Future Without-Project Conditions

Under future without-project conditions, low dissolved oxygen in the chutewill become a more frequent and more severe problem. As sedimentationcontinues, isolation of the chute will become more complete, the dissolvedoxygen problem will worsen, and ultimately the open water will be con-verted to marsh and then lowland brush habitat.

Alternatives Considered

Other than the proposed project described below, no other practical methodof providing continuously available fresh water for the backwater area hasbeen identified. Pumped flows or the use of mechanical aerators would notbe practical because of the size of the area to be benefited.

Two other alternative disposal sites for the dredged material were con-sidered (plate 1). Area A was rejected at the request of the Missourinepartment of Conservation, while Area R required the acquisition ofreal estate.

Droposed Project

The proposed project Involves hydraulically dredging a channel from themain channel to return depth to 6 feet at normal pool, thereby providingfre!;h water to the chute tnder all pool conditions. The channel followsthe existing chute to minimize dredging.

2

*1

Plate 1 shows a typical cross section of the area to be dredged. It isestimated that approximately 3,000 cubic yards would be removed using asmall hydraulic dredge and pumped into the sand/mud area immediately adja-cent to the dredge cut. At the upstream end of the disposal area, a nylonsilt retaining fence will be constructed to hold the dredged material inplace and to act as a silt screen (plate 1). A steel deflection platealeo will be used to dissipate the force from the dredge outfall pipeduring disposal.

As soon as possible after disposal, water-tolerant herbaceous vegetationwith short germination periods, such as rye grass, will be seeded onthe dredged material by the Corps of Engineers. This vegetation shculdstabilize the dredged material and prevent it from being washed awayduring high water. During the following year, trees and shrubs beneficialto wildlife would be planted by the Missouri Department of Conservation.

The project would be constructed under contract in accordance with plansand specifications prepared by the Corps of Engineers. If constructionfunds are received by March 1987, and plans and specifications are complete,the project could be constructed during the spring/summer of 1987. Theexcavated material would then be seeded in the fall of 19R7.

Project Impact

Construction of the project would have some short-term disturbance impactsfrom the filling activities. These conditions, however, would be minorand short-term, with recovery expected in one season after dredgedmaterial placement. It is not anticipated that the project would intro-duce toxic substances into nearby waters or result in appreciableincreases in existing levels of toxic materials. The project wouldrestore water circulation during low-flow periods to Monkey Chute, helpingto maintain water quality levels during critical periods, particularlydissolved oxygen. It also will permit the movement of fish in and out ofMonkey Chute, allowing the entrance of spawning adults and release of theadults and young. In addition, through revegetation efforts, bottomlandhardwood species more beneficial to wildlife should repopulate the area.The attached environmental assessment. (appendix A) contains additionalinformation on project impacts.

PROJECT REOUIREMENTS

Land Acquisition

No land needs to be acquired for the project, since the dredged materialwill be placed on land owned by the (orps of Engineers and managed by theMissouri Department of Conservation for wildlife management.

._..

Operation and Maintenance

The Corps of Engineers will monitor the project for 10 years to determinethe efficacy of this technique of backwater restoration at Monkey Chute.

Engineering and Construction Costs

The estimated engineering and construction costs for the proposed projectare:

Construction

3,000 cubic yds dredging at$4/cy $12,000

stump and snag removal 1,000

silt screen1RO yds at $7.R0/yd 1,400

construction subtotal 14,400

contingencies (25%) 3,600

Engineering and design (15%) 2,700

Supervision and administration (8%) 1,440

Total Project Costs $22,140

Local Cooperation/Cost-Sharing Agreement

The benefits that would accrue from the project would be nationallysignificant. All of the work being conducted would improve fish, water-fowl, and furbearer habitat on General Plan land owned by the Corps ofEngineers and managed by the State of Missouri Department of Conservationfor wildlife management purposes under a 1951 agreement between the Stateof Missouri, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the II.S. Army Corps ofEngineers. Therefore, the cost-sharing would be 100 percent Federal.

As the project would be constructed under the management of the Corps ofEngineers, a local sponsor would not be necessary for construction.

4

I/%

Coordination

The Corps of Engineers has coordinated the project with the Tl.S. Fish andWildlife Service, the Missouri Department of Conservation, the MissouriDepartment of Natural Resources, and other Federal and State agencies.

The Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact has beencirculated to the public for review. In addition, the Corps of Engineers

has issued a public notice on the project and offered an opportunity for

a public hearing.

Permit Requirements

The Corps of Engineers has obtained all applicable local and Statepermits.

As part of the process of ensuring project compliance with all Federalenvironmental statutes, the Rock Island District has prepared a Section404(b)(1) Evaluation and obtained Section 401 water quality certification

(appendix A).

Monitoring

Premonitorlng has shown low entrance depth and current use by fish. Post-

construction monitoring of dissolved oxygen, temperature, fish use, and

sedimentation will be conducted under the Long-Term Resource MonitoringProgram.

RECOMMENDATION

I recommend that the Secretary of Army, under the Tipper Mississippi RiverSystem - Environmental Management Program, enter into an agreement withthe Missouri Department of Conservation for the Monkey Chute restorationproject on a 100 percent Federal cost basis. The total cost of theproject would be 422,40. I further recommend that the funds he allocatedin FY 87 for project construction.

e A. martColonel, Corps of EngineersDistrict Engineer

t5

a i a

12: -di

at cmt I

ama

Il-

i

I I-

CL

Zwo I' 3v v 3o"P AT

110S

.5'

A

P

E

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT N

D

x

A

5 5'

1-'

- 5%~.

.5.5

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

ROCK ISLAND DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS

CLOCK TOWER BUILDING - P O. BOX 2004

LTROCK ISLAND. ILLINOIS 61204-2004

0EPLY TO

ATTENTION OF

NCRPD-E

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT


ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

MONKEY CHUTE RESTORATION 'PROJECT

POOL 21, MARION COUNTY, MSSOURI

SEPTEMBER 1986

SIX

, P,




MONKEY CHUTE RESTORATION PROJECT

POOL 21, MARION COUNTY, MISSOURI

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Subject Page

I. Authority and Need for Action EA-1

II. General Location and Description of theProposed Project EA-1

III. Alternatives Not Selected &A-2

* IV. Affected Environment EA-2

V. Environmental Consequences of Proposed Project EA-3

VI. Probable Adverse Environmental Effects WhichCannot Be Avoided EA-11

VII. Relationship Between Short-Term Use of Man'sEnvironment and Maintenance and Enhancement of

Long-Term Productivity EA-1 1

VIII. Any Irreversible or Irretrievable Commitments ofResources Which Would Be Involved if the ProposedAction Should Be Implemented EA-11

IX. Relationship of the Proposed Project to Land-UsePlans EA-11

X. Compliance with Environmental Quality Statutes EA-11

XI. Coordination EA-13

XII. Conc lus ions EA-13

REFERENCES EA-14

EA-i

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)

List of Tables

No. Title Page

EA-1 Effects of Recommended Plan on Resources of EA-4

Principal National Recognition

EA-2 Population Trends for the Affected Area EA-5

EA-3 Missouri Threatened and Endangered Species inMarion County EA-8

EA-4 Compliance of the Recommended Plan withWRC-Designated Environmental Statutes EA-12

ATTACHMENTS:

Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI)Project Plate

A Section 404(b)(1) EvaluationCorrespondence

Distribution List

77.

j.

°-J

'U 'U-'"

KO.'2%h


UPPFR MISSISSIPPI RIVER SYSTEM -


MONKEY CHUTE RESTORATION PROJECTPOOL 21, MARION COUNTY, MISSOURI

I. AUTHORITY AND NEED FOR ACTION.

Public Law (PL) 95-502 authorized the construction of a new dam and1,200-foot lock at Alton, Illinois, and directed the Upper MississippiRiver Basin Commission to prepare a comprehensive Master Plan for theManagement of the Upper Mississippi River System. The Basin Commissioncompleted the Master Plan report and submitted it to Congress on 1 January1982. The report recommended an environmental management program thatincluded construction of habitat rehabilitation and enhancement projects.

The 1985 Supplemental Appropriations Bill (PL 99-88), signed into law byPresident Reagan on 15 August 1985, provides authorization and appropria-tions for an environmental management program for the Upper MississippiRiver System that includes fish and wildlife habitat rehabilitation anaenhancement. The proposed project would be funded under this authorization.

The purpose of the proposed project is to restore the water connectionbetween the Mississippi River and Monkey Chute for the benefit of riverineaquatic resources.

II. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT

Monkey Ciute is an old Mississippi River side channel located just upstreamof Lock and Dam 21 at approximate river mile (RM) 325 (see plate 1). Thechute lies west of the navigation channel and is within the State of Missouri.

The upstream end of the chute was cut off many years ago by deposition of

sediment. Sedimentation in the lower end of Monkey Chute is now becomingacute. In cases when Pool 21 is below normal, deposited sediment isolatesthe chute from the river which strands aquatic organisms and causes waterstagnation. Monkey Chute is extensively used by waterfowl, particularlyduring the spring migration. Fishery studies also have shown that this isa very productive fish area.

As recommended by the Missouri Department of Conservation (MDOC), a smalldredge cut of about 3,000 cubic yards will be made using a mudcat dredge 'nthe lower end of the chute, as shown on plate 1. The dimensions of thedredge cut will be about 600 feet long by 30 feet wide, with an averagedepth of 4 feet. The dredged material will be pumped into the sand/mudarea immediately adjacent to the dredge cut (see plate 1). At theupstream end of the disposal area, a nylon silt retaining fence will beconstructed in order to hold the dredged material in place and to act as asilt screen. Hay bales also will be used to dissipate the force from thedredge outfall pipe during disposal.

',-

EA-l

%,'

III. ALTERNATIVES NOT SELECTED.

A. No Action. In the absence of the proposed project, continuing

sedimentation in the downstream opening will eventually isolate Monkey

Chute from the Mississippi River, thereby eliminating water circulationand access by fish and the public. The loss of this backwater area wouldbe unacceptable from the aquatic resource standpoint.

B. Alternative Disposal Areas. Disposal of dredged material on theadjacent agricultural field (Area B on plate 1) was investigated. This

site was not selected due to the need for land acquisition.

Disposal of dredged material in the land adjoining Monkey Chute (Area A

on plate 1) also was investigated. It was decided that this site was toonarrow to provide adequate room to construct a bermed area in order to

contain the silt material.

IV. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT.

A. Climate. Climate for the area is humid continental, characterizedby hot summers and cold winters. The mean average annual temperature at

Quincy, Illinois, is 54.1*F (12.3°C). The mean annual precipitation is37.2 inches (94.5 cm).

B. Air and Noise Quality. The air quality in the area is generally

good. In 1984, no excursions of the State of Illinois standards occurredfor total suspended particulates, sulfur dioxide, or ozone as measured in

Quincy, Illinois.

* ,Ambient noise levels would be moderate during tow activity at Lock and Dam21. No sensitive noise receptors such as hospitals or schools are located

within I mile of the project site.

C. Water Quality. Water and sediment samples were collected in late

June 1986. Sediment ranged from primarily silt, to a mixture of fine sandand silt, to primarily fine sand. Ambient water samples did not exceed any

State of Missouri water quality standard, although the lead concentrationequalled the State standard. In the elutriate samples, only un-ionized

ammonia-nitrogen exceeded the State standard.

D. Aquatic Resources. Portions of the backwater area known as

Monkey Chute provide excellent aquatic riabitat. Fish species depend uponthe backwater area to provide essential spawning, rearing, resting, and

feeding habitat. Fish surveys conducted by the MDOC in 1983 and 1984revealed a diverse and abundant sport fishery, including crappie, bluegill,bass, and catfish.

* EA-2

xr 2r %

Pool 21 is considered to have generally poor mussel populations. In theimmediate project area, the silty nature of the substrate does not provide

good quality mussel habitat.

E. Terre ;trial/Wildlife Resources. A variety of mammal speciesdepend on the habitat provided by the Monkey Chute backwater area for food,including fox, raccoon, opossum, squirrel, muskrat, and beaver. The river

otter, a State of Missouri endangered species, also would likely occur inthe area.

F. Archeological-Historical Resources. The proposed dredge cut

is a deepening of an existing channel. The preferred disposal site isimmediately adjacent to the dredge cut and is a recently accreted saud/mud island. The alternate disposal area (Area A on plate 1) is an openmudflat area below the existing levee. Shovel tests to a depth of 80 crat this site indicated layers of flood-deposited silty clay down to thepresent water ta',le. None of the proposed construction activities willaffect landforms with a potential for containing significant culturalresources.

V. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF PROPOSED PROJECT.

A summary of project impacts can be found in Table EA-l, Effects of theRecommended Plan on Resources of Principal National Recognition.

A. Social and Economic Impacts.

I. Affected Property. The area affected by the proposed MinkeyChute Restoration Project includes Marion and Lewis Counties in Missouriand Adams County in Illinois. The development of the three-county area isprimarily agricultural. The combined 1985 population of the affected coun-ties was approximately 111,400, with employment chiefly in manufacturingactivities. As illustrated in table EA-2, the entire area has registered aslight increase in population over the past 15 years.

*J,

A

EA-3

I " " "" 4 ~ , """ , "" - °

TABLE EA-1

Effects of the Recommended Plan on Resources of Principal National Recognition

Principal Sources

Types of Resources of National Recognition Measurement of Effects

Air Quality Clean Air Act, as amended No violation of air quality(41 U.S.C. 1857h-7 et seq.) standards anticipated.

Areas of Particular Coastal Zone Management Act Not present in planning

Concern Within the of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. area.Coastal Zone 1451 et seq.)

Endangered and Threat- Endangered Species Act of No impacts anticipated.

ened Species Critical 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.

Habitat 1531 et seq.)

Fish and Wildlife Fish and Wildlife Coordination No adverse impacts

Habitat Act (16 U.S.C. Sec. 661 et seq.) anticipated.

Floodplain; Executive Order 11988, No impact.

Floodplain Management

Historic and Cultural National Historic Preservation No impacts anticipated.

Properties Act of 1966, as amended (16U.S.C. Sec. 470 et seq.)

Prime and Unique CEQ Memorandum of 1 August Not affected.

Farmland 1980: Analysis of Impacts on

Prime and Unique AgriculturalLands in Implementing the

National Environmental Policy

Act

Water Quality Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 No adverse impacts

U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) anticipated.

Wetlands Executive Order 11990, No adverse impactsProtection of Wetlands, Clean anticipated.

Water Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C.

1857h-7 et seq.)

Wild and Scenic Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, as Not present in project

9_ Rivers amended (16 U.S.C. 1271 et seq.) area.

EA-

la .

TABLE EA-2

Ppulation Trends for the Affected Area L/ 2/

Population % Change

Area 1970 1980 1985 1980 - 1985

Lewis County, MO 10,993 10,901 10,956 0.5Marion County, MO 28,121 28,638 28,782 0.5Adams County, IL1 70,893 71,652 71,701 0.1

1/ U.S. Bureau of the Census, County and City Data Book, 1983,

U.S. Government Printing Office: 1983.

2/ Claritas Corporation, REZIDE, 1980 and 1985, The NationalEncyclopedia of Residential ZIP Code Demography.

2. Community Growth. Based on the small scale of the project,few employees would be required. The surrounding area would not be affected

since the local population provides a labor pool of sufficient size toabsorb project needs.

3. Community Cohesion. No effects on community cohesion wouldbe expected due to the project's limited area of influence.

4. Property Values. Property values for land adjacent toMonkey Chute may increase slightly due to the improved aquatic resources.

5. Regional Growth. No effects on regional growth would be

expected due to the project's limited area of influence.

6. Tax Revenues. A slight increase in tax revenues may occur

as a result of any rise in property values for land adjacent to Monkey Chute.A small increasp in boat ownership and purchases may result from theproject. Tax revenues would then slightly rise as a result of increased

sales tax and boat and fishing license fee revenues.

7. Public Facilities. Public boating and fishing facilitieswould be Improved as a result of the dredging of Monkey Chute.

8. Public Services. The project would help fulfill a poctionof the recreational boat ing and fishing needs of the general public withinthe three-cointy area.

9. Displacement ofPeoi. No relocations would be requiredfor the project

1 ). Eml-oyment/Labor Forco. 'De project would not affect thepermanent employment or labor force of the thre,-countv area. There wouldhe no increase in ar,,a employment diriiig cn t rlct ion, due to the minor

natute of the project.

E , -5

11. Business and Industrial Activities. Changes in business andindustrial activity would be minimal. No business relocations would berequired for the project.

12. Farm Displacement. No farms would be affected by theproject.

13. Noise Levels. The dredging at Monkey Chute would tem-porarily increase noise levels. However, it is unlikely that this increasewould significantly affect the surrounding area because sensitive receptorssuch as hospitals and schools are located at least 1 mile from the projectsite.

B. Environmental Impacts.

1. Aquatic Resources. The upstream end of the disposal sitewill be enclosed using a nylon silt retaining fence. This is being doneto inhibit sediment flow and should act to slow and filter the sedimentafter disposal. Hay bales also will be used to dissipate the force fromthe dredge outfall pipe during disposal.

Dredging would prevent closure of the access channel. This will assistin maintaining good water quality within Monkey Chute and will permit themovement of fish in and out of Monkey Chute, as well as public access.

During the site visit, there was no evidence of large numbers of silt-tolerant mussel species.

2. Terrestrial Resources. The vegetation consisting of smallwillow shoots on the disposal site will not be removed. As soon aspossible after disposal, water-tolerant herbaceous vegetation with shortgermiiation periods such as reed canary grass, fescue, or annual rye grasswill be seeded on the dredged material. This grass should stabilize thedredged material and prevent it from being washed away during high water.During the following year, trees and shrubs beneficial to wildlife would beplanted by the MDOC.

3. Threatened or Endangered Species. I / The U.S. Fish andWildlife Service (FWS) has indicated that the following federally endangeredspecies may be present in the area:

American bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)Fi t pocketbook pearly mussel (Potamilus capax)

a. Arierican Bald Eagle. The American bald eagle uses thisreach of the Mississippi River as a source of food during the winter monthsbecause of the open water near the dam. Mature trees along the shoreline

1/ Constitutes a biological assessment under Section 7 of the Endangered

Species Act of 1973, as amended.

EA-6

are used by wintering eagles as feeding/perch trees. The bald eagle willnot be affected by the proposed project since no trees will be removed anddredgfing would not take place during the winter months (December - February).

c. Fat Pocketbook Pearly Mussel. The fat pocketbook pearlymussel is a large river species which has been found on both a sand andmud substrate and in various depths of water. According to the U.S. FWS,

the proposed dredge cut and disposal area is not suitable as habitat for

this mussel species.

Therefore, significant, adverse Impacts to these federally listedendangered species are not anticipated. lhe U.S. FWS has agreed with thisconclusion (see Coordination Act Report dated 28 July 1986).

River otters, a State of Missouri endangered species, have been released in

the area by Missouri biologists. However, State and Federal biologistshave determined that the proposed project would have no effect on this spe-cies since disturbances would be temporary and no denning sites are located

in the project area. (See Coordination Act Report dated 28 July 1986).

The publication entitled Rare and Endangered Species of Missouri (Wilson1984) by the MDOC was used to identify the State threatened and endangered

species. Table EA-3 discusses the species listed for Marion County, theirstatus, and anticipated impact from the proposed project. No significantadverse impacts are anticipated to any of the species listed. However, a

possible beneficial impact may occur for the water birds listed, due to

improvement of the Monkey Chute backwater habitat.

%

VA-)d

) '. f

TABLE EA-3

Missouri Threatened and Endangered Speciesin Marion County

Scientific Common Range/ ProjectName Name Status Habitat Impact

Accipiter Cooper's Endangered Primarily a Constructioncooperii Hawk migrant and to take place

winter resident before winter -no impact

Accipiter Sharp- Endangered Primarily a Constructionstriatus Shinned migrant and to take place

Hawk winter resident before winter -no impact

Acipenser Lake Endangered Large rivers Habitat not infulvescens Sturgeon and lakes with project area -

substrate of no impactsand & gravel

Bartramia Upland Rare Native prairie; Habitat not inlongicauda Sandpiper mixed grass project area -

pastures and no impacthayfields; norecent records

Botaurus American Rare Uncommon No impactlentiginosus Bittern migrant

Buteo Red- Rare Bottomland Not impactedlineatus Shouldered forests by the project

Hawk

Chelone Rose Endangered Swampy meadows, Not impactedobliqua Turtlehead margins of by the projectL. var springs, lowspeciosa wet woods

Circus Northern Endangered Nesting limited Habitat not incyaneus Harrier to tall grass project area -

prairie rem- no impactnants; migrantand winterresident

EA-8

-~~ r .S 1.

TABLE EA-3 (Cont'd)


Dodecatheon Amethyst Rare Crevices and Habitat not inamethystinuma Shooting steep slopes project srea -

Star of north-facing no impact

limestone bluffs

Egretta Little Rare Presently nests No adversecaerulea Blue Heron only in SE. impact; possible

Missouri - beneficial

migrant during impact frompost-breeding improving back-dispersal water habitat

Falco Peregrine Endangered Migrant along No impactperegrinus Falcon large rivers

and lakes

Floerkea False Rare Alluvial Not impactedproserpin Mermaid woodlands by the projectacoides

Lampsilis Higgins' Endangered Substrate of Substrate inhigginsi Eye Pearly mixed mud, sand project area

Mussel and gravel in silt and not

deep water suitable -

habitat no impact

Lechea Pinweed Possibly Only histori- No impact

racemulosa Extirpated cally known inMarion County

Lota Burbot Rare No recent No impactIota records in

Marion County

Macroclemys Al Ligator Rare Large rivers, No i-ipacttemminckii 'nappin;g sloughs, and

Turtl oxbows in SI.

Missouri

4ust (,1-4 Long- Rare Wood lands, Habitat not infrenata Tailed old fields, project area-

Weasel t ence r ws no impact

.Nyot-r. pi:3 P:I I I: PosslhIy Qni,.t i).,s, No impactani_ Sh i it r _t 1 rpat c.d c r,,ks to

Iar' 'e rivers - no% r(('ont records

in 'li, oi ri

TABLE EA-3 (Cont'd)


Nycticorax Black- Rare Marsh and No adverse im-nycticorax Crowned swamp habitat pact; possible

Night Heron beneficialimpact fromimprovement ofbackwater habitat

Phalacrocorax Double- Endangered Uncommon Formerly nestedauritus Crested migrant and in backwaters -

Cormorant casual winter possible bene-resident - no ficial impactrecent nesting from improvementrecords of backwater

habitat

Sambucus Red-Berried Endangered Shaded, north- Habitat notpubens Elder facing, wooded in project

limestone bluffs area - noand ledges impact

4. Archeological-Historical. A reconnaissance survey of theproposed project area by District archeologists indicated that channeldredging and dredged material disposal at the Monkey Chute location wouldhave No Effect on significant cultural resources.

5. Air Quality. Impacts to air quality could occur duringconstruction from exhaust emissions and fugitive dust particles. Theseimpacts will be minor and short-term. No violations of air quality stan-dards are anticipated.

6. Water Quality. Water quality impacts are discussed in theSection 404(b)(17 Evaluation.

The elutriate test was used to simulate river conditions that would occurduring dredging. The elutriate test results indicate that if dredgingwere to occur under conditions observed during sampling, high un-ionizedammonia-nitrogen concentrations may result. However, the percent ofammonia-nitrogen in the un-ionized form is dependent on pH and water tem-perature. Therefore, dredging will be done when the pH and temperaturewould be lower (pH less than 8.0; water temperature less than 15*C) toreduce the un-ionized ammonia-nitrogen concentrations. These conditionsshould exist from October through April.

EA- 10

VI. PROBABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WhIC}I CANNOT BE AVOL[DED.

A. Natural Resources. Fish, wildlife, water quality, and othernatural resources wilt not be significantly impacted by the proposed proj-ect S

B. Sociallpacts. Noise generated during construction act[vitieswould be unavoidable, but would not crcate any human health or welfareproblems since the increased noise levels would be minor and short-termand would occur during regular working hours.

VII. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USE OF MAN'S ENVIRONMENT ANDMAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY.

Dredging the downstream opening of Monkev alute is necessary because con-tinuing sedimentation wilL eventually isolate the chute from the MississippiRiver, which will eliminate water circllation and access by fish and thepublic.

VIII. ANY IRREVERSIBLE OR IRRETRIEVABLE COMIITMENTS OF RESOURCES WHICHWOULD BE INVOLVED IF THE PROPOSED ACTION SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED.

Manpower, fuel expended, and material used in the proposed project would beirretrievable.

IX. RELATIONSHIP OF f'HE PROPOSED PROJECT TO LAND-USE PLANS.

Land use after the project will be essentially the same as before theproject.

X. COMPLIANCE W[Th ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY SrATUTES.

A summary U compliance with environmental statutes can be found in TableEA-4 - Compliance of the Recommended Plan with WRC-Designated Environmental

St atilt es.

A. Archeol, ical/Historical. Coordination was initiated with theifssouri Stat, Historic Preservation Officer (SHP0) in accordance with

Sectio,; 1'16 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (as amended)by L-Ott.-r dated '24 June 1986. The 1HPO responded by letter dated 14 Julyl986 an,t corickirrd with the findings that the project will have nc, effecton si ilit icant historic, architectural , or archeological sites In thear,-a. Th, ,, tt.r-. art attached to the liA.

P. Fi-h in,t W'ildlife Coordination Act . Coordination with the U.S.F\ 4 1 tl , C (.;I completed. TPe Fish and Wildlife CoordinationA,.t (C.i(C), d Y V" Jliy 1986, ic; attached to this LA. The U.S. FWSmal , tI'in a r e 1,lend at ions atild con c isi mis ina the CAR concerning

1. ;i1t c 1,,; ;hoi ld be placed a'rss Th(e dowaistream (sic) endof the nudriat with the bottou of the screen secured into the

"A- I I

w%

TABLE EA-4

Compliance of the Recommended Plan with WRC-Designated Environmental Statutes

Federal Policies Compliance

Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act, 16 U.S.C.

469, et seq. Full compliance

Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 1857h-7, et seq. Full compliance

Clean Water Act (Federal Water Pl1lution Control Act)4 33 U.S.C. 1251, et seq. Full compliance

Coastal Zone Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 1451, et seq. Not applicable

Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. 1531, et seq. Full compliance

Estuary Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. 1221, et seq. Not applicable

Federal Water Project Recreation Act, 16 U.S.C.

460-1(12), et seq. Not applicable

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 16 U.S.C. 661,

et seq. Full compliance

Land and Water Conservation Fund Act, 16 U.S.C. 460/

-460/-11, et seq. Not applicable

Marine Protection Research and Sinctuary Act, 33 U.S.C.

1401, et seq. Not applicable

National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 4321,et seq. Full compliance

National Historic Preservation Act, 16 U.S.C. 470a,

et seq. Full compliance

River and Harbor Act, 33 U.S.C. 403, et seq. Full compliance

Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act,

16 U.S.C. 1001, et seq. Nof applicable

Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 16 U.S.C. 1271, et seq. Not applicable

NOTES:

I. Fulj-compliance. Having met all requirements of the statutes for the

current stage of planning (either preauthorization or postauthorization).

2. Partial compliance. Not having met some of the requirements that nor-

mally are met in the current stage of planning. Partial compliance entries

should be explained in appropriate places in the report and referenced in

the table.

3. Noncompliance. Violation of a requirement of the statute. Non-

compliance entries should be explainer in appropriate places in the report

and referenced in the table.

4. Not applicable. No requirements for the statute required.

EA- 12

Jw

2. "The pressur- at the outfall of the ripe should be dissipated

by using hay bales or some other means.

3. The disposal area should be stabilized by planting a fast

growing grass immediately after project completion. In thefollowing year, trees and shrubs beneficial to wildlifeshould be planted.

District Response: A silt screen will be placed across the upstream end,

not the downstream end, of the disposal area, as coordinated with the U.S.FWS.

All of these recommendations are incorporated into the proposed project.

C. Executive Order t1988, Floodplain Management. Land use after theproject would be esse:itially the same as land use before the project. Theproposed action will not encourage further development in the floodplain.

D. Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands. Executive Order

11990 recognizes the significant values provided by wetlands and requireseach Federal agency to provide leadership and take action to minimize thedestruction, loss, or degradation of wetlands and to preserve and enhancethe natural and beneficial values of wetlands. Disposal of material mayimpact a minor amount of wetland habitat, depending upon the river stage

at the time of disposal, but this is unavoidable and would not createsignificant impacts.

XI. COORDINATION.

The proposed project addressed in this Environmental Assessment is being

coordinated with the following agencies:

U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceMissouri Department of Natural Resources

Missouri Department of ConservationMissouri State Historic Preservation OfficerU.S. Environmental Protection Agency

XII. CONCLUSIONS.

No significant Impacts to the quality of the human environment would resultfrom the proposed project to restore the water connection between the

Mississippi River and Monkey Chute.

EA-I 3

I 4 WVS.- * l*** **#*q~ .

REFERENCES

IlLinois Environmental Protection Agency. 1984. Illinois Annual AirQuality Report, 1983. Division of Air Pollution Control.IEPA/APC/84-010. 156 pp.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, EndangeredSpecies, Great Lakes Region, with updates.

Wilson, J.H., ed. 1984. Rare and Endangered Species of Missouri. Missouri

Department of Conservation. 171 pp.'.EA1

.4J

*5'.p.

5J

' -'-.EA-1 4

n4 . 4

r4

.4,

.4

4

.9

'.4

Attachment I of 5

4q

4( m" k "" " " " . A '""' 'a ~~- '"""""ka. . ., , . . .. . ... .. . . .., .., ,,..- .. .. . .,, i

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT

UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVWR SYSTFM -

E.VIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM


I have reviewed the information provided by this Environimental Assessment,along with data obtained from Federal and State agencies having jurisdic-tion by law or special expertise and from the interested public. I findthat undertaking the Monkey Chute, Missouri, Restoration Project will notsignificantly affect the quality of the human environmelit. Therefore, itis my determination that an Environmental Impact Statement is not required.This determination will be reevaluated if warranted by later developments.

Alternatives considered included "no action" and alternative disposalareas.

Factors considered in making a determination that an Environmental ImpactStatement was not required are as follows:

1. The proposed project would improve the fish and wildlife resourcesand water quality of the Monkey Saute backwater area.

2. No significant impacts to fish and wildlife rnsources would

result from the proposed action.

3. Noise impacts would be minor and short-term aid would not impact

on human health or welfare.

4. No significant social, economic, environmental., or culturalimpacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed action.

1fA'X"""' j eWil. Smart

Date Colonel, Corps of EngineersDistrict Engineer

we.".' .- ". .,....-...,- '.'..- . ".. '. .... '." . . . . :• """""":, ¢ ... '.": , :*Z:z.

NN

Y W fllr-r

"z.' PROJECT PLATE

N

"-"" +" Attachmecnt 2 of 5

-.-.

x'-N EI

H. -

~~low

CJ 22

03

04 F

1 423 60

ata

219

- t4

- .

- - 0In

194

a 3 P4

4 .. oI.. a)

°

N

I SECTION 404(b) (1) EVALUATION

5.

.i Attachment 3 of 5

SA"

.-

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYROCK ISLAND DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS

CLOCK TOWER BUILDING - P 0 BOX 2004

UK,.T ROCK ISLAND ILLINOIS 61204 2004

ATTtNTION OF

NCRPD-E




CLEAN WATER ACTSECTION 404(b)(1) EVALUATION

,*.'* ;EPTrL;MBvR ) 956

* -.'..


-* ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM


.9'

CLEAN WATER ACT

SECTION 404(b)(1) EVALUATION

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Subject Page

I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1

Locat ion 1General Description 1Authority and Purpose 1

General Description of Fill Material 2Description of the Proposed Discharge Site 2Description of Disposal Method 2

-p

II. FACTUAL DETERMINATION 2

Physical Substrate Determination 2Water Circulation, Fluctuation, and Salinity Determinations 3Suspended Particulate/Turbidity Determinations 3Contaminant Determinat ions 3Aquatic Ecosystem and Organism Determinations 3Proposed Disposal Site Determinations 4Determination of Cumulative Effects on the Aquatic Ecosystem 4Determination of Secondary Effects on the Aquatic Ecosystem 4

III. FINDINGS OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE RESTRICTIONS ON DISCHARGE 4

Adaptation of the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines to ThisEvaluation 4

Evaluation of Availability of Practicable Alternativesto the Proposed Discharge Sites Which Would Have LessAdverse Impact on the Aquatic Ecosystem 4

Compliance With Applicable State Water Quality Standards 5Compliance With Applicable Toxic Effluent Standards or

Prohibition Under Section 307 of the Clean Water Act 5Compliance With Endangered Species Act of 1973 5Compliance With Specified Protection Measures for MarineSanctuaries Designated by the Marine Protection, Researchand Sanctuaries Act of 1972 5

Evaluation of Extent of Degradation of the Waters of theUnited States 5

Appropriate and Practicable Steps Taken to Minimize Potential.Adverse Impacts of the Discharge on the Aquatic Ecosystem 6

.. Conclusion 6

.4

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd) .

* List Of Plate-s

No. Title

Mississippi River Pool 21, Backwater Dredging,Site Maps. Plan and Section

UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER SYSTEM -•. " ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM


CLEAN WATER ACT


I - PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LOCATION.

Monkey Chute is an old Mississippi River side channel located just upstreamof Lock and Dam 21 at approximate river mile (RM) 325. The chute lies westof the navigation channel and is within the State of Missoiiri.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION.

The upstream end of Monkey Chute was cut off many years ago by depositionof sediment. Sedimentation in the lower end of Monkey Chute is now becomingacute. In severe cases when Pool 21 is below normal, sediment deposits canstrand aquatic organisms and cause stagnation by isolating the chute fromthe river. Monkey Chute is extensively used by waterfowl, particularly

* during the spring migration, and fishery studies have shown that this is avery productive fish area as well.

As recommended by the Missouri Department of Conservation (MDOC), a smalldredge cut of about 3,000 cubic yards will be made using a mudcat dredgeon the lower end of the chute, as shown on plate 1. The dimensions of thedredge cut will be about 600 feet long by 30 feet wide, with an averagedepth of about 4 feet. The dredged material will be pumped into the sand/mud area immediately adjacent to the dredge cut (see plate 1). At theupstream end of the disposal area, a nylon silt retaining fence will beconstructed in order to hold the dredged material in place and to a-t as asilt screen. Hay bales also uil be used to dissipate the force from thedredge outfall pipe during disposal.

AUTHORITY AND PURPOSE.

Public Law (PL) 95-502 authorized the construction of a new dam and1,200-foot lock at Alton, Illinois, and directed the Upper Mississippi

River Basin Commission to prepare a comprehensive Master Plan for theManagement of the Upper Mississippi River System. The Basin Commissioncompleted the Master Plan report and submitted it to Congress on

'U

I January 1982. The report recommended an environmental management programthat included construction of habitat rehabilitation and enhancement projects.

The 1985 Supplemental Appropriations Bill (PL 99-88), signed into law byPresidnt Reagan on 15 August 1985, provides authorizat[on and appropriation7for an environmental management program for the Upper Mississippi RiverSystem that includes fish and wildlife habitat rehabilitation and enhance-

*. ment. The proposed project would be funded under this authorization.

The purpose of the proposed project is to restore the water connectionbetween the Mississippi River and Monkey Chute for the benefit of riverineaquatic resources.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF FILL MATERIAL.

Silt and fine sand dredged from the opening of Monkey Chute will be pumpedinto the sand/mud area immediately adjacent to the dredge cut (see plate 1).

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED DISCHARGE SITE.

The proposed discharge site lies immediately above Lock and Dam 21, as shown

on plate 1.

DESCRIPTION OF DISPOSAL METHOD.

A mudcat dredge will be used to pump the silt into the proposed disposalarea.

.. II - FACTUAL DETERMINATION

PHYSI[CAL SUBSTRATE DETERMINATION.

.%.

he substrate in the project area consists of mostly silt and some finesand. Loss of some benthic species may occur from the filling activities.However, the area to be dredged is relatively small and impacts should beminor and temporary. Recolonization and stabilization of the benthic com-

munity should occur within one season.

0%,

2

-- 7Z)e% 1

WATER CIRCULATION, FLUCTUATION, AND SALINITY DETERMINATIONS.

A water quality parameter that could be violated by filling activitieswould be the standards for turbidity. However, this condition would beminor and short-term. Dredging will be done during October through Aprilto reduce un-ionized ammonia-nitrogen concentrations (see ContaminantDeterminations section below).

The proposed filling activities would not appreciably change the flow

regime and would not cause water level fluctuations beyond what currentlyexist by the natural river.

The proposed project involves a fresh water system. Salinity gradients,therefore, do not apply.

SUSPENDED PARTICULATE/TURBIDITY DETERMINATIONS.

Placement of silt material it the proposed disposal area may produceincreases in suspended particulate matter and turbidity. However, theseeffects should be minor and of a temporary nature. Also, a nylon siltretaining fence will be constructed at the upstream end of the dispcsalarea in order to hold the dredged material in place and to act as a siltscreen.

K' CONTAMINANT DETERMINATIONS.

The elutriate test was used to simulate river conditions that would occurduring dredging. The elutriate test results indicate that if dredgingwere to occur under conditions observed during sampling, high un-ionizedammonia-nitrogen concentrations may result. However, the percent ofammonia-nitrogen in the un-ionized form is dependent on pH and wateL tem-perature. Therefore, dredging will be done when the pH and temperaturewould be lower (pH less than 8.0; water temperature less than 15'C) toreduce the un-ionized ammonia-nitrogen concentrations. These conditionsshould exist from October through April.

%AUATIC ECOSYSTEM AND ORGANISM DETERMINATIONS.

Losses of some nektonic and planktonic organisms during construction wouldbe expected. The greatest losses would be of drifting organisms whichwould be unable to move out of the area. Some losses of benthic spLciesalso may occur. Recolonization and stabilization of the benthic c ,mmunityafter construction should occur within one season.

Minor disruption of the aquatic food chain could occur dirign construction.However, recolonization of aquatic organisius should occnr within oneseason, and predator species would move back into the aroa.

3' .,

% . .." k1"4 4": 4 ,, € . £ ':" L '' £ " 4" ??. ¢ ? ?- .- ".-' .'.... " . . " '.- '." - "- - -- . -' --.. ;-r -A%

II"""- ,- 5 5"i, ' " ' - ' " .a,. "/ - " "" ."" "'""'"'" - " g u " e " """":""", 't"" ' " ' " " ""'- "."" "" L:' """. "" ",

A listing of the Federal and State of Missouri species of fauna and floraidentified as threatened or endangered was consulted, and the proposed -"

project should have no adverse impacts upon any of the species listed.

PROPOSED DISPOSAL SITE DETERMINATIONS.

Filling activities for the proposed project should not violate waterquality standards if dredging is done between October through April. Nolong-term impacts are anticipated.

The proposed project would have no appreciable negative effects on thehuman use of the area, and, after construction, the proposed project shouldimprove access for fishing and boating activities that occur in the area.

DETERMINATION OF CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ON THE AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM.

The silt material would be placed into the disposal site only once. Therewould not be any cumulative effects due to subsequent discharge of material.

DETERMINATION OF SECONDARY EFFECTS ON THE AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM.

No secondary effects on the aquatic ecosystem are anticipated due to theproposed dredging and disposal of material. The dredged material will bestabilized by planting a water-tolerant fast-growing grass species after

-* disposal.

III - FINDINGS OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE RESTRICTIONS ON DISCHARGE

ADAPTATION OF THE SECTION 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES TO THIS EVALUATION.

No significant adaptations of the guidelines were made relative to this

evaluation.

EVALUATION OF AVAILABILITY OF PRACTICABLE ALTERNATIVES TO TIE PROPOSEDDISCHARGE SITES WHICH WOULD HAVE LESS ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE AQUATICECOSYSTEM.

The actual amount of material to be placed into the disposal site has been

minimized to the extent possible.

4

1r w - i . i1 i H i .J J ' '

' ; , i

15U6L

[.%,

COMPLIANCE WIT11 APPLI ABLE 'ATi WATER O_ .... , .A... RD_.

Complianc,2 with .;tat- water qua lit v t indards .i I be achi _aved by main-tatnin) turbidity and other paramet,r, ow the State stairlards Section

V 401 ater Qual itv Cr. ificatLon from the Stlt , of 'tissoaL has be(,nrec(,ived (see 1,tt e r lated 21 August 98- in tL: ctf en responldence attachiment).Circulation )f the knsiroamenta. ssessm, nt ind tlih , qection 404(b)(1)Evaluation would (-,)nstitute public . re i vw- Fill ing act ivit ies

should not vtolate water qual-ity standard of the S:k .t ' of 'issouri, sincedredging will he done when the water tenporature, in less than 15'C. andthe pH less than 8.0 to avoid violation of- the ;tandard for un-ionizedanmonia-nitrogen.

COMPI lANCE WiTH APPLICABLE TOXIC EFFLUI.ENT STAN)ARPS OR P1OIIIBITION UNDERSECTION 307 OF TiE CLEAN WATER ACT.

4 It is not ant icipat-d that tiie project would tnt roduce toxic substancesinto nearby waters or result in appreciable increases in existing levels oftoxic materials. The proposed action will not violat,' the Toxic EffluentStandards of Section 307 of the Clean Water Act.

COMPLIANCE WITh ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT OF 1973.

'As discussed previously, no significant impact to f,-Iderally listedendangered species is anticipated as -i result of this project.

COMPLIANCE WITH SPECIFIU ) PROTECTION -IEASUREHS FOR -IARINE SANCTUARIESDESIGNATED BY THE >IARIN_. PROTECTION, RE.I\\CO XND SANCTUARIES ACT OF 1972.

Thie project is in a fresh water inlind riv, r s.steo. No marine sanctuariesare involved.

EVALUATION OF EXTENT OF DEGRADAT[ON Or Tille YIA'TFR ()r 'i1KV l[E) STATES.

Tbe proposed placeioent of sil t and .;and ant eriil -1,1 1 ot resi t in si n-iF-i:ant adverse effects on human heai!lh and .,'<liar,:, fi ri]dI ,i :;1Ic1pa 1 ndprivate water supp] ic, , rer-reat ona! a;l cc-er r' 1! tf ish lo , planr> on, lish,Phlr1fish, vi Ili fe," 111 epecjql aqurt' I.' t' 71' - ifr S J~ iqrrt iclif( and ,threr wild titi, will not ao . l, r l . , .',' . iI i (i ltadv r , effects on i( n,li , ; t, V 'r- - ,7 , <: , ! - h: i lit V,andI(I rec ri;t i a)nn I , Lt . t [ ( I, a :n'd 2 )!' " cm .; : . : 1, c I I r

W..

" " ' .' .. ? .: , " ' . -. ' , ." . , . . ... ., .: .... .:

APPROPRIATE AND PRACTICABLE STEPS TAKEN TO MINIMIZE POTENTIAL ADVERSEIMPACTS OF THE DISCHARGE ON THE AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM. --.

A nylon silt retaining fence will be constructed at the upstream end of thedisposal area in order to hold the dredged material in place and to act as asilt screen. Hay bales also will be used to dissipate the force from thedredge outfall pipe during disposal. The dredged material will be stabilizedby planting a water-tolerant, fast-growing grass species after disposal.As specified by the Section 401 Water Quality Certification, dredging willbe done when the water temperature is less than 130 C. and the pl less than8.0 to avoid violations of the standard for un-ionized ammonia-nitrogen.

CONCLUSION.

On the basis of the guidelines, the proposed disposal site for the

discharge of fill material for the Monk, y Chlute Restoration Projectis specified as complying with the requirements of the guidelines.

"" A. SmartDate Colonel, Corps of Engineers

District Engineer

J

.1

c z

0~ 2u' 3

CI

N- N '26

. a

ctt

II

400

a 0 2

4 , 4 44

ZOOL

~In

01'

440

~ -I---

CORRESPONDENCE

Atalmn.4o

04

MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATIO

%1AII ING ADI)RIESS: STREET ILOCATION:P.O. Box 180 2901 West Truman BoulevardJefferson ( it, Missouri 65102-0180 Jefferson City, Missou,

Telephone 314,7514115LARRY R. CA. , Director

May 15, 1986

Colonel William C. Burns, Jr.District EngineerRock Island District, Corps of EngineersClock Tower BuildingRock Island, Illinois 61201

Dear Colonel Burns:

This letter is in reference to the Upper Mississippi River, Environmental Man-agement Program, Monke Chute Habitat Rehabilitation Project. The MonkeyChute area is located alc ng the Missouri shoreline in Pool 21 at approxi.nateriver mile 325.

As outlined in previous correspondence, we are recommending that a smalldredge cut (estimated 7,t'00 cubic yards) be made in the lower end of the chuteto assure that a water connection exists between the Mississippi River and thechute at all river stages.

We have proposed that the dredged material from this cut be disposed in acontainment area to be constructed on land which adjoins Monkey Chute. Theland is owned by the U.S. Government, Corps of Engineers. According to a1951 agreement between the Corps of Engineers, the U. S. Fish and WildlifeService and the Missouri Department of Conservation, this land was dedicated towildlife management under the jurisdiction of our Department.

This small parcel of land is presently covered by a dense stand of willow andsoft maple trees. The habitat value for terrestrial and/or wetland wildlife

species is low. Elevating this parcel of land several feet with dredge spoil willprovide the opportunity to experiment with reestablishing bottomland hardwoodspecies of high value to a variety of riverine wildlife species.

C r)MMJ'.IloN

JFF (HI RAN J.10 N P )1% F I, .1 N 0 8 %] If I, F F} I RI( HARD . RE( hillicothe Rolla printfield East Prairie

Colonel BurnsMay 15, 1986Page Two

We look forward to continued cooperation with the Rock Island District inmoving ahead with this habitat rehabilitation project. Please continue to directfuture coordination on this matter to Mr. Norman P. Stucky at the aboveaddress.

Sincerely,

LAR GALEDIRECTOR

cc: PDR (Bruzewicz)Rock Island DistrictCorps of Engineers

Dr. Frederick Brunner, DirectorDepartmnent of Natural Resources

V-m

p."

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYROCK ISLAND DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS

CLOCK TOWER BUI:LDING, - P 0 BOX 2004

ROCK ISLAND LLINOS 61204 2004

reprtv stato PlatnrlcPreqe'V'atILen Pffteet

TrIvizinn of Parkai arO'"1 stort c Preservati on

P . . 30 1 76.!effersor City. 4tapuourI A 51 np

9 Dear F'r. Rucert

Tthe Pock Istand DtatrIct, U.S. Arscy Corp* ofT~nvineers, is plarnivi to dre'pe ctit a ;Imall (30-foot,NY 60'n-fnot) c)annc1l I ert Into thok lorikpy Cltnte

If'~~1tiiv otrear of toe$: ano ?na!- ?t In gec. 159

~~ K. 5 WI., Varian County, Mi sqrnrl.

Tii paxrpose of the project Is hal-.Itat relAblflitarfonoar pert of the Poer Island District irrer NHismissIppfn Iver tys~tem rrivfronluental )'enap-ement Program (UF!R!'IP).f' ertfvusteA 11,OrIO cubic vorls of ere.-ve im'teriel will%e Aegitpe at one of tve Alternative (Rfsrormi site"gIn tbe Ireetate, project area (imap 1). An arceoogical

pl~rvo7 wocon~ucted tn evaluate tfi@ pertential i'mPactsn F t 'e rropose,' project or. rignI ftcant cul tural rerources.

P~ock Tglare Platrict archeoltpi'stp, )Xerner)' Parr enO(i-arlemq nr'1th- condizCtee an arc'eolo~lcc! reconnass~anceaitryev of t', rroposeA prolect arbA o11 JuJr@ Ift, 19Pf-.") area te) 1--e re'-rp4 lit An PxIstlrip clannel. Proroacee I ApoeaI prol At" is I% reer'ntly *ccrete* %An-* 4qa3ai~ witt"tarall villon startlnef to Yeipetntp- ft. rroropp'I Aimpoals.-te "r" Is an open mll' flAt area loet( InIUetelyJqA ,P . to tle mirl9~y C11ute elow tbe exi itr,. levee.-91ovel teots to a depth of PO cr at tl-.19 site fn'lcate!leverm of flood eroslte-' s!lty elar down to tl-e presentvor tr t W' Tl'1a lit"'forWr u'eo,14 bve ro ptentfal forcorttainfnp sigrificart cxt~ttiral refonrces.

~an4 o' t'e~ fi1$o1servntforso it Itt our mpinfont tat V,@e pro tA%0 prolecY. will 1 pvo Nr' Ffect nupl-c en t eul tural rpourc(,R. We ?rett your cow'ments ont'ils proieet at y'orr eArlIPSt conve'nience.

Tf you ,svr ar'v questions, plecce call MAr. "Mennet~h~n rr qt /7-"i*!-Rt. 340 or w:rite to tYp following

1~ Natrnet Vrneireer!'.S. Ar-zv rnzincer Platrict, RocV T'elaneATT'!: P'Tarnn~rp 71tviior,r1ock Tower '!uIlAInr - P.O. Por 200&LPock Tulon4, Tllinoltt 61704-7lflA

Signed C~yJ. T. SCHNEFPRE

lu.41ey, 11. 17anwqcn, P.F.Chief, rlsnnlnt DIvIsion

* Enel ot're

J0FhN ASIU:ROFU- 1 )~im'~n t I ni1ri ninicill-al

I w in ,*it ( i, i. )p int I ik

I<I)lRJ(:K A IIRI'NNlIR I) ... ,1,rk.R r'aI'Ari: W MISS) )I RI Dm ii it 11. rk'. RL'trcio

ulrco r a nA ()F M1 Y 1 I and HIisri it'n 'rvail

)EI ARTMINT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

P)IVIS I)N 0F PARKS. RI:( REATI( )N. ANI ) Ills 1' )RI(, I'RISl R\ATI( )N

kc'fcr%:rn (it.. M() (r; 12

July 14, 1986

Dudley M. HansonChief, Planning DivisionDepartment of the ArmyRock Island Corps of EngineersP.O. Box 2004Rock Island, Illinois 61204-2004

Re: Proposed Channel, Monkey Chute Lock and Dam 21 (COE),Marion County, Missouri

Dear Mr. Hanson:

In response to your letter dated 24 June 1986 concerning the above-referencedproject, the Missouri Historic Preservation Program has reviewed theinformation provided and we concur with your determination that the proposedundertaking will have "no effect" on any significant cultural resources.Therefore, we have no objection to the initiation of project activities.

However, if the currently defined project area or scope of project-relatedactivities is changed or revised, or cultural materials are encountered duringconstruction, the Missouri Historic Preservation Program must be notified andappropriate information relevant to such changes, revisions, or discoveries beprovided for further review and comment, in order to ascertain the need foradditional investigations.

If I can be of further assistanr:e, please call 314/751-7958 or write.

Sincerely,

DIVISION OF PARKS, RECREATION,AND HI ORIC PRESERVATION

Michael S. WeichmanChief, Review and Compliance

MSW:roI#6

United States Department of the Interior2 FISH AND WILDLIFE SFRVICE I ULLY RIVE To:

ROCK ISLAND FIELD OFICE (S) COM: 309-793-58001830 Second Avnue, Second Floor FTS: 386-5800

Rock Island, Illinois 61201

July 28, 1986

Colonel William C. Burns, Jr.District EngineerU.S. Army Engineer District

Rock IslandClock Tower Building, P.O. Box 2004Rock Island, Illinois 61204-2004

Dear Colonel Burns:

This is our Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Report for the Monkey Chuteproject located just above Lock and Dam 21 along the Missouri bank,Mississippi River mile 325.0. It has been prepared under the authority ofand in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act(48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.); the National EnvironmentalPolicy Act of 1969, as amended; the Endangered Species Act of 1973, asamended; and in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Service's MitigationPolicv.

Information for this report was provided by your staff, and a site me:tingattended by representatives of the Missouri Department of Conservation, theCorps of Engineers and this Service. By copy of this report, we request thecomments of the Missouri Department of Conservation.

Project Description

The Monkey Chute project area totals about 228 acres of which about 170 areforested bottomlands and 58 acres are open water. The only access to theMississippi River mainstem is an inlet located at the downstream end of thechute. This inlet has become extremely shallow with depths of less than a

* foot at flat pool. The proposed project would dredge out the shallow sectionof the inlet (30 feet x 600 feet), to a depth of 4 feet totaling about 3,000cubic yards. The preferred disposal area for the material is a mud flat area(Figure 1). Two other alternative disposal sites include a disturbed fieldbehind the levee of the Fabius River Levee and Drainage District, and abottomland hardwood area riverward of the levee.

Fish and Wildlife Resources of the Project Area

Fish

,.'. Monkey Chute is an important area for both sport fishing and fishreproduction. Fish surveys were conducted by the Missouri Department of

Conservation (MoDOC) for the years 1983 and 1984. Bluegill were foun

9AA

di I

0 4 - - - -

.Jh .aw

0I

4z

U 2

Sa

-~~ a ~ ~

14L .4

I ii 441

Fiur 1. Moke Chte-ojc

area and alentv dipsl ie

2

spawning in the chute and mary othe'r npecies likely use .he area for bothspawning and nursery habitat. Th, surveys a.sc ir:dcate a diverse and

C '.abundant sport fishery, For Loth years, white crappie and bluegill comprised57% of the collection u:;ing eleotrufishlng. Other species collected includeblack crappie, buffal.o, flatnead catfish, -itr:r.e i c s ,ti. and largemouth bass(Table 1). The river biulogis" for MoNe found tne Morikey Chute fishery tobe one of the best for aiy Mississippi ,iver backwater he had seen. Onereason for the good fishtry i that hole c w-e .ir,1c"ge it the backwater forlevee fill. Theze holes provide hat' rLt diversity a:d help aintain waterquality. In surrmer, the deaer qwater helps iainta;n c atlsfactory dissolvedoxygen levels while in winter, the deeper water helps minimize winter kill.Since there is no upstream opening, sedimentation of The backwater over theyears has been reduced.

Wildlife

Important wildlife zpecies presen in the Monkey Chute area include muskrats,raccoon, beaver, deer, and rne Missouri State Endangered river otter. Tracksrecognized by State and Federal biologists to be those of the river otterwere observed at the site meetig on June 12, 1986. Since river otter., havebeen released in the area by Mi.soori biologists, their occurance in MonkeyChute is likely.

Waterfowl use Monkey Chute as a migratory stop-over. In addition, wood ducksand mallards likely use the area for nesting.

Preferred Disposal Site

The preferred disposal area was a mud flat at the time of our June 12 visit.The mud flat appeared to be part of an old slough. Small willow shoots hademerged and would soon likely cover the mudflat. At the time of the sitevisit, the preferred disposal area provided no cover for wildlife or f'sh butobviously was used as a travel lane. Turtles and crayfish may also be usingthe area for nesting or resting though none were seen.

Alternative Disposal Sites A and BJ

Alternative disposal area A is located adjacent to the proposed cut andriverward of the levee. The area is composed primarily of bottomlandhardwoods with silver maple dominating. Other species include willow, elmcottonwood and sycamore. Some mature trees are present, over 20 feet tall.A wide strip cf mud f~at'wilo% nedlings is present between the woodland

, ,andthe chute.

Disposal alternative B is a frequently farmed fiald landward of the levee.Wildlife values in the area are marginal since, the field i p._owe andplanted when proper drainage permits.

Endangered Species

To facilitate cLmpllance with Sec-tion 7(c) of the EndangereJ :-pecles Act of:973, as amended, Federal Agencies are reouir;o to ,btair from the Fish andWildlife Service informatior concprning any iec , 2i 'ed or proposed to be

'*.- listed, which may be present. ir the area of a proposed actin. Therefore, we

'%

Table 1. Species list for fish collected by electrofishing from MonkeyChute, Pool 21, Mississippi River, 6-13-83.

Species Number % of Total

White crappie 215 32

Bluegill 167 25

Black crappie 9 1

Gizzard shad 91 14

Smallmouth buffalo 33 5

Drum 18 3

River carpsucker 11 2

Carp 60 9

Bigmouth buffalo 29 4

Flathead catfish 3 -

Largemouth bass 16 2

Channel catfish 2

Orangespotted sunfish 4

Warmouth 7 1

Brook silverside 1 --

Black bullhead 3

Golden shiner 2

Green sunfish 1

Bowfin 2

Total 67L

., No. Species 19

No./Hour 674

a~

3

are furnishing you the following list of species which may be present in theconcerned area:

Classification Common Nime S~ientific Name Habitat

Endangered Fat Pccketbook 'otamilus capax MississippiPearly Mussol River (Marion

County)

Endangered Bald Eagle Haliaeetus BreedingletcocePhalus Wintering

Dredging out the backwater and placing the material in any of the threealternative disposal sites will not affect habitat suitable for the fatpocketbook pearly mussel. Since no trees will be cleared and no work will beconducted during winter, the project will also not affect the bald eag'e.

This precludes the need for further action on this project as required underSection 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. Should thisproject be modified or new information indicate endangered species may beaffected, consultation should be initiated.

State and Federal biologists at the June 12, 1986 on-site meeting determinedthat proposed dredging or filling would have no effect on the StateEndangered river otter. The disturbances are temporary and areas disturbedare not denning sites for the otter. As their range extends to 30 miles theriver otter may escape the temporary disturbances.

Project Impacts on Other Fish and Wildlife Resources

The proposed project should result in many benefits to the fish and wildliferesources of Monkey Chute. The dredging should prevent the complete closureof the downstream access. This will help maintain water quality levelsduring critical periods, particularly dissolved oxygen. It will also permitthe movement of fish in and out of Monkey Chute; allowing the entrance ofspawning adults and release of the adults and young.

The dredging will remove silty substrate which contains invertebrate larvae

of species such as mayflies, caddisflies and chironomids. There was noevidence at the site that silt-tolerant mussel species were present in largenumbers. The relatively sma I area to be dredged should not affect thesepopulations.

To minimize adverse effects from the filling, a nylon silt screen should beplaced at the downstream end of the mudflat area to be filled. This willprevent most of the nilty miatJal from reentering the waterway. To beeffective, however, the bottom 6f the :;creen 'u3t be sealed all along itsedge and the force of the descharge rmst be dissipated. This may beacccmplished by surrounding !n-r,:.'nd of the pipe with hay bales. Filling themudflat w'll )iso benefit the ielife resource provided the area isrevegetated with treei and M >,'i eneficial te wildlife, as planned.Filling the rudflat a:-a _,hca :,ct significar:tly iffect populations oFspecies dwelling thur:1y ur 1 habitat. Thr cg/;h revegetation efforts, plant"pecies more henefi-fai to wtild1fe should repopulate the area.

1

4

a°'

Effects from disposal in area A would be minimized if the mature, valuabletrees remained intact and unharmed and if the entire disposal area werebermed. After disposal, the area could be enhanced by grading the berm andplanting open areas with trees and shrubs beneficial to wildlife.

Impacts resulting from the disposal of material in the agricultural field(area B) wou]d be minimal. Likewise, opportunities for enhancement wouldalso be low since the area would likely be farmed again after the dredgedmaterial dried out.

In accordance with the Service mitigation policy (46 FR 7644-7655), we haveV.. evaluated the habitats to be impacted by the proposed project in order to

determine their Resource Categories and proper Mitigation Goals. TheResource Categories and their Mitigation goals are as follows:

Resource Category 1 - Habitat is of high value and is unique andirreplaceable in the nation or ecoregion. Goal - no loss of existinghabitat value. Guideline - the Service will recommend that all losses

of existing habitat be prevented as these one-of-kind areas cannot bereplaced. Insignificant changes are acceptable provided they will haveno cumulative impact.

Resource Category 2 - Habitat is of high value and is relatively scarceor becoming scarce in the nation or ecoregion. Goal - no net loss ofin-kind habitat value. Guideline - losses that cannot be otherwiseavoided, minimized, rectified or eliminated over time can be compensatedby replacement with the same kind of habitat so that the total or net

. loss is zero.

Resource Category 3 - Habitat is of high to medium value and isrelatively abundant in the nation. Goal - no net loss of habitat valuewhile minimizing loss of in-kind habitat value. Guideline - losses thatcannot be otherwise avoided, minimized, rectified, eliminated over timeor compensated by in-kind replacement can be compensated by replacementwith other habitat types so that the total or net loss is zero.

Resource Category 4 - Habitat is of medium to low quality. Goal -minimize loss of habitat value. Guideline - the Service will makerecommendations to avoid, m.nimize, rectify or eliminate losses overtime depending on the significance of the potential loss. Such areasare good candidates for mitigation of Resource Category 2 and 3 lossesby management or enhancement to increase their habitat value.

We have assigned the aquatic habitat of Monkey Chute to Category 2. Disposalarea B is assigned Category 3 while disposal area A and the preferreddisposal area are Category 4. No additional mitigation requirements arenecessary for the affected habitats provided the project is constructed asproposed including the recommendations discussed below.

Recomendations

":2~ We recommend the following measures be incorporated into the project plans to

minimize damage and promote the enhancement of fish and wildlife resources.

' ,'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. .. -.-.... .. . ... .- - ...-....-..... -,... -......... -...- .. ,.. ..-

Preferred Disposal Area:

I. Silt screens should be placed across the downstream end of the

mudflat with the bottom of the screen secured into theV substrate.

2. The pressure at the outfall of the pipe should be dissipated byusing hay bales or some other means.

3. The disposal area should be stabilized by planting afast growing grass immediately after project completion. In thefollowing year, trees and shrubs beneficial to wildlife shouldbe planted.

Disposal Area A:

1. The disposal site should be bermed to minimize sedimentsreentering the waterway.

2. Tree clearing should be minimized, particularly leaving themost mature specimens.

3. After completion of dredging, the disposal area should be

seeded and revegetated as described for the preferred disposalarea.

Disposal Area B:

No recommendations

*. We appreciate this opportunity to comment on the Monkey Chute project. Ifyou have any questions, please contact Jody Millar or me.

S' cere,/1

chard C. Nelso

Field Supervisor

cc: MO DOC (Farabee, Stucky)

k -A P

lDim~i n (of I nt-rg%JORHN ASIICROFI im~n ofI n'i ric nut Qula

(o ..icf(lhirn i i iun ot (-vohWA ind Land surv

A .I )1%1"t1 iD m in ( % l l ag( If1 ll ULI i C!

FRFI)tRi(:K A BRL"NNFR Il ,n ,t J,'rks andI )ire, tot 'I A IT ()I %1 I,( )[ RI fiAtir. Pt't- attion

I)EPARTM ENT OF NATU RAL RESOU.'RCES

1o."IOI OFC)O FNA.IRO)NMI NT(AIL A'LITY" P0. Box 1-0

J' Ictlcr o Cn, 10 o5102

14-- I1-i241

°"0 i .061

07110001 -01 -00

August 11, 19B6 CERTIFIED MAIL P062013017

Mr. Doyle W. McCully, ChiefEngineering DivisionRock Island District, Corps of EngineersP.O. Box 200L4

Rock Island, Illinois 61204-200L4

Dear Mr. nizCully:

The Department of' Natural Resources, Water PollutionControl Program, has reviewed your request for waterquality certification for the proposed dredging access fromthe main channel of the Mississippi River to Monkey Chuteat. Upper Mississippi River Mile 325.0. This officecertifies that the proposed activity apparently will notviolate applicable Water Quality Standards, 10 CSR20-7.031, subject to the following conditions:

I. The dredging mu,- occur when the water temperature isless than 150 C and the pH is less than 8.0 to avoidviolations of the Missouri Water Quality Standards forun--io-kized amrrcria-nitrogen.

2. A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES) permit must be obtained from the Department ofNatural Resources prior to any dis1:harge of returnwater from the dredged disposal basin.

W.1er Qual ity Standards must corntinu- to be met during theoperjt, ion. If a vioiat. ion of the Standirds is found toexist, because of this operation, the Corps of Eng~neerswi]l L. ni ti f it arid th" certJ ,c atior may be withdrawn

Z. * . . °

Mr. Doyle W. McCully

August 11, 1986page 2

This certification is being issued under Section 401 of'Public Law 95-217, the Clean Water Act of 1977.

Sincerely,

T R POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAM

mes F. PenfoldChief, Compliance/Review Section

JFP:epc

cc: Mr. Bob Barber, U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyMr. Joe Tieger, U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceMr. Norm Stucky, Department of Conservation

2

4

[% ".,

92

i''I'-'I..

-. ' ' a 9

JOHN A-S 0RE7 Io)imion (A I ncrgN.J N ft., L I~H('R )r )Iiion ol I n~ironmcnial QuAii!

(KONVMk~r IDn,,.on of G. AgN and ind survIb"l mson of( Mallnln'ni Ic%v

FREDERICK A. BRUNNER )nlsion of urks And

I)rcdi.ir STATE OF MISS)URI Histor Prc,.crvation

I)EPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITYPO Box I-6

Jefferson City, MO 65102314-'51-3241

August 21, 1986

Mr. Doyle W. McCully, ChiefEngineering DivisionRock Island District, Corps of Engineers

P.O. Box 2004Rock Island, IL 61204-2004

Dear Mr. McCully:

Or. August 11, 1986, the Department of Natural Resources issued water

quality certification for the proposed dredging of approximately

2,800 cubic yards of material at the mouth of Monkey Chute in the

Mississippi River at Upper Mississippi River Mile 325.0. The

certification contained a special condition which required that the

Corps of Engineers obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination

System (NPDES) permit from the Department of Natural Resources priorto any discharge of return water from the disposal basin.

As a result of a follow-up conversation with your office, weunderstand that the dredged material will not be pumped into adisposal basin but will be pumped onto the island in Monkey Chute. Asilt retaining fence or similar structure will be constructed toretain the dredged material on site. Since there will not be any

disposal basin with a return water discharge, no NPDES permit wouldbe required. Therefore the second special condition of the water

quality certification is not appropriate and is removed. The first

condition of the certification remains in effect.

If you have any questions, please contact me or Mr. Earl Pabst of my

staff at 314/751-1299.

Sincerely,

mes F. Penfoldief, Compliance/Review Section

JFP/epb

cc: Mr. Norm Stucky, Departmerit of Conservation

- 0 4!14

0 ,;.:...

"."

,-.,.::.

S..

-S.

"*"%

"4 Atahmnt5 f

O'.

CaI ;T-i! iUT I!N L iS T fC P

N MONKEY CHUTE RESTORATION PROJECT

POOL 21, UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVERM4ARION COUNTY, MISSOURI

I I T 1 HU IDN -- 'T - 0 11Lt

NCcc

)~N.) A~ J110l') L. flAN 'l III q INI T 0 !,1 91 L IS NA l cl~l I' 'o 1 'UI T 11. It ST L Ltll 19 M4( ( 3101

04. ,) %AfL TH MA ~ A. rL- fCN. UNI Tf STATE S '-l ATCR

I;)N%~LIHA-'OLC L V-ILK" R, '.P' ' SENIA1iWE IN CCNGf SSF Fi) AL lUT' fltis, QcP )ms rI-4V'i8lL 14) 634 1

J TP_ r C-1,An Oi S C -1Y C U 4CTL. :j. HTi ;TUOHC ~EiO)LD P0 jLCG 981P' It). 0 _NYLVANJA AV :NUE hwm41ilNGT)N '_lC 2_1L4

)'f I C, rf FNd !P (NIr h rAL 00 IJ R V 9h Di 'AlR III )f I NT[ RIICRI idi U (;T N1. 4-i - i ~ 9 wV.f4I..4TlN FC 7074"'

44 1* N LSCM - i-' SUI J'lYV 9- U. .. f cH & bsIL')L f VIC'-

I1 .S ' s)N 9 AV F. "N 'i VIL, 9f C K I SL KD v IL E210

r- .' ! INA L ) 1R. C T( 01 - 1 1C~ 3,9 U.' f. F 4 A r WILELIi-E SERVICEFJ-LJ RAL H1LDVJ FORT )_%7LL14Gv TWIN C 11 I MN 5 111

MR~ vLON', J IOAFKJZ, - A04IhlI.TRAT0Rv US INVItZONMF-NTAL PROTECTION AGCY?ij S D>AH iPN ;T, C]AICAS') TL 6;.Cifl4

jI- i' "rCIoFL ) IR AL : 0 _ G _'4C Y M ANA 2 .PLN 71 G' NC YR' ' jN V I 1~i 9 1 w.LNUT ITRJ I - VCCM 3 0K Af'N A& rZ IymC c.41n'

K .', 4. I T Y MO (,41 -1

TA T C j ~T 1(, 1,4 1 ilL nN, vV'I1 TCN SEQ)lICt_Vt VA IV W '. V* :L'4i~ DP

I NAL vC'' SI T, F Rsr 3, ,vlc-J r F1 rC) u I I' b I J-_ il[ 4 C'~ SI 5C-,

-. A NI-UT

'-ft.

Jl[,r !P01 [ON -- KT.iA

)I 1 -T JN 'KGI NtAk v L AR~MY r-JGIN-' iR JlVN'-NORT1 1CFATRAL 1Al ~.INC)PE, 53(- 1; CIA Q( SIR FTCH1I--A G -11L '16C I

a4" H )LLr STJ R KF : LP'> R!~ PAI 1RIV, o A)S IN AS*41)HAM1 HUILDjIN;, 41- "' I TER STRI ET

>T H 'IUL 'IN 'Jt1C2

'JNj.AHL:- JO'1N !ASHArc7To -; V-RNfW Of MISSOURT

3 rI A F CAPU'[L, j.-FA-SrN CITY MJ 65101

ft I: C L') A)4NI *FkATIGNv OIVN Pf'F Pillr 4. FLARtNIPAGP)t )x i q9 ST A I ' C 5P I TliiJ- fI R; 04 C ' T Y Ml I 'IlIl

1 H CR . WAI I R P L L N -- P 4 , R AM-'.I; V )Nj if KNY1'14 N0 N F.L GJALITY q P*O. HOX 126".

J ,. C, l 51 12

L '-% cAL - Cl< C T 3-. M 1 -10'1 DFL- T nf NATLRAL PESO LPCES

'0H N TrU C K I'ii Mr R furl r:PrT OF Crp 0ft 'kVA T fON 2X I 't 0 0, J F ~LR'C CITY M4O C, j02

.1 K 76, J L Ff -R -7C N CITY 43 69101l

FN l N" '1, 41 ,L-U ;c Ir 3T,,r- -HI';-ifY Di PTH Ii 4; HQ' Y C M4M I I J 4 3L)~ V0 H.'X *17 n

R Jrr- 'NC T TY M 0C E1 1

'4 C --I 10, Ml f, 14

S.'. L 0 M I (t MTS(0'R I HIL~ fl f Pf V4 r-NTAT[VEFs

IU C 'I T L, .i I* N CI'Y f- flIC

0* 'd I' ly C U:; I H W))* JN T Y .1VIt 9 M MC 1~4 -,

IId ,L ~ f i J T L I74(~ I N IC A I

A4

IT ST %I F9uT I Ch -- .. Tt i'

Cc

)U4TY CL-R'(q MA*1ION CiUNTV -CURT tCUS[PALMYRA* P9f 6~34fl

r)JNTY [hJrIN:E', CCL1T HIUZ37MARION C)uNfYt PALPY'RA9 Ma f,3461

iH2..I0A4- MIJN11ACNJICOUUTC-JNTY ?dJLRT -CIISE9 PSLMYR-A. 040 634c

4R. ,{>; CE, MAN-1,-E-0 CH..MH>-' OF CCMPFRCE

i- MAY;), & CITY rt)LUNVIL,, CIT Y HALLj-' 1it~)hVf §-,NN!PAL* Mr r.3qnj

(:A 4 )L R tiTHI'4S, MA I3N CN TY '01 L it #At Hf CONS k 01 T

1iAUivJ3AL VF F U01-LI LIrH(ARY9 ?91 S(UTI- f Ifrh STPEErHA1i'I8A,9 M 1 63401

4.'AL&4 'i -'I)LIC LJWtP)Yq I'll -z. WITN ,T.

PeAL4qRA, 9 P#;4,

14S C-i-OLI"I R fFEN., P, S~I''RA CLUt4-9 1 1SW )' %UI 4 AStI, SUL r;- 929

Chi CA G' IL (-n6C"N

%'I N MICH[ *AN F ', UI T ' 9Cml' "AG I IL t~lrll

$.Ait~ ,4AN~~ N, tZAAK 6A~L TON L'-A( W:U 9 P I"I'IPV ;iI R- NL IFC9 66Sil AUTO CLUd RCAD

M!INKA" IL I, MN 594 3 1

IA%-- - Lry' - , T HE 31T-'%A CLUH7>?14 N Hi- NY 'T :,UIT - ?J ) it "A rI ',N il 5 lfl3

-)IJ PI S I ;T01'iT' r '3 XC FfT V7 LN-) CAT. 0

3

JIST-%TFUI ICP -- XT -1N'At

(CPI S

1 0,34, Kf M C FA[ 0h AN N IHA, I-*M-(-"4"

NPW!, RUJJM- KAC A' OICHAN14IHAL 9 M' 63491

;IN;LE C"P'IEf nTI;TRIqUTKD ECEPI AS INDICAT[O

DISTRIBUTION -- INTERNAL

COMMANDER, US ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ROCK ISLAND, CLOCK

TOWER BLDG., ROCK ISLAND, IL 61204-2004

ATTN: NCRDE NCRPDNCRRE-R NCRPD-E

NCRED NCRPD-R

NCRED-D NCROD

NCRED-DG NCROD-M

NCRED-H NCROD-MC

NCRED-HH NCRCD

NCRED-HQ NCRAS-L (3)

q.4...

A

P

,NF,

CORRESPONDENCE N

D

!,I

x.:

B

tle.5,

.0 .*1"

United States Department of the InteriorFISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE ~h*PYa~aT

Federal Building, Fort Snelling R/S

Twin Cities, Minnesota 55111

M~r. Andy BruzewiczU. S. Army Engineer District

Rock IslandClock Tower BuildingP. 0. Box 2004Rock Island, Tllinois 61204-2004

Dear Mr. Bruzewicz:

For your information and use, a copy of the Compatibility Determination for

the UMRS-EMP Monkey Chute project Is enclosed.

If you have questions or need any further information, please let me know.

Sfnc rely yours,

a,, Charles W. Ci~ ons

Facility Manager

Enclosure

P .f%

COMPATIBILITY DETERMINATION

Mark Twain National Wildlife Refuge was established in 1958 under authorityof the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401). The purpose ofthe Act is to develop, protect, rear and stock fish and wildlife on Federallands, and to stiy effects of pollution on fish and wildlife. The landsacquired tinder the Act were for mitigation and enhancement of fish andwildlife in connection with water use projects on the Mississippi River.The main concern of the refuge is management of migratory waterfowl; otherwildife management responsibilities have been transferred to the State ofMissouri.

The Army Corps of Engineers, as part of the environmental management programderived from co'istruction of a new dam and enlarged lock at Alton, Illinois,has proposed to restore the water connection between the Mississippi Riverand Monkey Chute for the benefit of riverine aquatic resources, near rivermile 325 in Pool 21. A dredge cut of about 3,000 cu. yds., about 600 feetlong by 30 feet ;'ide and 4 feet deep, is to be made in the lower end of thechute.

Impacts on refuge purposes are expected to be negligible. The project will-. help retain existing productive wildlife and fish habitat, provided

stipulations as developed in the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Reportand explained in the Environmental Assessment for Monkey Chute RestorationProject (September 1986) are incorporated.

Monkey Chute is extensively used by migratory waterfowl in the spring. The.proposed dredge cut will retain Monkey Chute's connection to the MississippiRiver, maintaining water circulation and access by fish and by the public.The stipulations are designed to prevent most of the dredged silty masterialfrom reentering the waterway.

Prepared by:___ _ - ___________ _ _ _- _ _ _

- DateJerry ummins, EP Coordinate/

I have determined !his project and its use of refuge lands is compatiblewith the purposes for which the rfuge was established.

Determined by: hRe nager Date

Rfeviewed by:pionoWl Pef ,ge 5 fj)r E 2)D

2:(n-urre1by h -, -/- I"g ional DIrrtor Date

96 Nr

W "..-

A

P

E

CoM4HENT LETTERS ON THE

ENVIRON IENTAL ASSESSMENT/SECTION; 404(b)(1) EVALUATION N

4' D

II

7,*-,c:, -d'-.,7- ,-. ,W : , e

UPPE2R MSS jSIPP[ IVI , SYSTEM -

FI NV'I RO*MI: NTAL, M.ANA I lI;NAT PROGRAMID)FF[N ITh: KOJEC' 'EI',)RT

FOR CONS;TR[IT ION

MO)NKEY C( UTE C1 R-St)R,\ U) tROJIC(:"POOL 21, UPPER MISS!5-S LPI RIVER

MARIU N COUNTY, 1ISSOURI

APPENDIX CCO MNT LETTERS ON THE ENVIiZONMIE:,TAL ASSESSMENT/


TFABLE OF CONTENTS

Letter Page

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service,dated 25 November 1986 C-1

M'?issouri Department of Natural Resources, dated 3 December 1986 C-2U.S. Eitvironmental Protection Agency, Region VII, dated

10 December 1986 C-3Missouri Clean Water Commission, Department of Natural Resources,

Division of Environmental Quality, dated 30 )ecember 1986 C-4U.S. Department of the Interi)r, Fish and Wildlife Service,dated 14 January 1987 C-6

Rock Island District Letter to Missouri Clean Water Commission,Missouri Department of Natural Resources, dated 29 January 1987 C-8

* .**.,', :.

United States Soil 555 Vandiver DriveDepartmentof ConservationAgnculture Service 6u202

60 November 25, 1986

Colonel Neil A. SmartRock Island District Corps or EngineersClock Tower Building

P.O. Box 2004Rock Island, Illinois 61204-2004

ATTN: Planning Division

Dear Colonel Smart:

. The environmental assessment for the Monkey Chute Restoration Project,Pool 21, Marion County, Missouri, has been reviewed by our office.

As it involves a dredge cut with no effect on prime farmland or other-ong-term damage to the environment, we do not have any comments.

Sincerely,

Paul F. Larson

State Conservationist

4.

I ".

U-°

.V.

lh'ison Ji I ncr,JOHIN AS11(H )7F Itson of I IMninrnm'nulI QuJhr%

t kI I)1 R1( K A I, R I H I)|hlis. ,,I N.Nrk'. R rcjc,,n

r STATF 01F MN SOLRI aid iti, . Pr'3ti)n

D)EPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

()FHC (F [1-TE )IRECT()RP.0 tk)X I(0

Jcffcr.n Cit. Mtz.uun 65 102Tclkphmc 14 '51-4422

December 3, 1986

Colonel Neil A. Smart,District Engineer

Rock Island DistrictCorps of EngineersClock Tower BuildingP. 0. Box 2004Rock Island, IL 61204-2004

Dear Colonel Smart:

The Departmernt of Natural Resources reviewed theEnvironmental Assessment for the Monkey Chute RestorationProject, Pool 21, Mississippi River. Marion County, Missouri.

This project is compatible with the development and

maintenance of established purposes of the Mississippi Riverand should be constructed.

Si nce-rel y,

DEPARTM T OF NATURAL RESOURCES

F- --

Freder i5, A. Brunner, Ph.D., P.E.V)i rector

FAB:cme

cc: Mr. Larry Gale

Mr. Wayne Muri

9.

, .

p 4.%.' r° ~s. ss s .~~

\ e~o Sr,

-5 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION VII726 MINNESOTA AVENUE

KANSAS CITY, KANSAS 66101

December 10, 1986

Colonel William C. Burns, Jr., USADistrict EngineerU.S. Army Engineer District, Rock IslandClock Tower Building - P.O. Box 2004Rock Island, Illinois 61204-2004

Attention: Planning Division

Dear Colonel Burns:

RE: Environmental Assessment Monkey Chute RestorationProject Pool 21, Marion County, Missouri

In accordance with our responsibilities under the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Section 309 of the CleanAir Act, the Region VII Office of the Environmental ProtectionAgency has reviewed the above-referenced document. We haveno objections to the implementation of the project as described.

Please keep this office apprised of any changes in theproject which may require a NEPA action or Section 309 review.

Sincerely yours,

-

Edward C. VestChief, EIS Section

I%%

' . r , . . " ,, ' . . .- ,- . -% ,.,,r ¢ , . . . - .' . - . . , . , . , - . . - . . . . .. ,, ,

1OHN ASH(CR(Fr D 1mI~ sion of Encrmo" "k .,

4 ~)m s, ioln o f En w r im cr it l Q uLJ ilt

I , ,.rrnr I)ilim on of ( .COI .g and Land %urx' %

FRFI)RICK A BRLNNFR Im'sion of Park, Rct remlon, r'

Inre (ir 'STATE OF MI'.4 )IRI And tih'on, Pr'cn-ation

I)EPARTMINT OF NATI !RAI. RESOURCFS

DIVISION (F FN\IRONMFNTAi QL ALITYP() Box 1-6

Jeler%)fn (iti, M(O ( 102

December 30, 1986

Colonel William C. BurnsDiatrict EngineerRock Island Dist., Corps of EngineersP.O. EBkx 2004

" Rock Island, Illinois 61201

Re: Public Notice NCROD-S-07O-OX6-1-146390. U.S.A.C.E.

.)car Colonel Burns:

The Department of Natural Resources has reviewed the above referencedpublic notice and has the following comments.

..e applicant, Rock Island District, Corps of Engineers, needs to,eceive a flood plain development permit from Marion County,Missouri. for the proposed action. Marion Cbunty is participating in

IC'z. the National Flood Insurance Program, and regulates dredging andfilling in the flood plains identified on the county's FloodInsurance Hate Map. Application should be made to the Marion CountyPlanning and Zoning Commission, Palmyra, Missouri.

1fne ..par.*nt. of Natural Resources has no objection to the dredgino

of the chute to restore water flow. However, consideration should be.iven to depqisiting the spoil outside the flood plain where it wouldprovi,]u net flood plain management benefits.

.xecutive Orders 11958 and 11990 apply to this proposed activity.T., iocx i3land District has not addressed alternatives to'-":>ition. T- Department of Natural Resources suggests that there!r,. iternat ives which should be explored before a finding is made,

anil before a permit is issued.

-%

.4

fil

Colonel William C. BurnsDecember 30, 19b6Page Two

We appreciate the opportunity to review and comment.

Sincerely,

MISSOURI CLEAN WATER ODMMISSION

C~irle A.Stiefer n, P.E.Director of Staff

CAS: Ibd

cc: Department of ConservationU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

U.S. Environmental Protection AgEncy, 404 Section

5 .

Ii

, i5

United States Department of' the Interior.FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE IN 1111I ftKFIm TO

Federal Building. Fort Snelling E LTwin Cities, Minnesota 55111

Colonel Neil A. Smart JN1418District EngineerRock Island District. Corps of LngineerisAttention: Planning DivisionClock Tower BuildingPost office box 2004kock Island, Illinois 61204-2004

Dear Colonel Smart:

The Fish and Wildlife Service htas review.ed the Environoental Assessmentthat includes a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) and PreliminarySection 404(b)(1) Evaluation for the Monkey Chute Restoration Project. Pool21, Marion County, Kissouiri. Also, we have reviewed Public NoticeNCROD-S-070--0X-1-146390 dated November 4, 1986 of a Section 404 permitapplication by the U.S. Aruy Corps of Engineers, Rock Island District, fortoe same project. This project is being proposed under authority of the

9 Supplemental Appropriations Bill (P.L. 99-88) as part of thte Environmental.4.. Management Program for the Upper Mississippi River System.

These commrents have been. prepared under the authority of the Fish andWildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. et seq.) andare consistent with the intent of the National Environmental Policy Act of1969, the U.S. Fish. and ~Iildlife Service's Mitigation P~olicy andPresidential Executive Orders 11988 and 11990. The Service finds that theasiesboent appears to comply with Federal laws that govern tn- proposeddredging and disposal activities. I concur with your determination thatthe proposed action will have no signIificant impact on the area's naturalresotirce A. more Imaportantly, It sl.oulo greatly improve an area that Ispresently cniedtobe declining in habitat quality.

I concur with the determination of the Refuge Manager. Mark Twain NationalWilalife kefuge. that Lhib project is compatible with the purpose for whichithe refuge was established provided that the recormendations in the RockIsland Field Office's Fish anid Wildlife Coordination Act Report, dated July28, 1986 and the followingj reco mwe dations are Incorporated into theproject.

We recosneend that:

(1) A maximum effort be expended to ensure that the disposal area hestabilized with vegetation and/or rock (riprap). If rock is usedas a bank stabilizer, we believe that benefits will accrue tocertain fishes &no other aquatic organisms.

(2) A more thorough analysis of disposal options be made in thefuture.

2

(3) A monitoring effort be established during disposal and following

disposal to determine the relative success of the retaining

* P. fence.

."

.,P The Fish and Wildlife Service would not object to the issuance of a permit

for this project.

Sincerely yours,

1884) John Popo-r'. 1

Wg11[Regional Director

bcc: WSS/FM, ARW, AF, AE, ES/FPC""Ff & MISO

,ICKE rTwain NWR; Fish Assistance, Winona

'Lz7.

p-J

_J

ja.J

o'a

I DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

ROCK ISLAND DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS

CLOCK TOWER BUILDING - P 0 BOX 2004 'j

RO( K ISt AND ILLINOIS 61204 .'004

January 29, 1987

Planning Division

Mr. Ciarlcs A. Stiefermann, P.E.Directur of StaffMissouri Clean Water Commission

! Issouri Department of Natural ResourcesP.O. Box 176

Jcfferson City, Missouri 65102

Drlar Mr. Stiefermann:

This is in response to your letter dated December 30,1966, concerning Public Notice NCROD-S-070-0X6-l-146390for the Monkey Chute Restoration Project, Pool 21, MarionCounty, Missouri. We appreciate your comments and con-sider ther to be supplementary to the official commentsprovided by Dr. Frederick Brunner, Director of the Depart-

,' ment of Natural Resources, in a letter dated December 3,1986. A copy of Dr. Brunner's letter is enclosed foryour information. The Environmental Assessment, whichwag prepared for the project and circulated concurrently;or review with the Public Notice, addressed alternativesto disposal and the relationship of the proposed activityto Executive Orders 11988 and 11990.

Should you have additional questions, please calli~r. Andrew Bruzewicz, our Rock Island District Environ-imental Management Program Manager, at 309/788-6361,.xt. 203, or write to the following address:

District EngineerU.S. Army Engineer District, Rock IslandATTN: Planning DivisionClock Tower Building - P.O. Box 2004Rock Island, Illinois 61204-2004

Sincerely,

Signed ByJ. T. SCH!VERPE

Dudley M. Hanson, P.E.Chief, PlanninV Division

Enclosure

-Sc -8

,1%

p'.

OISTRIFUTION LIST FOR

ENVIRONMENTAL, ASSESSMENT

- - UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER SYSTEM-



* OISTRIHUTIONh -- -ENTz.RNAL

* ~ON~qAHLr JOH-N C. OANFOR'YH, UNIEC STAflz S~hATflQ

815 flWz' ST SLITE 11679 ST LCUIS, PC f-,101

HNn4HLt TH'MAS F. EAGL TCNv UN17EC STo1ES SERATCR

4031 FEO r Al- CFFICE BL0G., ST. LOUIS, PC 631cz

HCN3i(A6Lv tARCLE L YCLKMER, REPREFh!IATJVE IN C0NfRFSl,

FE'tJRAL 4UItAJIA(, RUIM .370HA~NN!IBAL On 63401

C[IR-CTOH,, tOWISCRY CCUNCIL ON HISTCFIC PkS:,%

OLDl PLI HLDG NArJ9 1100 P.-NN';YLVANIA AV' NUE Ni

WASITNGT )h DC 2000 4

i ftICE flF E-'lVIRCNMbN1AL PROJ REVIEWp POOP 42411

O-,JAR14:NT CF INTER1OR9 idASHINGTON9 CC 202140

MR RICrHA-4 N-JLSCN - FIELO SUPRVR9 U.S*F1 H & 61LDLIFE SEP'VICZ

1-4313 S "CJND AVE. - 2NkD FLOOR9 RCCK ISLlkCiTt E12CI

F'>IGNAL 9IR'CT(Ri HFGION 3s U.S*FISH ANr WILELIFE SERVICEF;iL).LRAL 4LDG FCPT )NEfLLIN~, TWIN CITIES MN '!ll1

CCM'ANO7 ( SECONC CC/ST EUhA?0 DISTPICT1430 rDLIVF SI, ST ICUTS MO) 431O!

CIRN CT0Rv US rNIJF5A PrTK-CTILN AGfNCYpi ';TON vi It 324 F I ITH STKANASI CI TY PC- (,41 Oe

'"N VAI 'vA J l%0AMtU'; - A.)MIN I TRA TCH, US I NV IPChM NTAI PR0OIE...AION AfiCY

21') 3 0AHILRh .To (HICAGfl IL (-0604

CI~iCTOR, 9 rc-;-pDA E l;RG'-iNCY MANAGrMENI A(FNCV

P -(-, (d VIIv 9 11 WA L AUT S TR- T - R C C 3 0C

KA NSA' CITY pr: 641i0f

F r-rI(NA L A0 M I N I T RA IC R F r0 i.AL H I GtdW yA rMI h

A. GT "IN vi , Pa HIex 19711)K -A i CITY PO (f41 q

,A !~ L E Loi' I S C I T (IU T I r X Cf PT I f I NDJ I C A T

L s rtV.. *-'v A .,%.I -- %% .w .. '.%.'~

nrSTkIPUr[ON - EXTERNAL

.~STAT: - ~iRATOI SOIL CONSFRVATION SERWJCci

,Z 555 VA N 01 WEN kR~ COLUMBIA M,) E52CI

R E GI NAL FOR LSTE R, F CRESI SP OVICEUS DrIJI )F hGR ICUL LURII 310 W W ISCONSIN AVE -SLI TE ai00 2

- MILUK;': WI 52203

rW.WUN ENGINEIEk, L. ARMYPV FNGINEER DIVN-NOR~T- CFiTRALATTN NCCP0, 53F S CLARK STREETCH-ICAG IL 606C5

10S HJLLY 3I.3RKr~, LFFER 1013S RrVR HOSIk AS'lA41- '4AMM flUL110ING, 408 ST P---r~k STRF FTST PAUL MN t91C;

P04,RAHL' JOH-N PSHCRCFT, GCV'TRNO 0 OF PISSOUR!STAT;- CAPITrI, JFIIIFERStOh CITY MG 651I01

lF )eI CF IF AP)MINISTRAJION, OIVN nFl bLrG[T &FL~hNIhiG- P1 "OX r 'I-, -,TATF CAPITCL

C IRL CT0-( 9wf YIER NS FLNG PROGRAM-'. DIVISI-)N OF EN IR')NENTAL GUALITYip P.C. BOX 1!6A~

&J- -FR C N C ITY, 100 (5102

*%LA-(HY RI GALE - ETRECICRi MISSOURI1 DEPT Of NATURAL RfSOURCESP) 'AJX 1 09 JEFFLNRSCN CITY "0 65102

NC ?MA% ;TOCKY9 PTSCLRT DEPT OF CCNEERVATION 2~, Pi 'iEX 1409 JEFE-ERS (f CITY MO 651C2

C £I-CTi09 PTSSOLRI NATURAL R;'SOURCES COUNCILS Pi RiM 1769 JFFER'Ch CITY PO 65101

C HI t F rNCINWRi MISSCURI STATE HIGH'.AV r3EPTSJT T HIGP-UAY C'j)MMlSION HL.IGv P0 HrX 270

J i "t IN C I IY mc c -10 1

H1~i'A'L~N:),Mah L. PFRLRLL9 IzOR SF NATOR0l)NrIc-LIO, Mr) f131451

,UdGLE COI 5 'ISTRIBUr&O FXCEPT AS INn ICOTFC

2

Jp.

H0N-iAtHLv GARY C. S14-RIPE. MISSOURI Fl'Pf4[ hTa1IVi

Cou NTy A IT 08NE Y CO L AT H IU Sf

% PARION CJUNTY9 PALPIRA9 PC 63461

COJN TY C L' RK i MARION COUNTY COURT #CUS EPALMYR(A, 00 63461

COUNTY E-NGINL-ER9 CVJUPT HCUS'PAR ION COUNTY, PALP IRA,9 MO 63461

CHAIRMAN,9 MARION CNT I COURT.4 C,)UNTY (CJUPr hCUSE9 PALMYRA, MO 634(l

MR. GFO'RGE PACE, MANAGER, CHAMBER OF CCMPERC,.1 613 HPOA')WAY9 -ANNIFALt MO 63401

Tel AY "<t CITY CO)LKCIL9 CITY HALL'a ~ RR)ArIWAYt I-ANNlFAL9 MO 4 3401

C Ar(R )L jtMTpIN, PAR Il(N CNTY SOIL 9 6A1ENR CCNS% DI!TRR 1, 9 3AL 1Y Q A 9 C E 46 1

"p HA%NIHAL FRE[ PLf-LIC LTHtRARY9 200 SCUIH FIFTH STREETHANNNqALY M- 62401

PALMYRA PtJRLTC tI9RARY9 301 S. MAIK ST.PALMYRA 9 MO 6340;1

a PS CARJLYN RPFFFNSP; ;GER9 SI RHA CLUHcil'i ';iUrT b.AR14i 'CLITE 529Ci[CAG) IL f060"

~ A~tj~t TTlN('R, IERRA CLU4431 N MICHI(CAN AVEv SUITE 2700CHITCAGOl IL 60611

PAJL HANS~kt 174AI( WALTJN LCAGI~WLO'P R Ml 1)i IFPI R;GNL 'FC v 61 01 AUTO CLUP FCAD

MI N N;A'CL IS PON !9

I -L Cr rI TRI' ' C P

0[STRIBUTION -- EXTERNAL -

C(PIA '

JAN E LDER9 THE SIERFA CLUB214 N HENRY ST SUITE 2039 MADISON 61 t3703

18? COURr R-POST, HA~hIRAL, NO 63401

NEWdS R)OM, iAHMO IkALIC*'ANNIi3AL9 M,' 62401

hr~s ROOM, KORC RADICHANNIBA1, M-) 6!401

SINCLE CCPIrS !ISTRIBUTF'D EXCEPT AS INOICATEJ

4.4

1%%

A1

*19

J

.*& .- *u ~v U S S U U W U U ~ S U 'W .6.

0' 0' 'P ~P * - .~ A~f.* ~ * *

T~A~

Documents

RD-A184 MISSISSIPPI RIVER SYSTEM ENVIRONMENTAL ROCK … · FOR CONSTRUCTION MONKEY CHUTE RESTORATION PROJECT POOL 21, UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER / MARION COUNTY, MISSO/R-cio D i s t