![](media/image1.png){width="0.5736111111111111in" height="0.75in"}

**Repave and Rehabilitate**

**A Portion of the**

**Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway**

**(Mileposts 6.7 to 28.4)**

**Environmental Assessment**

**August 2005**

**Lassen Volcanic National Park**

**Mineral, California**

#########  {#section .unnumbered}

#########  {#section-1 .unnumbered}

######### **United States Department of the Interior • National Park Service**  {#united-states-department-of-the-interior-national-park-service .unnumbered}

**Executive Summary**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253853 .anchor}

A portion of the roadway in Lassen Volcanic National Park underwent
rehabilitation in 2002. That project was described in the Environmental
Assessment: Repair and Rehabilitate Main Park Road and Manzanita Lake
Campground Entrance Road August 2001 (NPS 2001C). It consisted of the
repair of 7.9 miles (12.7 kilometers) of the main park road, beginning
at the south entrance, and 0.6 miles (0.96 kilometers) of the road
beginning at the north entrance.

In the preferred alternative, described in this Environmental
Assessment, the National Park Service would complete the rehabilitation
of the Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway (remainder of the main park
road), a distance of about 21.7 miles (34.9 kilometers). Project work
would also include repair and rehabilitation of the campground loop
roads at Manzanita Lake, Crags Campground, Lost Creek Campground and
North and South Summit Lake campgrounds. Rehabilitation would begin at
the end of the previous rehabilitation project, just north of the
Bumpass Hell Parking Area, and would extend northward to where the Phase
I project concluded at the Manzanita Lake Campground Entrance Road. Like
the former project, the preferred alternative would include repaving and
rehabilitation of numerous areas along the route, including spur roads
providing access to campgrounds and picnic areas, and pullouts.

Due to funding uncertainties, this project may be split into two phases
that would be constructed two to three years apart, each phase requiring
approximately 1-1/2 summer seasons to complete. The first phase would
likely begin in summer of 2006 or 2007.

This project would be designed and administered by the Central Federal
Lands Highway Division (CFLHD) of the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) in cooperation with the National Park Service, Lassen Volcanic
National Park.

Table of Contents

[Executive Summary 2](#__RefHeading___Toc99253853)

[Introduction 5](#__RefHeading___Toc99253854)

[I. Purpose and Need 7](#__RefHeading___Toc99253855)

[Project Setting 7](#__RefHeading___Toc99253856)

[Scope of this Document 8](#__RefHeading___Toc99253857)

[Relationship to Laws, NPS Policy and Park Planning Documents
8](#__RefHeading___Toc99253858)

[II. Alternatives 12](#__RefHeading___Toc99253859)

[Alternative 1: Continue Current Management (No Action)
12](#__RefHeading___Toc99253860)

[Alternative 2: Repave and Rehabilitate a Portion of the Lassen Volcanic
National Park Highway (Preferred) 14](#__RefHeading___Toc99253861)

[Project Description 14](#__RefHeading___Toc99253862)

[Pavement Rehabilitation 14](#__RefHeading___Toc99253863)

[Pullout and Wide Shoulder Grading Treatments
15](#__RefHeading___Toc99253864)

[Pullout Modifications 16](#__RefHeading___Toc99253865)

[Road Curve Widening 16](#__RefHeading___Toc99253866)

[Alignment Shifts 16](#__RefHeading___Toc99253867)

[Culvert Modifications 17](#__RefHeading___Toc99253868)

[Road Gate Replacement 17](#__RefHeading___Toc99253869)

[Staging 17](#__RefHeading___Toc99253870)

[Borrow Pits/Use of Native Materials 17](#__RefHeading___Toc99253871)

[Construction Delays 18](#__RefHeading___Toc99253873)

[Disturbed Area Rehabilitation and Restoration
18](#__RefHeading___Toc99253874)

[Monitoring 19](#__RefHeading___Toc99253875)

[Site Specific Treatments 19](#__RefHeading___Toc99253876)

[Environmentally Preferred Alternative 26](#__RefHeading___Toc99253877)

[Alternatives Considered But Rejected 27](#__RefHeading___Toc99253878)

[III. Impact Topics 30](#__RefHeading___Toc99253879)

[IV. Affected Environment 34](#__RefHeading___Toc99253880)

[Soils 34](#__RefHeading___Toc99253881)

[Water Resources 34](#__RefHeading___Toc99253882)

[Water Quality 34](#__RefHeading___Toc99253883)

[Wetlands 35](#__RefHeading___Toc99253884)

[Water Quantity 36](#__RefHeading___Toc99253885)

[Vegetation 36](#__RefHeading___Toc99253886)

[Figure 2: Generalized Vegetation Map 39](#__RefHeading___Toc99253887)

[Wildlife 40](#__RefHeading___Toc99253888)

[Special Status Species 40](#__RefHeading___Toc99253889)

[Prehistoric and Historical Archeology 45](#__RefHeading___Toc99253890)

[Ethnography 47](#__RefHeading___Toc99253891)

[Historic Structures 48](#__RefHeading___Toc99253892)

[Cultural Landscapes 48](#__RefHeading___Toc99253893)

[Visitor Experience 51](#__RefHeading___Toc99253894)

[Visitor Use Access 51](#__RefHeading___Toc99253895)

[Visitor Use Opportunities 52](#__RefHeading___Toc99253896)

[Visitor Safety 52](#__RefHeading___Toc99253897)

[Park Operations 53](#__RefHeading___Toc99253898)

[V. Environmental Impact Analysis 54](#__RefHeading___Toc99253899)

[Methodology 54](#methodology)

[VI. Environmental Consequences 58](#__RefHeading___Toc99253901)

[Table 1: Alternatives Comparison 58](#__RefHeading___Toc99253902)

[Soils 63](#__RefHeading___Toc99253903)

[Water Resources 66](#__RefHeading___Toc99253904)

[Water Quality 66](#__RefHeading___Toc99253905)

[Wetlands 68](#__RefHeading___Toc99253906)

[Table 2: Potential Wetland Impacts 70](#__RefHeading___Toc99253907)

[Water Quantity 72](#__RefHeading___Toc99253908)

[Vegetation 73](#__RefHeading___Toc99253909)

[Wildlife 76](#__RefHeading___Toc99253910)

[Special Status Species 77](#__RefHeading___Toc99253911)

[Prehistoric and Historical Archeology 78](#__RefHeading___Toc99253912)

[Ethnography 79](#__RefHeading___Toc99253913)

[Historic Structures/Cultural Landscapes
79](#__RefHeading___Toc99253914)

[Visitor Experiences 81](#__RefHeading___Toc99253915)

[Visitor Use Access/Opportunities 81](#__RefHeading___Toc99253916)

[Visitor and Employee Safety 82](#__RefHeading___Toc99253917)

[Park Operations 84](#__RefHeading___Toc99253918)

[VII. Consultation and Coordination 86](#__RefHeading___Toc99253919)

[VIII. References 89](#__RefHeading___Toc99253920)

[Appendix 1: Summary of Impact Mitigation Measures
92](#__RefHeading___Toc99253921)

[Appendix 2: Pullout Modifications 96](#__RefHeading___Toc99253922)

[Appendix 3: Culvert Modifications 100](#__RefHeading___Toc99253923)

**Introduction**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253854 .anchor}

Lassen Volcanic National Park encompasses 106,372 acres on the southern
tip of the Cascade Range in northeastern California (Figure 1). Located
approximately 50 miles (80 kilometers) from Redding and Red Bluff,
California and 20 miles (32 kilometers) from Chester, California, it was
established by an Act of Congress on August 9, 1916 (39 Stat. 442)

> . . . for recreation purposes by the public and for the preservation
> from injury or spoliation of all timber, mineral deposits and natural
> curiosities or wonders within said park and their retention in their
> natural condition and to. . . provide against the wanton destruction
> of the fish and game found within said park and against their capture
> or destruction. . .

Incorporated into the park were the previously designated Cinder Cone
and Lassen Peak National Monuments, which were established in 1907 as
part of the Lassen Peak Forest Reserve. Portions of the park lie in four
different counties (Tehama, Plumas, Lassen and Shasta), with most being
in Shasta County.

At the time of its designation as a national monument, the eruption of
Lassen Peak was the most recent volcanic eruption in the continental
United States. The eruption of Mount St. Helens in 1980 changed that,
although it did not change the status of Lassen Peak as one of the
largest plug dome volcanoes in the world. In addition, the park is
unique in its preservation of the three other types of volcanoes
(shield, composite and cinder cones) in a relatively small geographic
area. The park, sometimes referred to as Little Yellowstone (NPS HAER
2000), also contains the most extensive undisturbed network of
geothermal resources west of Yellowstone National Park, including
boiling springs, mudpots, and fumaroles (NPS 2003B). According to the
park map and guide, the park is a compact laboratory of volcanic
phenomena and associated thermal features except true geysers (NPS
2003C).

In addition to its geologic features, the park is at the apex of three
biogeographic regions -- the southern Cascades, the northern Sierra
Nevada, and the Basin and Range Province. The overlap of these regions
results in exceptionally high biodiversity in the park, with 779species
of plants, 56 species of mammals, 190 species of birds, 18 species of
reptiles and amphibians and an unknown number of invertebrate species.

Approximately 400,000 people visit Lassen Volcanic National Park each
year. The park provides a variety of opportunities for people to learn
about volcanism and other park resources and to enjoy various
recreational pursuits, including sightseeing, camping, picnicking and
hiking. Over 75 percent of the park is congressionally designated
wilderness.

This Environmental Assessment has been prepared to satisfy the
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 as
amended, including the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)
regulations found at 40 CFR 1500 *et seq*. This Environmental Assessment
also facilitates compliance with National Park Service policy and a
variety of other federal laws, including Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act, Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, the
Wilderness Act, Clean Water Act, and the Clean Air Act enacted for the
protection of the environment.

NEPA requires the documentation and evaluation of potential impacts
resulting from federal actions on lands under federal jurisdiction. An
Environmental Assessment discloses the potential environmental
consequences of implementing the proposed action and other reasonable
and feasible alternatives. NEPA is intended to provide decision-makers
with sound knowledge of the environmental consequences of the
alternatives available to them. In this case, the superintendent of
Lassen Volcanic National Park and the Pacific West Regional Director are
faced with a decision regarding whether to rehabilitate the Lassen
Volcanic National Park Highway as described herein.

**Figure 1: Lassen Volcanic National Park Region**

![](media/image2.jpeg){width="6.491666666666666in"
height="8.484722222222222in"}

**I. PURPOSE AND NEED**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253855 .anchor}

The approximately 21.7 mile (34.9 kilometer) portion of the Lassen
Volcanic National Park Highway not encompassed by rehabilitation work in
2002-2003 is at the end of its normal service life. Oxidation has caused
the asphalt to become brittle and to begin to erode from the outer edge
of the pavement inward, creating hazardous driving conditions and
narrowing lane widths. Age, weather and heavy use have contributed to
deterioration of the roadway surface, leading to warped pavement,
pavement cracking, asphalt spalling on the edge of the road, and
increased potholing. The road therefore needs comprehensive repair and
rehabilitation. This is further evidenced by escalating maintenance
costs in recent years to keep the road in fair condition for heavy
summer visitor use and to ensure safe passage in winter for snow-plowing
operations. The costs to repair the road have averaged over \$50,000 a
year since 1995 and have included emergency repairs of road failures due
to washouts.

The need for repaving and rehabilitation of this road subsequent to the
completion of the park General Management Plan has also resulted in an
opportunity to implement some aspects of that plan with respect to the
roadway improvements it calls for. These improvements include analysis
of pull-outs and visitor use parking areas for rehabilitation,
restoration and continued use to better preserve adjacent park resources
and to improve the visitor experience and to reduce safety hazards
associated with visitors pulling on and off the road at poorly located
pullouts. The opportunity also exists to remedy some long-term impacts
caused by the physical design of the road, including the placement of
new culverts and other drainage features where needed, especially in the
vicinity of the Lassen Peak Parking Lot and Dersch Meadows, as well as
to ensure that the project actions are consistent with the recently
completed Wayside Exhibit Plan (NPS 2000c) and the direction in the GMP
to minimize ongoing impacts to water quality by paving some formerly
unpaved vista points, picnic areas and campground roads and parking
areas. In addition, many feet of non-historic road curb lines the main
road, presenting a safety hazard during snowplowing. Finally, the
opportunity exists to remedy effects of some of the emergency repairs
conducted in recent years which have had incremental effects on the
aesthetic character of the road, including characteristics which make it
eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.

The main park road was recently re-designated the Lassen Volcanic
National Park Highway in an analysis of its eligibility for inclusion on
the National Register of Historic Places as a cultural landscape. Much
of this historic road traverses steep mountainous slopes or valley
bottoms along perennial creeks at high elevations on the west side of
the park. It is the primary means of access for most park visitors to
and through the park because it is the only through road and because it
was designed to access many of the park's significant volcanic features
and scenic characteristics and many of the park's information areas,
campgrounds, picnic areas, trailheads and concession facilities are
situated along it.

As a result of its recent determination of eligibility for the National
Register, actions that retain the character of the road and which avoid,
minimize or mitigate effects on contributing features are important
considerations for the proposed project. As with all National Park
proposed actions, other important considerations also include ensuring
that the project fulfills the mission of the park and the National Park
Service in its preservation of park resources and the visitor experience
for future generations.

At a minimum, to be considered successful, the purposes of this project
must be fulfilled, including to improve public health and safety,
enhance the visitor experience, preserve the historic road, improve
natural resources protection and to enable more efficient use of park
road maintenance funds.

**Project Setting**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253856 .anchor}

The proposed project area begins just north of the Bumpass Hell
Trailhead Parking Area and extends for approximately 21.7 miles (34.9
kilometers) in a general northerly direction to the intersection with
the Manzanita Lake Campground Road. The road traverses steep, rocky
terrain as it passes Lake Helen on its ascent to the Lassen Peak Parking
Area and the Summit Lake campgrounds and then its descent through Dersch
Meadows, Hat Creek and the Devastated Area enroute to Manzanita Lake.
Elevations within the project area range from 5,808 -8,511 feet (1,770
-- 2,595 meters). Numerous intermittent and perennial creeks cross this
section of the road, including the scenic Kings Creek and Hat Creek
areas. Between them, the road follows a small perennial fork of Hat
Creek as it traverses Dersch Meadows. Along the way, the road winds
through mountain hemlock, red fir and yellow pine forests, subalpine
meadows, wetlands and mudflow/rockfall (barren) areas.

**Scope of this Document**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253857 .anchor}

This Environmental Assessment is intended to analyze impacts from two
alternatives, the no action alternative and the National Park Service
preferred alternative implementing the rehabilitation of (Mileposts 6.7
to 28.4) of the Lassen National Park Highway.

Included in the cumulative impacts analysis are the following projects:

-   Construction of the Southwest Visitor Services Facility (2005-2006)

-   Alteration of parking design and lot size at Lost Creek Campground
    (2004)

-   Seasonal hazard tree removal

-   Wayside exhibit installation (2004-2005)

-   Restoration of 40-acre abandoned downhill ski area (2003-2004)

-   Rehabilitation/revegetation of six former dump sites (2003-2005)

-   Rehabilitation of the first segment of the Lassen Volcanic National
    Park Highway.

The primary issues driving the actions considered in this Environmental
Assessment include:

-   Minimizing threats to public health and safety,

-   Increasing visitor access and enjoyment of the park,

-   Preserving park natural and cultural resources, and

-   Decreasing the degree of road maintenance and the potential for road
    failure.

**Relationship to Laws, National Park Service Policy and Park Planning
Documents**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253858 .anchor}

**[Repair and Rehabilitate Main Park Road and Manzanita Lake Campground
Entrance Road Environmental Assessment, August 2001]{.underline}**

Under this project, the NPS repaired 7.9 miles (12.7 kilometers) of the
main park road and 0.6 miles (0.96 kilometers) of the Manzanita Lake
Campground Entrance Road in the park. The purposes of that project were
to enhance public health and safety, enhance the visitor experience,
preserve the main park road (a cultural resource), improve natural
resources protection, and to enable more efficient use of park
maintenance funds. This project was completed in 2002-2003.

**[General Management Plan]{.underline}**

The park's recently completed General Management Plan/Environmental
Impact Statement (NPS 2003B) provides long-term direction for park
resource preservation and visitor use.

The proposed project area occurs within the Scenic Drive Zone as
described below (pp. 19-20):

> This zone includes the main park road extending from the Highway 44
> junction at the north entrance to the southwest entrance. It
> encompasses the paved roads, pullouts, overlooks, and associated
> trails and small picnic areas, parking areas and other facilities that
> support visitor touring. . .

Resource Conditions goals for this zone state:

> Although there is concentrated visitor use and extensive development
> in this zone, natural systems are not significantly affected.
> Biological inventories and assessments provide sufficient information
> to ensure that there are no impacts from development or visitor use on
> sensitive or threatened and endangered species habitat, wetlands are
> avoided in any new development and restored where already impacted,
> thermal areas are protected from inappropriate visitor uses, and
> streams are protected from erosion and polluted runoff.

Visitor Experience Criteria note:

> Visitors use the paved roadways, trails and associated developments in
> the scenic drive zone to tour the park, enjoy scenic overlooks and
> interpretive media and gain access into other park zones. . . Some
> trails and most facilities in this zone are accessible to disabled
> persons.

Management Criteria include:

> Intensive management is provided. . . to ensure resource protection
> and public safety with. . .
>
> regular trail, road and roadside facility maintenance. . .
> Interpretation includes signs, displays, wayside exhibits and milepost
> guides. . .Facilities are rustic and consistent with the defining
> elements of the cultural landscape. . .
>
> Visitor stopping points along the road serve a number of different
> purposes and they are developed and managed accordingly.
>
> Individual pullouts are located and designed for a visitor or groups
> of visitors to enjoy the views or other park resources. . . without
> the disruption of other visitors. Pullouts accommodate one to three
> vehicles. They are unpaved but designed to prevent informal
> enlargement. . .

Planning goals for the GMP (NPS 2003B) related to the current proposed
rehabilitation of the road include:

-   The Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway cultural landscape would
    be preserved and interpreted for park visitors. (p. 32)

-   Physical rehabilitation would be undertaken for resource protection
    purposes, such as. . . rehabilitation of several historic culverts,
    repair of road structural deficiencies. . .

-   All pullouts where visitor safety is compromised or resource damage
    is occurring would be evaluated and redesigned for appropriate use.
    (p. 32)

-   The \[Kings Creek\] area would be redesigned to improve resource
    protection, safety and visitor experience. . . (p. 33)

-   Additional improvements in the \[Summit Lake\] area would include. .
    . improved trailhead parking. (p. 33)

The following items related to this Environmental Assessment were
considered deficient visitor service facilities (p. 25):

-   Poorly located pullouts on the main road that limit scenic view
    opportunities

-   Overflowing parking lots and poorly designed pedestrian crossings
    at. . . Lake Helen, . . . Kings Creek trailhead. . .

Several of the actions called for in the preferred alternative described
later in this document were also identified in the GMP (NPS 2003B),
including:

-   Improved pullouts on the main road to provide interpretive and
    scenic view opportunities. (p. 40)

-   Parking lots at. . .and Lassen Peak would be redesigned to improve
    their safety and appearance. Site plans . . . would be accompanied
    by appropriate environmental compliance. (p. 41)

-   Pullouts on the main road would be reevaluated, redesigned and
    relocated to achieve improved visitor experience including scenic
    views, interpretation, and availability of convenience facilities
    (p. 42)

-   At Kings Creek, the picnic area would be expanded to provide bus
    parking and areas suitable for group use. (p. 42)

> In addition, the following capital improvement items were included in
> the selected alternative cost estimate (p. 44) :

-   Upgrade Safety at Major Parking Lots

-   Relocate/Upgrade Main Road Pullouts

**Purpose and Function of Park Roads**

One objective of the actions described in this Environmental Assessment
is to maintain the purpose of the national park road network as
summarized in the "Park Road Design" memorandum dated February 20, 1986
from then NPS Director Mott:

> *The Purpose of park roads remains in sharp contrast to that of the
> Federal and State highway systems. Park roads are not intended to
> provide fast and convenient transportation; they are intended to
> enhance visitor experience while providing safe and efficient
> accommodation of park visitors and to serve essential management
> access needs (NPS 2002c).*

As stated in the 1984 NPS Park Road Standards, among all public
resources, those of the National Park System are distinguished by their
unique natural, cultural, scenic, and recreational qualities; values
that are dedicated and set-aside by public law to be preserved for
generations. In general, the protection, use, and enjoyment of park
resources in a world of modern technology have necessitated the
development of a system of public park roads. In most parks today, the
basic means of providing for visitor and park administrative access is
the park road system. For visitors, park roads provide both access and
enjoyment (scenic touring).

The park road system includes roads within or accessing a park. The
roads are administered by the NPS or by the NPS in cooperation with
other agencies. In defining functional classification, the routes that
make up a park road system are grouped into three broad categories,
primarily based on use, including: public use park roads, administrative
park roads, and urban parkways (NPS 2002).

Park roads intended for the primary use of visitors for access into and
within a park are designated as Public Use Park Roads. This
classification includes all roads that provide vehicular means of access
for visitors, or access to such representative park areas as points of
scenic or historic interest, campgrounds, picnic areas, trailheads, and
similar features.

Administrative Park Roads are comprised of all public and non-public
roads intended primarily to fulfill management objectives for the
particular area. This category of roadway includes those routes serving
employee residential areas, maintenance areas, and other administrative
developments, as well as patrol roads, truck trails, or similar
administrative roads (NPS 2002). Urban Parkways are routes and
facilities serve high volumes of park and non-park related traffic.

Functionally, the Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway is classified as
both a Public Use and Administrative Park Road.

**Federal Lands Highway Program**

The Federal Lands Highway Program (FLHP) began in 1982 under the Surface
Transportation Assistance Act, however, the NPS and the FHWA (and its
predecessor, the Bureau of Public Roads) have cooperated since the
inception of the NPS in 1916. The NPS and FHWA have had a formal
relationship since 1926 to develop and maintain the current system of
National Park Roads and Parkways. The main intent of the FLHP is to
disburse funding to a coordinated program of public roads that serve the
transportation needs of federal lands, not under state or local
governmental responsibility.

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), operating through Interagency
Agreements with federal land managing agencies including the National
Park Service, oversees and administers a coordinated federal lands
program, which includes forest highways, public lands highways, park
roads and parkways, refuge roads, and reservation roads. Overall, the
FLHP program is responsible for funding to maintain more than 90,000
miles of federally owned and public authority-owned roads, which provide
access to and serve federal lands. The NPS maintains jurisdiction over
approximately 8,000 miles of park roads and parkways. Under this
agreement, FHWA is responsible for a majority of the design and
construction, while the NPS is responsible for planning, and protection
of the environment and park values (NPS 2002).

The rehabilitation of the Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway project
is being funded under the FLHP. FHWA, Central Federal Lands Highway
Division, is a cooperating agency on the design of the project and
preparation of the Environmental Assessment.

**II. ALTERNATIVES**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253859 .anchor}

**Alternative 1: Continue Current Management (No
Action)**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253860 .anchor}

Under this alternative, no new rehabilitation or comprehensive
resurfacing would take place. This alternative would not address
improvements to the condition of the road, resource impacts from the
existing road, safety issues or improvements to the visitor experience.
Although no comprehensive repairs to the road would occur, this
alternative would continue to result in routine maintenance actions,
including snow removal; spring opening; unpaved road grading, shaping
and repair; paved road asphalt patching, crack sealing, and application
of slurry- or chip-seal treatments; ditch clearing; culvert cleaning;
vegetation maintenance; traffic control striping; and signage
replacement as needed (and as summarized below). This alternative would
also result in some minor reconstruction of existing road features if
failure occurred. The impacts of major rehabilitation or reconstruction
treatments, however, have not been included in this analysis. Because
the overall condition of the road would not undergo comprehensive
improvements, the portion not affected by the 2002-2003 project (Phase I
rehabilitation) would likely continue to deteriorate. Over time, this
deterioration could result in increasingly uneven pavement (warping and
cracking), narrowing lane width and other road conditions that would
adversely affect both visitor safety and experience on the road and
within the park, as well as the quality of wetland, forest and other
resources along the road, including the quality of the road resource
itself and its continued eligibility for the National Register of
Historic Places.

[Routine Road Maintenance Program]{.underline}

The purpose of the park road maintenance program is to provide safe
vehicular access on park destination roads, campground roads,
administrative roads, etc. and in public and administrative parking
areas. To accomplish this, regular maintenance of the road surface,
including bridges, culverts and ditches occurs as summarized below.

**Winter**

Mechanical removal of snow occurs regularly in the winter. Snow removal
also occurs during spring opening and on other roads as needed. Snow
removal can include the application of sand or other abrasives as needed
to provide traction enhancement for vehicles on icy roads. Snow removal
reduces hazardous winter driving conditions and ensures that some park
roads are open to visitor use in winter. The main park road from the
north boundary to the Manzanita Lake developed area and from the south
boundary to the southwest developed area is plowed from mid-October to
mid-May each year, depending on snow conditions. Spring opening usually
commences on March 5 and at this time the rest of the main park road is
begun to be plowed out, with some areas, such as the Lassen Peak Parking
Lot left to melt out. To assist with vehicle traction in icy areas,
approximately 10 cubic yards (13.08 cubic meters) of cinder sand is
applied annually. Snow and ice melt chemicals are not used.

**Spring**

Spring road opening operations begin by April 1 to ensure availability
during the peak visitor use season (June through September). For
non-public roads, work is done as needed or at the end of the public
road opening. Road opening activities include snow removal, clearing
roads of windfall trees and debris, clearing avalanches or rock slides,
cleaning culverts, and minor repairs to the road surface or shoulders or
embankments.

**Summer**

Road maintenance activities occurring during normally dry weather
include grading unpaved road surfaces, shoulder maintenance, removal of
sloughed material from ditches, pavement repairs and leveling, pothole
patching, crack sealing, slurry sealing, repaving, pavement marking,
signage installation, etc.

Unpaved roads are graded, reshaped and smoothed as needed (without
adding material or widening) to restore crown, proper shape, drainage
and a smooth traveling surface. Maintenance includes pulling material
from and cleaning roadside ditches and culverts and disposing of this
material as needed. It also includes reshaping shoulders as necessary.

Unpaved road surface materials are often lost due to traffic, erosion
during storms and other predictable and unpredictable events. As needed,
repair and stabilization of unpaved roads occurs by adding crushed rock
to the road surface. To accomplish this, reshaping and compacting to
control ruts, potholes, washouts, and corrugation may also be done.

On paved roads, patching of small areas of asphalt paving with cold,
premix asphalt concrete to correct abrupt depressions, potholes, edge
failures and other potential road/parking surface hazards is undertaken
to provide a smooth paved surface. Occasionally, permanent pothole
patching is conducted with a premix asphalt concrete and asphalt
emulsion (tack) to correct abrupt depressions, potholes, edge failures,
and other potential road/parking surface hazards to provide a smooth
paved surface.

Other maintenance actions include clearing road shoulder and parking
ditches to enable rapid melt water and rain dispersion off the road
surface. This includes the cleaning and reshaping of roadside ditches
along paved and unpaved roads and parking areas as well as the removal,
hauling and disposal of excess material to restore the original grade
and to ensure adequate drainage. On occasion, it can include the
importation of additional material. It also includes the trimming or
removal of woody vegetation from roadside ditches and shoulders and the
removal of overgrown herbaceous vegetation. These actions are done to
eliminate or improve edge ruts, washouts, ridges, corrugation and
encroaching vegetation.

When pavement failures are encountered, these areas may be repaired by
removing and replacing areas of failed surfaces with premix asphalt,
including a base course, if required, to provide a structurally sound
surface and to eliminate safety hazards from roads and parking areas.
Work may include the placement of a new asphalt surface leveling course
on asphalt-paved surfaces to provide a smooth driving surface and to
eliminate safety hazards. Premix asphalt concrete is then applied with
either a grader or a spreader box. Slurry seal or chip seal is applied
as needed and includes the placement of liquid asphalt with an aggregate
or chip seal coat to seal cracks and prevent water entry and related
damage to base course materials, correct minor surface depressions to
seal asphalt surfaces, to restore skid resistance and to retard further
surface deterioration.

Day to day maintenance may also include:

-   Sweeping paved road/parking surfaces, including intersections and
    curb gutters to remove dirt, sand and other debris;

-   Cleaning drainage structures by removing rocks, debris and silt from
    pipe culverts, box culverts, inlets and storm sewers to maintain
    adequate drainage and to prevent roadway flooding.

-   Repairing pipe culverts, drop inlets, catch basins, headwalls, and
    manholes to provide proper drainage;

-   Maintenance and repair of curbs and gutters damaged by snowplows
    and/or traffic to ensure proper drainage flow, including the
    replacement of short curb sections;

-   Cutting and removing brush, trees and overhanging limbs along roads,
    in campgrounds and parking areas to maintain vistas and to restore
    sight distances, to eliminate traffic hazards and to remove
    encroaching vegetation;

-   Picking-up and disposing of litter along roads, at overlooks and
    along/in parking areas for aesthetics and to remove objects that
    could be hazardous or could obstruct drainage or damage road
    maintenance equipment;

-   Repairing slope failures and erosion near roads and developed areas
    and the removal of eroded material, including occasional reseeding,
    replanting or installing mechanical erosion control measures as
    needed to prevent such an occurrence from happening again in the
    same area;

-   Removing rock fall and slide material from the roadway and
    roadsides;

-   Striping the centerline, lane, fog and edge markings on roads and
    the parking stalls and roadway directions for traffic safety,
    parking and pedestrian control;

-   Cleaning road bridge decks and bearing surfaces to remove sand and
    other debris, including the cleaning of drain holes, joints and
    curbs; and

-   Repairing minor bridge components such as railing and decks.

Major repairs or rehabilitation falling into these categories would
undergo separate environmental analysis and are not included in the
analysis of the No Action Alternative.

**Alternative 2: Repave and Rehabilitate a Portion of the Lassen
National Park Highway (Preferred)**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253861
.anchor}

**[Project Description]{.underline}**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253862
.anchor}**:** The project would begin at the end of the previous main
park road rehabilitation project just north of the Bumpass Hell parking
lot, and extend approximately 21.7 miles (34.9 kilometers) northward to
the Manzanita Lake Campground Road. The project would include the
rehabilitation of this section of the main park road and roads providing
visitor access to campgrounds, picnic areas, trailheads and day use
areas, including 18 specific project improvement areas noted below.
Rehabilitation work would also include all pavement, curbs and
associated road structures, as well as repairs to concrete box culverts
at Hat Creek and Lost Creek. Lastly, the project would include
obliteration of numerous gravel pullouts no longer needed for visitor
use or administrative access. In addition, the following campground
roads would be repaired and rehabilitated (paved): Manzanita Lake,
Crags, Lost Creek and North and South Summit Lake.

Under this project, the previous phase would also be chip-sealed (from
just southwest of the park entrance to just past the Bumpass Hell
Parking Lot and from the junction with the Manzanita Lake Campground
Road to the junction with State Route 44 at the park boundary). It would
also include the Manzanita Lake Campground Access Road. Chip seal would
involve placement of a thin layer of asphalt cement covered by rock
chips and would result in a roughened, durable pavement surface. The
entire length of the project is 30.6 miles (49.4 kilometers), including
the chip seal segments.

Due to funding uncertainties, this project may be split into two phases
that would be constructed two to three years apart, each phase requiring
approximately 1-1/2 summer seasons to complete.

The following activities under this project would occur and are
described in more detail below: pavement rehabilitation; pullout
obliteration, construction and rehabilitation; road shoulder
rehabilitation; curve widening; alignment shifts, culvert cleaning,
replacement and installation; and gate replacement. In addition, there
would be site specific treatments at the following areas: Lake Helen
Picnic Area; Lassen Peak Trailhead Parking Lot, Kings Creek Picnic Area,
Kings Creek Meadow Pullout, Kings Creek Falls Trailhead, Summit Lake
Campground North and South, Summit Lake Ranger Station and Trailhead
Parking, Dersch Meadows, Hat Lake Parking Area, Hat Creek Box Culvert,
Lost Creek Box Culvert, Lost Creek Campground, Crags Campground,
Devastated Area Parking, Hot Rock Pullout, Sunflower Flat Pullout, Chaos
Jumbles Pullout, Manzanita Creek Headwall, and Manzanita Lake
Campground.

-   **[Pavement
    Rehabilitation]{.underline}**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253863 .anchor}

The existing asphalt road surface along the main park road would be
pulverized and compacted; a new asphalt surface would be constructed;
shoulder grades would be raised with compacted aggregate to the level of
the new paved surface; and pavement markings would be applied to the
surface of the road. Road signs would be replaced as appropriate. The
new pavement would be similar in width to the existing pavement, with
widening only in a few specific areas as identified below. In places
where the road base is failing, the base and sub-grade would be
excavated and replaced with suitable material. Some culverts would be
replaced and other culverts would be extended. Some additional culverts
would be installed to correct drainage deficiencies. All new or replaced
culverts would retain the native stone headwalls characteristic to the
road. Curbing and other minor features would be removed, replaced or
repaired as appropriate to facilitate visitor use and to correct
drainage problems.

-   **[Pullout and Wide Shoulder Grading
    Treatments]{.underline}**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253864 .anchor}

Six different grading treatments would be employed to remove, repair or
improve pullouts and shoulders along the road. These treatments are
noted by type and purpose below.

Type 1 (Excavation and Berm Construction for Shoulder Benches Greater
Than 2.5 m)

Approximately 0.5 miles (0.82 kilometers) would be treated with Grading
Treatment Type 1, which consists of the following actions:

-   Grade roadside ditch to establish or maintain drainage;

-   Construct undulating (varying in width and height) berms
    approximately 2.3 to 3.3 feet (0.7 to 1.0 meter) high with 1:3
    (vertical to horizontal) slopes;

-   Scarify area to be revegetated to a minimum depth of 6 inches (150
    mm);

-   Use excavated material to construct berms;

-   Minimize disturbance around existing trees to be retained according
    to instructions from project engineer; and

-   Hydromulch disturbed areas to cover the extent of disturbance.

Type 2A (Placement of Barrier Stones where Drainage is Away from Road)

Approximately 0.9 miles (1.4 kilometers) would be treated with Grading
Treatment Type 2A or 2B. Grading Treatment Type 2A consists of the
following actions:

-   Scarify area to be rehabilitated to a minimum depth of approximately
    6 inches (150 mm) and hydromulch;

-   Place roadway aggregate shoulder material adjacent to roadway at the
    edge of pavement; and

-   Space barrier stones with an approximately 3 feet (900 mm) diameter
    3-4 feet (900 -1200 mm) from edge of pavement spaced 5.5 -- 7 feet
    (1700 -- 2200 mm) apart and partially bury (approximately 1/3) in
    ground.

Type 2B (Placement of Barrier Stones with Ditch -- Drainage toward the
Road)

Grading Treatment Type 2B consists of the actions noted in Type 2A,
plus:

-   Grade ditch adjacent to roadway aggregate to maintain or establish
    drainage;

-   Space barrier stones as in Grading Treatment Type 2A; and

-   Scarify, seed and mulch disturbed area.

Type 3 (Excavation to Oversteepen Shoulder Benches Less Than 2.5 m)

Approximately 12.3 miles (19.83 kilometers) would be treated with
Grading Treatment Type 3, which consists of the following actions:

-   Scarify area to be rehabilitated to a minimum depth of approximately
    6 inches (150 mm) and hydromulch;

-   Place roadway aggregate shoulder material adjacent to roadway at the
    edge of pavement;

-   Oversteepen edge of road beyond crushed aggregate to 1:3 maximum for
    3 feet (1 meter) width and flatten slope to two percent to intercept
    existing slope. Slopes would be rounded at intercept point;

-   Excavated material would be used to construct berms for Grading
    Treatment Types 1, 4A and 4B.

Type 4A (Construct Berm on Bench)

Approximately 1.6 miles (2.6 kilometers) would be treated with Grading
Treatment Type 4A or 4B. Grading Treatment Type 4B consists of the
following actions:

-   Scarify existing ground prior to berm construct and hydromulch
    finished berm grades

-   Use excavated material from Type 3 treatments to construct
    approximately 2-3 feet (0.7-1.0 meter) high berms with an undulating
    appearance (varying in width and height). Berms would be constructed
    from excavated material and be topped with topsoil;

-   Place roadway aggregate shoulder material adjacent to roadway at the
    edge of pavement; and

-   Excavate ditch at a minimum 4 feet (1.2 meters) away from the edge
    of pavement to maintain or establish drainage and scarify to 6
    inches (150 mm).

Type 4B (Construct Undulating Backslope with Ditch and Fill against
Slope)

Grading Treatment Type 4B involves back filling against an existing
slope and uses the same actions noted for Grading Treatment Type 4A.

-   **[Pullout
    Modifications]{.underline}**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253865 .anchor}
    **[(See Appendix 2: Pullout Modifications for a list of pullouts
    with proposed changes)]{.underline}**

Consistent with the GMP, a pull-out analysis was conducted and
appropriate pull-outs to be retained, added or removed along this
portion of the roadway were identified. Pullouts selected to remain are
needed to preserve the road's cultural history, for visitor enjoyment
(as viewpoints), for visitor safety, or for road maintenance.

Of the following estimated 96 pullouts along this section of the
roadway, 4 would be new, 29 would be regraded and/or repaved, and 63
would be obliterated. Most (22 of 25) paved pullouts would be retained,
while, most (53 of 60) gravel pullouts would be obliterated.

The following actions would be undertaken for the pullout modifications:

-   Pull-outs to be removed would be regraded and restored using native
    vegetation, hydromulched and seeded, or planted amongst partially
    buried, staggered random boulders or berms placed to deter future
    parking.

-   Some pull-outs to be retained would be modified by reducing the
    pull-out width, length or shape, or their ability to accommodate
    interpretive waysides and most would be paved.

-   Existing asphalt curbing along pullouts and the roadway would
    generally be removed to facilitate snow-plowing operations and to
    minimize the effect of these later additions to the historic
    roadway.

-   New pullouts to accommodate visitor use and to reduce impacts to
    roadside resources would be added in the following areas: Lake Helen
    Picnic Area (southbound side); before Lassen Peak Parking Lot
    (southbound side); and two just past Kings Creek Meadow (one on
    southbound side and one on northbound side).

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **[Road Curve Widening]{.underline}**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253866
    .anchor}

> The paved surface of the road would be widened along several tight
> radius curves, while keeping the same alignment of the road. The
> disturbed areas adjacent to the inside curve widening would also be
> rehabilitated using the grading treatments noted above. Curves
> anticipated to be widened include:

-   Lake Helen curve,

-   Two Hairpins south of Shadow Cliffs (near stations 24000 and 24200),
    and

-   Minor curves along the road north of Shadow Cliffs (near stations
    25000, 30618, 41500, 43458).

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **[Alignment Shifts]{.underline}**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253867
    .anchor}

A number of slight alignment shifts (approximately 21) would also occur
along the road using the existing road bench, between the following
stations: from 23520 -- 23820, 24400 -- 24720, 29000 -- 29300, 31150 --
31630, 31980 -- 32340, 32970 -- 35210, 35500 -- 36320, 37440 -- 38290,
38470 -- 39190, 40140 -- 40760, 41900 -- 42500, 43130 -- 44140, 45840 --
46830, 47390 -- 47680, 47900 -- 48600, 49700 -- 49820, 50000 -- 50360,
50500 -- 50770, 50940 -- 51590, 53720 -- 53910, and 55100 -- 55450.
Alignment shifts would be utilized to center the new pavement and
abutting shoulders onto the existing bench areas to avoid introducing
new uphill cuts or downhill fill slopes.

-   **[Culvert
    Modifications]{.underline}**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253868 .anchor}
    **[(See Appendix 3: Culvert Modifications for a list of culverts and
    proposed improvements)]{.underline}**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Approximately 102 of 165 culverts (including 7 new ones and 14 that
    may not be present) would have some work done to them in the
    proposed project.

-   Approximately 52 culvert inlets and outlets would be cleaned. Some
    interiors may also need cleaning.

-   Another 2 culvert headwalls and 4 culverts would be removed. One
    culvert would be realigned with its drainage channel, while 8 would
    be replaced and 13 extended.

-   Approximately 43 new headwalls and 29 riprap aprons would be
    constructed. Seven new culverts would be installed (five of these
    where the road passes through Dersch Meadow).

-   Headwalls would be constructed to look like historic headwalls, but
    would be distinguished from these by their use of different
    (non-weathered) mortar and rocks.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **[Road Gate
    Replacement]{.underline}**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253869 .anchor}

Road gates throughout the park are comprised of many different styles
and several (on the following roads) would be replaced with a consistent
design.

-   Summit Lake North Campground,

-   Summit Lake South Campground,

-   Lost Creek Water Treatment Plant,

-   Lost Creek Group Campground,

-   Crags Campground, and

-   South of Manzanita Lake on the main road.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **[Staging]{.underline}**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253870 .anchor}

Staging areas for equipment and materials would be in previously
disturbed, park-approved locations. Major staging would occur at the
Lost Creek Helispot/Maintenance Area (staging area). Staging areas would
be protected from spillover impacts by the placement of silt fencing or
other barriers as appropriate and would be returned to pre-construction
conditions upon completion of the proposed project. Only the southern
portion of this area may be used, the northern portion of area (existing
helipad) must be kept clear for emergency use.

[Lost Creek Helispot/Maintenance Area (Primary Staging
Area)]{.underline}

This old pumice quarry area, near Devastated Area, about 0.5 miles (0.87
kilometers) south of Hot Rock Pullout, now functions as a helispot and
park Maintenance staging area. To avoid the helispot/take-off area on
the north, materials would be stored lengthwise and/or toward the
southern end of the site. Staging would not expand beyond the upper
paved area down into the lower pumice quarry site.

-   **[Borrow Pits/Use of Native
    Materials]{.underline}**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253871 .anchor}

Rock removed from ditch cleaning by the park is stockpiled at the Lost
Creek Pit. Approximately 10,500 cubic yards of fill is required for the
proposed rehabilitation. This fill would be obtained from other portions
of the project area and would primarily be used in the following
locations:

-   Lake Helen curves and Lake Helen Picnic Area,

-   Kings Creek Trailhead,

-   Dersch Meadows widening, and

-   Where use of Grading Treatment Type 4 is employed.

Boulders for placement in restored or minimized pullouts and road
shoulders will come from outside the park, and from road rehabilitation
excavation or other areas along the road corridor. Rocks, whether
obtained from the park or from outside sources, will be similar in
texture and color to the surroundings they are placed into.

-   **[Construction Delays]{.underline}**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253873
    .anchor}

Visitors to the park could encounter construction delays of up to 30
minutes Monday through Friday. To minimize impacts on the busiest days,
no construction delays would occur on weekends or federal holidays.
Holiday, weekend and night work could be approved through specific
authorization of the park superintendent, with adequate public
notification. Work that would affect major visitor use areas, such as
the Kings Creek Picnic Area or the Manzanita Lake Campground Road would
be scheduled late in the season to avoid the greatest potential for
visitor use impacts due to area closures that would need to occur. A
public information campaign would be initiated to inform visitors and
local residents of construction delays and closure scheduling. Public
notices would include fliers posted at local businesses, press releases
and information in the park newspaper. The California Department of
Transportation statewide toll-free telephone road conditions message
would also be notified of the project construction delays and
scheduling.

-   **[Disturbed Area Rehabilitation and
    Restoration]{.underline}**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253874 .anchor}

As earthwork concludes, disturbed areas would be hydromulched by the
contractor. Some areas would also be hand-seeded and/or planted by the
park or its revegetation contractor. Topsoil and duff would be salvaged
to the degree possible from the road corridor and pullouts and applied
to priority areas by the contractor as available and directed by the
park. Disturbed areas not receiving topsoil may be treated with soil
amendments or growth stimulants as they are planted. Based on past
experience with road rehabilitation and other restoration projects in
the park, the most effective hydroseeding technique is to employ a two
step process in the fall: 1) hydroseed, 2) hydromulch (with tackifier
and paper mulch).

Approximately 6 hectares (14.8 acres) of previously disturbed area
within the road prism (primarily attributed to pullout obliteration and
wide bench obliteration and installation of culverts at Dersch Meadow)
would be disturbed by the proposed improvements. This area also includes
minor road widening at the Kings Creek culvert and some fillslope
modifications.

To facilitate rehabilitation of these areas, the following actions would
occur:

-   The proposed road contractor would complete earthwork (such as
    placement of berms, boulders and scarification) according to
    contract documents to ensure adequate surface preparation for
    restoration/revegetation.

-   Prior to construction, site specific and species specific seed
    collection would occur along the length of the project area.

-   Revegetation treatments would include hydromulching (mechanical
    seeding), hand seeding with native perennial grasses, and spot tree
    and shrub planting. Revegetation would occur following road
    rehabilitation work proposed under this alternative.

-   The revegetation strategy would rely heavily on natural regeneration
    from conserved topsoil. Blue wild rye, a fast establishing native
    grass, would provide initial erosion control. Revegetation plantings
    would use native species that are slower to establish naturally
    (e.g. red/white fir, western white pine, pinemat manzanita) and
    would be from genetic stocks originating in the park. The principal
    goal is to assist natural regeneration in re-establishing a
    sustainable native plant community similar to surrounding
    undisturbed vegetation.

-   Revegetation success would be monitored by park staff to ensure its
    successful implementation and in compliance with applicable
    permitting requirements.

-   The primary revegetation areas include obliterated pullouts and wide
    road shoulders where various grading treatments would result in
    either undulating berms or the placement of staggered random
    boulders to deter future parking use.

-   Although some revegetation would be done by park staff, the park
    would also contract with appropriate sources for seed propagation
    and restoration treatments such as duff salvage, plant propagation
    and planting.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **[Monitoring]{.underline}**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253875 .anchor}

FHWA would work in cooperation with the NPS to provide oversight and
compliance monitoring of contractor activities throughout the duration
of the project. NPS staff would periodically conduct onsite monitoring
construction activities or inspection of materials to ensure protection
of park resources. Arrangements would be made to inspect all equipment
and materials entering the project.

-   **[Site Specific
    Treatments]{.underline}**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253876 .anchor}

In addition to pulverizing and repaving (hot mix asphalt concrete) the
main park road generally following its current width and alignment, site
specific improvements would be made to the following areas. These
improvements would be made for various reasons, including: to improve
accessibility, to reduce the existing resource impacts from the current
road, and to improve visitor safety and the visitor experience.

**Lake Helen Picnic Area**

-   Main Park Road: Create a left turn lane out of the current width of
    the road adjacent to Lake Helen. Due to the high degree of
    super-elevation on the main road at this intersection, visibility
    into the parking area from the road is extremely limited, making
    left turns from the northbound lane difficult. Adjusting the
    super-elevation of the main road and adding the turn lane into Lake
    Helen would reduce the blind turn and sight distance problems, and
    allow left-turning vehicles to wait for oncoming vehicles to clear
    without blocking through traffic. Visibility for vehicles making
    turns out of the parking lot back onto the main road would also be
    improved. This alignment change can be accomplished within the
    existing road bench.

-   Redesign the entrance to the Lake Helen Picnic Area. Existing
    asphalt pavement would be pulverized and a new asphalt surface
    placed on top.

-   Pave the parking area to eliminate the existing gravel parking,
    which generates dust during dry conditions and contributes sediment
    to Lake Helen. Restore areas nearest the lake to natural conditions
    \[the large denuded area and social trails would be scarified
    (loosened) and hydromulched by the contractor and restored by the
    park\].

-   Two clumps of trees, one with approximately 12 small mountain
    hemlocks (2-5 inches or 51-127 mm in diameter) and the other with
    approximately 8 small mountain hemlocks (2-6 inches or 51-152 mm in
    diameter) as well as a number of seedling trees and shrubs would be
    removed to accommodate turning radius needed for one-way parking
    loop.

-   The large pullout on the same side of the road as the Lake Helen
    parking lot would be repaved and used for oversize vehicle parking.
    A new wayside exhibit would also be installed along the edge of this
    oversize vehicle parking to provide better information about this
    alpine lake.

-   Construct concrete walk from accessible parking to existing vault
    toilet.

-   Delineate parking by constructing 12 to 16 parking spaces, including
    accessible spaces, close to picnic tables, the existing vault toilet
    and lake access.

**Lassen Peak Trailhead**

At the Lassen Peak Trailhead, there would be three improvements made: 1)
installing increased capacity drainage structures to correct flooding
and ditch scouring along the main park road during spring snowmelt; 2)
installing a drystack rock wall at the foot of the slope bordering the
northern edge of the parking lot to prevent slope raveling and to assist
in discouraging pedestrian use of the slope area which results in this
denuded area of loose rock; and 3) resurfacing the parking lot with a
chip seal to seal cracks and prevent water entry and related damage to
base course materials, and to retard further surface deterioration. The
parking lot would be then be restriped to match the existing striping
pattern.

-   [Lassen Peak Parking Area Culvert]{.underline}

Beginning around Memorial Day, park crews plow out the parking lot to
approximately four feet deep. At that time, the partially plowed parking
area is surrounded by approximately 18-foot walls of snow and then is
allowed to melt out. During melt-out the snow becomes super-saturated
with water. Upon further melt, it breaches on the lower end and water
rushes out across the main park road (bypassing the undersized and
poorly located culvert) and coursing down the road into Lake Helen,
causing road bank erosion and contributing a high degree of sediment to
the lake. As a result, under the proposed project the following actions
would occur:

-   Install a drainage structure (a large aluminum arch pipe culvert)
    under the main park road, near the lower (downslope) end of the
    Lassen Peak Parking Area. Water would then be redirected via a swale
    to this new aluminum arch pipe culvert and under the road.

-   Recontour, grade and pave drainage swale from lower end of parking
    area to further redirect water into the proposed culvert and under
    the road.

-   Construct a Trench drain near the south entrance of the parking area
    that outlets into the drainage swale and riprap the downslope area
    to redirect water flow to the settling basin. Flow of water into the
    settling basin across the road will allow the flow of water to slow
    down and to drop its sediment load. The proposed settling basin is a
    rock-surrounded depression left over from the construction of the
    Lassen Peak parking area and the re-routing of the main road
    adjacent to the parking lot (c. 1960).

-   Place riprap at the culvert outlet to protect the slope from erosion
    as water settles into the catch basin.

These actions will help to capture the rush of water that currently
occurs. With the slower transport, silt and heavier sediments will
settle out as the water ponds, before being slowly released through
groundwater transport toward Lake Helen. Installation of the arch pipe
will provide an increase in capacity compared to the existing metal pipe
culvert (24 inches or 610 mm). In addition to cost and ease of
construction, the arch pipe (with stone veneer headwalls and wing walls)
would provide an opening shape similar to other locations such as the
Kings Creek crossing and the Manzanita Creek culvert.

-   [Lassen Peak Parking Area Rockery Wall]{.underline}

The purpose of the rockery wall is to decrease the slope raveling into
the Lassen Peak Parking Area and to stem the proliferation of social
trails onto this sparsely vegetated rocky slope above the parking lot:

-   Construct drystack rockery wall (2.5 to 2.8 feet tall and 345 feet
    or 105 meters long) at toe of upper end slope to retain slope. The
    wall would be set back approximately 6 feet (1.8 meters) from a new
    curb along the northeast edge of the parking lot. (Pedestrians would
    continue to walk alongside in the paved parking lot. The six foot
    buffer located between the curb and rockery wall will prevent
    snowplows from striking the wall and allow for snow storage.)

-   Replace existing curb, gutter and sidewalk with colored concrete
    curb, gutter and sidewalk. New curb and gutter would also be
    installed along portions of the parking lot entrances for storm
    water and vehicle control.

The drystack (without grout) rockery wall would be primarily composed of
2 to 3 courses of rock.  The bottom layer of rocks is proposed to have a
diameter of between 1.5 feet (450 mm) and 2.0 feet (610 mm).  The top
course(s) would be comprised of rocks ranging in size from 12-18 inches
(300-450 mm).  The height of the wall will vary from 1.6 -- 2.0 feet
(500-610 mm).  Due to the size and quantity of rocks needed to construct
the wall, rocks would be obtained from field and/or quarried stone
outside the park and would be of materials similar in texture and color
to those found at this location. 

The 1:3 slope behind the wall would initially provide a bench that later
would fill-in with slough rock from the slope above and the wall would
fulfill its dual purpose of retaining the slope and preventing visitor
use of this sensitive area adjacent to the Lassen Peak Trailhead.

+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Item                               | Approximate                     |
|                                    |                                 |
|                                    | Quantity                        |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Excavation                         | 103 cubic yards (79 cubic       |
|                                    | meters)                         |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Backfill Material                  | 74 cubic yards (57 cubic        |
|                                    | meters)                         |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Rockery Wall                       | 115 square yards (96 square     |
|                                    | meters)                         |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+

-   [Lassen Peak Parking Area Rehabilitation]{.underline}

    -   Chip seal parking area, and

    -   Restripe the parking lot.

The proposed layout for striping the parking lot would provide 132
regular parking stalls, 4 accessible parking stalls and 11 oversize
spaces.  Circulation through the lot would primarily be two-way (23-29
feet or 7.2-9 meters wide).  Regular parking stalls would be 9.8 feet
(3.0 meters) x 19.6 feet (6.0 meters), with oversize spaces large enough
for buses at 16.5 feet (5.0 meters) x 54 feet (16.5 meters).  The
striping would result in improved vehicle circulation and accessible
parking areas.

**Kings Creek Picnic Area**

-   [Culvert Replacement and Roadway Widening Along the
    Alignment]{.underline}

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Remove and replace the 24 and 36 inch (610 and 900 mm) culverts with
    bottomless structural plate box culvert that is 8.75 feet x 2.5 feet
    (2.67 meters x 0.76 meter).

-   Construct stone veneer headwalls and wing walls similar to historic
    culverts.

-   Rehabilitate and widen the road (approximately 3-4 feet or 1.1-1.45
    meters) at the culvert to provide a minimum 16 foot or 5.0 meter
    width).

Because road closure is required to replace the culverts, the culverts
would be replaced in fall during low flows to both minimize impacts to
water quality and park visitors. Depending on water flow, water would
likely first be redirected (through sandbagging) into one of the
existing culverts and then into the other after replacement of the first
culvert. To complete the work a small coffer dam would likely be
constructed and silt fencing installed to minimize transport of sediment
during construction and to comply with water quality certification and
other applicable permit conditions. Willows near the inlet would be
salvaged and stored on an upstream sandbar to allow their availability
for transplanting following construction.

-   [Picnic Area Parking and Circulation Improvements]{.underline}

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Formalize the parking lot by paving primarily within the existing
    disturbed footprint. Remove the lodgepole pine at chokepoint.

-   Pave gravel road and turnaround, leaving island. Two small trees
    near the corner of the turnaround would be removed to improve the
    turning radius for oversized vehicles.

-   Shift accessible parking in front of vault toilet and construct a
    sidewalk to the existing vault toilet.

-   Construct 3 accessible and 31 regular parking spaces as part of the
    picnic area access and turnaround improvements.

Later improvements would occur, as called for in the GMP, to improve
picnicking facilities. Actions could include modifying picnic table
locations, adding group sites, and constructing access trails as
appropriate.

**Kings Creek Meadow Pullout**

Impacts are occurring at the Kings Creek Meadow Pullout due to dispersed
vehicle parking and the pullout encroaching on the meadow. Modifications
would be made to the Kings Creek Meadow area to reduce these impacts and
to improve visitor access from the opposite side of the road.

-   Reduce the size of the main pullout and repave it. Install barrier
    rocks to prevent vehicles from driving onto the meadow.

-   Add a new pullout across the road from the meadow to improve access
    for vehicles traveling the opposite direction by utilizing disturbed
    gravel area there.

-   Rehabilitate portion of reduced pullout above and nearby pullout
    adjacent to the creek and meadow to restore wetland functions.

**Kings Creek Falls Trailhead**

This heavily visited area is in need of rehabilitation to provide for
visitor safety and to prevent resource impacts caused by visitor
confusion over the location of the trailhead that continues to occur.
The following actions are proposed:

-   Realign the road from the Kings Creek Box Culvert to the Kings Creek
    Trailhead area slightly by moving the center line about one foot
    north (thereby slightly reducing the size of the paved pullout
    parking across the road).

-   Rehabilitate paved parallel parking pullouts across from the
    Trailhead (reducing current parking widths to accommodate the
    alignment change).

-   Redesign and extend the pullout on the south side eastward to expand
    parking capacity.

-   Redesign the Kings Creek Trailhead and its approaches to make it
    more obvious and to reduce trail-cutting along the slope by
    constructing a curb and raised sidewalk up to the large red fir (37
    inches or 950 mm) (to be retained). Connect the parking to an
    asphalt walkway that continues to the end of the new parking area
    (the asphalt walkway will be delineated by a white stripe between
    the edge of the new parking and the at-grade walkway).

-   Construct an interpretive area above the trail to formally designate
    the trailhead. Stone veneer masonry walls would be used to support
    the walkway and trailhead improvements.

-   Construct a stone stairway from the trailhead down to meet the
    existing trail. This will stabilize the sidehill trail and
    discourage social trailing.

-   Capture and disperse road surface water flow underneath the stone
    veneer retaining wall and trail by installing a catch basin and
    culvert outlet.

**Summit Lake North and South Campgrounds**

-   [Repave/rehabilitate existing campground loop roads and campsite
    parking pads.]{.underline}

Summit Lake North Campground contains two one-way loops with 0.36 miles
(0.58 kilometers) of roads varying in width from 10 to 15 feet (3-4.6
meters). Summit Lake South has three one-way loop roads with 0.49 miles
(0.79 kilometers) of roads that vary in width from 12 to 15 feet
(3.6-4.6 meters). Both campgrounds contain a short segment of two-way
road connecting the day use areas and the loop roads (approximately 0.2
miles or 0.32 kilometers total).

Under the proposed project which would occur either before or after the
rehabilitation of the main park road, existing asphalt would be
pulverized, bladed smooth, and then compacted. Afterwards, a 2.5 inch
(63.5 mm) mat of hot mix asphalt concrete would be applied. This asphalt
would cover the current footprint of paved roads and parking spaces in
the campground (although some parking spaces are now deteriorated, at
one time all were paved). Road and parking shoulders would then be
dressed with aggregate base course material from a park-approved source.
There would be no substantive changes in sites or parking.

**Summit Lake South Campground**

Rehabilitation of this area would include the following minor actions.

-   Rehabilitate the access road (19.7 feet or 6 meters) and day use
    parking area at existing widths up to the campground registration
    station. Saw cut tree roots at edge of pavement prior to pulverizing
    it to reduce the damage to existing trees and remove existing 40
    inch (1 meter) stump.

-   Remove and replace the asphalt walkway near the registration kiosk.

-   Construct an administrative parking space next to the kiosk. Barrier
    stones would be placed at the edge of the pavement to show the
    parking limits. An existing 14 inch (350 mm) culvert would be
    removed and replaced, including installing stone masonry headwalls
    and a riprap apron at its outlet.

-   Repave/rehabilitate existing campground loop roads and campsite
    parking pads.

**Summit Lake North Campground**

Like the Summit Lake South Campground, minor actions to improve the
roadway (prior to entering the campground) would occur.

-   Rehabilitate the entrance road to provide a minimum 19.7 foot (6
    meters) width.

-   Obliterate and restore the gravel area on the north side of the
    intersection with the main park road (Type 3 grading treatment).

-   Pave around the narrow tree island, retaining trees. Extend the
    paving from the tree island to the existing parking blocks to
    improve vehicle circulation.

-   Remove and replace the existing 12 inch (300 mm) culvert at the
    entrance. The new culvert would have stone masonry headwalls and a
    riprap apron at the outlet.

-   Repave/rehabilitate existing campground loop roads and campsite
    parking pads.

**Summit Lake Ranger Station and Trailhead Parking**

Modifications to the Summit Lake Ranger Station and Trailhead Parking
Area would be made to reduce sedimentation and to improve wetland
resources and visitor access by providing designated parking and a
vehicle turnaround.

-   Rehabilitate the road generally at existing width, widening slightly
    where less than 15.7 feet (4.8 meters) and remove the small
    lodgepole pines along the road berm where it traverses the wetland.

-   Pave and stripe the unpaved trailhead parking lot within the
    existing disturbed footprint. Paving would extend only up to the
    drip line of trees surrounding parking area. Paving will include
    removal of two trees in the center of the lot \[28 inch (0.7 meter)
    and 32 inch (0.8 meter)\] and one on the north edge of pavement \[22
    inch (0.55 meter)\] as well as an approximately 50 inch (1,270 mm)
    red fir stump on the edge of the parking lot.

-   Replace 18 inch (450 mm) culvert (shorten culvert to end at apron)
    in wetland area and apply stone facing to metal apron headwalls.

**Dersch Meadows**

The main park road along Dersch Meadow acts like a raised dike through
the meadow preventing the natural flow of surface and subsurface water
from one side to the other. Only one culvert crossing consisting of two
30 inch (750 mm) pipes allows for continuous flow of the creek running
adjacent to the road. In addition, the roadway width (20.3 feet or 6.2
meters) is less than the typical width of the main park road (22 feet or
6.7 meters), causing cars to pass very closely to one another. To
address these problems the following actions would be taken:

-   Install five 18 inch (450 mm) culverts to allow continuous
    conveyance of water under the main park road. These culverts would
    generally be placed in natural depressions where water is ponding on
    the south side of the road. The south side of the road has flowing
    water along much of its length through the meadow.

-   Extend the existing northwest 30 inch (750 mm) culvert 6.5 feet (2
    meters) downstream and add a stone masonry headwall (parallel to the
    main park road) connecting the two large culverts.

-   Reconstruct road for approximately 540 feet (165 meters) from
    10-foot (3 meters) travel lanes with no shoulder to 10-foot (3
    meter) travel lanes with one-foot (300 mm) shoulders (to maintain a
    width consistent with the rest of the road). A number of small
    lodgepole pines (est. 0.5 -- 5 inches or 13-127 mm) that have become
    established in the unnatural higher ground of the road shoulder
    would be removed.

-   Construct a steepened rock fill along the fillslopes on the north
    side of the road to retain the roadway and to minimize further
    encroachment into the north side wetlands.

-   Disturbance along the south side of the road would primarily be
    confined to the inlet grading at proposed culvert locations.
    Approximately 0.044 acres of wetlands would be affected by the
    placement of the culverts and the construction of the fill slope to
    retain the road and the culvert headwalls.

**Hat Lake Parking Area**

The Hat Lake Trailhead and interpretive wayside parking area would
undergo the following minor improvements.

-   Pulverize the asphalt parking area and place new asphalt with
    concrete curbs, and an accessible path to the trail across the road
    (leading to Hat Lake).

-   Replace asphalt curb with a colored concrete curb around the parking
    lot and island.

-   Formalize path through island by providing a walkway of asphalt to
    accommodate pedestrians crossing the island and main park road to
    reach the trail across the road.

-   Add curb cuts on either side of the walkway to match pavement
    grades.

**Hat Creek and Lost Creek Box Culverts**

Concrete deterioration (spalling and cracking) within and on (headwalls)
of the Hat Creek Box Culvert and within the Lost Creek Box Culvert would
be repaired.

The following measures would be used to repair both culverts:

-   To minimize dust, sediment or other materials from the concrete
    removal from entering the waters below the culverts, contractors
    would employ a mechanism to catch falling debris (Hat Creek and Lost
    Creek).

-   Work would occur in the dry season to minimize sedimentation of the
    creek. There would be no access roads or pathways constructed (Hat
    Creek and Lost Creek).

-   Work would be implemented from the surface of the box culvert (Hat
    Creek) to repair concrete deterioration on headwalls. Needed hand
    equipment would be lowered from the road for this work.

-   Interior work on both culverts would employ hand tools and small
    hand-carried power tools to prevent the need for reopening
    long-abandoned access routes down the slope.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Deteriorated (spalling and soft) concrete would be mechanically
    removed using small power-driven hand tools (small jackhammers --
    less than 30 lbs., chipping hammers -- 15 lbs. or less).

-   Hand tools (hammers and chisels) would be used for removal of the
    final particles of concrete or to achieve the required finish
    removal.

-   All reinforcing steel to remain in place would be cleaned of rust
    and corrosive products, including oil, dirt, concrete fragments, and
    other coatings that would destroy or inhibit the bond with new
    concrete.

-   Any damaged reinforcing steel would be repaired or replaced.

Erosion adjacent to the north wing wall of the Hat Creek Culvert also
would be repaired as described below:

-   Excavate material adjacent to box culvert north wing wall and
    replace with riprap to retain the slope.

-   Grade the area to redirect water flow away from, instead of into
    culvert wing wall. Small trees encroaching on the wing wall would
    also be removed.

-   Employ resource protection measures to prevent contamination of the
    creek and to ensure larger trees not affecting the culvert wing
    walls are retained.

At Lost Creek, the degree of concrete deterioration within the culvert
may require diversion of water from one side of the double box to the
other. Work is anticipated to extend to the bottom of the interior
walls, which would need to be worked on in dry conditions.

The following resource protection measures would pertain to the culvert
rehabilitation projects:

-   Finish work would retain the character of the historic rock facing
    (Hat Creek) to the degree possible (including numbering and
    photographing rock used in facing as necessary and reusing it in the
    same locations in reconstruction).

-   Erosion control and tree protection measures would be used to
    prevent damage to trees to be retained and raveling of material
    downslope during wing wall riprap installation (Hat Creek).

**Lost Creek/Crags Campgrounds**

-   [Repave/rehabilitate existing campground loop roads and campsite
    parking pads.]{.underline}

The Crags and Lost Creek Campgrounds project is similar to the Manzanita
Lake Campground paving described below. Repaving would be limited to the
current footprint or original as built drawings. Approximately 0.32
miles (0.51 kilometers) would be paved in Crags campground and 0.30
miles (0.48 kilometers) of road in Lost Creek Campground. Lane width
varies from 10 to 15 feet (3-4.6 meters). Both campgrounds have a short
section of two way road with a width of 19 feet (5.8 meters). The
remainder of the campground roads are a circular one-way road with
parallel, pull through and perpendicular parking.

Under the proposed project which would occur either before or after the
rehabilitation of the main park road, existing asphalt would be
pulverized, bladed smooth, and then compacted. Afterwards, a 2.5 inch
(63.5 mm) mat of hot mix asphalt concrete would be applied. This asphalt
would cover the current footprint of paved roads and parking spaces in
the campground (although some parking spaces are now deteriorated, at
one time all were paved). Road and parking shoulders would then be
dressed with aggregate base course material from a park-approved source.
There would be no substantive changes in sites or parking.

**Devastated Area**

The Devastated Area parking lot would be rehabilitated and improvements
would be made to improve restroom accessibility.

-   Rehabilitate the parking lot pavement by pulverizing and overlaying.

-   Realign the existing walkway to the restrooms to meet Americans with
    Disabilities Act (ADA) standards by constructing a new, slightly
    wider (6 feet or 1.8 meters) asphalt sidewalk to create an
    accessible path to the existing restroom (replace asphalt with
    asphalt). Maintain an accessible grade of 1:20 or less on the
    proposed sidewalk.

-   Retain existing stone curbing and reset stone curbing where needed
    (hand remove asphalt back from stone curb to preserve curb).

-   Construct a 6 foot (1.83 meter) wide opening between the existing
    curb stones to access the vault toilet sidewalk. (Some stone will
    need to be removed to facilitate this opening.)

-   Saw cut tree roots at proposed edge of pavement to avoid tree
    removal.

Two different options were considered for both the sidewalk length
(minimum or entire) and its construction material (asphalt or colored
concrete), the one selected was to construct an asphalt sidewalk the
entire length to the vault toilet. This option provided the lowest cost
and would best meet accessibility standards. (See *Alternatives
Considered But Rejected* for more information.)

**Hot Rock Pullout**

The Hot Rock Pullout would be rehabilitated to allow for new
interpretive signing and to make it accessible. Rehabilitating the
pullout includes cutting and removing tree roots which are damaging the
existing pavement, installing root barriers, and replacing asphalt curbs
with concrete curbs as follows:

-   Create space for an accessible wayside.

-   Remove and replace asphalt curb with a colored concrete curb. Place
    boulders at the beginning and end of the pullout to deter vehicles
    from pulling off the pavement.

-   Regrade pullout and remove tree roots to decrease buckling of
    pavement.

-   Decrease the size of the existing pullout by delineating it through
    new curbing.

**Sunflower Flat Pullout**

The gravel Sunflower Flat Pullout has expanded over the years and would
be reduced and paved as follows:

-   Decrease the existing pullout area. Pulverize existing pullout
    surface and pave the proposed footprint (to accommodate five
    vehicles).

-   Scarify area to be revegetated and place partially buried boulders
    at the pavement limits to prevent parking beyond newly paved
    pullout.

**Chaos Jumbles Pullout**

Similar to Sunflower Flat and Hot Rock, this gravel pullout would paved
and would have an accessible interpretive exhibit created as follows:

-   Create an accessible interpretive exhibit by regrading area
    (retaining shrubs near current exhibit).

-   Parking area would accommodate five vehicles.

-   Pave the existing footprint.

**Manzanita Creek Culvert**

This creek flooded in 1997 and the road to Manzanita Lake Campground
washed out. Emergency funding was sought to repair the road and replace
the culvert. Funding allowed for a steel plate culvert to be inserted,
but did not allow for rock facing of the culvert headwalls or wingwalls.
As a result, under the proposed project, the headwalls and wingwalls
would be faced with stone. Installation of the stone faced headwalls
would occur at the close of the primary visitor use season in late fall.

**Manzanita Lake Campground**

-   [Repave/rehabilitate existing campground loop roads and campsite
    parking pads.]{.underline}

This project would involve paving all four campground loops and the main
service road from the terminus of the Manzanita Lake Camper Service
Store Parking Lot to the entrance of loop D. According to the FHWA
inventory, this paving would encompass approximately two lane miles of
existing asphalt road with a varying lane width of between 11 and 16
feet. The camp ground loop roads are one way and have irregular width.

Under the proposed project which would occur either before or after the
rehabilitation of the main park road, existing asphalt would be
pulverized, bladed smooth, and then compacted. Afterwards, a 2.5 inch
(63.5 mm) mat of hot mix asphalt concrete would be applied. This asphalt
would cover the current footprint of paved roads and parking spaces in
the campground (although some parking spaces are now deteriorated, at
one time all were paved). Road and parking shoulders would then be
dressed with aggregate base course material from a park-approved source.
There would be no substantive changes in sites or parking.

**Environmentally Preferred Alternative**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253877
.anchor}

In accordance with Director's Order-12, *Conservation Planning,
Environmental Impact Analysis, and Decision-making* and CEQ (Council on
Environmental Quality) requirements, the NPS is required to identify the
"environmentally preferred alternative" in all environmental documents,
including Environmental Assessments. The environmentally preferred
alternative is determined by applying the criteria suggested in the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, which is guided by the
CEQ). The CEQ (46 FR 18026 - 46 FR 18038) provides direction that the
"environmentally preferable alternative is the alternative that would
promote the national environmental policy as expressed in NEPA's Section
101," including:

• Fulfilling the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the
environment for succeeding generations;

• Ensuring for all generations safe, healthful, productive, and
esthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings;

• Attaining the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment
without degradation, risk of health or safety, or other undesirable and
unintended consequences;

• Preserving important historic, cultural and natural aspects of our
national heritage and maintaining, wherever possible, an environment
that supports diversity and variety of individual choice;

• Achieving a balance between population and resource use that will
permit high standards of living and a wide sharing of life's amenities;
and

• Enhancing the quality of renewable resources and approaching the
maximum attainable recycling of depletable resources (NEPA Section
101(b)).

Generally, these criteria mean the environmentally preferable
alternative is the alternative that causes the least damage to the
biological and physical environment and that best protects, preserves,
and enhances historic, cultural, and natural resources (46 FR 18026 --
46 FR 18038).

In this Environmental Assessment, the Alternative that best meets these
criteria is Alternative 2, the Preferred Alternative. Review of resource
and visitor impacts and mitigation strategies has found that the
preferred alternative achieves the greatest balance between the need for
repairing the road and the need for preserving natural and cultural
resources and improving the visitor experience in the park. This
alternative was selected as the best alternative when taking into
account greater enhancements and upgrades to park maintenance
operations, visitor and employee safety, and long-term operational
costs. The Preferred Alternative has the following benefits:

-   Minimizing loss of natural and cultural resources

-   Protecting public health, safety, and welfare

-   Improving operations efficiency and sustainability, and

-   Protecting employee safety and welfare.

Because Alternative 1, the No Action Alternative, could result in
adverse effects on the eligibility of the Lassen Volcanic National Park
Highway for the National Register of Historic Places; because this
alternative would also continue to result in adverse impacts to wetlands
in the vicinity of Dersch Meadows; because this alternative could
continue to result in adverse impacts to visitor safety; and because
this alternative would likely result in a greater potential for road
failure, it would not best meet the criteria noted above.

**Alternatives Considered But Rejected**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253878
.anchor}

**Pavement Only Repair and Rehabilitation**

Under this alternative, none of the visitor use areas addressed in the
site specific improvements section would be modified. This alternative
was rejected because modification of many of these sites will improve
not only the visitor experience, but also resource protection, including
enhanced preservation of historic structures, rehabilitation of wetland
impacts, reduction in dust and sediment entering waterways, etc. This
alternative was also rejected because comprehensive improvement to the
roadway would result in repairs that will ensure that the Lassen
Volcanic National Park Highway and other park resources are preserved.
This alternative would not provide widening of substandard roadway
widths, control of snow melt at the Lassen Peak Parking Lot or
replacement of damaged culverts.

**Other Surfacing Treatments for Devastated Area Walkways**

Four different options were considered (including developing cost
estimates) for the Devastated Area Walkway to the vault toilet. These
included constructing A) an asphalt sidewalk the minimum length to the
toilet; B) constructing an asphalt sidewalk the entire length to the
vault toilet, and constructing a colored concrete sidewalk the minimum
(C) or entire (D) length. Option B was selected because it would have
the lowest cost and would best meet accessibility standards.

  ----------- -------------------------------------------- --------------
  Option      Description                                  Estimated Cost

  A           Construct asphalt sidewalk the minimum       \$700
              length (56 feet or 7 meters)                 

  B           Construct asphalt sidewalk the entire length \$2,000
              (157 feet or 48 meters) to vault toilet      

  C           Construct colored concrete sidewalk the      \$3,000
              minimum length (56 feet or17meters)          

  D           Construct colored concrete sidewalk the      \$8,000
              entire length (157 feet or 48 meters) to     
              vault toilet                                 
  ----------- -------------------------------------------- --------------

**Lassen Peak Parking Area Culvert Type and Length**

Also considered for the culvert replacement at the lower end of the
Lassen Peak Parking Area was a concrete box culvert, but an aluminum
arch culvert was found to have lower cost, easier constructability and
similar headwall aesthetics given the proposed location. In addition,
extending the box inlet further up the channel was considered but
rejected due to increased maintenance difficulty and the cost of a
longer structure.

**Other options for restoring cross-road wetland flow in Dersch
Meadows**

FHWA was asked to come up with solutions to restore wetland water flow
that would minimize the amount of disturbance through this area. The
following options were considered but rejected during the design process
due to their greater (unacceptable) impacts on the wetland as noted in
brackets:

-   Construct small walls to increase top bench width \[Road clear zone
    would not be maintained\];

-   Reconstruct roadway embankment with a permeable wrapped rock fill to
    allow cross drainage \[New culverts would still be needed in case
    rock fill blanket clogs\];

-   Construct reinforced fill with geotextile using steepened side
    slopes to maintain existing toe of slope \[Area would have wetlands
    impacts that would be difficult to revegetate\];

-   Replace the existing crossing with a larger concrete box crossing
    \[Would result in visually intrusive and larger wetlands impacts\];
    and

-   Installing 2.0 foot (600 mm) diameter round pipe culverts \[Would
    have required raising the road grade 12-18 inches (300-450 mm) and
    caused more wetlands impacts.\]

**Kings Creek Meadow Pullout**

Similar to Sunflower Flats and Chaos Jumbles (below), the park and FHWA
looked at options for "head-in" parking but found that it could cause
increased wetlands impacts and would have made it difficult for visitors
to back out onto the main highway due to limited sight distance.
Specifically considered alternatives included head in parking with a 12
foot (3.6 meter) backing aisle and raised pedestrian boardwalk (rejected
due to wetlands impacts and safety concerns with backing into main park
road traffic), and head in parking with a 20 foot (6.0 meter) backing
aisle and raised pedestrian boardwalk (rejected due to much greater
wetlands impacts).

**Kings Creek Trailhead**

Other alternatives considered at this location included a mortared stone
masonry wall on a concrete footer (rejected due to incompatibility with
stone masonry veneer elsewhere in the park); a wall location further
downslope (with far greater impacts on vegetation); a plaza area at
grade with two stairways (rejected due to safety problems with
pedestrians in the plaza area); and not including a walkway to convey
pedestrians from distant parking to the plaza area (added to enhance
recognition of trailhead and to increase visitor safety).

**[Sunflower Flats and Chaos Jumbles]{.underline}**

The park and FHWA looked at options for "head-in" parking similar to the
current configuration for the Brokeoff Mountain Trailhead parking lot
but found that these would be too large and expensive for current and
future anticipated visitor needs.

**III. IMPACT TOPICS**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253879 .anchor}

Specific impact topics were developed to address potential natural,
cultural, recreational and park operations impacts that might result
from the proposed Alternatives as identified by the public (no comments
received on March 2004 public scoping press release), NPS, and other
agencies, and to address federal laws, regulations and orders, and NPS
policy. A brief rationale for the selection or non-selection of each
impact topic is given below.

**[Impact Topics Analyzed in this Document.]{.smallcaps}** Impacts of
the alternatives on the following topics are presented in this
Environmental Assessment: soils; water resources, including wetlands and
water quality; vegetation; wildlife; special status species; prehistoric
and historic archeological resources; ethnography; historic structures;
cultural landscapes; visitor experience; and park operations.

**Soils**: *Management Policies* (NPS 2001A) require the NPS to
understand and preserve and to prevent, to the extent possible the
unnatural erosion, physical removal, or contamination of the soil. The
Preferred Alternative involves ground-disturbing activities with the
potential for erosion or sedimentation impacts to occur. Therefore,
soils are addressed as an impact topic.

**Water Resources, including Wetlands and Water Quality**: The 1972
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended by the Clean Water Act
of 1977, is a national policy to restore and maintain the chemical,
physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters, to enhance
the quality of water resources, and to prevent, and control, and abate
water pollution. NPS *Management Policies* provide direction for the
preservation, use, and quality of water in national parks.

The preferred alternative would take place in and/or near surface
waters, namely Manzanita, Hat, Kings, and Lost Creeks. The Clean Water
Act is a national policy aimed at restoring, maintaining, and enhancing
the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters
and to prevent, control, and abate water pollution. Construction will
result in earth disturbing activities, which increases the potential for
erosion and sedimentation to occur.

> **Water Quality**: Section 401 of the *Clean Water Act* as well as NPS
> policy requires analysis of impacts on water quality.
>
> **Wetlands**: Executive Order 11990 requires that impacts to wetlands
> be addressed.
>
> **Water Quantity:** The increased/decreased use of water to provide
> for public use may also have an impact on park resources, such as
> amphibians. Withdrawal of water from Kings Creek and Manzanita Lake,
> as well as from the park's domestic water supply is proposed.

**Vegetation:** The *National Environmental Policy Act* (NEPA) calls for
examination of the impacts on the components of affected ecosystems. NPS
policy is to protect the natural abundance and diversity of park native
species and communities, including avoiding, minimizing or mitigating
potential impacts from proposed projects.

Most of the road corridor traverses a volcanic landscape nearly devoid
of vegetation. Even so, areas unaffected or affected long ago by
volcanic activity have recovered to the point that the project area
encompasses some old growth forest and a variety of other vegetation
communities. The Preferred Alternative will remove vegetation including
trees.

**Wildlife**: The *National Environmental Policy Act* (NEPA) calls for
examination of the impacts on the components of affected ecosystems. NPS
policy is to protect the natural abundance and diversity of park native
species and communities, including avoiding, minimizing or mitigating
potential impacts from proposed projects. More than 260 native species
of terrestrial and aquatic vertebrates have been recorded in the park,
including 56 mammals, 190 birds, and 18 amphibians and reptiles. Many
wildlife species may reside in or near the project area.

**Special Status Species:** The *Endangered Species Act* (ESA) requires
an examination of impacts to all federally listed threatened or
endangered species. NPS policy also requires an analysis of impacts to
state-listed threatened or endangered species and federal candidate
species. Under the ESA, the NPS is mandated to promote the conservation
of all federal threatened and endangered species and their critical
habitats within the park boundary. Management Policies include the
additional stipulation to conserve and manage species proposed for
listing. Ongoing informal consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, and California Department of Fish and Game (Natural Diversity
Database) has identified several important rare, threatened and
endangered species that occur in Lassen Volcanic National Park.

**Prehistoric and Historic Archeological Resources:** Conformance with
the *Archeological Resources Protection Act* in protecting known or
undiscovered archeological resources is necessary.

**Ethnography:** Lassen Volcanic National Park and the surrounding area
have a long history of use by prehistoric and contemporary Native
Americans. Analysis of impacts to known resources is important under the
*National Historic Preservation Act* and other laws. The National Park
Service defines ethnographic resources as any "site, structure, object,
landscape, or natural resource feature assigned traditional legendary,
religious, subsistence, or other significance in the cultural system of
a group traditionally associated with it" (DO-28, *Cultural Resource
Management Guideline*, p. 181).

**Historic Structures/Cultural Landscapes:** Consideration of the
impacts to cultural resources is required under provisions of Section
106 of the *National Historic Preservation Act of 1966*, as amended, and
the 1995 *Programmatic agreement among the National Park Service, the
National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers, and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation*. It is also required under
*Management Policies* (2001). Federal land managing agencies are
required to consider the effects proposed actions have on properties
listed in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of
Historic Places (i.e., Historic Properties), and allow the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment.
Agencies are required to consult with Federal, state, local, and tribal
governments/organizations, identify historic properties, assess adverse
effects to historic properties, and negate, minimize, or mitigate
adverse effects to historic properties while engaged in any Federal or
federally assisted undertaking (36 CFR Part 800). Requirements for
proper management of museum objects are defined in 36 CFR 79.

**Visitor Experience:** Dependent on the selected alternative, a variety
of impacts to visitor use may occur. Based on *Management Policies*
(2001), impacts to visitors are considered with respect to park
undertakings.

**Park Operations:** Impacts to park operations and visitor services are
often considered in Environmental Assessments to disclose the degree to
which proposed actions would change park management strategies and
methods.

**[Impact Topics Dismissed from Further Analysis.]{.smallcaps}** The
topics listed below either would not be affected or would be affected
only negligibly by the alternatives evaluated in this Environmental
Assessment. Therefore, these topics have been dismissed from further
analysis. Negligible effects are effects that are localized effects that
would not be detectable over existing conditions.

**Air Quality:** Lassen Volcanic National Park is in a mandatory Class I
airshed under the Clean Air Act (1977). Class I areas are afforded the
highest degree of protection under the Clean Air Act. This designation
allows very little additional deterioration of air quality. The Clean
Air Act states that park managers have an affirmative responsibility to
protect park air quality related values (including visibility, plants,
animals, soils, water quality, cultural resources and visitor health)
from adverse air pollution impacts. Special visibility protection
provisions of the Clean Air Act also apply to Class I areas, including
new national rules to prevent and remedy regional haze affecting these
areas. Under existing visibility protection regulations, the NPS
identified "integral vistas" that are important to the visitor's visual
experience in NPS Class I areas, and it is NPS policy to protect these
scenic views. None are currently being monitored.

Although the preferred alternative would require use of heavy equipment
during certain activities, emissions and dust associated with these
activities would be rapidly dissipated by air movement. Effects would be
short-term and negligible in a local and regional context.

**Water Resources:**

> **Floodplains:** Executive Order 11988 (Floodplain Management)
> requires an examination of impacts to floodplains and potential risk
> involved in placing facilities within floodplains. NPS Management
> Policies, DO-2 (Planning Guidelines), and DO-12 (Conservation
> Planning, Environmental Impact Analysis, and Decision Making) provide
> guidelines for proposals in floodplains. Executive Order 11988
> requires that impacts to floodplains be addressed. No floodplains
> would be affected by actions proposed in this Environmental
> Assessment. The proposed project is primarily located along steep,
> mountainous roads. The requirements of this executive order do not
> apply to the proposed action. No new facilities are proposed within
> floodplains.

**Geologic/Geothermal Resources/Geological Hazards:** Lassen Volcanic
National Park has an extensive history of eruptions, ashfall, debris
flows and other geologic events that have shaped the present landforms.
Within the park is a diverse array of volcanic resources including
composite volcanoes, shield volcanoes, plug dome volcanoes, tephra
cones, lava flows, and active geothermal areas. These present an ongoing
hazard to visitors and staff. *Management Policies* (2001) calls for
analysis of geological hazards should they be relevant. Although there
are a large number of thermal volcanic features traversed by the main
park road, these are outside of the proposed project area. In addition,
while geologic hazards could occur at any time, the proposed project
would not influence their occurrence or affect them in any way.

**Prime and Unique Farmlands**: Even though soil surveys have not been
conducted in Lassen Volcanic National Park, no unique agricultural soils
are believed to exist in the park because its soils generally contain
low nutrient levels or are poorly developed (of recent volcanic origin)
and acidic.

**Scenic Values:** Management Policies and the NPS Organic Act identify
the need to protect the scenic values of parks. The main park road and
other elements of this project are now in place and have been for
decades. Although the roads themselves do interrupt the scenic values of
the park, they also provide access to them. The proposed action does not
relocate or expand the roads while it does maintain a leisurely,
park‑like setting for the road. During construction there would be
effects due to the presence of construction equipment but these effects
would be short-term and would occur within an existing developed road
corridor, and therefore negligible.

**Collections**: Management Policies and other cultural resources laws
identify the need to evaluate effects on National Park Service
Collections if applicable. The collections at Lassen Volcanic National
Park would not be affected by the proposed project, except by the
potential addition of material for the collections if any is found (see
mitigation measures under *Archeological Resources* in the
*Environmental Consequences* section).

**Wilderness:** In October 1972, Congress designated 75% of the park
(78,982 acres) as the Lassen Volcanic Wilderness. The 2003 General
Management Plan for Lassen Volcanic National Park proposes an additional
25,000 acres be included for wilderness designation. NPS wilderness
management policies are based on provisions of the 1916 NPS Organic Act,
the 1964 Wilderness Act, and legislation establishing individual units
of the national park system. These policies establish consistent
service-wide direction for the preservation, management, and use of
wilderness and prohibit the construction of roads, buildings and other
man-made improvements and the use of motorized vehicles in wilderness.
All park management activities proposed within wilderness are subject to
review following the minimum requirement concept and decision
guidelines. The public purpose of wilderness in national parks includes
the preservation of wilderness character and wilderness resources in an
unimpaired condition, as well as for the purposes of recreational,
scenic, scientific, education, conservation, and historical use.

Although some construction work on the road would occur near the
wilderness boundary and near some trailheads, proposed and designated
wilderness would be avoided during construction activities. There would
be no long-term adverse consequences to proposed federally designated
wilderness lands or potential wilderness values or solitude should the
proposal be selected. Therefore, this impact topic has been dismissed
from further analysis.

**Socioeconomics:** Socioeconomic impact analysis is required, as
appropriate, under NEPA and NPS Management Policies pertaining to
gateway communities. The local and regional economy and most business of
the communities surrounding the park are based on logging and wood
products manufacturing, cattle ranching, agriculture, professional
services, tourist sales and services, and educational research. Actions
evaluated in this Environmental Assessment would have negligible
short-term economic benefits from construction- related expenditures and
employment and would include economic gains for some local and regional
businesses and individuals. These effects would be negligible in context
of the overall local and regional economy. Measures to minimize traffic
disruptions during construction would be implemented (e.g., no
construction on weekends or federal holidays, no more than 30 minute
traffic delays, dissemination of information to the public concerning
construction delays and closure scheduling). Therefore, construction is
not expected to discourage or reduce visitation and adverse impacts on
tourist-related businesses is expected to be negligible.

**Environmental Justice:** Executive Order 12898 requires all federal
agencies to incorporate environmental justice into their missions by
identifying and addressing disproportionately high and adverse human
health or environmental effects of their programs and policies on
minorities and low-income populations and communities. This Executive
Order does not apply to the subject of this Environmental Assessment.
The actions evaluated in this Environmental Assessment would not
adversely affect socially or economically disadvantaged populations.

**IV. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253880 .anchor}

**A. Soils**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253881 .anchor}

The soils within Lassen Volcanic National Park are generally rocky,
shallow, rapidly drained and strongly acidic. They are almost
exclusively volcanic in origin. Depths vary from several feet in limited
lower elevation meadows to thin or nonexistent in the higher elevations.
The distribution of many herbs, shrubs, and trees in the park and
throughout the Cascade Range follows geologic formations and soil
properties as much as climatic factors. In the vicinity of Chaos
Jumbles, for example, there are three distinct overlapping rock fall
avalanches, each with soil of a different texture and composition and
each with a different vegetative cover. Because of their rock porous
nature, the soils are rather resistant to erosion. Erosion does occur in
conjunction with some heavily used trails. Detailed soil information
comes from a few small development projects and is site specific. A
comprehensive soil survey has never been completed for the entire park,
though efforts are underway to begin a park-wide soil survey by the
Natural Resource Conservation Service in 2005.

**B. Water Resources**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253882 .anchor}

Lassen Volcanic National Park contains portions of five drainage basins.
Four of the drainage basins (nearly the entire park) flow into the
Sacramento River and eventually to the Pacific Ocean. A small area on
the eastside of the park flows into the landlocked Eagle Lake drainage
basin. The northern half of the park is the Hat Creek drainage, which
ultimately feeds into the northern Sacramento River system via the Pit
River. The western and southern portions of the park also flow to the
Sacramento River via three main channels: the southeast portion of the
park drains via the Upper North Fork of the Feather River, which is
dammed approximately 18 miles outside the park at Lake Almanor; and the
west and southwest portions of the park flow into Battle Creek and Mill
Creek, respectively. Mill Creek currently has no dams blocking
anadromous fish and is one of very few stream courses remaining in
California to have its biologic integrity preserved from its origin in
northern California to the Sacramento River. As a result, Mill Creek has
been identified as a potential Wild and Scenic River (NPS 2003B).

The park contains over 200 lakes and ponds and 15 perennial streams.
Inventory data on aquatic life in these water bodies, however, is very
limited. Some lakes have been significantly modified by past programs of
stocking non-native sport fish, which continued until 1992.

Some of the natural drainage systems in the park have been altered. The
most obvious of these are Manzanita and Reflection Lakes. Manzanita Lake
was created from the Chaos Crags rock fall avalanche 300 years ago and
was enlarged with a dam in 1911 for a small hydropower operation. Water
was also diverted from Manzanita Creek to Reflection Lake, originally a
closed basin lake, to provide water- generated power and to improve fish
production. Natural drainage patterns in Warner Valley's Drakesbad
Meadow were also altered by early ranchers to more evenly distribute
water in the meadow for livestock grazing. Dream Lake Dam was also built
in Warner Valley in the 1930's as part of the Drakesbad Guest Ranch
prior to park ownership in the late 1950's.

Of the drainages noted above, only the Hat Creek, Lost Creek, Kings
Creek, and Manzanita Creek drainages are within the proposed project
area. Lake Helen, Summit Lake, Hat Lake, Manzanita Lake and Reflection
Lake are also adjacent to proposed project areas (see also more detailed
discussion below in *Wetlands*).

> **1. Water Quality**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253883 .anchor}

Water quality is generally considered to be excellent because Lassen
Volcanic National Park is located at the top of its watersheds. Aside
from park developed areas, there is no other development that could
affect park waters. Water quality data has been sporadically collected
over the years, including some data from the park's hydrothermal areas
at Sulphur Works, Bumpass Hell and Devil's Kitchen.

Surface water from a total of six sources (Butte Lake, Manzanita Creek,
Lost Creek, East Fork Hat Creek, Forest Creek, and Martin Creek) and two
springs (Drakesbad Springs and Warner Valley Springs) is treated to
provide drinking water for park visitors and staff. Drinking water is
monitored daily to ensure a safe supply for human use.

Periodic sampling and testing is also performed in park waters where
existing sewage systems or human use levels are such that contamination
is a possibility. A Sanitary Survey in 1997 tested for temperature, pH,
turbidity, dissolved oxygen, coliform, giardia, cryptosporidium and flow
rates for five watersheds. This survey provided baseline data for a
water quality monitoring program that will continue every five years to
better understand the impact of visitation on water quality and ambient
water quality and water intakes.

Broad based chemical analysis and testing for herbicides and pesticides
has been conducted in five watersheds (Forest Creek, North Fork of Hat
Creek, Lost Creek, Manzanita Creek and Flat Iron Ridge Spring) over the
last twelve years. No pesticides have ever been detected in any of the
park's watersheds. A level I water quality inventory will be completed
for the park by the US Geological Survey in 2005.

> **2. Wetlands**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253884 .anchor}

Wetlands are a critical resource in the park supporting a high diversity
of species. National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) maps were produced in
~~the~~ 1989 for the park and surrounding National Forest lands, though
most of these maps have not been digitized or ground-truthed for
accuracy. Based on several rough estimates for vegetation types, wet
meadow and riparian/alder zones total over 2,000 acres in the park. Of
this acreage, several wet meadow wetland complexes are significant in
size, including Drakesbad Meadow, Kings Creek Meadow and Dersch Meadows.
Drakesbad Meadow in Warner Valley was identified as a fen in 2000
because it has organic soils more than 40 cm thick. At approximately 35
acres, this spring-fed complex is the largest wetland in the Park. Fens
occur throughout the Rocky Mountains but there are very few reports of
peat lands occurring in the Cascades (California, Oregon and Washington)
or the Sierra Nevada (California). There are hundreds of smaller
wetlands throughout the park; many are associated with lakes and ponds
and can be found throughout the park's wilderness.

The following wetlands are located in or near the proposed project area:

-   Dersch Meadow,

-   Kings Creek Meadow,

-   Summit Lake Meadow,

-   Kings Creek,

-   Lost Creek, and

-   Hat Creek.

Of these areas, the three meadows are considered palustrine (freshwater
not associated with lakes, but rather with persistent groundwater),
persistent emergent wetlands (dominated by an array of grass-like plants
and true grasses) and the three creeks are considered upper perennial
riverine wetlands (Johnson personal communication 2005).

Palustrine wetlands include all nontidal wetlands dominated by trees,
shrubs, persistent emergents, emergent mosses or lichens, and some
saltwater wetlands. Palustrine wetlands include those areas called
marshes, bogs, fens and prairies as well as shallow permanent or
intermittent ponds. Palustrine wetlands are further classified as
forested, emergent wetland persistent, and scrub-shrub wetlands
(Cowardin *et al.* 1979).

Dersch Meadow (a scrub-shrub palustrine emergent wetland) contains an
overstory of alder and willow, and an understory of grasses, sedges and
rushes. Scrub-shrub wetlands generally contain an overstory of trees
(approximately 20%) and an understory of shrubs (60%) with the trees
usually less than 20 feet tall (Cowardin *et al.* 1979).

Summit Lake and Kings Creek meadows are classic sedge-dominated wet
meadows, with Kings Creek shown as an example of this type of wetland in
the USFWS guide to *Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United
States* (Cowardin *et al.* 1979) (Plate 66).

Riverine wetlands include all wetlands and deepwater habitats contained
within a channel, except for wetlands dominated by trees, shrubs,
persistent emergents, emergent mosses or lichens and those near salt
water. Water is usually, but not always flowing in the channel and these
wetlands may also be surrounded on their floodplain by other kinds of
palustrine wetlands (Cowardin *et al.* 1979).

Lost, Hat and Kings Creek are upper perennial streams with seasonally
flooded margins including small pockets of wetlands and scrub-shrub
wetlands on the boundary of their riverine and upland habitats.

Wetland boundaries for Dersch and Kings Creek meadows were
ground-truthed in summer 2002, using Global Positioning System (GPS)
devices. These boundaries have, in turn, been analyzed with respect to
the proposed road rehabilitation occurring in their vicinity. Wetland
boundaries have also been delineated for the Summit Lake Ranger Station,
Hat Creek, Lost Creek and other areas affected by the proposed project.

> **3. Water Quantity**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253885 .anchor}

Two water treatment plants at the developed areas at the southwest
entrance station (Forest Creek) and at Manzanita Lake (Manzanita Creek)
provide domestic water supply of approximately 30,000 gallons per day
and 62,000 gallons per day, respectively. Other creeks which provide
water for park uses include: Lost Creek, East Fork of Hat Creek and
Martin Creek. Of these, the park's domestic water supply at both
Manzanita Lake and the southwest water treatment facilities, and water
from Kings Creek and Manzanita Lake are proposed for use under the
current project in Alternative 2.

**C. Vegetation**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253886 .anchor}

Lassen Volcanic National Park covers approximately 166.2 square miles
(106,372 acres) of the southernmost peaks of the Cascade Mountain range
just north of the Sierra Nevada. Elevations in the park vary from 5300
feet (1,616 meters) at Warner Valley to 10,247 feet (3187 meters) atop
Lassen Peak. Because the park is located near the junction of two
mountain ranges and comes close to the Great Basin Province as well,
plant diversity is great and the park contains overlapping ranges of
species common to each of these unique areas. According to the GMP, the
diversity of geologic formations and chemical and textural compositions
of lava have also resulted in a wide diversity of plants in these
communities and many anomalies to the altitudinal life zones.

Most of the park below 7,900 feet (2,400 meters) is forested, with the
distribution of conifers affected by elevation (Parker 1991). Red fir
*(Abies magnifica)* and lodgepole pine *(Pinus contorta var. murrayana)*
dominate upper elevations (6,900-7,900 feet or 2,100-2,400 meters),
whereas white fir (*Abies concolor)* and Jeffrey pine (*Pinus jeffreyi)*
are most abundant at lower elevations (\<6,900 feet or 2,100 meters).
Limited stands of mountain hemlock *(Tsuga mertensiana)* occur at
treeline generally above 7,900 feet or 2,400 meters.

Although most of the park is forested, a great percentage is also rocky,
exposed and relatively devoid of vegetation. The volcanic eruptions of
Lassen Peak destroyed over three square miles of forests. With
reforestation now occurring through succession, herbs, shrubs and now
trees are growing. The first trees to survive are lodgepole pines, which
then give way to other pines and firs.

Four major plant communities are found within the park, including yellow
pine forest, red fir forest (including the intermediate lodgepole pine
forest), subalpine forest and alpine fellfields. Minor plant communities
include montane chaparral or brush lands and herbaceous wet meadows as
well as localized riparian areas (dominated by willows and alders along
water courses and aspens in moist areas at low elevations.

**Red Fir Forest:** Red fir forest is the most widespread forest type in
the park and is a common upper montane forest type throughout the Sierra
Nevada and in the southern Cascades. In the Park, red fir forest is
found between 6,500 and 8,000 feet or 2,400 and 2,900 meters and covers
some 35,000 acres, about one third of the Park. In red fir forests, red
fir (*Abies magnifica*) is the sole dominant tree in the canopy, but
lodgepole pine (*Pinus contorta* ssp. *murrayana*), Jeffrey pine (*Pinus
jeffreyi*), mountain hemlock (*Tsuga mertensiana*), sugar pine (*Pinus
lambertiana*), western white pine (*Pinus monticola*) or white fir
(*Abies concolor*) may be present in small numbers. Mature red fir is
commonly 60 to 120 feet or 22-44 meters tall and lives over 300 years.
Red fir seedling distribution is closely related to shade; seedlings are
largely absent from areas receiving more than half strength full sun.
Shrubs and flowers include arrowleaf balsamroot (*Balamorhiza
saggittata*), mule's ear (*Wyethia mollis*) and greenleaf manzanita
(*Arctostaphylos patula*).

Depending on soil type and elevation, mountain hemlock may be a
component of either the Red Fir Forest or the Subalpine Forest. Mountain
hemlock is usually found on nutrient-poor sites with coarser textured
soils than red-fir dominated sites (Parker 1991). The pre-successional
lodgepole pine stands often occur between 6,200 and 7,500 feet or 1,900
and 2,300 meters and are most common on flat, valley bottom sites or
lower slopes, often near the margins of meadows and lakes.

**Yellow Pine Forest:** This forest type is found below 6,000 feet
(1,900 meters) usually with a mix of species including sugar pine
(*Pinus lambertiana*), Jeffrey pine, white fir, ponderosa pine (*Pinus
ponderosa*), western white pine, incense cedar (*Calocedrus decurrens*)
and even red fir. The soils associated with these forest types have
significantly higher potassium, calcium, and magnesium than most other
Lassen Park forest types (Parker 1991).

**Subalpine Forest:** The subalpine forest, at the upper end of the
park's coniferous forests in elevation (above 8,500 feet or 3,100
meters) is dominated by mountain hemlock and whitebark pine (*Pinus
albicaulis*), a highly weather resistant pine that may grow as high as
10,000 feet or 3,600 meters. Shrubs and flowers include currants
(*Ribes* sp.), willow (*Salix* sp.), lupine (*Lupinus* sp.), senecio
(*Senecio* sp.), pearly everlasting (*Anaphalis* *margaritacea*), rubber
rabbitbrush (*Chrysothamnus nauseosus*), and pine mat manzanita
(*Arctostaphylos nevadensis*).

**Alpine Meadows and Fellfields:** These areas, located above
timberline, are carpeted with colorful wildflowers, including spreading
phlox (*Phlox diffusa*), phacelia (*Phacelia* sp.), stonecrops (*Sedum*
sp,), alpine saxifrage (*Saxifraga tolmei*), cinquefoils (*Potentilla*
sp.), penstemons (*Penstemon* sp.), alpine daisy (*Erigeron
compositus*), and buckwheats (*Eriogonum* sp.).

**Montane Chaparral or Brushland:** Pinder *et al.* (1997) found that
most chaparral species in the park occur below 7,500 feet (2,300 meters)
on relatively dry sites. These scattered shrub fields, which comprise
approximately 10 percent of the park are dominated by greenleaf and
pinemat manzanita (*Arctostaphylos patula and A. nevadensis)*, snowbrush
ceanothus *(Ceanothus velutinus*), and bush or California chinquapin
*(Castanopsis sempervirens)* as well as currant (*Ribes* sp.),
gooseberry (*Ribes* sp.), serviceberry (*Amelanchier* sp*.*), bitter
cherry (*Prunus* sp.)*.*

**Wet Meadows:** Herbaceous communities are scattered throughout the
park and range from densely vegetated, wet meadows near seeps, streams
and lakes that contain primarily grass and grass-like species including
sedges *(Carex spp.),* and perennial grasses, including Thurber's
bentgrass (*Agrostis thuberiana*)*,*tufted hairgrass *(Deschampsia
caespitosa*) *,* and Pullup muhly (*Muhlenbergia filiformis*) (Taylor
1990b); to less densely vegetated areas composed of mostly broad-leaved
plants such as satin lupine *(Lupinus obtusilobus),* mule's ears*,*
sagebrush (*Artemisia douglasiana*)*,* and mountain alder (*Alnus
tenuifolia*) that occur on steep slopes or in larger gaps within
forested areas (Pinder *et al*. 1997). Forbs include monkeyflower
(*Mimulus* sp.), bog laurel (*Kalmia* sp.), California corn lily
(*Veratrum californicum*), alpine shooting star (*Dodecatheon alpinum*)
and lupine.

See additional descriptions above under *Water Resources -- Wetlands*
for the two wet meadows that would be traversed by the proposed project
area.

**Vegetation Distribution in the Project Area**

Most portions of the project area are dominated by development,
including the road and associated parking areas, and support little
vegetation. The project area, however, traverses a variety of plant
communities, including red fir forest, riparian corridors, wet meadows,
and subalpine meadows.

During late summer and early winter visits, the following plants were
observed in areas that would be affected by the proposed project: trees
(mountain hemlock, lodgepole pine, red fir, alder, and willow); shrubs
(pine mat manzanita, and rabbitbrush); forbs (lupine, yarrow,
everlasting, aster, and mints); as well as a variety of unknown grasses,
sedges, and rushes. Most of the vegetation excluding trees that would be
affected by the proposed project consists of sparse vegetation in highly
disturbed road shoulders and pullout edges.

Figure 2. Generalized Vegetation Map for Lassen Volcanic National
Park[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253887 .anchor}.

![](media/image3.jpeg){width="6.48125in" height="8.373611111111112in"}

**D. Wildlife**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253888 .anchor}

More than 260 native species of terrestrial and aquatic animals have
been recorded in the park area, including 61 species of mammals, 138
species of birds and 15 species of amphibians and reptiles. Another
three occurred historically but have not been documented recently,
including the great gray owl, wolverine and Pacific fisher. Little is
known about the distribution and abundance of most wildlife species.

Small mammals include the deer mouse, five species of shrew, Allen's and
yellow-pine chipmunk, Douglas squirrel, flying squirrel, golden-mantled
ground squirrel, yellow-bellied marmot and pika. Small and medium-sized
carnivores include the long-tailed weasel, pine marten, raccoon, striped
skunk, river otter, bobcat, red fox and coyote. Large mammals include
the black bear, black-tailed deer and mountain lion. In addition, seven
species of bats occur in the park.

Of the birds approximately 80 species are known to nest in the park.
Raptors include the northern goshawk, Cooper's hawk, red-tailed hawk,
sharp-shinned hawk, peregrine falcon, golden eagle, bald eagle, northern
saw-whet owl, spotted owl, great horned owl, and northern pygmy owl.
Other bird species include the gray jay, Clark's nutcracker,
red-breasted sapsucker, common flicker, pileated woodpecker, Steller's
jay, Oregon junco, warbling vireo, Audubon's warbler, Wilson's warbler,
hermit warbler, fox sparrow, and song sparrow.

Amphibians include the western toad, Pacific tree frog, Cascades frog
and long-toed salamander. Reptiles include the western terrestrial
garter snake, northern alligator lizard, rubber boa and sagebrush
lizard.

Although most park lakes are naturally barren, four native species of
fish occur in the park, including rainbow trout, Tahoe sucker, tui chub
and Lahontan redside. In addition there are a number of introduced fish,
including brook trout (*Salvelinus fontinalis*) and brown trout (*Salmo
trutta*). Stocking of hatchery-reared rainbow and brown trout occurred
from the park's establishment until 1992.

While recent systematic surveys have not found any fish because of
downstream barriers that prevent native rainbow and exotic brown trout
from entering this part of the stream, the nearby Manzanita Lake fishery
has been state designated as a "blue ribbon" fishery, with native Eagle
Lake Rainbow Trout. Fishing there is catch and release with regular
creel censuses conducted. Regardless, Manzanita Creek is closed to
fishing. Lost Creek, Hat Creek, and Kings Creek have populations of
non-native brook trout.

The park also contains a wide variety of known and unknown
invertebrates, including insects, spiders and worms.

**E. Special Status Species**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253889 .anchor}

> **1. Plants**

There are no federal or state listed threatened and endangered plants
occurring in Lassen Volcanic National Park. The park is home, however,
to 24 special status species monitored by park staff and the California
Native Plant Society (Koenig 2004A). These species are associated with
aquatic or alpine habitats and would not be affected by the actions
proposed in this Environmental Assessment.

> **2. Wildlife**

**Federally Threatened and Endangered Species*.***

  ----------------------------------- -----------------------------------
  **Species**                         **Federal Status**

  Bald Eagle (*Haliaeetus             Threatened
  leucocephalus*)                     

  California Red Legged Frog (*Rana   Threatened
  aurora draytonii*)                  

  Delta Smelt (*Hypomsus              Threatened
  transpacificus*)                    

  Central Valley Steelhead            Threatened
  (*Oncorhynchus mykiss*)             

  Winter Run Chinook Salmon           Endangered
  (*Oncorhynchus tshawytscha*)        

  Shasta crayfish (*Pacifastacus      Endangered
  fortis*)                            

  Central Valley spring-run chinook   Threatened
  salmon (*Oncorhynchus tshawytscha*) 

  Vernal pool invertebrates           Critical habitat
  ----------------------------------- -----------------------------------

[Bald Eagle]{.underline}. The bald eagle is the only listed species
known to occur in the park. Bald eagles build their nests in trees
greater than 30 inches in diameter, within a ¼ - ½ mile from a
fish-providing water source. Because of scarce food supply and
relatively harsh nesting season climatic conditions, the park has
extremely marginal bald eagle nesting habitat. There is one known bald
eagle nest in the park at Snag Lake, which was first discovered in 1980
and monitored until 2001. The nest tree fell down during the winter of
2000/2001 and no new nest has since been located. In 2002, there were
sightings of bald eagles around Snag Lake and Butte Lake although no
nests were found. There were no sightings of bald eagles in the Snag
Lake area in 2003. There were reports of bald eagles at Butte Lake in
2004, although nesting was not confirmed. Surveys are currently being
conducted to locate a new nest in the Snag/Butte Lake area. Hunting
territory for this pair comprises most of the eastern half of the park.
The only other known bald eagle activity in the park is seasonal
foraging use of the Manzanita Lake area by eagles believed to nest at
McCumber Reservoir outside of the park. There would be no effect on bald
eagles because no habitat would be removed and no project work would
take place near known nesting areas during the nesting season.

The other seven federally listed species described below have not been
found in the park and suitable habitat does not exist in the project
area.

[California Red-legged Frog]{.underline}. This species has not been
positively identified within the park. It inhabits elevations generally
lower than the project area from sea level to about 5,000 feet. Nearly
all of the known occurrences are from below 3,500 feet. California
red-legged frogs spend most of their lives in and near sheltered
backwaters of ponds, marshes, springs, streams, and reservoirs. Deep
pools with dense stands of overhanging willows and an intermixed fringe
of cattails are considered optimal habitat. No suitable habitat occurs
in the project area. There would be no effect on red-legged frogs from
this project.

[Delta Smelt and Central Valley steelhead]{.underline}. These species
occur or spawn in the Sacramento River and its tributaries. No streams
within the park have been found to support these species, therefore
there would be no effect from this project.

[Winter-run Chinook Salmon]{.underline}. This species is found only in
the upper Sacramento River. No streams within the park have been found
to support this species and no suitable habitat exists within the
project area. There would be no effect on Winter-run Chinook from this
project.

[Central Valley Spring-run Chinook Salmon.]{.underline} This species is
found within the Sacramento River and its tributaries -- Butte, Big
Chico, Deer, and Mill creeks. These salmon enter the Sacramento River
between February and June. They move upstream and enter the tributaries
between February and July, peaking in May and June, where they stay in
pools until spawning occurs in mid-August to mid-October (September
peak). There are no current records of spring-run chinook salmon within
the section of Mill Creek that is within Lassen Volcanic National Park.
No suitable habitat occurs within the project area. There would be no
effect on Spring-run Chinook from this project.

[Shasta crayfish]{.underline}. This species is only known from Shasta
County in lower elevation waters outside of the park. They inhabit cool,
clear, spring-fed lakes, rivers, and streams and most are found in still
and moderately flowing waters. No suitable habitat occurs in the project
area for this species. There would be no effect on Shasta crayfish from
this project.

[Vernal pool invertebrates.]{.underline} Vernal pools are seasonally
flooded shallow depressions in grasslands that have hardpan, clay or
volcanic soils that prevent water penetration. These depressions fill
with water in the rainy season and dry out as the summer progresses.
Several species of invertebrates (some listed as threatened or
endangered) live and breed in these pools. There are no vernal pools
within the project area. Vernal pools and the invertebrates associated
with them would not be affected by this project.

**Candidate Species**

[Green sturgeon (*Acipenser medirostris*).]{.underline} The green
sturgeon is known only from the Klamath River. No evidence of this
species has been found within the park and no suitable habitat exists
within the project area. There would be no effect on this species from
this project.

[Central Valley fall/late fall-run chinook salmon (*Oncorhynchus
tshawytscha*).]{.underline} The Central Valley fall/late fall-run
chinook salmon is found only in the central valley of California. No
evidence of this species has been found within the park and no suitable
habitat exists within the project area. There would be no effect on this
species from this project.

[Pacific fisher (*Martes pennanti pacifica*)]{.underline} are believed
to be extirpated from the park and typically avoid areas with human
activity and development, such as the proposed project area. There would
be no effect on Pacific fisher from this project.

**Species of Concern**

Seven bats have been identified by the USFWS and California as likely to
occur in the park -- pale Townsend's big-eared bat (*Corynorhinus
(=Plecotus) townsendii pallescens*), spotted bat (*Euderma maculatum*),
small-footed myotis (*Myotis ciliolabrum*), fringed myotis (*Myotis
thysanodes*), long-legged myotis (*Myotis volans*), Yuma myotis (*Myotis
yumanensis*), and long-eared myotis (*Myotis evotis*). Only the latter
three, however, have been positively identified in the park. These
species likely depend on late successional old-growth forest, where they
roost beneath loose bark or in cavities. Other landscape features more
commonly associated with day roosts, hibernacula, and maternity colonies
(such as significant lava tubes, caves, and abandoned mines) are largely
absent from the park. Cliff and rock slopes are also possible habitat
areas. None of the above features would be affected by the actions
proposed in this Environmental Assessment. There would be no effect on
bat species from this project.

[California wolverines (Gulo gulo luteus)]{.underline} are believed to
be extirpated from the park and typically avoid developed areas. Surveys
for this species have occurred throughout the State over the past 10
years with no confirmed detections statewide. Due to its absence from
the park, there would be no effect on California wolverine from this
project.

[Sierra Nevada snowshoe hare (*Lepus americanus tahoensis*)]{.underline}
occur in thickets of brush, pine, fir, and riparian vegetation. This
species may be found in brush thickets along the road corridor. These
thickets, located off the edge of the road, would not be affected by the
proposed project. There would be no effect on snowshoe hare from this
project.

[Pygmy rabbit *(Brachylagus idahoensis)*]{.underline} is associated with
tall, dense, large-shrub stages of big sagebrush, greasewood, and
rabbitbrush. This species does not occur in the park and will not be
affected by this project.

[American marten (*Martes americana*)]{.underline}. Martens require a
variety of different aged stands, particularly old growth conifers and
snags which provide cavities for denning and nesting. This species is
found in the old growth areas of the park. Suitable habitat would not be
affected by actions proposed in this Environmental Assessment and noise
generated by the proposed actions would be similar to ambient traffic
levels. There will be no effect on American marten from this project.

[Sierra Nevada red fox (*Vulpes vulpes necator*) (California
endangered)]{.underline}. generally occur above 5,000 feet in forest and
fell fields but may visit lower elevation areas as well in summer. There
are currently no known den sites and most of the sightings have been in
developed areas along the main park road. This species is known to beg
at parking areas and campgrounds throughout the park. Due to already
being habituated to human disturbance, there will be no effect on Sierra
Nevada red fox by the actions proposed in this Environmental Assessment.

[American peregrine falcon (*Falco peregrinus anatum*) (California
endangered)]{.underline}. There is one known peregrine falcon nest
(monitored annually by park staff since 1997) located on U.S. Forest
Service land bordering the park's western boundary (Blue Lake Canyon).
Peregrine falcons can be seen hunting in the higher elevations around
Lassen Peak in the late summer and early fall but would not be affected
by the proposed project described in this Environmental Assessment since
no suitable roosting or foraging habitat would be modified and no
nesting areas affected.

[California spotted owl (*Strix occidentalis
occidentalis*)]{.underline}. There are three known spotted owl pairs
within Lassen Volcanic National Park. Two pairs are on Prospect Peak and
one pair inhabits the Terminal Geyser area. Nest trees have been located
for all three of these pairs. No systematic survey of Lassen Volcanic
National Park has been completed. Surveys were initiated in 2002 to
survey for spotted owls within Prescribed Fire Management project areas.
These surveys will cover roughly half of the suitable spotted owl
habitat within the park. Surveys will be conducted in 2005 and 2006 in
areas outside of projected Prescribed Fire Management areas to conduct a
complete survey of suitable habitat within the park. Suitable habitat
would not be affected by actions proposed in this Environmental
Assessment and noise generated by the proposed actions would be similar
to ambient traffic levels. There would be no effect on California
spotted owls from this project.

[Western burrowing owl (*Athene cunicularia hypugaea*).]{.underline}
This species is a small ground nesting bird of prairie and grassland
habitats. They depend upon burrows made from other animals to nest.
There have been no sightings of this species with Lassen Volcanic
National Park. This species will not be affected by this project.

[Flammulated owl (*Otus flammeolus*)]{.underline}. This species is found
in coniferous forests in the Sierra Nevada and Cascade ranges. It nests
in cavities or woodpecker holes below the elevation of the park. This
species has not been documented within the park and will not be affected
by this project.

[Greater sandhill crane (*Grus canadensis*) (California
threatened).]{.underline} This species is found in wetland habitats such
as meadows, pastures, grain fields, bogs, fens, marshes and fields.
There have been sightings in Kings Creek Meadow, Snag Lake, and Warner
Valley. No reproduction of this species has been confirmed in the park.
Kings Creek meadow is the only suitable habitat found in the project
area. There has only been one sighting in this meadow. Due to the
absence of greater sandhill cranes and the negligible effect on this
meadow under the proposed project, there will be no affect on greater
sandhill cranes.

[Little willow flycatchers (*Empidonax traillii brewsteri*) (California
endangered)]{.underline}. This species nests in dense willow thickets in
montane meadows and along streams. Records indicate this species
historically bred in Sulfur Creek Meadows and around Snag Lake. This
species is currently found in the Warner Valley area of the park. A
breeding pair was discovered in Warner Valley in the park in 2004. Due
to lack of habitat in the project area, there will be no affect to
little willow flycatchers with this project.

[Rufous hummingbirds (*Selasphorus rufus*)]{.underline}. This species
does not breed in the park but are found in the park during spring and
fall migration. They are found in open meadow areas where they forage on
wildflower nectar. Due to it migratory nature and lack of habitat in the
project area, this species will not be affected by this project.

[Lawrence's goldfinch (*Carduelis lawrencei*).]{.underline} This species
requires open woodland or shrubland, a nearby source of water, with
forbs and shrub seeds. This species has only been documented in Warner
Valley (one dispersing juvenile in 2004) and habitat does not exist in
the park. This species will not be affected with this project.

[Vaux's swift ***(**Chaetura vauxi).*]{.underline} This species requires
hollow trees and snags for nesting and roosting. It shows an apparent
preference for foraging over rivers and lakes. It has been documented in
the park. There will be no effect on this species due to the lack of
habitat in the project area.

[Black swift *(Cypseloides niger)*]{.underline}. This species requires
moist locations on cliffs behind or adjacent to water falls in deep
canyons. This species has been documented in the park. There will be no
effect on this species due to lack of habitat in the project area.

[American dipper (*Cinclus mexicanus*)]{.underline}. This species
requires clear fast-moving water. It is confined to clear, clean streams
and rivers with rocky shores and bottoms in mountains. This species does
occur in the park and will not be affected by this project due to lack
of habitat in the project area.

[Lewis' woodpecker (*Melanerpes lewis*)]{.underline}. Lewis' woodpeckers
are found in dry open woodlands, orchards, farmlands, and foothills.
This species requires open habitats with scattered trees and snags with
cavities. This species has been documented in the park and will not be
affected by this project due to lack of habitat in the project area.

[Tricolored blackbird (*Agelaius tricolor*).]{.underline} This species
is found in the central valley of California and seeks cover in emergent
wetland vegetation. It nests in dense cattails or tules. There is only
one record for this species in the park at Manzanita Lake. Due to lack
of presence in the project area, this species will not be affected by
this project.

[Oak titmouse (*Baeolophus inornatus*)]{.underline}. This bird prefers
woodland habitat in which oaks predominate. This species has not been
recorded in the park boundary and will not be affected by this project.

[Loggerhead shrike (*Lanius ludovicianus.*)]{.underline}. This species
prefers open habitats in lowlands and foothills with scattered shrubs,
trees, posts, fences which are used as perches. This species has not
been recorded in the park and will not be affected by this project.

[Long-billed curlew (*Numenius americanus*).]{.underline} This species
is found in estuaries along coastal areas and wet meadow habitat in
northeastern California. This species has not been documented in the
park and will not be affected by this project.

[Prairie falcons (*Falco mexicanus*)]{.underline} require sheltered
cliff ledges for cover. There are historic breeding records of this
species at Eagle Peak. This species will not be affected by this project
due to lack of habitat in the project area.

[Northwestern pond turtles (*Clemmys marmorata marmorata*)]{.underline}
use slow streams, ponds, lakes, and wetlands and associated uplands from
sea level to 6,000 feet. This species has been documented historically
in Lassen Volcanic National Park in the Manzanita, Reflection Lake area.
There have been no recent sightings of this species in the park. Due to
lack of habitat and no recent sightings, this species will not be
affected by this project.

[Foothill yellow-legged frogs (*Rana boylii*).]{.underline} This species
is found in or near rocky streams in a variety of habitats from sea
level to 6,000 feet. There is one specimen in the Lassen National Park
museum, however, it is unclear whether this species came from the park.
There have been no recent sightings of this frog in the park. It is
believed this species does not occur in the park due to its elevation
limits and therefore it would not be affected by this project.

[Cascades frog (*Rana cascadae*)]{.underline}. This species inhabits
lakes and meadows in the park. Numerous amphibian studies have shown
this species to be declining throughout the Sierra Nevada and Cascade
ranges. A fish and amphibian survey during the summer of 2004 found this
species to occupy some of the ponds in the Juniper Lake area. No
Cascades frogs were found in the project area during this survey. There
will be no affect on this species due to its absence in the project
area.

[Eagle Lake rainbow trout (*Oncorhynchus mykiss auilarum*).]{.underline}
This species is endemic to Eagle Lake in Lassen County. It is used in
planting programs by the State of California and may be one of the
species planted for recreational fishing in Manzanita Lake. There would
be no effect on this species from the proposed project.

[Rough sculpin (*Cottus asperrimus*)]{.underline} This species is found
in the Pit River, Fall River and Hat Creek. There have been no
observations of this species in the park. There will be no effect on
this species due to its absence from the park.

[Pit roach (*Lavinia symmetricus mitrulus*).]{.underline} This species
is found in the Pit River and does not occur in the park. There will be
no effect on this species due to its absence from the park.

[Longfin smelt (*Spirinchus thaleichthys*).]{.underline} This species is
found along the Sacramento and San Joaquin estuaries and does not occur
in Lassen Volcanic National Park. There will be no effect on this
species due to its absence from the park.

[Sacramento splittail (*Pogonichthys macrolepidotus*).]{.underline} This
species occurs in the Sacramento River and its tributaries and is not
found within Lassen Volcanic National Park. There will be no effect on
this species due to its absence from the park.

**F. Prehistoric and Historical
Archeology**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253890 .anchor}

**Area of Potential Effects for Cultural Resources**

The area of potential effects for prehistoric and historic archeological
resources, ethnographic resources, historic structures and cultural
landscapes includes the main park road corridor from the beginning of
the project near the Bumpass Hell Parking Area up to its junction with
and including the Manzanita Lake Campground Entrance Road. It
encompasses all of the areas affected by the original road construction
and areas within 40 feet of the centerline of the road, expanding to
include the outside edge of pullouts and parking areas and developed
areas, not included within this zone \[including those at Lake Helen,
Lassen Peak, Kings Creek Meadow, Trailhead and Picnic Area, Summit Lake
Campgrounds (North and South) Entrance Roads (North and South) and Day
Use Area, Summit Lake Ranger Station roadway, Lost Creek, Hat Creek,
Devastated Area, Sunflower Flat, and Chaos Crags\].

**Prehistoric Archeological Resources:** Little is known of the early
part of the prehistoric chronology of Lassen Volcanic National Park.
Part of this may be, as Treganza (1963:14) suggests, because large areas
suitable for use as seasonal campsites have been covered by the
eruptions of Lassen Peak during and prior to the early 20^th^ century.
As noted by Journey (1970:31), there appears to be more evidence of
prehistoric aboriginal use in the southern part of the park (most likely
due to the volcanic disturbance in the north). These southern sites are
generally low in elevation (often in the open valleys), near fresh
water, and in areas that support game and other wild resources. The lack
of early sites represented in the archeological record also appears to
be partly due to the limited numbers of cultural resource inventories
and test excavations conducted in the area. Many archeological sites,
because of their seasonal, high elevation nature, have limited deposits.
In general, the high elevations within the park precluded year-round
occupation by prehistoric people. Park lands, however, were an important
area for hunting game and gathering food and other materials for
subsistence in lower river valleys.

Archeological sites, however, are distributed throughout the park from
about 5,500 feet up to about 7,000 feet. Archeological sites include a
large village, lithic scatters (from stone tool manufacture) and
evidence of numerous smaller seasonal camps. To date, a total of 96
archeological sites are documented in the park. These include
prehistoric flaked-stone artifact scatters and habitation sites with
midden deposits, historic-period structures, features, and associated
artifacts. Prehistoric site density varies within the park as a result
of past volcanic activities. Volcanic tephra deposits cover much of the
northern half of the park burying signs of early human activities in the
park under layers of volcanic ash and lapilli. Recorded prehistoric
sites are sparse in the northern portion of the park with the many of
the documented sites located in the Warner Valley or Sulphur Creek areas
in the southern portion of the park.

One archeological district listed on the National Register of Historic
Places (NRHP) is located within the park but outside of the project
area. The Sulphur Creek Archeological District contains ten sites and
reflects late prehistoric occupation as early as 700 A.D. to
approximately 150 years ago (Moffitt and Anderson 1979). The District
contains six late prehistoric or protohistoric campsites and four sites
that were determined to be ephemeral, or limited use lithic scatters.
Determination of function or duration of use appears to be based on the
extent of cultural material deposits either on the surface or, when
exposed, in subsurface contexts. Limited activity areas or lithic
scatters have small assemblages of obsidian or other volcanic lithic
debitage and few or no tools. Campsites generally have greater numbers
of tools and debitage, and often contain one or more components
indicating a slightly longer-term occupation. Indicators of long-term
occupation include ground stone artifacts, midden deposits, and house
pit depressions. Two of the sites in the district have historic
Euro-American components in addition to the Late Horizon prehistoric
components. Each has evidence of historic camping or habitation
activities.

Approximately 5-6 miles of the road were completely surveyed before
snowfall. An additional 3.5 miles were surveyed on one side of the road.
Recording of isolated sites and the remains of a CCC camp at Old
Boundary Spring is still needed. As a result, archeological survey of
the upper main park road corridor is incomplete and will be reinitiated
when snow cover recedes. Specific measures have been identified below in
the *Environmental Consequences* section to ensure that the project has
no effect on potentially unidentified archeological resources. In
addition, the entire road has been surveyed for historic resources
related to its construction (see below).

**Historic Archeological Resources:** Historic-period archeological
sites in the park include features that related to early emigration to
California, homesteading, ranching, early use of the park area for
recreation, and park administration and development. Other
historic-period features include cabins, corrals, fence lines, old
telephone lines, and related historical debris that have been documented
in the park as archeological sites or are referenced in literature and
historical records. The park Historic Resources Study (2003) provides an
in-depth review of the park's history.

As a result of the ski area rehabilitation and Southwest Visitor
Services Facility projects, an archeological survey was conducted in
2003, within the project area by SWCA, Inc. (Berg 2003) The survey
re-evaluated two of the sites within the Sulphur Creek Archeological
District (CA-TEH-583/H and CA-TEH-596) and recorded one new site (SWCA
1). The newly documented site, SWCA 1, consists of a few remains of a
historic downhill ski area. The integrity of the remaining ski area
features has been compromised by the removal of most of the equipment
after the closing of the ski operations after 1993. Therefore it is
determined that the ski area site is not eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places and no further treatment of the site is
required.

**[Special Areas to be Protected]{.underline}**

**Water Flume**: South of Crags Campground is a constructed earthen
ditch and timber-framed water flume historically used to convey (divert)
water from Lost Creek to Manzanita Lake to generate electricity. The
flume is designated a special resource area and has been documented as
an archeological resource. Although the flume is eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places, it has not yet been listed.

**Nobles Emigrant Trail Crossing**: The Nobles Emigrant Trail (which
crosses the main park road near Crags Campground and Manzanita Lake) was
one of the many routes that comprised the California Trail and is
significant as a 19^th^ century transportation route that served as an
avenue of commerce and communication during westward migration across
the United States. The trail is listed on the National Register of
Historic Places (regional level of significance). In the park, the trail
continued to be used over the years as a wagon road, then as a service
road.

**G. Ethnography**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253891 .anchor}

The Lassen area has been described as a meeting point for at least four
native groups. Use of the area by the Atsugewi, Yana, Yahi, and northern
Maidu groups brought a mix of cultural elements characteristic of
central and northeastern California with Great Basin-Plateau elements
(Treganza 1963:5).

For groups moving through the area, Lassen Peak provided seasonal
resources on its slopes and in the open valleys and lakes that border
it. Some of the most important resources include mule deer (*Odocoileus
hemionus hemionus*), wild sunflower (*Wyethia mollis*), and various
tubers. Journey (1970:30) draws a connection between sites where hopper
mortars and pestles have been found and the reliance on wild sunflower
as a staple in the late prehistoric and protohistoric diet.

Organized groups of Maidu and Atsugewi are currently located to the
southeast and north of the Park. There are no organized groups of Yana
or Yahi. Although there is a fair amount of written ethnographic data
for these American Indian groups, little information about the groups'
contemporary use of the Park resources has been obtained. The park is in
the early stages of acquiring and documenting traditional and current
use information from the local American Indian communities.

Detailed ethnographic accounts for these groups (Garth 1978; Johnson
1978; Riddell 1978) and for the park (Schultz 1954) portray seasonal use
of the park area by all three groups to exploit seasonally available
food resources and to follow mobile game. For an in-depth review of
settlement patterns and subsistence strategies, refer to these
publications. Ethnographic resources may include places traditionally
used to hunt or gather resources, trails or paths and associated camping
sites, and ceremonial locations or places of religious significance.
Affiliated American Indian groups still retain strong emotional ties to
the Lassen Volcanic area and information pertaining to culturally
significant places is confidential. The park recently completed a
Traditional Use Study that identified areas of sacred significance. Some
Traditional Cultural Places have been identified in the Traditional Use
Study and some have been identified through consultation with Native
American Tribes. One site which has not been designated, but that may be
eligible, is located in the vicinity of the road in the proposed project
area. The site is significant to the Pit River Tribe and has a strong
sacred and cultural history and continues to be used today. Nonetheless,
the park has been informed of it and is continuing to obtain information
that will be valuable in its management. That management and the site
(as noted in the *Environmental Consequences* section below) would not
be affected by the actions proposed in this Environmental Assessment.

There are ten federally recognized tribes in the Lassen area. They are:
Berry Creek Rancheria, Enterprise Rancheria, Greenville Rancheria,
Mechoopda Indian Tribe of the Chico Rancheria, Mooretown Rancheria,
Redding Rancheria, Susanville Rancheria, Round Valley Indian Tribe, Pit
River Tribe, and United Auburn Indian Community.

Five of the ten recognized tribes are routinely consulted with regarding
park proposed actions. These tribes are Greenville Rancheria, Mooretown
Rancheria, Redding Rancheria, Pit River Tribe and the Susanville
Rancheria. These five tribes were sent letters on April 14, 2004 and
October 4, 2004 noting the likely undertaking in the proposed project
area.

**H. Historic Structures**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253892 .anchor}

Historic-period structures located within the park include facilities
related to early recreational development, and park administration and
development. Lassen Volcanic National Park has 84 structures on the List
of Classified Structures (LCS) (those considered eligible for or listed
on the National Register). These include the facilities at the park
headquarters complex, Manzanita Lake, Drakesbad, the Mt. Harkness fire
lookout, the Summit Lake, Horseshoe Lake and Warner Valley ranger
stations, the Loomis Visitor Center, as well as numerous bridges, signs,
trails, and other features. Also considered eligible, although currently
removed from its original location, is the Prospect Peak Fire Lookout.
The following properties associated with the road are either listed or
have had a Determination of Eligibility (DOE) completed and been
determined eligible for listing (Park Entrance Station and Residence --
DOE 1975, Nobles Emigrant Trail -- listed 1975, Park Headquarters --
listed 1975, Headquarters District -- DOE 1994, Loomis Visitor Center --
listed 1975, Park Naturalist's Residence -- DOE 1976, and Loomis Comfort
Station -- DOE 1975) (NPS CLI 2000:4/2).

**I. Cultural Landscapes**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253893 .anchor}

Cultural landscapes are intertwined patterns of natural and constructed
features that represent human manipulation and adaptation of the land.
With cultural landscapes, large significant landscape features are
easily identified, but the inclusion of small-scale contributing
elements is often not as obvious. The park has identified at least six
cultural landscapes that relate to historical use of the park, including
park administration and development. These include: the Manzanita Lake,
Drakesbad, Mineral Headquarters Historic District, Warner Valley Ranger
Station/Campground, Nobles Emigrant Trail and the Main Park Road (Lassen
Volcanic National Park Highway).

The Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway was determined to be eligible
for the National Register of Historic Places at the national level of
significance through a consensus determination between the NPS and the
California State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) on February 15,
1995.

According to the Historic American Engineering Record (NPS HAER 2000)
and the Cultural Landscape Inventory (CLI) (NPS 2000), the 30-mile long
Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway is eligible for designation on the
National Register of Historic Places as a cultural landscape. As stated
in the HAER report, the significance of the highway is that it

> "is a classic example of early twentieth century road design. The
> road, which is the sole means of automobile access to the greater part
> of Lassen Volcanic National Park, was carefully designed and located
> to maximize scenic opportunities for automobile tourists while
> preserving the majority of the park as wilderness. Built between 1925
> and 1934, the Lassen Park Road is an example of an early collaboration
> between the National Park Service and the Bureau of Public Roads in
> the design and construction of national park roads. It represents an
> important example of national park planning, development and scenic
> road design in the early decades of the twentieth century."

In addition, the road alignment was designed to display the park's most
scenic and geologically interesting areas. . . Roadside amenities,
including scenic pullouts, trailhead parking areas, and roadside markers
were designed to enhance the motorists' experience, to allow hikers
access to the park's extensive backcountry trail system, and to add to
the visitor's understanding of the dramatic geological processes that
created the diverse volcanic landscape (NPS CLI 2000:1/6). According to
the CLI the road retains integrity to both its original construction
through the CCC work on it (1925-1941) and later road paving and
widening projects (1948-1951) that brought the road to its current width
(from 16 feet to 20 feet with 2-3 foot shoulders) (NPS CLI 2000:1/14).
As a result, retaining the character of the road and avoiding,
minimizing, or mitigating effects on contributing features are important
considerations of the road rehabilitation design.

The Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway is a linear landscape that
extends 29.86 miles (48 kilometers) between the southwest and northwest
entrance stations of Lassen Volcanic National Park. The road traverses
active geothermal areas, sub-alpine forests, mountain meadows, and
barren areas. Designed in the early 1920s as a recreational pleasure
drive, the Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway remains the primary
means by which most visitors experience the park. According to the
Cultural Landscape Inventory (NPS 2000:1/6), significant features
include the road's route and alignment, scenic overlooks, headwalls,
culverts, entrance pylons and the northwest entrance station.

As with other park roads constructed during the early twentieth century,
some of the most prominent names in NPS park development and road
construction were involved in the Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway
design (NPS HAER 2000). The collaborative undertaking between the former
Bureau of Public Roads and the National Park Service "ensured that park
roads were built to the highest engineering standards, while also
protecting the natural landscape and scenic values" (NPS HAER 2000).
These standards included locating borrow pits out of sight of the road,
preserving natural vegetation to the degree possible in the construction
right-of-way, often including preservation of specimen trees adjacent to
the road, and sloping shoulders to prevent erosion and to maintain a
naturalistic appearance.

The road was originally constructed as a narrow (16 feet or 4.8 meters
wide) gravel road but was later paved and widened to approximately 22-26
feet (6.7-7.9 meters). At switchbacks and tight curves in the road,
small boulders and large rocks edge the road, discouraging drivers from
pulling off at undesignated locations (NPS HAER 2000). The road has a
maximum grade of six percent. . . Perennial streams at Hat Creek and
Kings Creek are crossed with historic box culverts that are finished
with lava rock masonry. Architectural details on the culvert at Kings
Creek include a headwall with a lintel and ringstones. Rustic stone
masonry headwalls at Hat Creek extend above the surface of the road at
Hat Creek to form a low rising stone curb alongside the road. While
constructed of concrete, the Lost Creek culvert also contains rustic cut
lava rock stone masonry veneered headwalls. Where the Nobles Immigrant
Trail crosses the road between Hat Creek and Sunflower Flat, vegetation
is regularly cut back to create discrete vistas and to preserve the
trail (NPS HAER 2000).

A culvert survey was undertaken in Fall 2004 and black and white and
color photographs were taken of several presumed historic culverts with
print (black and white and color) and digital (color) cameras. According
to the CLI (NPS CLI 2000:1/22), during the CCC era drainage systems were
introduced to channel groundwater, rain and snowmelt away from the
surface of the road. Culverts then were either 10 or 18 inch (254 mm or
457 mm) corrugated metal drain pipes dressed with rubble masonry
headwalls.

The significance of cultural landscapes is related to the degree to
which the following features are represented:

-   [spatial organization]{.underline} (the way elements are arranged
    within the landscape),

-   [land use]{.underline} (the use of landforms),

-   [natural systems and natural features]{.underline} (how these are
    retained or enhanced by landscape design),

-   [circulation]{.underline} (provision for vehicle and pedestrian
    travel in the landscape),

-   [vegetation]{.underline} (the use of landscaped vegetation to
    enhance or define areas),

-   [views and vistas]{.underline} (the integration of views and
    vistas),

-   [topography]{.underline} (the use of natural topography in the
    design),

-   small scale features (elements of the landscape such as drinking
    fountains, curbing and other built elements),

-   [constructed water features]{.underline} (culverts, culvert
    headwalls, box culverts, etc), and

-   buildings and structures (housing, administration, maintenance and
    other buildings, as well as bridges, utility systems, etc.).

According to the CLI (NPS CLI 2000:3a/1) those identified above by
underlining retain integrity. Only some small scale features and some
buildings and structures have lost integrity.

Of the main road, only the segments east of the Lassen Peak Parking Lot
and the Kings Creek Picnic Area are not contributing because the road
originally curved around the upper end of the lot and because the picnic
area was originally a campground.

Parallel pullouts can be found along the entire length of the park road.
These features are oriented as bump-out or parallel, rather than
perpendicular extensions, and can generally be found where views to the
eastern portion of the park can be seen. Approximately ninety exist;
half of these are paved. Although no construction document has been
found that designates any of the pullouts as formal or designed
constructions, the 1939 "Lassen Volcanic National Park" guidebook lists
"points of interest" along the road. The following minor developed areas
(NPS CLI 2000:3a/13) are listed: Diamond Peak, Lake Emerald, Lake Helen,
Highway Summit, Kings Creek Meadows, Summit Lake, Devastated Area, Hot
Rock, and Chaos Crags. Pullouts in these locations can be considered
integral components of the road's formal design. Further research is
needed to determine the intent of all other pullouts along the park road
(NPS CLI 2000:3a/13). Later, however (NPS 2000:3b/26-27), the CLI names
the Lake Helen/Emerald Lake views and vistas, Bumpass Hell parking lot,
Panorama Pullout (about one mile east of Lassen Peak parking lot),
Meadow Views (consisting of the formal and informal series of pullouts
lining the road between Kings Creek Meadow, Dersch Meadow and Hat Lake),
with the Devastated Area, Nobles Emigrant Trail as having significant
views and vistas.

Culvert headwalls and drainage culverts are the predominant NPS rustic
design feature on the road. Headwalls were designed to serve a practical
function as well as to produce an aesthetic effect; they provided
passage for perennial and intermittent streams while masking the
corrugated iron pipes within. The use of locally obtained lava rock used
in the headwall masonry was both an economic expedient and a design
contrivance as it was readily available and served to blend the
structures into the landscape. Of the constructed water features,
headwalls constructed between 1925 and 1951 (during the period of
significance) appear to be distinguishable from later construction by
masonry patterns, masonry materials, and culvert diameters (18 or 24
inches in diameter corrugated iron pipes), according to the CLI (NPS CLI
2000:3a/18). While headwall dimensions vary in relation to culvert
diameter, most are four feet by four feet by eighteen inches and feature
flush pointing and squared edges. Masonry construction techniques range
from ashlar to rubble. The headwalls and drainage culverts are
documented in the Bureau of Public Roads Final Construction Reports for
the 1920s and 1930s and were installed as part of early road grading and
later road widening processes. Headwalls constructed between 1925 and
1951 appear to be distinguishable from later construction by masonry
patterns, masonry materials, and culvert diameters. Road-widening
projects between 1947 and 1951 would have necessitated the
reconstruction of many of these headwalls. Additional headwalls and
drainage features were installed following the periods of significance.
In 1983/84, two major culvert replacement projects were undertaken.
Cement mortared rubble headwalls were constructed with a less regular
pattern, an uneven face, and used stone other than lava rock. The second
major culvert replacement project, in 1993/94, replaced or installed
twenty-four plastic pipe culverts. Each was built with new rubble and
poured concrete headwalls in two general locations: between the Chalet
and the Emerald Sidehill south of the summit and between Lower Kings
Creek Meadows and the east fork of Hat Creek.

The CLI concludes that of the original culverts on the road 117 appear
to remain from the periods of significance and of these 104 retain the
original corrugated iron culvert and a single headwall, with 10 having
the iron culvert and two headwalls and two with no headwalls and 3 iron
pipes with rebuilt headwalls. All should be considered contributing.

The Lost Creek (1931: dual-span box culvert), Kings Creek (1928-29:
masonry arch culvert) and Hat Creek (1931: single span box culvert)
bridge culverts all retain integrity. The Hat Creek culvert was veneered
with local stone in three textures to a depth of 12 inches. According to
the CLI, the Lost Creek culvert wing wall masonry rock was carefully
selected for its weathered appearance.

The Hat Lake and Manzanita Lake signs are 2 of 5 contributing small
scale features (NPS CLI 2000:3b/2).

In 1998, the CLI documented the condition of the eligible Lassen
Volcanic National Park Highway as "fair," stating that "the landscape
shows clear evidence of minor disturbances and deterioration by natural
and/or human forces, and some degree of corrective action is needed
within 3-5 years to prevent further harm to its cultural and/or natural
features. If left to continue without the appropriate corrective
actions, the cumulative effect of the deterioration of many of the
character-defining elements in the landscape will cause the landscape to
degrade to a poor condition" (NPS CLI 2000:4/5).

Among the recommendations included in the CLI were:

1\) A number of historic culvert headwalls along the entire length of
the road are in need of repointing and, in some cases, rebuilding.
Condition assessment of headwalls should be performed with subsequent
preservation/stabilization actions performed.

2\) Significant spring and groundwater activity is found along the road.
. ." This recommendation noted that the repair would likely be completed
during the first phase road project, which was proposed at the time of
its writing and likely referred to the two big landslide areas repaired
in Phase I.

3\) Buildings and structures that contribute to the integrity of the
road are few. . .Future projects on those remaining structures should
follow the Secretary of the Interior's Standards. . .

4\) Major culvert replacement projects in 1971, 1984 and 1995 have
removed historic fabric at the expense of historic integrity. Further, a
number of headwalls have been inappropriately built, or rebuilt with
unsympathetic stones and patterning. Future drainage projects should
strongly consider retaining historic culverts, headwalls and original
materials (NPS CLI 2000:4/6).

**J. Visitor Experience**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253894 .anchor}

> **1. Visitor Use Access**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253895 .anchor}

Visitation at Lassen Volcanic National Park is highly seasonal, with
peak visitation occurring in July and August, but spread out between May
and October. The four-month period between June and September typically
accounts for over 80 percent of visitors. July and August alone may
account for over half the annual visitation. Visitation has also been
relatively constant over the last two decades, averaging about 400,000
people per year (approximately 350-470 thousand annual visitors between
1980 and 1999) (GMP 2001). While some cross-country skiing and
snowshoeing occurs during the winter, visitation levels do not rise
substantially until the main road is opened. And, main road opening and
closing dates can vary substantially, depending on snowfall, with the
road closing as early as the beginning of October or as late as early
December and opening as early as the beginning of May or as late as the
middle of July.

Outlying areas (not connected to the main park road) include Butte Lake
(northeast portion of park), Juniper Lake (southeast portion of park)
and Warner Valley (south central portion of park). These areas are
accessed off California Route 44 (Butte Lake), and California Route 36
(Juniper Lake and Warner Valley).

Most (80 percent) visitors to Lassen Volcanic National Park are from
California. The balance of park visitors come from the rest of the
United States (15 percent) and from foreign countries.

Most park visitation occurs along the main park road, where the majority
of the park's recreation facilities and interpretive displays are found.
The road also provides ready access to backcountry destinations.
Approximately 80 percent of the park visitors enter through the
Southwest Entrance. North entries (where there is a small museum with
interpretive displays) are highly concentrated on summer weekends,
reflecting heavy weekend use by Redding area residents. In contrast,
Southwest Entrances reveal significant weekday use, suggesting longer
duration trips from areas outside the immediate region.

> **2. Visitor Use Opportunities**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253896
> .anchor}

Recreational activities available at Lassen Volcanic National Park
include auto touring, hiking, backpacking, camping, climbing, horseback
riding, fishing, skiing, snowshoeing, ranger talks, and guided
walks/tours. Hunting is prohibited within park boundaries.

The park has over 150 miles of maintained hiking trails including 17
miles of the Pacific Crest Trail. Approximately two percent of park
visitors stayed overnight in 1999. Lassen Volcanic National Park
contains eight regular campgrounds and two group campgrounds with
approximately 375 individual sites and 15 group sites which are open
from May/June to September/October, depending on weather. Of those who
stay in the park, approximately 25 percent stay in developed
campgrounds. Stock use by horses, mules, burros, and llamas is permitted
in the backcountry areas of the park, although most visitors travel by
foot.

Fishing is allowed in all streams and lakes with the exception of
Manzanita Creek above Manzanita Lake. The park has extensive backcountry
skiing as well as snowshoe use available; however, winter use comprises
only about 10 percent of the park's total.

Ranger talks, guided walks/talks, and Junior Ranger and Firefighter
programs are scheduled from early July through early September. While
some of the activities take place only a few days a week, others run up
to 7 days a week. They take place in various places across the park:
Loomis Museum, Manzanita Lake Amphitheater, and the Discovery Center.
Other interpretation includes handouts, wayside exhibits and roving
interpreters.

> **3. Visitor Safety**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253897 .anchor}

**Volcanic Activity**: Because Lassen Volcanic National Park vicinity
has an extensive history of volcanic activity, seismic activity is
monitored by a network of nine seismometers located both within and
outside of the park. These seismometers provide a continuous (24-hours a
day) record of seismic activity through their radio and phone line
connections to the USGS Earthquake Laboratory in Menlo Park, California.
The purpose of continuous monitoring is to detect volcanic activity
early and to learn more about earthquake and volcanic phenomena based on
background levels of seismicity. This information provides park staff
with the means to prepare the most effective warning and evacuation plan
if renewed volcanic activity is detected at levels of concern.

Ongoing studies by scientists have also resulted in changes in park
operations. For instance, after a study in the 1970s showed potential
dangers from avalanche rock fall at Manzanita Lake, these facilities
were closed until subsequent geologic analyses in 1987 reevaluated the
hazard and concluded that it was somewhat less threatening and extensive
than had previously been indicated. This reappraisal resulted in the
reopening of most of the facilities in this area.

**Relationship to Accidents**: Approximately 150,000 vehicles use the
road annually. The current broken and uneven road surface can cause
traffic markings to rapidly deteriorate, which could lead to accidents.
Of the two fatality accidents that have occurred along the road (near
Diamond Point and Sulphur Works), however, neither was determined to be
related to road conditions or to roadway geometrics. In addition, the
only recent accident to have occurred in the proposed project area (near
Kings Creek) was related to driver inattention.

**Construction Activity**: Road construction projects are by nature
inherently hazardous to workers involved in the project and to park
visitors. Workers must have adequate training and knowledge,
particularly in traffic safety operations as well as those associated
with their individual areas of expertise, to effectively carry out their
job. In a national park this knowledge must include familiarity with the
terrain and park resources affected by the project and how these
resources might respond to disturbance (including tree felling, rock
fall, slumping, etc.). Although park visitors must be aware of road
hazards on a continuous basis, road construction areas are particularly
hazardous, especially when implemented in scenic terrain. Visitors may
be unaware of the road construction project and may come upon it
suddenly, while focused on viewing scenery or wildlife. They may be
unprepared for or become bothered by long delays during one-lane
closures. Some are unfamiliar with the nature of historic, winding park
roads, which often contain few of the traffic devices normally
encountered in steep mountainous terrain, such as guard walls,
reflectors and sudden or sharp curve signage.

**K. Park Operations**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253898 .anchor}

Lassen Volcanic National Park contains and is responsible for the
management of 42 miles of paved park roads, 15 miles of unpaved roads,
13 parking lots (containing approximately 665 spaces), 314 road signs
and 5 road bridges.

The park runs a complex road maintenance operation, which includes
vegetation maintenance, snow management, road repair and a variety of
other activities in season on the above system of developed roads and
roadway structures. The road maintenance operation comprises
approximately 10-15 percent of the park budget, not including
rehabilitation projects like that discussed in this Environmental
Assessment. It includes the array of activities described in the No
Action Alternative.

**V. Environmental Impact Analysis**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253899
.anchor}

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires that environmental
documents disclose the environmental impacts of the proposed federal
action, reasonable alternatives to that action, and any adverse
environmental effects that cannot be avoided should the proposed action
be implemented. This section analyzes the environmental impacts of two
project alternatives on affected park resources. These analyses provide
the basis for comparing the effects of the alternatives. NEPA requires
consideration of context, intensity and duration of impacts, indirect
impacts, cumulative impacts, and measures to mitigate impacts. In
addition to determining the environmental consequences of the preferred
and other alternatives, NPS *Management Policie*s (NPS 2001A) and
Director's Order-12, *Conservation Planning, Environmental Impact
Analysis, and Decision-making*, require analysis of potential effects to
determine if actions would impair park resources.

The fundamental purpose of the National Park System, established by the
Organic Act and reaffirmed by the General Authorities Act, as amended,
begins with a mandate to conserve park resources and values. NPS
managers must always seek ways to avoid or minimize to the greatest
degree practicable adverse impacts on park resources and values.
However, the laws do give the NPS management discretion to allow impacts
to park resources and values when necessary and appropriate to fulfill
the purposes of a park, as long as the impact does not constitute
impairment of the affected resources and values. Although Congress has
given the NPS management discretion to allow certain impacts within
parks, that discretion is limited by the statutory requirement that the
NPS must leave park resources and values unimpaired, unless a particular
law directly and specifically provides otherwise. Impairment is an
impact that, in the professional judgment of the responsible NPS
manager, would harm the integrity of park resources or values, including
opportunities that would otherwise be present for the enjoyment of those
resources or values. An impact to any park resource or value may be
impairment, however, an impact would more likely constitute impairment
to the extent that it affects a resource or value whose conservation is:

> • necessary to fulfill specific purposes identified in the
> establishing legislation or proclamation of the park;
>
> • key to the natural or cultural integrity of the park or to
> opportunities for enjoyment of the park;
>
> • or identified as a goal in the Park's General Management Plan or
> other relevant NPS planning documents.

###### 

###### METHODOLOGY

The environmental consequences for each impact topic were defined based
on the following information regarding context, type of impact, duration
of impact, area of impact and the cumulative context.

-   **CONTEXT**: Setting within which impacts are analyzed -- such as
    the project area or region, or for cultural resources -- the area of
    potential effects.

-   **TYPE OF IMPACT:** A measure of whether the impact will improve or
    harm the resource and whether that harm occurs immediately or at
    some later point in time.

    -   **Beneficial**: Reduces or improves impact being discussed.

    -   **Adverse**: Increases or results in impact being discussed.

    -   **Direct**: Caused by and occurring at the same time and place
        as the action, including such impacts as animal and plant
        mortality, damage to cultural resources, etc.

    -   **Indirect**: Caused by the action, but occurring later in time
        at another place or to another resource, including changes in
        species composition, vegetation structure, range of wildlife,
        offsite erosion or changes in general economic conditions tied
        to park activities

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **DURATION OF IMPACT**: Duration is a measure of the time period
    over which the effects of an impact persist. The duration of impacts
    evaluated in this EA may be one of the following:

    -   **Short-term**: Often quickly reversible and associated with a
        specific event, one to five years

    -   **Long-term**: Reversible over a much longer period, or may
        occur continuously based on normal activity, or for more than
        five years.

-   **AREA OF IMPACT**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Localized**: Detectable only in the vicinity of the activity

-   **Widespread**: Detectable on a landscape scale (beyond the affected
    site)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **CUMULATIVE**: Cumulative impacts are the effects on the
    environment that would result from the incremental impacts of the
    action when added to other past, present and reasonably foreseeable
    future actions. Impacts are considered cumulative regardless of what
    agency or group (federal or non-federal) undertakes the action.

-   **IMPACT MITIGATION**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Avoid** conducting management activities in an area of the
    affected resource

-   **Minimize** the type, duration or intensity of the impact to an
    affected resource

-   **Mitigate the impact by**

    -   **Repairing** localized damage to the affected resource
        immediately after an adverse impact

    -   **Rehabilitating** an affected resource with a combination of
        additional management activities

    -   **Compensating** a major long-term adverse direct impact through
        additional strategies designed to improve an affected resource
        to the degree practicable.

**All Impacts Except Special Status Species and Cultural Resources**

-   **Negligible**: Measurable or anticipated degree of change would not
    be detectable or would be only slightly detectable. Localized or at
    the lowest level of detection.

-   **Minor**: Measurable or anticipated degree of change would be have
    a slight effect, causing a slightly noticeable change of
    approximately less than 20 percent compared to existing conditions,
    often localized.

-   **Moderate**: Measurable or anticipated degree of change is readily
    apparent and appreciable and would be noticed by most people, with a
    change likely to be between 21 and 50 percent compared to existing
    conditions. Can be localized or widespread.

-   **Major**: Measurable or anticipated degree of change would be
    substantial, causing a highly noticeable change of approximately
    greater than 50 percent compared to existing conditions. Often
    widespread.

**Special Status Species**

-   **No Effect:** The project (or action) is located outside suitable
    habitat and there would be no disturbance or other direct or
    indirect impacts on the species. The action will not affect the
    listed species or its designated critical habitat (USFWS 1998).

-   **May Effect, Not Likely to Adversely Effect**: The project (or
    action) occurs in suitable habitat or results in indirect impacts on
    the species, but the effect on the species is likely to be entirely
    beneficial, discountable, or insignificant. The action may pose
    effects on listed species or designated critical habitat but given
    circumstances or mitigation conditions, the effects may be
    discounted, insignificant, or completely beneficial. Insignificant
    effects would not result in take. Discountable effects are those
    extremely unlikely to occur. Based on best judgment, a person would
    not 1) be able to meaningfully measure, detect, or evaluate
    insignificant effects or 2) expect discountable effects to occur
    (USFWS1998).

-   **May Effect, Likely to Adversely Effect:** The project (or action)
    would have an adverse effect on a listed species as a result of
    direct, indirect, interrelated, or interdependent actions. An
    adverse effect on a listed species may occur as a direct or indirect
    result of the proposed action or its interrelated or interdependent
    actions and the effect is not: discountable, insignificant, or
    beneficial (USFWS 1998).

**Cultural Resources Impacts**

-   **No Effect**: The action will not affect a historic property or the
    characteristics of a property that may qualify it for inclusion in
    the National Register of Historic Places. The action would also not,
    based on conditions of approval, likely result in impacts to
    presently unidentified cultural resources.

-   **No Adverse Effect**: An undertaking has an effect on a historic
    property when the undertaking may alter characteristics of the
    property that may qualify the property for inclusion in the National
    Register. For example, the action may result in diminishing the
    character-defining features or aspects of a historic structure that
    make it eligible for the National Register, but the actions are
    consistent with the Secretary's Standards for the Treatment of
    Historic Properties.

-   **Adverse Effect**: An undertaking is considered to have an adverse
    effect when the effect on a historic property may diminish the
    integrity of the property's location, design, setting, materials,
    workmanship, feeling or association. In other words, the effects on
    character-defining features or aspects of a historic structure would
    result in diminishing or removing the characteristics that make it
    eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and as a
    result would not be consistent with the Secretary's Standards for
    the Treatment of Historic Properties.

### 

**[Mitigation Measures Incorporated into the Preferred
Alternative]{.underline}**

These measures have been developed to lessen the potential adverse
effects of the Preferred Alternative. The rehabilitation of the Lassen
Volcanic National Park Highway would be phased to avoid the rainy season
and snow conditions, thus construction would occur from May through
November or December. Other general measures include: (1) limiting
rehabilitation to work within the existing road prism (area affected by
road construction activities), (2) using construction materials (design,
types, and colors) that blend with the surroundings, and (3)
revegetating disturbed areas to blend with the surrounding environment.
Construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be used to control
impacts from construction. These include the following measures:

-   The contractor would conduct a project orientation program for all
    workers to increase their understanding and sensitivity to the
    challenges of working within a national park environment.

-   Construction limits would be clearly marked with stakes at the
    beginning of ground disturbing activities. No disturbance would
    occur beyond these limits. Temporary construction fencing would be
    installed where determined necessary by FHWA and NPS project
    coordinators.

-   Vegetation and soil disturbance would be minimized to the maximum
    extent possible.

-   Erosion control measures will include the use of some or all of the
    following: sediment traps, silt fencing, and check dams. Disturbed
    and/or stockpiled soils may be temporarily covered with straw, jute
    matting, and erosion control netting, or plastic sheeting.

-   Temporary barriers, such as those noted above, would be used to
    protect natural surroundings (including waterways, trees, plants,
    and root zones) from damage.

-   Waste and excess excavated materials would be located outside of
    drainages to avoid sedimentation.

-   Regular site inspections during construction would be conducted to
    ensure that erosion control measures remain in place and are
    functional.

-   Controls would be implemented to eliminate the discharge of
    pollutants into storm water and into streams, lakes, reservoirs or
    other waters from project construction materials.

-   Chemicals, fuels, and other toxic materials would be properly
    stored, used and disposed of (according to manufacturer's
    instructions).

-   Construction equipment would be refueled in upland areas to minimize
    the potential for fuel spills near drainages and would be inspected
    for hydraulic and oil leaks regularly as well as prior to use in the
    park.

-   Water would be used as necessary to control dust.

-   All construction equipment would employ functional exhaust/muffler
    systems to minimize sound-related environmental impacts.

-   The asphalt batch plant would be located outside the park.

-   Revegetation would occur as soon as possible following road
    rehabilitation actions.

-   Excavated soil from the proposed grading treatments would be used
    within other grading treatments.

-   Revegetation work would use topsoil conserved along the corridor and
    seeds or propagules from native species (genetic stock originating
    in Lassen Volcanic National Park).

-   Sources of rock, sand, gravel, earth, topsoil or other natural
    material would be inspected for noxious weeds prior to use in the
    proposed project.

-   Materials used in project work would be transported and stored so as
    not to acquire noxious weed seeds from adjacent areas.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Undesirable plant species would be monitored and control strategies
    implemented if such species occur.

-   Construction equipment would be washed to thoroughly remove all
    dirt, plant and other foreign material before it is brought into the
    park and prior to working with or transporting weed free materials.
    Particular attention must be shown to the under carriage and any
    surface where soil containing exotic seeds may exist.

-   Construction vehicle parking would be limited to existing roads and
    parking areas.

Should unknown archeological resources be uncovered during construction,
work would be halted in the discovery area, the park Cultural Resources
Program Manager contacted, the site secured, and the park would consult
according to 36 CFR 800.11 and, as appropriate, provisions of the Native
American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990. In compliance
with this act, the National Park Service would also notify and consult
concerned tribal representatives for the proper treatment of human
remains, funerary, and sacred objects should these be discovered during
the course of the project.

During construction, signs would inform visitors of the construction
activities on the park road and of potential travel delays. Barriers and
barricades, signs and flagging, as necessary or appropriate, would be
used to clearly delineate work areas and provide for safe vehicle travel
through the construction area.

Contractor-selected non-commercial material source, staging or spoils
areas not identified within this Environmental Assessment for project
work would, at a minimum, prior to any use have written documentation
submitted by the contractor (under the laws noted) to ensure that
potential effects on rare, threatened or endangered species (Endangered
Species Act), waters of the United States (Clean Water Act), or
prehistoric or historic resources (National Historic Preservation Act)
have been evaluated as to presence and effects of the proposed
activity(ies).

**VI. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253901
.anchor}

Table 1: Alternatives Comparison[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253902 .anchor}

+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| ***Impact | *No Action Alternative*   | *Preferred Alternative*      |
| Topic***  |                           |                              |
+===========+===========================+==============================+
| **        | Soil disturbance as a     | Excavation and grading       |
| *Soils*** | result of annual and      | during construction would    |
|           | cyclic routine            | result in a minor to         |
|           | maintenance would result  | moderate, localized          |
|           | in a long-term negligible | long-term adverse effect.    |
|           | adverse effect.           | Soil compaction during       |
|           | Catastrophic failure of   | construction would result in |
|           | slopes or culverts could  | a short-term negligible to   |
|           | result in short and       | minor, adverse effect. Soil  |
|           | long-term minor to        | mixing and pullout and       |
|           | moderate adverse effects  | walkway paving would result  |
|           | depending on the degree   | in a long-term negligible    |
|           | of failure.               | localized adverse effect.    |
|           |                           |                              |
|           |                           | The application of grading   |
|           |                           | treatments would have both a |
|           |                           | localized minor to moderate  |
|           |                           | adverse effect and a         |
|           |                           | long-term minor to moderate  |
|           |                           | beneficial effect. Culvert   |
|           |                           | repair, replacement and      |
|           |                           | inlet/outlet cleaning would  |
|           |                           | result in a negligible to    |
|           |                           | minor localized adverse      |
|           |                           | effect on soil.              |
|           |                           | Rehabilitation of denuded    |
|           |                           | areas would result in        |
|           |                           | negligible to minor          |
|           |                           | localized long-term          |
|           |                           | beneficial effect on soils.  |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| ***Soils  | [Cumulative]{.underline}: |                              |
| Impact    | Impacts from past,        |                              |
| S         | present and future        |                              |
| ummary*** | actions on soils would    |                              |
|           | continue to result in     |                              |
|           | minor adverse cumulative  |                              |
|           | impacts to soils. The No  |                              |
|           | Action alternative would  |                              |
|           | contribute a negligible   |                              |
|           | long-term adverse impact, |                              |
|           | while the Preferred       |                              |
|           | Alternative would         |                              |
|           | contribute localized      |                              |
|           | negligible to moderate,   |                              |
|           | short and long-term,      |                              |
|           | beneficial and adverse    |                              |
|           | impacts on park soils,    |                              |
|           | which would be both       |                              |
|           | disturbed and restored.   |                              |
|           |                           |                              |
|           | [Conclusion]{.underline}: |                              |
|           | The No Action Alternative |                              |
|           | would have long-term      |                              |
|           | negligible and short-term |                              |
|           | minor to moderate impacts |                              |
|           | on soils. The Preferred   |                              |
|           | Alternative would result  |                              |
|           | in localized negligible   |                              |
|           | to moderate adverse and   |                              |
|           | negligible to moderate    |                              |
|           | beneficial effects. There |                              |
|           | would be no impairment of |                              |
|           | park soil resources or    |                              |
|           | values.                   |                              |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| ***Water  | Continued inputs of       | [Earthwork]{.underline}      |
| Res       | pollutants, localized     | would result in negligible   |
| ources*** | flooding and continued    | to minor, short-term adverse |
|           | wetlands impacts would    | impacts on water quality.    |
| ***Water  | result in a long-term     | Culvert repair, replacement  |
| Q         | minor to moderate adverse | or installation would result |
| uality*** | impacts.                  | in localized, short-term     |
|           |                           | minor to moderate adverse    |
|           |                           | effects combined with        |
|           |                           | long-term minor to moderate  |
|           |                           | beneficial effects by        |
|           |                           | increasing water flow and    |
|           |                           | decreasing the potential for |
|           |                           | clogged culverts and         |
|           |                           | localized flooding.          |
|           |                           |                              |
|           |                           | Rehabilitation of affected   |
|           |                           | areas would result in short- |
|           |                           | and long-term negligible to  |
|           |                           | moderate beneficial effects  |
|           |                           | on sediment retention,       |
|           |                           | thereby improving water      |
|           |                           | quality.                     |
|           |                           |                              |
|           |                           | The importation of fill and  |
|           |                           | surfacing materials would    |
|           |                           | result in some beneficial    |
|           |                           | and some adverse effects,    |
|           |                           | both slowing and speeding    |
|           |                           | the passage of water through |
|           |                           | affected areas. New paving,  |
|           |                           | as well as improvements such |
|           |                           | as those above Lake Helen,   |
|           |                           | would also result in         |
|           |                           | localized, long-term         |
|           |                           | negligible to moderate       |
|           |                           | beneficial effects by        |
|           |                           | decreasing sedimentation,    |
|           |                           | therefore improving water    |
|           |                           | quality.                     |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| ***Water  | [Cumulative]{.underline}: |                              |
| Res       | Impacts of the above      |                              |
| ources*** | actions and factors, in   |                              |
|           | conjunction with the      |                              |
| ***Water  | impacts of the no-action  |                              |
| Quality   | alternative, would        |                              |
| Impact    | continue to result in     |                              |
| S         | minor adverse cumulative  |                              |
| ummary*** | effects on water quality. |                              |
|           | The No Action Alternative |                              |
|           | would contribute          |                              |
|           | negligible to minor       |                              |
|           | localized inputs to       |                              |
|           | cumulative impacts. With  |                              |
|           | the Preferred             |                              |
|           | Alternative, there would  |                              |
|           | be short-term, localized  |                              |
|           | negligible to moderate,   |                              |
|           | adverse effects on water  |                              |
|           | resources during          |                              |
|           | construction and          |                              |
|           | long-term, negligible to  |                              |
|           | moderate beneficial       |                              |
|           | effects during            |                              |
|           | operations. Overall,      |                              |
|           | water resources would     |                              |
|           | likely benefit from the   |                              |
|           | Preferred Alternative.    |                              |
|           |                           |                              |
|           | [Conclusion]{.underline}: |                              |
|           | The No Action Alternative |                              |
|           | would continue to         |                              |
|           | contribute negligible to  |                              |
|           | minor localized adverse   |                              |
|           | effects on water          |                              |
|           | resources. The Preferred  |                              |
|           | Alternative would employ  |                              |
|           | construction storm water  |                              |
|           | management mitigation     |                              |
|           | measures to control       |                              |
|           | erosion and sedimentation |                              |
|           | during construction, and  |                              |
|           | coupled with improvements |                              |
|           | in water collection and   |                              |
|           | conveyance would result   |                              |
|           | in short-term negligible  |                              |
|           | to moderate localized     |                              |
|           | effects and long-term     |                              |
|           | minor to moderate         |                              |
|           | beneficial effects. There |                              |
|           | would be no impairment of |                              |
|           | water resources under     |                              |
|           | either alternative        |                              |
|           | discussed in this         |                              |
|           | Environmental Assessment. |                              |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| ***Water  | Although no new wetlands  | Under the proposed project,  |
| Res       | impacts would occur,      | 0.028 acres of wetlands      |
| ources*** | there would continue to   | would experience permanent   |
|           | be negligible to minor,   | effects and 0.123 acres      |
| ***We     | long-term adverse         | would experience temporary   |
| tlands*** | effects. At Kings Creek   | effects, for a total         |
|           | and Dersch Meadow, there  | wetlands impact of 0.151     |
|           | would continue to be      | acres.                       |
|           | long-term, minor to       |                              |
|           | moderate adverse impacts. | Of the wetlands impacted,    |
|           |                           | only those at Kings Creek    |
|           |                           | Meadow (0.001 acre), Kings   |
|           |                           | Creek Culvert (0.012 acres)  |
|           |                           | and Dersch Meadow (0.040)    |
|           |                           | would be considered          |
|           |                           | jurisdictional (subject to   |
|           |                           | wetlands permitting under    |
|           |                           | the U.S. Army Corps of       |
|           |                           | Engineers administration of  |
|           |                           | the Clean Water Act).        |
|           |                           |                              |
|           |                           | In addition, the following   |
|           |                           | non-jurisdictional areas     |
|           |                           | would be impacted to the     |
|           |                           | degree shown (includes       |
|           |                           | temporary and permanent      |
|           |                           | impacts):                    |
|           |                           |                              |
|           |                           | Manzanita Creek Culvert      |
|           |                           | 0.012 acres                  |
|           |                           |                              |
|           |                           | Hat Creek Box Culvert 0.025  |
|           |                           | acres                        |
|           |                           |                              |
|           |                           | Lost Creek Box Culvert 0.018 |
|           |                           | acres                        |
|           |                           |                              |
|           |                           | Unnamed Culverts 0.420 acres |
|           |                           |                              |
|           |                           | These wetlands impacts would |
|           |                           | occur in areas previously    |
|           |                           | impacted by road             |
|           |                           | construction activities and  |
|           |                           | fall under an excepted       |
|           |                           | action in NPS compliance     |
|           |                           | with the executive order on  |
|           |                           | the protection of wetlands.  |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| ***Water  | [Cumulative]{.underline}: |                              |
| Resources | Overall, in comparison to |                              |
| Wetlands  | the total park area       |                              |
| Impact    | originally containing     |                              |
| S         | wetlands, the extent of   |                              |
| ummary*** | cumulative impacts has    |                              |
|           | been localized and        |                              |
|           | negligible to minor       |                              |
|           | (ranging to moderate or   |                              |
|           | major effect where dams   |                              |
|           | have been constructed).   |                              |
|           | The contribution of the   |                              |
|           | No Action or Preferred    |                              |
|           | alternatives to these     |                              |
|           | effects would be both     |                              |
|           | negligible in terms of    |                              |
|           | both beneficial and       |                              |
|           | adverse effects.          |                              |
|           |                           |                              |
|           | [Conclusion]{.underline}: |                              |
|           | While the No Action       |                              |
|           | Alternative would not     |                              |
|           | affect new wetlands, it   |                              |
|           | would continue to         |                              |
|           | contribute to negligible  |                              |
|           | to minor (ranging to      |                              |
|           | moderate at Dersch        |                              |
|           | Meadow) long-term         |                              |
|           | localized adverse effects |                              |
|           | throughout the park where |                              |
|           | water flow is impeded by  |                              |
|           | poorly constructed or     |                              |
|           | maintained culverts,      |                              |
|           | drainage ditches and      |                              |
|           | other water conveyance    |                              |
|           | devices. Under the        |                              |
|           | Preferred Alternative,    |                              |
|           | approximately 0.028 acres |                              |
|           | of wetlands would be      |                              |
|           | affected permanently      |                              |
|           | (placement of riprap or   |                              |
|           | other fill material) and  |                              |
|           | 0.123 acres of wetlands   |                              |
|           | would experience          |                              |
|           | temporary effects         |                              |
|           | (primarily removal of     |                              |
|           | vegetation) from          |                              |
|           | construction activities,  |                              |
|           | for a total of 0.151      |                              |
|           | acres of wetlands         |                              |
|           | affected. There would be  |                              |
|           | no impairment of wetlands |                              |
|           | or wetland values as a    |                              |
|           | result of either          |                              |
|           | alternative.              |                              |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| ***[Water | There would be no         | There would be a minor to    |
| Resourc   | additional use of water   | moderate localized effect on |
| es]{.unde | under this alternative.   | water quantity from the use  |
| rline}*** |                           | of water to aid in dust      |
|           |                           | control and execution of the |
| ***[Water |                           | proposed road rehabilitation |
| Quanti    |                           | project.                     |
| ty]{.unde |                           |                              |
| rline}*** |                           |                              |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| ***[Water | [Cumulative               |                              |
| Resources | Impacts]{.underline}:     |                              |
| Water     | Water is withdrawn        |                              |
| Quantity  | throughout the park in    |                              |
| Impact    | small quantities to       |                              |
| Summa     | supply visitor and        |                              |
| ry]{.unde | administrative needs,     |                              |
| rline}*** | including for             |                              |
|           | campgrounds, picnic       |                              |
|           | areas, restrooms and      |                              |
|           | other activities. The use |                              |
|           | of this water has         |                              |
|           | occurred from the         |                              |
|           | establishment of the      |                              |
|           | park. The small           |                              |
|           | additional use of water   |                              |
|           | to keep dust down on the  |                              |
|           | roadway, and to           |                              |
|           | facilitate the            |                              |
|           | implementation of the     |                              |
|           | road project would add    |                              |
|           | incrementally to the use  |                              |
|           | of water for visitor and  |                              |
|           | administrative uses.      |                              |
|           |                           |                              |
|           | [Conclusion]{.underline}: |                              |
|           | The limited use of water  |                              |
|           | from Kings Creek,         |                              |
|           | Manzanita Lake or the     |                              |
|           | park's domestic water     |                              |
|           | supply to control dust    |                              |
|           | and to aid in road        |                              |
|           | project implementation    |                              |
|           | would have a minor to     |                              |
|           | moderate adverse effect   |                              |
|           | on water quantity, but    |                              |
|           | would not impair the      |                              |
|           | park's ability to provide |                              |
|           | water or the natural      |                              |
|           | systems where that water  |                              |
|           | would otherwise be        |                              |
|           | present.                  |                              |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| ***Vege   | Routine maintenance and   | The application of grading   |
| tation*** | minor repairs would       | treatments and curve         |
|           | continue to result in     | widening would result in     |
|           | long-term negligible      | negligible to minor          |
|           | adverse effects on        | localized adverse impacts,   |
|           | vegetation. Depending on  | coupled with long-term minor |
|           | the severity of           | to moderate beneficial       |
|           | catastrophic road         | effects from restoration.    |
|           | failure, impacts would    | Indirect effects from        |
|           | range from minor to       | discouragement of visitor    |
|           | moderate and would likely | use following restoration    |
|           | be long-term but          | would also add long-term     |
|           | localized.                | negligible to minor          |
|           |                           | beneficial effects.          |
|           |                           |                              |
|           |                           | The removal of trees and     |
|           |                           | other incidental vegetation  |
|           |                           | during rehabilitation of     |
|           |                           | minor developed areas,       |
|           |                           | roadside ditches and         |
|           |                           | culverts would result in     |
|           |                           | localized long-term          |
|           |                           | negligible to moderate       |
|           |                           | adverse impacts.             |
|           |                           | Reestablishment of plants    |
|           |                           | following these activities   |
|           |                           | would constitute a           |
|           |                           | negligible long-term         |
|           |                           | beneficial effect.           |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| ***V      | [Cumulative]{.underline}: |                              |
| egetation | Impacts from past and     |                              |
| Impact    | future actions, in        |                              |
| S         | combination with the      |                              |
| ummary*** | impacts of the No Action  |                              |
|           | Alternative, would result |                              |
|           | in negligible adverse     |                              |
|           | cumulative effects on     |                              |
|           | vegetation over the       |                              |
|           | long-term. Both the       |                              |
|           | Preferred and the No      |                              |
|           | Action alternatives would |                              |
|           | have a negligible to      |                              |
|           | minor, localized and      |                              |
|           | long-term adverse         |                              |
|           | contribution to the total |                              |
|           | cumulative effect on      |                              |
|           | vegetation in the park,   |                              |
|           | while the Preferred       |                              |
|           | Alternative would also    |                              |
|           | have long-term negligible |                              |
|           | to minor localized        |                              |
|           | beneficial effects.       |                              |
|           |                           |                              |
|           | [Conclusion]{.underline}: |                              |
|           | The No Action Alternative |                              |
|           | would have long-term, but |                              |
|           | localized, negligible to  |                              |
|           | minor adverse effects on  |                              |
|           | vegetation from ongoing   |                              |
|           | repairs in the road       |                              |
|           | corridor that affect      |                              |
|           | vegetation. The Preferred |                              |
|           | Alternative would also    |                              |
|           | have a series of adverse  |                              |
|           | effects on vegetation,    |                              |
|           | primarily from the        |                              |
|           | removal of that           |                              |
|           | vegetation to construct   |                              |
|           | needed repairs. These     |                              |
|           | effects would range from  |                              |
|           | negligible to minor and   |                              |
|           | would be localized and    |                              |
|           | long-term. This           |                              |
|           | Alternative, however,     |                              |
|           | would also have           |                              |
|           | complementary long-term   |                              |
|           | localized beneficial      |                              |
|           | effects on vegetation     |                              |
|           | from the restoration of   |                              |
|           | approximately 6 hectares  |                              |
|           | (2.42 acres) of disturbed |                              |
|           | road shoulders and        |                              |
|           | pullouts, resulting in    |                              |
|           | negligible to minor       |                              |
|           | effects, depending on the |                              |
|           | location. There would be  |                              |
|           | no impairment of          |                              |
|           | vegetation or values      |                              |
|           | related to it from the    |                              |
|           | implementation of either  |                              |
|           | alternative.              |                              |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| ***Wi     | Ongoing repair and        | Noise and activity           |
| ldlife*** | routine maintenance of    | associated with construction |
|           | the road would result in  | would be concentrated in     |
|           | periodic noise and human  | various locations throughout |
|           | presence that would have  | the project area,            |
|           | short-term, localized     | constituting a short-term,   |
|           | negligible to minor       | negligible to minor impact   |
|           | impacts on wildlife.      | on wildlife presence in the  |
|           | Continued use of the road | project area. Excavation and |
|           | would continue to result  | other earth disturbing       |
|           | in noise and mortality of | activities could result in   |
|           | wildlife. Catastrophic    | mortality of some some       |
|           | road failure could result | animals and invertebrates,   |
|           | in additional short-term  | and continued use of the     |
|           | minor to moderate noise   | road would continue to       |
|           | and disturbance, as well  | result in disturbance and    |
|           | as localized habitat      | mortality of wildlife,       |
|           | removal.                  | resulting in negligible, but |
|           |                           | long-term adverse effects.   |
|           |                           |                              |
|           |                           | The negligible loss of       |
|           |                           | vegetation would result in   |
|           |                           | an incremental, long-term    |
|           |                           | negligible effect on         |
|           |                           | wildlife. Importation of     |
|           |                           | fill materials could result  |
|           |                           | in negligible, long-term     |
|           |                           | adverse effects. Restoration |
|           |                           | of gravel pullouts would     |
|           |                           | result in long-term          |
|           |                           | negligible to minor,         |
|           |                           | localized beneficial         |
|           |                           | effects, increasing plant    |
|           |                           | cover and adding             |
|           |                           | incrementally to wildlife    |
|           |                           | habitat.                     |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| **        | [Cumulative]{.underline}: |                              |
| *Wildlife | The existence and         |                              |
| Impact    | maintenance of the road   |                              |
| S         | and park developed areas  |                              |
| ummary*** | would continue to         |                              |
|           | contribute to a long-term |                              |
|           | negligible to minor       |                              |
|           | adverse effect on         |                              |
|           | wildlife increasing some  |                              |
|           | species while decreasing  |                              |
|           | the presence of others.   |                              |
|           | Actions proposed under    |                              |
|           | the No Action Alternative |                              |
|           | or the Preferred          |                              |
|           | Alternative would         |                              |
|           | contribute a negligible   |                              |
|           | long-term adverse effect, |                              |
|           | as well as negligible to  |                              |
|           | minor beneficial effects  |                              |
|           | from habitat restoration  |                              |
|           | along road shoulders and  |                              |
|           | pullouts from the latter  |                              |
|           | alternative.              |                              |
|           |                           |                              |
|           | [Conclusion]{.underline}: |                              |
|           | The No Action Alternative |                              |
|           | would have short-and      |                              |
|           | long-term negligible to   |                              |
|           | minor adverse impacts     |                              |
|           | from retention of the     |                              |
|           | roadway and from minor    |                              |
|           | repairs to it. The        |                              |
|           | Preferred Alternative     |                              |
|           | would result in           |                              |
|           | short-term negligible to  |                              |
|           | moderate adverse impacts  |                              |
|           | from noise and            |                              |
|           | disturbance associated    |                              |
|           | with the rehabilitation   |                              |
|           | project and long-term     |                              |
|           | negligible to minor       |                              |
|           | beneficial impacts from   |                              |
|           | increasing plant cover    |                              |
|           | associated with changing  |                              |
|           | the condition of road     |                              |
|           | shoulders and pullouts.   |                              |
|           | There would be no         |                              |
|           | impairment of wildlife    |                              |
|           | under either alternative. |                              |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| *         | There would be no         | There would be no effect on  |
| **Special | additional impacts (no    | special status species under |
| Status    | effect) to special status | the implementation of the    |
| S         | species under the         | Preferred Alternative.       |
| pecies*** | implementation of the No  |                              |
|           | Action Alternative.       |                              |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| *         | [Cumulative]{.underline}: |                              |
| **Special | Most of the special       |                              |
| Status    | status species have not   |                              |
| Species   | been verified to occur    |                              |
| Impact    | within the park and       |                              |
| S         | suitable habitat is       |                              |
| ummary*** | limited or does not       |                              |
|           | exist. Habitat            |                              |
|           | modification within the   |                              |
|           | park includes broad scale |                              |
|           | changes in vegetation     |                              |
|           | characteristics due to    |                              |
|           | fire suppression,         |                              |
|           | grazing, water resources  |                              |
|           | alteration, and the loss  |                              |
|           | of comparatively small    |                              |
|           | patches and corridors     |                              |
|           | where park land has been  |                              |
|           | developed for facilities, |                              |
|           | trails, and roads. This   |                              |
|           | has resulted in a         |                              |
|           | reduction of habitat      |                              |
|           | available for use by      |                              |
|           | special status species    |                              |
|           | that occur within the     |                              |
|           | park. Because neither     |                              |
|           | alternative would affect  |                              |
|           | special status species,   |                              |
|           | there would be no         |                              |
|           | contribution to           |                              |
|           | cumulative effects on     |                              |
|           | these species.            |                              |
|           |                           |                              |
|           | [Conclusion]{.underline}: |                              |
|           | Because no habitat for    |                              |
|           | any listed, rare, or      |                              |
|           | sensitive species would   |                              |
|           | be affected by the        |                              |
|           | proposed actions and      |                              |
|           | because many of those     |                              |
|           | species also do not occur |                              |
|           | in the vicinity of the    |                              |
|           | project area, there would |                              |
|           | be no effect on any       |                              |
|           | listed, candidate, rare   |                              |
|           | or sensitive wildlife.    |                              |
|           | There would be no         |                              |
|           | impairment of special     |                              |
|           | status species under      |                              |
|           | either alternative        |                              |
|           | discussed in this         |                              |
|           | Environmental Assessment. |                              |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| ***Pr     | There would be no         | Potential for finding        |
| ehistoric | additional impacts (no    | previously unidentified      |
| and       | effect) on known          | archeological resources      |
| Historic  | archeological resources   | would be increased, however  |
| Arch      | as a result of the        | work is taking place in      |
| eological | implementation of the No  | previously disturbed areas   |
| Res       | Action Alternative.       | and surface surveys for      |
| ources*** | Although routine          | archeological resources will |
|           | maintenance and minor     | be completed prior to the    |
|           | repairs have the          | project's initiation.        |
|           | potential for uncovering  | Therefore, because           |
|           | archeological resources,  | mitigation measures would be |
|           | mitigation measures would | employed, there would be no  |
|           | ensure that there would   | adverse effect on            |
|           | be no adverse effect on   | archeological resources.     |
|           | these resources should    |                              |
|           | they be found.            |                              |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| ***Arch   | [Cumulative]{.underline}: |                              |
| eological | Archeological resources   |                              |
| Resources | along the Lassen Volcanic |                              |
| Impact    | National Park Highway and |                              |
| S         | elsewhere in the park     |                              |
| ummary*** | have been adversely       |                              |
|           | impacted to varying       |                              |
|           | degrees from past         |                              |
|           | construction-related      |                              |
|           | disturbances (prior to    |                              |
|           | the advent of             |                              |
|           | archeological resources   |                              |
|           | protection laws); visitor |                              |
|           | impacts and vandalism;    |                              |
|           | and erosion and other     |                              |
|           | natural processes. There  |                              |
|           | would be no               |                              |
|           | construction-related      |                              |
|           | contributions to          |                              |
|           | cumulative impacts from   |                              |
|           | the no-action             |                              |
|           | alternative. There is a   |                              |
|           | slight possibility;       |                              |
|           | however, that future      |                              |
|           | proposed work or          |                              |
|           | landslides could affect   |                              |
|           | unidentified cultural     |                              |
|           | resources. Because of     |                              |
|           | mitigation measures, the  |                              |
|           | Preferred Alternative     |                              |
|           | would also not be         |                              |
|           | expected to contribute to |                              |
|           | cumulative effects on     |                              |
|           | archeological resources.  |                              |
|           |                           |                              |
|           | [Conclusion]{.underline}: |                              |
|           | The proposed actions      |                              |
|           | under the No Action or    |                              |
|           | Preferred Alternative     |                              |
|           | would have no adverse     |                              |
|           | effect on and would not   |                              |
|           | impair park archeological |                              |
|           | resources or the values   |                              |
|           | for which they have been  |                              |
|           | protected.                |                              |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| ***Et     | There would be no         |                              |
| hnography | additional impacts to, no |                              |
| (         | cumulative effects from,  |                              |
| Including | and no impairment of      |                              |
| Impact    | known ethnographic        |                              |
| Su        | resources as a result of  |                              |
| mmary)*** | the implementation of     |                              |
|           | either alternative.       |                              |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| **        | This alternative would    | Taken together,              |
| *Historic | result in not             | modifications to the         |
| St        | rehabilitating the Lassen | historic roadway, pullouts,  |
| ructures/ | Volcanic National Park    | culverts and culvert         |
| Cultural  | Highway, a road eligible  | headwalls and other features |
| Land      | for the National Register | of the cultural landscape,   |
| scapes*** | of Historic Places. As a  | which would adhere to the    |
|           | result, there would be    | Secretary's Standards        |
|           | ongoing deterioration of  | (including with respect to   |
|           | the road and its          | the design of new features   |
|           | associated structures,    | and reconstruction of        |
|           | unless another            | existing historic features   |
|           | comprehensive             | using historic materials to  |
|           | rehabilitation effort or  | the degree possible) would   |
|           | specific measures to      | have no adverse effect on    |
|           | preserve historic         | historic structures or the   |
|           | culverts and headwalls or | eligibility of the Lassen    |
|           | other contributing        | Volcanic National Park       |
|           | structures was            | Highway as a cultural        |
|           | undertaken. Initially     | landscape. Proposed actions  |
|           | there would be no effect  | would result in the          |
|           | on the road, however,     | retention of historic        |
|           | over time benign neglect  | designed features of the     |
|           | could result in a         | road that planners           |
|           | short-term adverse effect | envisioned and that have     |
|           | on the road's eligibility | contributed to visitor       |
|           | for the National Register | enjoyment dating from the    |
|           | as its historic features  | historic period.             |
|           | deteriorated.             |                              |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| **        | [Cumulative]{.underline}: |                              |
| *Historic | The impacts from past     |                              |
| Struc     | actions in combination    |                              |
| tures/*** | with the impacts of the   |                              |
|           | no-action alternative     |                              |
| **        | would continue to result  |                              |
| *Cultural | in impacts on historic    |                              |
| L         | structures and cultural   |                              |
| andscapes | landscapes but would, if  |                              |
| Impact    | conducted in the manner   |                              |
| Su        | described herein, with    |                              |
| mmary.*** | recognition and           |                              |
|           | consultation regarding    |                              |
|           | the significance of the   |                              |
|           | cultural landscape would  |                              |
|           | have no adverse effect on |                              |
|           | the eligibility of these  |                              |
|           | resources for the         |                              |
|           | National Register of      |                              |
|           | Historic Places. If       |                              |
|           | however, under the No     |                              |
|           | Action Alternative, the   |                              |
|           | road was allowed to       |                              |
|           | continue to deteriorate,  |                              |
|           | there could be an adverse |                              |
|           | cumulative effect on the  |                              |
|           | road as an historic       |                              |
|           | resource and cultural     |                              |
|           | landscape.                |                              |
|           |                           |                              |
|           | [Conclusion]{.underline}: |                              |
|           | The No Action and         |                              |
|           | Preferred alternatives    |                              |
|           | would ultimately result   |                              |
|           | in no adverse effect to   |                              |
|           | or impairment of the      |                              |
|           | Lassen Volcanic National  |                              |
|           | Park Highway or the       |                              |
|           | values for which it has   |                              |
|           | been preserved.           |                              |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| *         | Continuing deterioration  | Road rehabilitation would    |
| **Visitor | of the road could result  | result in short-term,        |
| Expe      | in road closures for      | negligible to moderate       |
| rience*** | emergency repairs and     | adverse effects on visitor   |
|           | unsafe driving conditions | access as visitors are       |
| *         | for visitors and park     | directed around or unable to |
| **Visitor | staff, a long-term minor  | visit certain areas.         |
| Access/   | to moderate adverse       |                              |
| Opportu   | impact. Catastrophic road | At the conclusion of the     |
| nities*** | failure could result in   | project, there would be      |
|           | short-term, minor to      | increased opportunities for  |
|           | major impacts of park     | visitors, especially those   |
|           | visitors.                 | with mobility problems or    |
|           |                           | large vehicles to access the |
|           |                           | park. New interpretive       |
|           |                           | opportunities would          |
|           |                           | complement the aesthetics of |
|           |                           | the improved road, resulting |
|           |                           | in both minor beneficial and |
|           |                           | adverse effects on visitor   |
|           |                           | access and opportunities.    |
|           |                           | Negligible effects could     |
|           |                           | occur as a result of the     |
|           |                           | obliteration of some         |
|           |                           | pullouts.                    |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| *         | Not rehabilitating the    | Long-term minor to moderate  |
| **Visitor | road could fail to meet   | beneficial effects would be  |
| Expe      | one objective of the      | realized from rehabilitating |
| rience*** | road's use -- that is to  | the road, improving minor    |
|           | provide a safe road       | developed areas, directional |
| ***       | condition for all         | signage and improved         |
| Safety*** | travelers and to reduce   | pullouts/recovery zones and  |
|           | the possibility of        | road shoulders. These        |
|           | catastrophic road         | changes would result in      |
|           | failure. Current roadway  | minor to moderate            |
|           | problems, such as,        | improvements to visitor      |
|           | settling, pavement        | safety, lessening confusion  |
|           | cracking, and slumping    | and improving the ability of |
|           | are being caused by       | visitors to enjoy accessing  |
|           | weather conditions and    | these areas.                 |
|           | the age of the road.      |                              |
|           | These conditions will     | Negligible to minor          |
|           | continue to cause similar | beneficial impacts would     |
|           | distress if stabilization | result from improvements     |
|           | repairs are not           | associated with further      |
|           | implemented. This could   | separating pedestrians and   |
|           | result in a long-term     | vehicles in the access of    |
|           | negligible to moderate    | day use areas.               |
|           | adverse impact on visitor |                              |
|           | and employee safety.      |                              |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| *         | [Cumulative]{.underline}: |                              |
| **Visitor | Because the roadway would |                              |
| E         | continue to deteriorate,  |                              |
| xperience | the No Action Alternative |                              |
| Impact    | would continue to         |                              |
| S         | contribute to a potential |                              |
| ummary*** | long-term minor to        |                              |
|           | moderate adverse impact   |                              |
|           | on visitor access and     |                              |
|           | opportunities and a       |                              |
|           | negligible to moderate    |                              |
|           | adverse impacts on        |                              |
|           | visitor safety, while the |                              |
|           | Preferred Alternative     |                              |
|           | would have some           |                              |
|           | short-term negligible to  |                              |
|           | minor adverse effects on  |                              |
|           | visitor access and an     |                              |
|           | array of negligible to    |                              |
|           | moderate beneficial       |                              |
|           | effects on visitor access |                              |
|           | and opportunities and     |                              |
|           | visitor and employee      |                              |
|           | safety.                   |                              |
|           |                           |                              |
|           | [Conclusion]{.underline}: |                              |
|           | The proposed              |                              |
|           | rehabilitation under the  |                              |
|           | Preferred Alternative     |                              |
|           | would result in           |                              |
|           | negligible to moderate    |                              |
|           | adverse, primarily        |                              |
|           | short-term, effects on    |                              |
|           | visitor access,           |                              |
|           | opportunities and safety  |                              |
|           | and negligible to         |                              |
|           | moderate beneficial       |                              |
|           | effects on access,        |                              |
|           | opportunities and safety. |                              |
|           | Improvements to the       |                              |
|           | roadway would compensate  |                              |
|           | for the short-term        |                              |
|           | inconvenience to visitors |                              |
|           | and would result in a     |                              |
|           | better road for many      |                              |
|           | years. There would be no  |                              |
|           | impairment of the visitor |                              |
|           | experience as a result of |                              |
|           | the proposed project      |                              |
|           | under Alternative 2.      |                              |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| ***Park   | This alternative would    | Systematic improvements      |
| Oper      | not result in             | (visitor, resource, safety,  |
| ations*** | comprehensive             | and others) to the main park |
|           | improvements to the       | road and associated minor    |
|           | Lassen Volcanic National  | and major developed areas    |
|           | Park Highway and would    | would result in long-term    |
|           | result in minor to        | improvements that would      |
|           | moderate, long-term       | constitute a minor to        |
|           | adverse effects on park   | moderate beneficial effect   |
|           | operations. Without a     | on park operations.          |
|           | comprehensive project     |                              |
|           | that would improve the    | Until the deterioration of   |
|           | road, opportunities to    | such resources began anew,   |
|           | improve visitor access to | the park would realize       |
|           | minor and major developed | benefits from systematic     |
|           | areas also would not      | improvements related to      |
|           | occur and would result in | water conveyance and         |
|           | ongoing difficulties for  | improved visitor access and  |
|           | park managers in          | opportunities, resulting in  |
|           | maintaining these areas.  | long-term negligible to      |
|           | Impacts to park           | minor to moderate beneficial |
|           | resources, including      | effects.                     |
|           | wetlands, opportunities   |                              |
|           | for social trails to      |                              |
|           | persist, and vegetation   |                              |
|           | damage would continue,    |                              |
|           | increasing the need for   |                              |
|           | restoration efforts.      |                              |
|           |                           |                              |
|           | Incremental effects on    |                              |
|           | the character of the road |                              |
|           | as the Lassen Volcanic    |                              |
|           | National Park Highway     |                              |
|           | would continue,           |                              |
|           | potentially altering the  |                              |
|           | ability of the park to    |                              |
|           | retain some character     |                              |
|           | defining features of the  |                              |
|           | road and therefore        |                              |
|           | possibly jeopardizing the |                              |
|           | road's eligibility for    |                              |
|           | inclusion on the National |                              |
|           | Register of Historic      |                              |
|           | Places as a cultural      |                              |
|           | landscape.                |                              |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+
| ***Park   | [Cumulative]{.underline}: |                              |
| O         | The No Action Alternative |                              |
| perations | would contribute a minor, |                              |
| Impact    | long-term, adverse        |                              |
| S         | increment to total        |                              |
| ummary*** | cumulative effects on     |                              |
|           | park operations (drawing  |                              |
|           | time and money away from  |                              |
|           | the management of other   |                              |
|           | park resources to         |                              |
|           | maintain an ever          |                              |
|           | deteriorating roadway),   |                              |
|           | while the Preferred       |                              |
|           | Alternative would         |                              |
|           | initially result in an    |                              |
|           | easy to maintain roadway  |                              |
|           | before once again         |                              |
|           | contributing to increased |                              |
|           | expenditures for          |                              |
|           | maintenance as the road   |                              |
|           | deteriorated, ending its  |                              |
|           | service life before       |                              |
|           | repairs were needed once  |                              |
|           | again.                    |                              |
|           |                           |                              |
|           | [Conclusion]{.underline}: |                              |
|           | The No Action Alternative |                              |
|           | would have a minor,       |                              |
|           | long-term, adverse effect |                              |
|           | on park operations. Under |                              |
|           | the Preferred             |                              |
|           | Alternative, visitors     |                              |
|           | would be inconvenienced   |                              |
|           | during road repairs, but  |                              |
|           | the road would remain     |                              |
|           | open and access to the    |                              |
|           | park would continue over  |                              |
|           | the long-term. The        |                              |
|           | Preferred Alternative     |                              |
|           | would have primarily      |                              |
|           | long-term beneficial      |                              |
|           | negligible to minor       |                              |
|           | impacts, benefiting park  |                              |
|           | cultural and natural      |                              |
|           | resources by enhancing    |                              |
|           | their preservation and    |                              |
|           | enhancing visitor safety  |                              |
|           | and visitor enjoyment     |                              |
|           | while reducing the need   |                              |
|           | for day-to-day            |                              |
|           | maintenance. Neither      |                              |
|           | would impair park         |                              |
|           | operations.               |                              |
+-----------+---------------------------+------------------------------+

**A. Soils**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253903 .anchor}

**Alternative 1**

Under the No Action Alternative, there would be few impacts to soils
except in the event of road failure. Routine, ongoing maintenance of the
road surface could involve shoulder work and ditch maintenance and would
affect soils. As a result, soils could be mixed, removed, moved and
replaced. These actions would likely occur as a result of annual and or
cyclic maintenance or repair needs and except in the case of annual
maintenance actions would occur widely spaced over time, constituting a
long-term, negligible adverse impact. In the event of catastrophic road
failure, soils would be disturbed and erosion and sedimentation could
occur and affect areas down slope from the road, resulting in short and
long-term minor to moderate adverse effects, depending on the severity
and extent of the road failure.

**Alternative 2**

The following specific actions called for by this alternative would
affect soils:

-   Pavement rehabilitation and new paving application in former gravel
    parking areas and pullouts and widened curves or road alignment
    changes

-   Replacement/construction of restroom walkways at Lake Helen Picnic
    Area, Kings Creek Picnic Area and the Devastated Area; construction
    of trail steps at the Kings Creek Falls; and construction of the
    pathway through the island at Hat Lake Parking Area.

-   Creation of accessible interpretive exhibits or trailhead features
    at Kings Creek Falls, Summit Lake North Campground, Hot Rock,
    Sunflower Flat and Chaos Jumbles (excavation, grading and surfacing)

-   Application of grading treatments for road shoulder rehabilitation
    and pullout construction, rehabilitation and obliteration, and
    placement of riprap (excavation, fill placement and compaction, berm
    construction, grading -- general and ditch creation, procurement and
    placement of barrier rocks, scarification for restoration)

-   Culvert cleaning, removal, replacement and installation, and
    installation of a trench drain in the Lassen Peak Parking area
    (excavation and fill placement and compaction)

-   Construction of a drystack rock wall in the Lassen Peak Parking area
    and a concrete core wall with stone veneer at Kings Creek Falls
    Trailhead (excavation, fill placement and compaction and wall
    construction)

-   Formal utilization of catch basin across from Lassen Peak Parking
    Area (water storage)

-   Removing vegetation, including trees and stumps (excavation)

-   Hydromulching, hand seeding or planting as well as the salvage or
    importation of topsoil and the salvage of duff during rehabilitation
    or restoration

-   Materials staging and spoils deposition

-   Use of borrow material from within and outside the park

Under this Alternative, soils would be affected over the length of the
road rehabilitation project, wherever excavation and/or fill is called
for, as well as in the following specific areas, where excavation or
grading would occur: Lake Helen Parking Area, Lassen Peak Parking Lot,
Kings Creek Culvert and Picnic Area, Kings Creek Falls Trailhead, Summit
Lake Trailhead, Dersch Meadow, Hat Creek, Devastated Area, Sunflower
Flat and Chaos Jumbles, however much of this soil disturbance would be
limited within the existing road prism (area affected by original road
construction activities).

Soil excavated during construction would be retained for use on the
roadway or in the grading treatment areas. During excavation and
grading, soils would be mixed, moved, and replaced, causing a minor to
moderate, localized but long-term, adverse effect to the area's soil
profiles, with the greater degree of impact occurring in the limited
areas not previously disturbed by the construction of existing cut and
fill slopes.

Moving, covering, trampling, and compaction of soils by equipment and
workers within the construction work zone would also occur, however, a
majority of soils in the project corridor have been previously disturbed
by road-related development activities (e.g., maintenance and
construction). Localized soil compaction would temporarily decrease soil
permeability, change soil moisture content, and lessen its water storage
capacity. Because of planned scarifying during restoration, these
actions would constitute a negligible to minor, short-term adverse
effect on soils.

During pavement rehabilitation and new paving application along the 21.7
mile (34.9 kilometer) length of the roadway project, in former gravel
parking areas and pullouts and in widened curves or areas where the road
alignment is changed, soils would be excavated, mixed and replaced, with
fill materials, including aggregate base added where needed to ensure a
smooth finished road surface. Paving would include asphalt milling and
compaction, base and sub-base excavation (as needed), fill placement and
compaction, and surfacing as appropriate to ensure a smooth finished
road surface. This would constitute a long-term negligible localized
adverse effect on soils, much of which have been previously disturbed by
original road construction and repaving efforts since park
establishment.

Replacement and/or construction of restroom walkways at Lake Helen
Picnic Area, Kings Creek Picnic Area and the Devastated Area;
construction of trail steps and a pedestrian walkway/interpretive
trailhead at the Kings Creek Falls; and construction of the pathway
through the island at Hat Creek Parking Area would result in excavation
and removal of soil to create the walkways, resulting in a negligible
long-term localized adverse effect on soils.

Application of grading treatments for road shoulder rehabilitation and
pullout construction, rehabilitation and obliteration, and placement of
riprap (excavation, fill placement and compaction, berm construction,
grading -- general and ditch creation, procurement and placement of
barrier rocks, scarification for restoration would cover approximately 6
hectares (2.42 acres). In some cases, topsoil would be removed, stored
and replaced; in others soils would be graded, then excavated for
placement of boulders or excavated, then bermed. Scarification (ripping)
of soils to decrease compaction would occur wherever restoration
treatments are prescribed (primarily in obliterated or reduced
pullouts). Ditching would consist of creating or recreating ditches that
run alongside the road to ensure clear passage for water flow during
rain and snow melt. Together these activities would constitute a
localized minor to moderate long-term adverse effect on soils. Upon
successful seeding and replanting, there would also be a long-term minor
to moderate beneficial effect as the growth of plants and their return
of nutrients and water holding capacity to soils in restored areas
resulted in less erosion and more stable roadsides.

With approximately 60 culverts slated for cleaning, and 42 for headwalls
installation or repair, and 29 for riprap installation, there would also
be excavation of soils at culvert ends to ensure clear passage for water
flow during rain or snowmelt. An estimated 50-235 square feet
(4.64-21.84 square meters) would be affected at each location, depending
on the size of the culvert and other needed rehabilitation work. The
installation of new culverts (primarily at Dersch Meadow) and replaced
culverts would also result in an additional 15,000 cubic yards (11,500
cubic meters) of soil excavation. Installation of a trench drain in the
Lassen Peak parking area would result in some additional excavation (13
cubic yards or 10 cubic meters) and fill. Construction of rock walls at
Lassen Peak and Kings Creek Falls Trailhead would also result in 350
cubic yards or 270 cubic meters of soil excavation, respectively to
create a foundation for wall placement. Together these actions would
constitute a negligible to minor localized adverse effect on soils.

Aggregate, asphalt and some soil would likely come from commercial
sources, resulting in a need to ensure clean fill materials to prevent
contamination of the park soils through weed seed or other unwelcome
additives. Where disturbed, slopes would be sculpted to provide a
natural appearance to emulate the surrounding terrain and blend with
landscape. Mulch and seed would also be applied to the reclaimed areas.
This would constitute a negligible to minor localized long-term and
beneficial effect on soils.

The following avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures would
limit effects on area soils:

-   reuse of excavated material to construct berms or to use in leveling
    areas of impact;

-   revegetation through seeding or planting of road shoulders and
    obliterated pullouts (using soil additives where appropriate or
    needed);

-   construction of natural appearing undulating berms and scattered
    random rock placement in obliterated pullouts and/or wide road
    shoulders; and

-   importation of weed-free specified clean fill.

[Cumulative Impacts]{.underline}: Adverse impacts to soils as a result
of other past and ongoing actions include compaction, soil mixing, and
soil loss from removal and erosion, from development and concentrated
visitor use in the park, as well as from areas where soils have been
disturbed and revegetation has not occurred naturally or been undertaken
by the park. Other impacts include an overall decrease in soil
infiltration, where hardening of surfaces (roads, walkways, buildings)
has occurred. Some restoration and development projects (e.g. addition
of new visitor service facilities, restoration of old roads or building
sites) could occur within the park and project vicinity. These projects
could contribute to both beneficial and adverse impacts to soils.
Because most of the park continues to be undisturbed by human impacts
and is designated wilderness, the amount of area affected by past and
possible future projects is not substantial and soil impacts therefore
are relatively minor. Impacts from the above actions, together with the
impacts of the No Action or Preferred alternative, would continue to
result in minor adverse cumulative impacts to soils in the park. The No
Action Alternative would contribute a negligible, long-term, adverse
increment to total cumulative effects on soils, while the Preferred
Alternative would contribute a localized negligible to moderate adverse
and negligible to moderate beneficial impacts on park soils, which would
both be disturbed and restored under this alternative.

[Conclusion]{.underline}: The No Action Alternative could have long-term
negligible and short-term minor to moderate impacts on soils. The
implementation of the Preferred Alternative would result in localized
negligible to moderate adverse and negligible to moderate beneficial
effects on area soils, which would be compacted, altered, removed,
moved, mixed, replaced and rehabilitated. Approximately 16,570 cubic
yards (12,670 cubic meters) of soil and earth would be removed from the
project site for subexcavation, select borrow, and earthwork.
Approximately 850 cubic yards or 650 cubic meters of fill material would
be needed. Approximately 6 hectares (14.8 acres) of disturbed ground
would be restored and revegetated following construction and mitigation
would include adding soil amendments as needed in areas that would be
replanted. Surfacing, scarifying, rehabilitation, and revegetation
efforts would reduce the loss of soil through erosion. Natural soil
processes would be restored in rehabilitated areas only over the long
term, as soil structure slowly returned to a more natural state. There
would be no impairment of park soil resources as a result of the
proposed actions described in this Environmental Assessment.

**B. Water Resources**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253904 .anchor}

1.  **Water Quality**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253905 .anchor}

**Alternative 1**

Existing impacts on water resources would continue under the No Action
Alternative. In addition to petroleum products deposited onto the road
surface from passing vehicles and picked up during rain and snowmelt,
there could be localized flooding due to undersized, damaged, or clogged
culverts, and from poor drainage conditions under affected roads. Poor
drainage under the roadway and localized flooding could also contribute
to a catastrophic road failure. In that case, it is likely that
disturbed soil and sediment would be carried into the nearby streams and
adversely impact water quality. This condition would constitute a
long-term, minor to moderate, adverse impact.

**Alternative 2**

The following specific actions called for by this alternative could
affect water quality:

-   Construction or rehabilitation of landscape features, such as paving
    gravel parking areas and roads, constructing rock walls, curbing,
    compacted roadside ditches, walkways; placement of barrier stones;
    etc.

-   Excavation, grading, vegetation removal, scarification and other
    soil moving activities for road repair, shoulder rehabilitation and
    for pullout modifications, construction and obliteration/restoration

-   Culvert cleaning, replacement, removal and installation

-   Redirecting water flow as needed for general culvert replacement and
    specifically for the Kings Creek Culvert, Dersch Meadow culvert
    installation, Lost Creek Box Culvert and Manzanita Creek headwall
    replacement.

-   Regrading and redirecting water flow near the north wing wall of the
    Hat Creek Box Culvert

-   Work near water, including that near unnamed snowmelt drainages,
    intermittent or perennial creeks along the main park road and other
    access roads.

-   Not following construction best management practices during periods
    of wet or snowy weather.

-   Plant salvage and planting within Kings Creek (Kings Creek Culvert)

-   Construction of a riprap protected slope in Dersch Meadows.

-   Hydromulching and importation of fill materials (aggregate, topsoil,
    barrier and headwall stone, etc.

-   Reconstruction of the Lassen Peak Parking Area exit culvert and
    direction of that water into a catch basin

-   Removal of asphalt walkway near the Summit Lake North Campground
    registration kiosk

-   Removal of asphalt curbing throughout the proposed project

The greatest impacts to water resources would be from the potential
erosion of graded or bermed areas, especially those located near streams
or lakes, during the first rains following construction (sediment
transported offsite during uncontrolled storm water runoff), although
these impacts would be naturally limited by the high porosity of the
park's volcanic soils, resulting in little erosion or transport (Johnson
personal comm. 2004). Other areas sensitive to erosion would include
earth stockpiled during construction. Still other potential impacts
could occur from spills of fluids or petroleum products during refueling
or maintenance operations within construction areas.

Earth work would include: construction or rehabilitation of landscape
features; excavation, grading, vegetation removal and scarification for
pullout and shoulder work; and culvert cleaning, replacement, removal
and installation. This work could constitute a negligible to minor
short-term adverse impact on water quality.

Work in or near water would include culvert work at several unnamed
intermittent or perennial creeks (see Table 2 below in *Wetlands*
section); and re-directing water flow as needed for Kings Creek Culvert,
Dersch Meadow culvert installation and construction of over steepened
riprap edge, Lost Creek Box Culvert and Manzanita Creek headwall
replacement; regrading and redirecting water flow near the north wing
wall of the Hat Creek Box Culvert; and other work near water, including
that near unnamed snowmelt drainages, intermittent or perennial creeks
along the main park road, Summit Lake, and Manzanita Lake. These actions
could result in localized inputs of sediment to their associated water
bodies, constituting localized short-term minor to moderate adverse
effects. Cleaning out, replacing and installing new culverts and
hardening some drainage system components by the placement of riprap or
headwalls, however would have long-term minor to moderate beneficial
effects on water resources by improving water flow throughout the
proposed project area, thereby limiting the potential for catastrophic
road failure to result in major sedimentation impacts. These projects
could therefore have short-term minor to moderate adverse impacts during
construction, and minor to moderate beneficial impacts once construction
is complete.

Short-term negligible to minor beneficial effects would result from
hydromulching, which would add nutrients to typically nutrient poor
volcanic soils and aid in retaining water and soil for plant
establishment. Restoration efforts throughout the project area resulting
in plant establishment would have a long-term negligible to moderate
beneficial effect on sediment retention by increasing plant cover and,
over time, soil fertility as plants grow and decompose, eventually also
increasing the water holding capacity of the soil.

The importation of fill materials (aggregate, topsoil, barrier and
headwall stone, etc.) would result in some beneficial and some adverse
effects -- with the use of aggregate adjacent to the roadway acting as a
sediment trap to retain pollutants before they are transported into
groundwater and the use of barrier stones, asphalt and other impervious
surfacing treatments increasing the speed of runoff and accelerating the
pace at which pollutants, including sediments enter nearby water bodies.

The proposed project will not only repave existing paved areas, but will
also add paving in nearly 9,900 square meters or 2.5 acres for new paved
pullouts and parking areas, resulting in both short-and long-term
beneficial and adverse effects on water quality. As noted above,
impervious surface treatments would increase the speed of runoff. This
effect would, however, be countered by grading new parking areas and
pullouts so that water flow is directed into areas that may filter
pollutants, including directing culvert and sheet flow into vegetated
areas, before entering nearby creeks or lakes. New paving would also,
however, have a long-term minor to moderate beneficial effect on
decreasing sedimentation in these same areas because formerly gravel
parking areas and pullouts would be paved. This would result in a
long-term negligible to moderate beneficial effect on water quality,
particularly in the vicinity of Lake Helen and Summit Lake as well as
near Kings Creek.

Reconstruction of the Lassen Peak Parking Area exit culvert and
direction of that water into a catch basin would result in a long-term
minor beneficial effect on water quality at Lake Helen. Whereas runoff
from parking area snowmelt currently courses down the main road and then
via groundwater flow into Lake Helen, holding that water in a catch
basin would slow its transport and allow filtration of pollutants prior
to reaching groundwater and Lake Helen.

To minimize the potential for water quality impacts to occur, the
following Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be used during (and
submitted and approved prior to) construction:

-   Using temporary sediment control devices such as filter fabric
    fences, sediment traps, or check dams as needed during culvert
    replacement.

-   Covering stockpiled soil and rock throughout the duration of the
    project with semi-permeable matting or plastic or another type of
    erosion control material.

-   Minimizing soil disturbance and re-seeding or revegetating disturbed
    areas as soon as practical.

-   Retaining silt fencing in disturbed areas until stabilization by
    reseeding or revegetation.

-   Using swales, trenches, or drains to divert storm water runoff away
    from disturbed areas.

-   Locating staging areas away from areas where water would runoff to
    adjacent rivers and streams.

-   Tackifier/paper mulch may be used for erosion control in revegetated
    areas. Elsewhere, silt fences and seed-free curlex logs may be used
    for erosion control.

-   Contractor must submit an erosion control plan and storm water
    pollution prevention plan (required by California Water Quality
    Control Board).

-   Turbidity (a measure of water quality) would be monitored upstream
    and downstream from project activities and actions taken upon
    unacceptable readings.

[Cumulative Impacts]{.underline}: Other visitor use and facilities in
the park and project area contribute to sediments and pollutants,
including oil and other contaminants from motor vehicles as well as
litter that can enter drainages and affect water quality. Some
restoration and development projects (e.g. addition of new visitor
service facilities, restoration of old roads or building sites) could
occur within the park and would contribute both beneficial and adverse
impacts to water quality. Given the minimal and localized nature of
these effects parkwide, impacts on park waters would be negligible.
Non-human factors, such as natural erosion of exposed soils can also
affect water quality. Impacts of the above actions and factors, in
conjunction with the impacts of the no-action alternative, would
continue to result in minor adverse cumulative effects on water quality.
The No Action Alternative would contribute negligible to minor localized
inputs to cumulative impacts. With the Preferred Alternative, there
would be short-term, localized negligible to moderate, adverse effects
on water resources during construction and long-term, negligible to
moderate beneficial effects during operations. Cumulative impacts could
result if erosion and sedimentation measures are not controlled
following construction (i.e., during earth disturbance construction
activities or by improving drainage systems) but would not otherwise be
present. Overall, water resources would likely benefit from the planned
road project.

[Conclusion]{.underline}: The No Action Alternative would continue to
contribute negligible to minor localized adverse effects on water
resources. The Preferred Alternative would employ construction storm
water management mitigation measures to control erosion and
sedimentation during construction, and coupled with improvements in
water collection and conveyance would result in short-term negligible to
moderate localized adverse effects and long-term minor to moderate
beneficial effects. There would be no impairment of water resources
under either alternative discussed in this Environmental Assessment.

2.  **Wetlands**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253906 .anchor}

**Alternative 1**

No new wetlands impacts would occur under the implementation of this
Alternative. There would, however, continue to be negligible to minor
long-term adverse effects throughout the park where water flow would
continue to be impeded by unimproved or plugged culverts, poorly
maintained or constructed roadside ditches, and other inadequate water
conveyance devices. In addition, at Kings Creek Meadow and Dersch Meadow
there would continue to be long-term minor to moderate adverse impacts
to these palustrine emergent wetlands as a result of the existence of
the park road and (in the case of Kings Creek Meadow) visitor parking on
the meadow itself. Some culverts would also be subject to catastrophic
washout as a result of the inadequacy of the size or location or
footings of culverts and culvert headwalls.

**Alternative 2**

The following specific actions called for by this alternative would
affect delineated wetlands in the project area:

-   Kings Creek Culvert (Picnic Area) replacement and road widening;

-   Kings Creek Meadow Culvert Replacement;

-   Dersch Meadow culvert installation and replacement and riprap
    construction;

-   Summit Lake Ranger Station Access Road culvert replacement and road
    widening;

-   Lost Creek Box Culvert repair;

-   Hat Creek Box Culvert repair; and

-   Manzanita Creek headwall replacement.

In addition there would likely also be some disturbance of wetlands
associated with some unnamed culverts due to end cleaning, replacement
and headwall or riprap installation or repair. For the impacts noted
below, wetlands delineation maps from Lassen Volcanic National Park were
derived from aerial photos and ground-truthed using GPS in the field
(Koenig 2004B). Installation of silt fencing would occur approximately
two feet outside wetland boundaries. The installation area is included
in the figures given below (for temporary impacts).

The following table identifies wetland areas that would be impacted by
the proposed road rehabilitation project. Permanent adverse effects
include the loss of wetland soils and vegetation when they are replaced
by compact aggregate fill or riprap. Temporary adverse effects would
include the loss of existing vegetation and would be temporary because
vegetation, particularly low herbaceous grasses and grass-like plants,
would readily reestablish in these areas following disturbance and
because it would not change the degree of effectiveness of the culvert,
and would remain unless future project work requires its removal (such
as in cyclic culvert maintenance work). Temporary adverse effects could
also include some sedimentation around culvert ends from placement of
silt fencing to protect areas outside the limits of construction. The
potential range of these effects is as identified for each area below.

**Table 2: Potential Wetland Impacts**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253907
.anchor}

![](media/image4.png){width="6.385416666666667in"
height="7.447916666666667in"}

[Kings Creek Picnic Area]{.underline}: To extend and to construct new
headwalls for the culvert located just below the junction of the main
park road and the picnic area road, wetland areas on either side of the
road would be affected. The perennial Kings Creek flows through these
culverts. There would be 394 feet (120 meters) of under drain
constructed approximately 1,640 feet (500 meters) down the road. A
second set of culverts (24 inches or 600 mm and 36 inches or 900 mm),
located where Kings Creek crosses the road would be replaced with a
structural plate bottomless box culvert and the road widened slightly.
This would result in 502 square feet (23.5 square meters of permanent
impacts and 23.15 square meters) of disturbance for the culvert
replacement and road widening. The two existing corrugated metal pipe
culverts would be replaced. Stone masonry headwalls and wing walls would
complete the construction. Together these actions would result in .012
acre of disturbance and would constitute a negligible to minor localized
long-term adverse effect. Disturbed areas would be replanted using
plants salvaged from the construction area and stored in the Kings Creek
on sandbars and by planting willow cuttings taken from the area,
resulting in a long-term negligible beneficial effect.

[Unnamed culvert inlets/outlets]{.underline}: Wetland impacts would
occur at a total of 13 additional culverts where inlet and outlet
cleaning and/or repairs would result in a total of 0.42 acres (171.96
square meters) of impact. Impacts at each culvert would, however vary
from 0.001 acres (4.64 square meters) to 0.005 acres (21.84 square
meters). This would constitute a negligible long-term localized adverse
effect.

[Kings Creek Meadow]{.underline}: Culvert replacement would result in
0.001 acres (6 square meters), most (60 square feet) of which would be
temporary impacts, resulting in a temporary negligible to minor adverse
effect. Long-term negligible to moderate beneficial effects would be
realized from the removal of dispersed parking from the meadow.

[Dersch Meadow]{.underline}: The installation of five 18 inch (450 mm)
culverts (including two-end headwall construction) and
extension/replacement of one (30 inch or 750 mm) culvert, as well as
road widening (from 9-11 foot travel lanes or 3.3-4.0 meters) and the
construction of a road-retaining steepened rock fill slope would result
in 0.040 acres or 163.72 square meters of disturbance in delineated
wetlands. Road widening would occur within the disturbed footprint of
the road (including paving of gravel shoulders), while the installation
of the culverts and retention wall would require new excavation. The
five culverts would be from 32-33.5 feet or 9.7-10.2 meters in length.
While the installation of these features would have a minor localized
long-term adverse effect, they would immediately begin to correct
cross-flow impacts in Dersch Meadow that have been present since the
road was constructed, resulting in a minor to moderate long-term
beneficial effect as water begins to pass under the road at these
locations. This would likely eventually result in changed vegetation
patterns on the south side of the road that had been altered by the
drier conditions present as a result of the road and now contain
lodgepole pines.

[Summit Lake Ranger Station]{.underline}: Replacement of an 18 inch (450
mm) culvert in the wetland and removal of lodgepole pines along the road
berm where it traverses the Summit Lake wetland would result in 0.008
acres (33.54 square meters) of disturbance. Although delineated wetlands
exist in the vicinity of the paving of the parking area, none would be
disturbed by this or other construction activity work at the site. Work
at the site would result in both short- and long-term, localized
negligible adverse effects to Summit Lake wetlands.

[Lost Creek]{.underline}: Removal of a 12 inch (300 mm), 16 foot (5.0
meter) long corrugated metal pipe culvert from the top of the slope and
repair of the concrete headwalls at Lost Creek as shown in the above
table would result in 0.018 acres (74.31 meters) of temporary wetland
impacts, a short-term, negligible adverse effect.

[Hat Creek]{.underline}: Excavation to stabilize the box culvert wing
wall slope and work to repair structural damage, cracking and spalling
on the concrete culvert headwalls would affect Hat Creek. Approximately
13 cubic yards (9.93 cubic meters) of material would be excavated and
replaced by riprap adjacent to the wing wall. This would result in 0.025
acres (100.5 square meters) of temporary wetland impacts. Headwall
repair would not require excavation, but would require diversion of the
creek to work in dry conditions. This would constitute a minor,
localized short and long-term adverse effect to wetlands previously
disturbed by the construction of this concrete box culvert.

[Manzanita Creek]{.underline}: Approximately 0.012 acres of wetlands
(47.2 square meters) would be disturbed by the installation of stone
headwalls for this culvert which, like other culvert activities where
perennial water flow occurs, would require temporary diversion of the
creek to allow replacement work to be completed in dry conditions. This
would constitute both a negligible short and long-term localized adverse
effect.

[Cumulative Impacts]{.underline}: Wetlands and riparian areas have been
lost or disturbed by a number of past and present actions. Heavy sheep
and cattle grazing in the late 1800's and early 1900's reduced or
eliminated herbaceous cover in meadows and riparian areas. Natural
drainage patterns and water flow were altered by development and
diversions, including the water flume located in the project area that
diverted Manzanita Lake to near Crags Campground. The Manzanita Lake dam
raised the water level in this natural lake ~~level~~ to create a larger
water storage area. The Dream Lake Dam also converted natural stretches
of creek and riparian habitat into open water. The digging of ditches to
drain or redistribute water in Drakesbad Meadow and Warner Valley
affected local hydrology and vegetation. In addition, numerous road and
stream crossings have been constructed throughout the park, which have
reduced the extent of riparian habitat. Overall, in comparison to the
total park area originally containing wetlands, the extent of these
cumulative impacts has been localized and negligible to minor (ranging
to moderate or major effect where dams have been constructed). The
contribution of the No Action or Preferred alternatives to these effects
would be both negligible in terms of both beneficial and adverse
effects.

[Conclusion]{.underline}: While the No Action Alternative would not
affect new wetlands, it would continue to contribute negligible to minor
(ranging to moderate at Dersch Meadow) long-term localized adverse
effects throughout the park where water flow is impeded by poorly
constructed or maintained culverts, drainage ditches and other water
conveyance devices. Under the Preferred Alternative, approximately 0.028
acres of wetlands would be affected permanently (placement of riprap or
other fill material) and 0.123 acres of wetlands would experience
temporary effects (primarily removal of vegetation) from construction
activities, for a total of 0.151 acres of wetlands affected. Mitigation
for wetland disturbance would include: salvage and replanting of
vegetation, where appropriate, including at Kings Creek culvert, and
construction of drainage improvements (such as culvert end cleaning) so
that vegetation recolonization could occur. These wetlands impacts would
occur in areas previously impacted by road construction activities and
fall under an excepted action in NPS compliance with the executive order
on the protection of wetlands, which allows for maintenance of existing
structures (such as culverts) along with new impacts that enhance
wetlands if they cause little permanent impact (0.1 acre). Under the NPS
Wetlands Procedural Manual, "actions designed specifically for the
purpose of **restoring** degraded (or completely lost) natural wetland,
stream, riparian, or other aquatic habitats or ecological processes. For
purposes of this exception, \"restoration\" refers to reestablishing
environments in which natural ecological processes can, to the extent
practicable, function at the site as they did prior to disturbance.
Temporary wetland disturbances that are directly associated with and
necessary for implementing the restoration are (also) allowed under this
exception." There would be no impairment of wetlands or wetland values
as a result of either alternative.

3.  **Water Quantity**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253908 .anchor}

**Alternative 1**

There would be no additional use of water under this Alternative.

**Alternative 2**

To aid in dust control and execution of the proposed road rehabilitation
project, water from Kings Creek, could be used. Near the north entrance,
water may be pumped from the Manzanita Lake Boat Ramp (with a 7 mm or
smaller screen located on the intake to prevent fish from entering the
pump). Up to 10,000 gallons (37,850 liters) of water could be used per
day from the park's domestic water system between June and August from
any of the fire hydrants in the Manzanita Lake Developed Area. In
addition, a raw water supply through a two inch diameter pipe could be
provided from the Southwest Water Treatment Plan (approximately 2,500
gallons over 20 minutes).

The use of this water would have little effect on the water supply in
either Kings Creek or that in the park's domestic water supply. The
culverts at Kings Creek will be modified under the current project.
Water used from Manzanita Lake would have no discernible effect on the
level of water in that lake. Use of water from the domestic water supply
is permissible because the supply of water for this system has
repeatedly proven to be far greater than demand. In addition, there is
sufficient supply for domestic needs as well as for fire fighting.

[Cumulative Impacts]{.underline}: Water is withdrawn throughout the park
in small quantities to supply visitor and administrative needs,
including for campgrounds, picnic areas, restrooms and other activities.
The use of this water has occurred from the establishment of the park.
The small additional use of water to keep dust down on the roadway, and
to facilitate the implementation of the road project would add
incrementally to the use of water for visitor and administrative uses.

[Conclusion]{.underline}: The limited use of water from Kings Creek,
Manzanita Lake or the park's domestic water supply to control dust and
to aid in road project implementation would have a minor to moderate
localized adverse effect on water quantity, but (like Alternative 1)
would not impair the park's ability to provide water or the natural
systems where that water would otherwise be present.

**C. Vegetation**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253909 .anchor}

**Alternative 1**

Under the No Action Alternative, continual minor repairs and maintenance
to the Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway would be necessary. These
activities may include repairs in the shoulder areas and drainage
ditches, which could result in the removal or disturbance of vegetation.
This would be a long-term negligible impact. In the event of a
catastrophic road failure, depending on the location and severity of the
failure, adverse impacts to vegetation could range from minor to
moderate in intensity, and be long-term in duration, depending on the
nature of the repair (for example, from new fill placed in fill slope to
riprap that replaces fill slope) and the degree of revegetation
implemented, but would likely be localized.

**Alternative 2**

The following specific actions called for by this alternative would
affect vegetation:

-   Application of grading treatments (grading, berms and barrier stone
    placement) for road shoulder rehabilitation and pullout
    construction, rehabilitation and obliteration; and curve widening

-   Revegetation treatments, including scarification, hydromulch
    application, hand seeding and planting, topsoil, duff salvage and
    reuse

-   Incidental vegetation loss associated with roadside ditch line
    construction and rehabilitation; culvert cleaning, replacement,
    extension and installation; construction of the rock walls at Lassen
    Peak Trailhead and Kings Creek Falls Trailhead; and removal of
    vegetation along road shoulders and vegetation in the way of pullout
    reshaping or construction.

-   Removal of trees at:

    -   Lake Helen Picnic Area \[two clumps of trees with approximately
        12 small mountain hemlocks (2-4 inches or 50-100 mm) in one and
        eight mountain hemlocks (2-6 inches or 50-150 mm) in the
        other\];

    -   Kings Creek Meadow pullout \[several small lodgepole pines (2-4
        inches or 50-100 mm)\]);

    -   Kings Creek Picnic Area \[one lodgepole pine (est. 12 inches or
        300 mm)\];

    -   Kings Creek Falls Trailhead \[two mountain hemlocks (est. 12 and
        18 inches or 300 and 450 mm respectively and one red fir (est.
        36 inches or 900 mm)\];

    -   Summit Lake Trailhead Road and Parking Area \[15-20 small
        lodgepole pines (1-3 inches or 25-75 mm)\];

    -   Dersch Meadow \[numerous small lodgepole pines (2-4 inches or
        50-100 mm)\]; and

    -   Hat Creek Box Culvert \[one small lodgepole pine (est. 6 inches
        or 150 mm)\].

-   Staging and spoils deposition; and the

-   Importation of fill, including asphalt, aggregate, mulch, erosion
    control devices, barrier stone and other materials.

Although there is very little vegetation along most road shoulders and
in most pullouts in the project area, the application of grading
treatments in these areas and curve widening would result in the
negligible to minor localized loss of some herbaceous plants and shrubs,
as well as a number of small trees. With the application of the
treatments and their included vegetation restoration measures, there
would be a long-term minor to moderate beneficial effect as these
disturbed areas regained their former vegetative cover from revegetation
treatments such as scarification, hydromulching, hand seeding and
planting and topsoil and duff salvage and reuse. Over time, revegetation
would result in a more natural appearance of the edge of the roadway as
it passed through the park's various plant communities. As contrasted
with the revegetated pullouts and shoulders, the paved pullouts
resulting from the proposed project would become more obvious places for
visitors to stop and the consequent results of stopping in former gravel
pullouts (such as the creation of social trails emanating from these
with their concurrent loss of vegetation) would be reduced and
vegetation would begin to reestablish, resulting in an additional
long-term indirect, negligible to minor, beneficial impact.

Numerous actions associated with the proposed project, including ditch
line construction and rehabilitation, culvert cleaning, replacement,
extension and installation, staging and spoils deposition also would
result in the temporary loss of small amounts of vegetation, resulting
in a minor adverse impact as the loss of competition on nutrient poor
mineral soil increased the probability for non-native plants to invade
and allowed for the dispersal of new or existing weed seed. As noted
above (under *Wetlands*) much of this vegetation would be likely to
reestablish following construction. As a result, roadside ditches,
culvert ends and other areas would once again become lined with
low-growing herbaceous vegetation, which would generally be allowed to
remain, although cyclic removal of woody vegetation in these same areas
would continue to occur. This would result in long-term negligible to
minor adverse and beneficial effects.

Trees to be removed at Kings Creek Meadow (new pullout), Lake Helen
Picnic Area, Summit Lake Trailhead Access Road, Dersch Meadow and Hat
Creek Box Culvert are almost exclusively trees that have grown up since
road and developed area construction. Most are quite small (up to about
three inches in diameter and growing in clusters. Those at Dersch Meadow
and the Summit Lake Access Road would not be there without the roads in
those locations, which have created drier conditions for non-wetland
associated trees (lodgepole pines). The removal of these trees, some of
which may return, would constitute long-term negligible to minor
localized adverse impacts on vegetation.

Some of the very large trees that would be removed from the Kings Creek
Picnic Area, Kings Creek Falls Trailhead, and Summit Lake Parking Lot,
however, are trees that were apparently purposely left during road
construction, when park roads were constructed to be narrower and did
not accommodate the large vehicles and volume of visitors now routinely
present during the busy season. Removal of the trees at the Kings Creek
Picnic Area and Summit Lake Parking Lot is necessary to accommodate the
turning radius of large vehicles, and to make it possible for two
standard size vehicles to pass each other when traveling in opposite
directions. Removal of the trees at the Kings Creek Falls Trailhead will
accommodate the construction of the rock wall, interpretive trailhead
kiosk and pedestrian walkway. The removal of these trees would
constitute a long-term, localized minor impact on vegetation.

To avoid, minimize or mitigate vegetation impacts, the following
strategies would be used during or following construction:

[Impact Avoidance, Minimization and Mitigation Strategies]{.underline}

-   Equipment (including hydroseeder) used in the project would be
    cleaned prior to use in the park. This measure has been effective in
    preventing the invasion of exotic plants as a result of the first
    phase of the road project.

-   The contractor would control exotic species prior to importing
    materials from quarries or borrow areas outside the park.

-   No straw mulch would be used for erosion control.

-   Tree wells or other protection would be used around trees to be
    retained, especially those that are within or directly adjacent to
    the limits of construction.

-   A monetary damage clause for impacts to trees/vegetation not within
    the project area would be part of the contract for road
    rehabilitation.

-   Fill materials imported from outside the park would be from approved
    commercial sources and would be inspected and/or approved by NPS
    staff prior to importation into the park.

-   Staging areas would be protected from spillover impacts by the
    placement of silt fencing or other barriers as appropriate and would
    be returned to pre-construction conditions upon completion of the
    proposed project.

-   Only native species, appropriate to the site would be used in
    revegetation (seeding or planting).

-   Salvage of topsoil and duff would occur in and adjacent to the
    rehabilitated shoulders and pullouts as appropriate, subject to
    approval from park staff.

-   Salvage of vegetation would occur to the degree possible; staff time
    and need permitting, however most plants would be propagated from
    seed collected within each plan community along the road where
    revegetation is needed.

[Cumulative Impacts]{.underline}*:* Much of the area that the road
traverses through is rocky, exposed and relatively devoid of forested
vegetation. Volcanic eruptions of Lassen Peak in 1914 and 1915 destroyed
over three square miles (640 acres) of forestland. The successional
process of reforestation is now taking place, with herbs, shrubs, and
finally, trees taking root in the coarse soils of recent lava flows, or
in some places revegetation is proceeding directly to trees. Human
activities, particularly fire suppression, have also altered the
structure and composition of forest vegetation. In addition to broad
scale changes in vegetation characteristics, relatively small patches
and corridors of habitat have been lost in the park in areas that have
been developed for facilities, trails, and roads. Impacts from the above
actions, in combination with the impacts of the No Action Alternative,
would result in negligible adverse cumulative effects on vegetation over
the long-term. Both the Preferred and the No Action alternatives would
have a negligible to minor, localized and long-term adverse contribution
to the total cumulative effect on vegetation in the park, while the
Preferred Alternative would also have long-term negligible to minor
localized beneficial effects.

[Conclusion]{.underline}: The No Action Alternative would have
long-term, but localized, negligible to minor adverse effects on
vegetation from ongoing repairs in the road corridor that affect
vegetation. The Preferred Alternative would also have a series of
adverse effects on vegetation, primarily from the removal of that
vegetation to construct needed repairs. These effects would range from
negligible to minor and would be localized and long-term. This
Alternative, however, would also have complementary long-term localized
beneficial effects on vegetation from the restoration of approximately 6
hectares (14.8 acres) of disturbed road shoulders and pullouts,
resulting in negligible to minor effects, depending on the location.
There would be no impairment of vegetation or values related to it from
the implementation of either alternative.

**D. Wildlife**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253910 .anchor}

**Alternative 1**

Ongoing work to repair the park road (including crack sealing, asphalt
overlays, etc.) would cause periodic noise and human presence that would
have short-term negligible to minor impacts on wildlife presence.
Continued use of the road would also result in some continued noise and
mortality impacts from vehicle wildlife collisions. If catastrophic road
failure occurred, wildlife habitat would be altered, water quality in
nearby streams could be degraded, and longer-term noise associated with
reconstruction of the roadway could result in additional short-term
minor to moderate impacts on wildlife.

**Alternative 2**

The following specific actions called for by this alternative would
affect wildlife:

-   Above ambient noise and activity and emissions associated with
    project implementation (noise: asphalt grinding, tree removal, heavy
    equipment use) in staging area, along road corridor and in minor
    developed areas.

-   Conversion of some highly disturbed road shoulders, pullouts and
    other areas to pavement or rehabilitation.

-   Removal of a small number of trees and other changes in vegetative
    cover.

-   Importation of fill materials.

-   Restoration activities leading to plant establishment.

In general, there would be few impacts to wildlife since no intact
habitat areas would be disturbed and construction would occur in areas
previously impacted by road and developed area construction. There
would, however, be above ambient noise and activity during project
implementation. Road repair would also coincide with the visitor use
season, when some of the heaviest traffic occurs on the main park road.
The noise and activity associated with the construction would be similar
to the noise and disruption of visitor traffic in the vicinity of the
proposed project area. This activity, however, would be concentrated in
various locations throughout the visitor use season. As a result,
wildlife would tend to avoid the construction area during daylight hours
when project work was occurring. In the evening and on weekends when
work would generally cease, wildlife would be expected to return to the
project areas. Some species, such as birds, deer, and squirrels might
also be seen throughout the day. Since these impacts would be localized
alongside an already highly modified road corridor and in the park's
minor developed areas, and a great deal of suitable habitat for wildlife
would continue to be present in the vicinity, these impacts would be
short-term and negligible to minor**.**

The excavation needed to repair various portions of the road would
likely result in some disturbance and elimination of small mammals and
invertebrates not able to move quickly away from the project site. In
addition, there would continue to be wildlife vehicle collisions on the
road as a result of normal use. Because speed limits change variously
through the project area and minor alignment changes would not be
expected to result in faster speeds, the potential for these collisions
would remain the same as in the No Action Alternative, resulting in a
negligible long-term adverse effect on wildlife use in the project
areas.

Habitat modification (including food and cover) as a result of the
proposed implementation of the project (with some isolated vegetation
removal and some tree removal) would preclude short and long-term return
to the former level of use in some areas by some species of wildlife,
particularly perching birds, who used the formerly present trees for
food or roosting. Therefore, among the habitat loss would be a long-term
localized negligible incremental loss of a few trees that were used for
perching or food.

Road work in some areas also has the potential to cause sedimentation in
adjacent or nearby aquatic habitat, should best management practices
fail. Sedimentation can have negative consequences on fish and amphibian
species occurring in, and downstream of, areas where sedimentation
occurs. Impacts to wildlife would be minor and short-term, having no
lasting effects beyond the revegetation period.

The importation of fill materials has the potential to result in changes
in the microbial composition of the soil, thereby altering its utility
or viability for some unknown organisms. Because no topsoil would be
imported and because this effect would not be as likely to occur from
the importation of gravel, small and large rocks, this effect would be
unlikely to occur and would be negligible.

Finally, as a result of the restoration of former gravel pullouts and
road shoulders, there would be a long-term negligible to minor,
localized, beneficial impact in increasing plant cover and therefore
habitat for some species of wildlife.

[Cumulative Impacts]{.underline}: The combined effects of development in
the park and in the surrounding area over time coupled with the
purposeful eradication of many predator species during the 1800s and
early 1900s have contributed to low level or extirpated wildlife
populations of some key species in the park. While there are no major
development projects planned for the park that would result in
additional cumulative effects to wildlife, the cumulative effects of
existing development continue to take a toll on wildlife from the
effects of collisions on the road as well as from occasional
wildlife-human interactions. The existence and maintenance of the road
and park developed areas would continue to contribute to a long-term
negligible to minor adverse effect on wildlife increasing some species
while decreasing the presence of others. Actions proposed under the No
Action Alternative or the Preferred Alternative would contribute a
negligible long-term adverse effect, as well as negligible to minor
beneficial effects from habitat restoration along road shoulders and
pullouts from the latter alternative.

[Conclusion]{.underline}: The No Action Alternative would have short-and
long-term negligible to minor adverse impacts from retention of the
roadway and from minor repairs to it. The Preferred Alternative would
result in short-term negligible to moderate adverse impacts from noise
and disturbance associated with the rehabilitation project and long-term
negligible to minor beneficial impacts from increasing plant cover
associated with changing the condition of road shoulders and pullouts.
There would be no impairment of wildlife under either alternative.

**E. Special Status Species**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253911 .anchor}

**Alternative 1**

There would be no additional impacts (no effect) to special status
species under the implementation of the No Action Alternative.

**Alternative 2**

*[Note]{.underline}: Occurrence and impact information is presented in
the Affected Environment section and the effects summarized below.*

[Cumulative Impacts]{.underline}: Most of the special status species
have not been verified to occur within the park and suitable habitat is
limited or does not exist. Habitat modification within the park includes
broad scale changes in vegetation characteristics due to fire
suppression, grazing, water resources alteration, and the loss of
comparatively small patches and corridors where park land has been
developed for facilities, trails, and roads. This has resulted in a
reduction of habitat available for use by special status species that
occur within the park. Because neither alternative would affect special
status species, there would be no contribution to cumulative effects on
these species.

[Conclusion]{.underline}: Because no habitat for any listed, rare, or
sensitive species would be affected by the proposed actions and because
many of those species also do not occur in the vicinity of the project
area, there would be no effect on any listed, candidate, rare or
sensitive wildlife. There would be no impairment of special status
species under either alternative discussed in this Environmental
Assessment.

**F. Prehistoric and Historical
Archeology**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253912 .anchor}

**Alternative 1**

There would be no additional impacts (no effect) on known archeological
resources as a result of the implementation of the No Action
Alternative. Routine, ongoing maintenance of the road prism (area
affected by road construction activities) would not result in additional
ground disturbance. Future road failure, if the road remained in poor
condition would, however, have the potential for disturbing previously
unknown or undiscovered archeological resources. Because the discovery
of these resources would employ mitigation measures noted below in
Alternative 2 and because it is unlikely that archeological resources
would be discovered in this way, there would be no adverse effect.

**Alternative 2**

The following specific actions called for by this alternative could
affect previously unidentified prehistoric or historic archeological
resources:

-   Ground disturbing activities, including excavation, grading,
    vegetation removal, and scarification for road repair, shoulder
    rehabilitation and for pullout construction and
    obliteration/restoration.

The potential for affecting previously unidentified archeological
resources would be reduced somewhat by the completed and ongoing survey
of the project area for archeological resources. During surveys
conducted to date, no resources have been found. No prehistoric
archeological resources have previously been located in the project area
that are eligible for or listed on the National Register. There are,
however, historic archeological resources that are present in the
vicinity of the proposed project area, but that would remain unaffected
by proposed project work under this Alternative. These include the
Nobles Emigrant Trail crossing and a water flume in the vicinity of
Crags Campground. Isolated archeological resources, such as the Old
Boundary Spring CCC Camp also exist in the vicinity but would not be
affected by the proposed actions. To ensure that no undetected
archeological resources would be affected, project work would not
commence in unsurveyed areas until initial surveys are complete and
documented.

If prehistoric or historic archeological resources were discovered
during any portion of the proposed action, work in the area associated
with the find would cease until evaluated by the park archeologist or
designated representative. If necessary or possible, relocation of the
work to a non-sensitive area would occur to enable more site testing and
documentation. Every effort would be made to avoid further disturbance
to the site. If relocation could not occur, then mitigation would
include exhaustive documentation of the site to appropriate standards
based on consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer and
other experts as applicable.

[Cumulative Impacts]{.underline}: Archeological resources along the
Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway and elsewhere in the park have
been adversely impacted to varying degrees from past
construction-related disturbances (prior to the advent of archeological
resources protection laws); visitor impacts and vandalism; and erosion
and other natural processes. There would be no construction-related
contributions to cumulative impacts from the no-action alternative.
There is a slight possibility; however, that future proposed work or
landslides could affect unidentified cultural resources. Because of
mitigation measures, the Preferred Alternative would also not be
expected to contribute to cumulative effects on archeological resources.

[Conclusion]{.underline}: The proposed actions under the No Action or
Preferred Alternative would have no adverse effect on and would not
impair park archeological resources or the values for which they have
been protected.

**G. Ethnography**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253913 .anchor}

**Alternative 1 and Alternative 2**

There would be no additional impacts to, no cumulative effects from, and
no impairment of known ethnographic resources as a result of the
implementation of either alternative.

**H. Historic Structures/Cultural
Landscapes**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253914 .anchor}

**Alternative 1**

This alternative would result in not rehabilitating the Lassen Volcanic
National Park Highway, a road eligible for the National Register of
Historic Places. As a result, there would be ongoing deterioration of
the road and its associated structures, unless another comprehensive
rehabilitation effort or specific measures to preserve historic culverts
and headwalls or other contributing structures was undertaken.
Therefore, initially, there would be no effect on the preservation of
the road or its associated components as historic structures or the
whole of these as a cultural landscape. As noted in the recent Cultural
Landscape Inventory (NPS CLI 2001), without attention soon, it is likely
that the culvert headwalls will lose integrity. Over time, benign
neglect could result in adverse effects to these and other resources,
including catastrophic failure of portions of the road or its associated
structures. It is unlikely; however, that these effects would continue
unchecked because the road is itself critical to visitor use and
enjoyment of Lassen Volcanic National Park and therefore would likely
continue to be the target of ongoing rehabilitation efforts to keep it
in good condition. Regardless, without systematic preservation of the
features that contribute to its significance, such as historic culvert
headwalls, these could continue to deteriorate and some features could
eventually be lost to that deterioration. The No Action Alternative
could result in an adverse effect to but would likely not result in
impairment of the Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway or the values
for which it has been preserved.

**Alternative 2**

The following specific actions called for by this alternative could
affect historic structures and/or cultural landscapes:

-   Reducing and/or removing pullouts and constructing new pullouts by
    constructing new features along roadway (scattered random boulder
    and berm treatments);

-   Replacing/removing culverts and culvert headwalls, and installation
    of new culverts and culvert headwalls;

-   Curve widening, road widening and other changes in alignment of the
    road (see also cultural landscapes below);

-   New feature construction in historic developed areas (rock walls,
    parking lot modifications, etc.); and

-   Removing asphalt curbing and other non-historic features.

Of the approximately 92 pullouts that now exist on the section of the
Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway proposed for project work under
this alternative, 29 would be retained and 63 would be obliterated using
a variety of roadside rehabilitation techniques (see Grading Treatments
in Alternative 2 description). Another four would be constructed.
Although rocks and other measures, including revegetation, have
historically been used to deter parking along roadsides, the extent to
which they would be employed in the current project surpasses any
documented use. (Barrier rocks were first used along the road at
lookouts and at switchbacks between Diamond Point and Lassen Peak
between 1971 and 1973 (NPS CLI 2000/14). Nonetheless most (22 of 25) of
the paved pullouts would be retained and another would be added to
replace two removed near Kings Creek Meadow, while most (53 of 60)
gravel pullouts would be removed. While information on whether the
pullouts to be removed are historic is unknown and cannot be obtained
due to lack of documentation associated with their construction and use,
based on their location, the pullouts that are being retained are likely
the ones both designed and used to facilitate visitor access to the key
features of the Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway, including
trailheads, viewpoints and minor developed areas. Those being removed,
on the other hand, are ones that are likely to have been created over
time by repetitive visitor use and maintenance operations. Retaining the
noted pullouts is consistent with the design intent of the road, while
removing those that have been haphazardly created over time by driver
non-compliance or other actions associated with maintaining the road is
also consistent with the design intent. None of the pullouts to be
removed are associated with either trailheads or significant viewpoints
noted in the Cultural Landscape Inventory. As a result, pullout
modifications are consistent with the Secretary's Standards and would
have no adverse effect on the eligibility of the road as an historic
designed landscape on the National Register.

Of the approximately 165 culverts identified in the project area, 4
would be removed (including 2 headwalls) and 7 new culverts would be
installed. Another 30 would undergo headwall construction (43 headwalls)
to match those with historic headwalls and new 29 riprap aprons would be
constructed. Of the 165 culverts, 13 have existing rock (drystack)
headwalls and 40 have existing stone (mortared) headwalls. Three
headwalls proposed to be reconstructed (see below) are considered to
have integrity to the historic period. Culvert modifications, including
adding rock facing on headwalls and wingwalls, are consistent with other
road rehabilitation projects that have occurred over time on the Lassen
Volcanic National Park Highway. Because rock facing would employ the
same materials as the historic rock facing and because due to
differences in modern mortar would look different from the historic rock
facing, it is consistent with the historic design intent of the road and
would have no adverse effect on the eligibility of the road as a
historic designed landscape on the National Register.

Nine existing culvert headwalls would be reconstructed, as part of work
to either replace deteriorated culvert pipes or extend pipes to the toe
of the fill bench, or for the specific purpose of repairing failing
headwalls.

**[Headwall location Masonry type Historic integrity
Condition]{.underline}**

Station 22+307 R Grouted split stone No Poor

Station 29+822 L Dry-stacked rubble No Poor

Station 30+045 L Dry-stacked rubble No Fair

Station 31+147 L Grouted split stone Yes Good

Station 31+147 R Dry-stacked rubble No Fair

Station 32+895 L Grouted split stone No Poor

Station 47+019 L Dry-stacked rubble No Poor

Station 48+605 L Grouted split stone Yes Fair

Station 50+458 L Grouted split stone Yes Good

Minor alignment changes, including curve widening in three places, and
the changes in the vicinity of Lake Helen, Kings Creek Trailhead and
Dersch Meadow, would result in slight modifications to the road's
original alignment. In addition, there would be some minor construction
of new features in developed areas considered part of the cultural
landscape. Because these changes would primarily be made within the
original road prism (area affected by road construction activities) and
because there are historic precedents for gentling curves and making
slight changes in alignment documented in the cultural landscape report,
these changes would have no effect on the road as a historic structure
or its contribution to the cultural landscape and are consistent with
road rehabilitation projects during the historic period.

Removing asphalt curbing and other non-historic features would result in
a slight beneficial effect on the road as a historic structure and the
roadway as a cultural landscape.

Taken together, the above changes, which would adhere to the Secretary's
Standards (including with respect to the design of new features and
reconstruction of existing historic features using historic materials to
the degree possible) would have no adverse effect on historic structures
or the eligibility of the Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway as a
cultural landscape. Proposed actions would result in the retention of
historic designed features of the road that planners envisioned and that
have contributed to visitor enjoyment dating from the historic period.

[Cumulative Impacts]{.underline}: The historic Lassen Volcanic National
Park Highway and contributing features have sustained previous loss or
alteration as a consequence of repairs and modern improvements (e.g.
road improvements in the 1960s, major repairs in the 1980s and 1990s, as
well as rehabilitation of the first section of the Lassen Volcanic
National Park Highway). The impacts from past actions in combination
with the impacts of the no-action alternative would continue to result
in impacts on historic structures and cultural landscapes but would, if
conducted in the manner described herein, with recognition and
consultation regarding the significance of the cultural landscape would
have no adverse effect on the eligibility of these resources for the
National Register of Historic Places. If however, under the No Action
Alternative, the road was allowed to continue to deteriorate, there
could be an adverse cumulative effect on the road as an historic
resource and cultural landscape.

[Conclusion]{.underline}: The No Action and Preferred alternatives would
ultimately result in no adverse effect to or impairment of the Lassen
Volcanic National Park Highway or the values for which it has been
preserved.

**J. Visitor Experience**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253915 .anchor}

1.  **Visitor Use Access/Opportunities**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253916
    .anchor}

**Alternative 1**

Continuing deterioration of the road could result in road closures for
emergency repairs and unsafe driving conditions for visitors and park
staff, a long-term minor to moderate adverse impact. Road closures would
be more likely to be complete and to affect periods of high visitation.
This could result in visitors either not being able to access an area
during their visit or in longer term area closures while funding and
materials were secured for repairs. In the event of a catastrophic road
failure, access through the park could be seriously affected for either
short time periods or longer if the road could not be repaired in a
single construction season before winter snows close the road. Visitors
might not be able to access certain areas or might experience long
detours, such as driving around the park on state highways to access
northern and southern points of interest in the park. This short-term
impact would range in intensity from a minor to major, depending on the
severity of the road failure.

**Alternative 2**

The following specific actions called for by this alternative would
affect visitor access and opportunities to experience park resources:

-   Overall rehabilitation of the main park road and associated minor
    and major developed areas

-   Construction delays

-   Installation of accessible parking spaces/walkways at Lake Helen,
    Kings Creek Picnic Area, Lassen Peak Parking Lot, Hat Creek, Summit
    Lake Ranger Station, and Devastated Area, and accessible
    interpretive exhibits at Hot Rock, Sunflower Flat, and Chaos Jumbles
    pullouts and designation of large vehicle parking Lake Helen, Lassen
    Peak, and Kings Creek Picnic Area

-   Rehabilitation of Summit Lake South and North Campground parking
    areas

-   Reducing, removing and installing new pullouts

The rehabilitation of the road, in general, and of specific areas, such
as the Summit Lake South and North Campground parking areas and the
Summit Lake Trailhead Parking Lot would result in long-term negligible
to minor beneficial effects on visitor access through a variety of
means, including constructing smoother roadways, with clearer signage
and pullouts and eliminating confusion associated with features no
longer used.

As a result of the road rehabilitation, summer park visitors would
encounter one-lane road closures with construction delays of up to 30
minutes during the week. On weekends and holidays, construction would
cease unless occasional approval for work on these days was granted by
the superintendent. The project would take approximately 2-3 seasons to
complete and would likely begin in 2006. Work that would affect major
visitor use areas would be scheduled at the end of the season to avoid
impacts to the greatest number of people. Materials deliveries would
take place in the early morning and late evening hours to minimize their
impact and would proceed along the shortest route possible. Park
visitors would be informed of construction delays through various means,
including the park newspaper, press releases to local media, signs in
the park and state highway information road condition (phone) reports.
There would be short-term, negligible to moderate adverse effects on
visitor access as a result of the road construction.

Visitor access and especially opportunities for visitors with walking
difficulties or those with large vehicles would be improved by the
rehabilitation (including paving or repaving and striping) of parking
lots to include large vehicle and handicapped accessible parking spaces,
as well as accessible walkways. On the whole visitors would find clearer
parking access from the paving of now largely gravel parking areas.
Although the space allotted to parking would be reduced at areas such as
Lake Helen, large vehicle parking and accessible parking spaces would
both be improved at Lake Helen, Lassen Peak and Kings Creek Picnic Area,
while handicapped spaces would also be improved at all officially
designated parking lots, including Hat Lake and the Devastated Area.
Accessible restroom walkways would be created or improved at Lake Helen,
Kings Creek Picnic Area, Lassen Peak Parking Lot, Hat Lake, Devastated
Area, and Summit Lake Ranger Station, and accessible interpretive
waysides would be created or improved at Kings Creek Falls Trailhead,
Hot Rock, Sunflower Flat and Chaos Jumbles pullouts. These actions would
result in minor beneficial effects on visitor access and opportunities.

Changing the configuration of pullouts would result in negligible to
minor adverse and beneficial effects on visitor access and
opportunities. Overall, visitors would find fewer pullouts along the
roadway, but remaining pullouts would be paved and would be close to
areas where most visitors would want to leave the main roadway to take
in views or to take advantage of minor developed areas. Repeat visitors
could also find some favorite pullouts obliterated, however those that
access formal trails and viewing areas would remain.

2.  **Visitor and Employee Safety**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253917
    .anchor}

**Alternative 1**

Not rehabilitating the road could fail to meet one objective of the
road's use -- that is to provide a safe road condition for all travelers
and to reduce the possibility of catastrophic road failure. Current
roadway problems, such as, settling, pavement cracking, and slumping are
being caused by weather conditions and the age of the road. These
conditions will continue to cause similar distress if stabilization
repairs are not implemented. Catastrophic failures of this road have
occurred in the past, causing closures, incurring expenses, threatening
safety and health, and increasing traffic on portions of the park's road
system. Failure to correct structural and design deficiencies would
result in an increased potential for accidents. If the roadway is not
repaired it will continue to deteriorate and likely continue to result
in relatively higher accident rates and/or catastrophic failures that
may impact other park resources. This could result in a long-term
negligible to moderate adverse impact on visitor and employee safety.

**Alternative 2**

The following specific actions called for by this alternative could
affect visitor and/or employee safety:

-   Pavement rehabilitation

-   Pullout and road shoulder improvements

-   Sign replacement

-   Road widening at Kings Creek Picnic Area, Summit Lake Trailhead
    parking and Dersch Meadows

-   Installation of walkway at Kings Creek Falls Trailhead

-   Installation of rock wall at Lassen Peak

-   Constructing one-way loops and/or paving and striping parking areas
    at Lake Helen, Kings Creek Picnic Area, Lassen Peak Parking Lot, and
    Summit Lake Trailhead

-   Installation of left turn lane at Lake Helen

The proposed project under the preferred alternative would contain a
number of improvements to visitor safety. Among these would be the
rehabilitation of the road itself, which would result in a smoother,
more uniform travel width for vehicles as well as clearer directional
signage and improved pullouts/recovery zones and road shoulders.
Overall, visitors would find a safer road, wider in some places (Kings
Creek Picnic Area, Summit Lake Trailhead Access Road and Dersch
Meadows), with fewer tight radius curves and improved way-finding
signage and features. The paving of parking areas at Lake Helen, Kings
Creek Picnic Area and Summit Lake Trailhead would result in obvious
pull-in and large vehicle parking and turnarounds and reduce confusion
about which way to go. These changes would result in minor to moderate
improvements to visitor safety, lessening confusion and improving the
ability of visitors to enjoy accessing these areas.

Installation of the walkway at Kings Creek Falls Trailhead would
separate visitors and vehicles and reduce slope cutting travel hazards.
Construction of the rock retaining wall at the Lassen Peak parking area
would also reduce slope cutting. Both would result in negligible to
minor beneficial impacts to visitor safety. In the same way,
constructing a left turn lane at Lake Helen would result in long-term
moderate beneficial effects on park visitors by eliminating the sight
distance/blind curve problems now associated with using this area.

As with most road projects visitor could experience travel delays of up
to 30 minutes. Evening, weekend and holiday work/construction delays or
total road closures could also occur with permission of the
superintendent. After the primary visitor use season (after Labor Day),
the following areas would be closed to allow needed work to take place
prior to snow fall:

-   Kings Creek Picnic Area,

-   Manzanita Lake Access Road, and

-   Summit Lake North and South campgrounds.

Lake Helen would be closed for approximately three weeks during the
primary visitor use season (during the week) but would be open on
Saturdays and Sundays during this time.

[Cumulative Impacts]{.underline}: The majority of park visitation occurs
along the main park road, where most of the park's recreational
facilities and interpretive displays are found. Over time, new
facilities (limited by the current developed footprint) could continue
to be added or old facilities improved, resulting in negligible to minor
adverse and beneficial cumulative impacts. Because the roadway would
continue to deteriorate, the No Action Alternative would continue to
contribute to a potential long-term minor to moderate adverse impact on
visitor access and opportunities and a negligible to moderate adverse
impacts on visitor safety, while the Preferred Alternative would have
some short-term negligible to minor adverse effects on visitor access
and an array of negligible to moderate beneficial effects on visitor
access and opportunities and visitor and employee safety.

[Conclusion]{.underline}: The proposed rehabilitation under the
Preferred Alternative would result in negligible to moderate adverse,
primarily short-term, effects on visitor access, opportunities and
safety and negligible to moderate long-term beneficial effects on
access, opportunities and safety. Improvements to the roadway would
compensate for the short-term inconvenience to visitors and would result
in a better road for many years. There would be no impairment of the
visitor experience as a result of the proposed project under Alternative
2.

**K. Park Operations**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253918 .anchor}

**Alternative 1**

This alternative would not result in comprehensive improvements to the
Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway and would therefore continue to
cost the park an average of approximately \$50,000 per year to maintain
the road, including the ongoing and increasing need for emergency
repairs to remedy failed sections of roadway. Asphalt deterioration,
warped pavement, pavement cracking, spalling on the edge of the road and
potholing would increase. Without a comprehensive project that would
improve the road, opportunities to improve visitor access to minor and
major developed areas also would not occur and would result in ongoing
difficulties for park managers in maintaining these areas due to poorly
laid out parking areas, difficulties in providing handicapped access to
facilities and the likelihood of continuing accidents or incidents
associated with the deteriorating condition of these areas. Impacts to
park resources, including wetlands, opportunities for social trails to
persist and increase (such as at Kings Creek Falls Trailhead and the
hillside adjacent to the Lassen Peak Parking Lot), and vegetation damage
would continue, increasing the need for restoration efforts.

The management of melt-out at the Lassen Peak Parking Lot would continue
to result in a rush of sediment-laden water toward Lake Helen, over the
surface of the road, rather than through appropriate drainage channels,
continuing to result in the potential for damage to this section of the
road and continuing to result in ongoing short- to long-term adverse
effects on the road surface and or drainage structures.

Incremental effects on the character of the road as the Lassen Volcanic
National Park Highway would also continue to occur, potentially altering
the ability of the park to retain some character defining features of
the road and therefore possibly jeopardizing the road's eligibility for
inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places as a cultural
landscape.

Taken together the effects of not repairing the road would result in a
long-term moderate to major effect on park operations, with annually
increasing costs to maintain the road and potential failure to protect
significant resources from damage.

**Alternative 2**

The following specific actions called for by this alternative would
affect park operations:

-   Overall rehabilitation of the main park road and associated minor
    and major developed areas (including new paving, striping, signage,
    drainage improvements, pullout and road shoulder rehabilitation and
    other actions).

-   Drainage improvements, including installation of a larger culvert
    that allows water from the melt out of the Lassen Peak Parking Lot
    to flow into a catch basin

-   Pullout paving, obliteration and creation

-   Safety improvements, such as the installation of left turn lane at
    Lake Helen

-   Interpretive improvements at Lake Helen, Hat Creek, Hot Rock,
    Sunflower Flat, Chaos Jumbles

The systematic improvements to the main park road and associated minor
and major developed areas, would result in long-term improvements that
would cost the park less to maintain annually, a minor to moderate
beneficial effect. Instead of improvements funded out of special project
or emergency funding and the annual park operations budget, improvements
would be funded through the federal highways program and would be
comprehensive. The project would take approximately two to four seasons
to complete and would likely begin in 2006 or 2007, depending on funding
availability.

Drainage improvements, including the replacement of culverts throughout
this section of roadway, drainage ditch creation and cleanout, and the
modification of drainage at the Lassen Peak Parking Lot, as well as the
rehabilitation of the Hat and Lost Creek culverts would reduce the
potential for washout or catastrophic failure at these areas and would
therefore diminish future long-term costs for maintenance and emergency
repairs, resulting in a long-term minor to moderate beneficial effect on
park operations.

The creation, retention and obliteration of pullouts would have varying
effects on park operations. Creating pullouts in more appropriate
locations would result in better management of visitors, who would then
stop close to points of interest, rather than trying to access those
areas from areas further away and having to cross the main road or
creating social trails to get to the points of interest, resulting in
long-term negligible to minor beneficial effects.

Retaining and paving pullouts would aid in visitor management by
enabling visitors to get to the places they want to be and by hardening
surfaces so pullout widening would not occur during heavy visitor use
periods, resulting in long-term negligible to minor beneficial effects
on resource preservation (and the subsequent need not to restore these
areas). Obliterating some pullouts and rehabilitating road shoulders
would limit the amount of disturbed area available for non-native
species to colonize and would, over time, result in a more vegetated
roadside, thus decreasing the need for future revegetation or
restoration of these disturbed areas and resulting in a long-term
negligible to minor beneficial effect. Lastly, obliterating pullouts
could result in a negligible to minor adverse effect on park operations
by eliminating some pullouts used by slow moving vehicles or for traffic
stops by park law enforcement staff.

Safety improvements to the roadway, including selected roadway widening,
decreasing tight radius curves, installation of a left turn lane at Lake
Helen and construction of one-way turnaround loops at various areas
would result in long-term beneficial impacts to park operations by
reducing the potential for accidents in these areas, therefore freeing
park and law enforcement staff to do other work to preserve park
resources, such as spending more time in high visitor use areas when
visitors are present.

Finally, while actual interpretive improvements would be made via the
implementation of the wayside exhibit plan, these improvements would be
facilitated by the accessible walkway, parking and pullout improvements
in this alternative, resulting in a long-term minor to moderate
beneficial effect on park operations by allowing the park to disseminate
interpretive messages aimed at giving visitors a better understanding of
park resources and giving them the tools to better protect park
resources.

[Cumulative Impacts]{.underline}: Park operations are currently hampered
by lack of adequate facilities in some areas of the park. A number of
development projects (e.g. new administration and maintenance facilities
and upgraded utility systems could occur within the park that would
enhance the efficiency of park operations. Regardless, the efforts
needed to maintain the road, over time, would remain the same, with
periodic systematic rehabilitation needs. The No Action Alternative
would contribute a minor, long-term, adverse increment to total
cumulative effects on park operations (drawing time and money away from
the management of other park resources to maintain an ever deteriorating
roadway), while the Preferred Alternative would initially result in an
easy to maintain roadway before once again contributing to increased
expenditures for maintenance as the road deteriorated, ending its
service life before repairs were needed once again.

[Conclusion]{.underline}: The No Action Alternative would have a minor,
long-term, adverse effect on park operations. Under the Preferred
Alternative, visitors would be inconvenienced during road repairs, but
the road would remain open and access to the park would continue over
the long-term. The Preferred Alternative would have primarily long-term
beneficial negligible to minor impacts, benefiting park cultural and
natural resources by enhancing their preservation and enhancing visitor
safety and visitor enjoyment while reducing the need for day-to-day
maintenance. Neither would impair park operations.

**VII. CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253919
.anchor}

Lassen Volcanic National Park conducted both internal scoping with
appropriate NPS staff and external scoping with the public and
interested and affected groups, agencies, and tribes to determine the
range of issues to be discussed in this Environmental Assessment. Staff
of Lassen Volcanic National Park, FHWA, and resource professionals of
the NPS Denver Service Center and Pacific West Region conducted internal
scoping. This interdisciplinary process defined the purpose and need,
identified potential actions to address the need, determined the likely
issues and impact topics, and identified the relationship of the
preferred alternative to other planning efforts in the park.

A press release initiating the public scoping process and comment period
was issued on March 4, 2004. No comments or questions were received as a
result of issuing this press release, which was published in the
following newspapers: *Chester Progressive* (3-10-04) and *Redding
Record Searchlight* (3-14-04).

A series of meetings were held among Federal Land Highway Program, park
and other National Park Service staff and consultants to identify
project objectives and to evaluate designs for specific project
components.

**Native American Indian Tribes**

There are ten federally recognized tribes in the Lassen area. They are:
Berry Creek Rancheria, Enterprise Rancheria, Greenville Rancheria,
Mechoopda Indian Tribe of the Chico Rancheria, Mooretown Rancheria,
Redding Rancheria, Susanville Rancheria, Round Valley Indian Tribe, Pit
River Tribe, and United Auburn Indian Community.

Five of the ten recognized tribes are routinely consulted with regarding
park proposed actions. These tribes are Greenville Rancheria, Mooretown
Rancheria, Redding Rancheria, Pit River Tribe and the Susanville
Rancheria. These five tribes were sent letters in August 2003 and in
April 2004 noting the likely undertaking in the proposed project area.
No comments were received.

**California State Historic Preservation Office**

Consultation, noting determinations of effects on cultural resources
will be sent to the State Historic Preservation Office pending the
release of this Environmental Assessment to determine concurrence with
the determinations of effect noted herein.

**U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service**

Because there would be no effect on listed or candidate species from the
alternatives in this Environmental Assessment, no further Section 7
(Endangered Species Act) consultation with the USFWS is necessary for
the proposed projects.

This Environmental Assessment is available for a **thirty-day** public
review period. At that time, a press release will be distributed to a
list of persons, businesses and agencies that have expressed interest in
Lassen Volcanic National Park proposed actions and events. The
Environmental Assessment will also be mailed to local libraries,
organizations and individuals that have requested to receive a copy of
the EA as well as others who request copies during the review period.
The Rehabilitate a Portion of the Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway
Environmental Assessment will also be available on the park's website,
located at <http://www.nps.gov/lavo.html>.

Comments on this Environmental Assessment should be directed to:

Superintendent

Lassen Volcanic National Park

P.O. Box 100

Mineral, California 96063

If reviewers do not identify substantial environmental impacts, this
Environmental Assessment will be used to prepare a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI), which will be sent to the National Park
Service Pacific West Regional Director for signature.

During the public review period, additional consultation will occur to
affirm determinations of effect with the California State Historic
Preservation Office. Notice of the concurrence with the determinations
of effect for historical resources will be identified in the FONSI for
this Environmental Assessment, if prepared (see above).

For more information concerning this Environmental Assessment, please
contact park Chief of Maintenance, Dan Jones at (530) 595-4444,
extension 5120 or park Chief of Resources Management, Louise Johnson at
extension 5170. For a copy of this document, please call Lassen Volcanic
National Park at (530) 595-4444, extension 5101.

The following people (organizations and agencies noted) were consulted
and provided comments during the preparation of this Environmental
Assessment:

**National Park Service, Pacific West Regional Office (Seattle)**

909 First Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98104

Sean Provencher, Cultural Landscape Architect

c/o Craters of the Moon National Monument and Preserve, P.O. Box 29,
Arco, Idaho 83213

Rose Rumball-Petre, Environmental Protection Specialist (Preparer)

**National Park Service, Lassen Volcanic National Park**

P.O. Box 100, Mineral, California 96063-0100

Debra Frein, Compliance Program Manager

Karen Haner, Chief of Interpretation and Cultural Resources

Dan Jones, Chief of Maintenance

Louise Johnson, Chief of Natural Resources Management

Cari Kreshak, Cultural Resources Program Manager

Lane Slover, Road Foreman

Michael Magnuson, Wildlife Biologist

**National Park Service, Denver Service Center**

P.O. Box 25287, Denver, Colorado, 80224-0287

John Freeman, Landscape Architect

Cam Hugie, Project Manager

**National Park Service, Pacific West Regional Office (Oakland)**

1111 Jackson Street, Suite 700, Oakland, California 94607

Dave Kruse, Federal Lands Highway Program Coordinator

Justin DeSantis, Landscape Architect

**Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Central Federal Lands Highway
Division (CFLHD)**

Rick West, Project Manager

Matthew Ambroziak, Highway Designer

Alan Blair, Surveys, Mapping and Right of Way Manager

Bart Bergendahl, Hydraulics Engineer

Gene Dodd, Construction Operations Engineer

Heidi Hirsbrunner, Highway Design Manager

William Jones, Permits

Mike Peabody, Materials Engineer

Mike Voth, Pavements Engineer

**Carter and Burgess, CFLHD Architectural and Engineering Design
Consultant**

Mark Talvitie, Project Manager

Doug Stremel, Highway Designer

Mike Butters, Hydraulics Engineer

Matt Gilbert, Structural Engineer

**VIII. REFERENCES**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253920 .anchor}

Cowardin, Lewis M., Virginia Carter, Francis C. Golet, and Edward T.
LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the
United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. Office of Biological Services, Fish and
Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.

(Garth 1978). Garth, T.M. 1978. Atsugewi. *In* Robert F. Heizer (ed.),
*Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8: California.* Washington,
D.C., Smithsonian Institution.

Johnson, Louise. 2004. Personal communication (onsite meeting) with
Louise Johnson, Chief of Resources Management and others Lassen Volcanic
National Park. August 12, 2004.

Johnson, Louise. 2005. Personal communication (email from) Louise
Johnson, Chief of Resources Management, Lassen Volcanic National Park.
January 11, 2005.

Journey, A.E. 1970. *An Archaeological Survey of Lassen National Park*.
I.C. Report No. 953. Unpublished Master's Thesis, University of
California, Davis.

Koenig, Sara. 2004A. (from Fire Management Plan) personal communication
with Sara Koenig (former Lassen Volcanic National Park Botanist).

Koenig, Sara. 2004B. Email from Sara Koenig (former Lassen Volcanic
National Park Botanist) to FHWA staff regarding wetlands delineation.

National Park Service. 1979. The Sulphur Creek Archeological District,
The-583 thru The-590; The-596; Sha-786. Western Archeological Center,
Tucson, Arizona.

National Park Service. 1984. Park Road Standards. National Park Service,
U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.

National Park Service. 1998. NPS-28: Cultural Resources Management
Guideline. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service,
Washington, D.C.

National Park Service. 1998. Director's Order and Procedural Manual
#77-1, *Wetland Protection*. U.S. Department of the Interior.
Washington, D.C.

National Park Service, Cultural Landscape Inventory. 2000a. *Draft
Cultural Landscape Inventory for Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway*.
Pacific West Regional Office, San Francisco, California.

National Park Service, Historic American Engineering Record (HAER).
2000b. HAER No. CA-270 Lassen Park Road. Leonard Warner and Justine
Christianson. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service,
Washington, D.C. 92 pp.

National Park Service. 2000c. Wayside Exhibit Proposal and Project
Agreement, Lassen Volcanic National Park, U.S. Department of the
Interior, Interpretive Design Center, Harper's Ferry, West Virginia.

National Park Service. 2001A. National Park Service Management Policies.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.

National Park Service. 2001B. Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway
Cultural Landscape Inventory. U.S. Department of the Interior. Report on
file, Lassen Volcanic National Park.

National Park Service. 2001C. Repair and Rehabilitate Main Park Road and
Manzanita Lake Campground Entrance Road. U.S. Department of the
Interior, National Park Service, Lassen Volcanic National Park, Mineral,
California.

National Park Service (NPS). 2002. United States Department of the
Interior. Rehabilitation of Highway 62 West Environmental Assessment
(EA). Crater Lake National Park. Klamath County, Oregon.

National Park Service. 2003A. Lassen Volcanic National Park Fire
Management Plan *Draft* Environmental Assessment. Prepared by Mary
Rasmussen and Debra Frein. Report on file, Lassen Volcanic National
Park.

National Park Service, Lassen Volcanic National Park. 2003B. Lassen
Volcanic National Park General Management Plan. U.S. Department of the
Interior, National Park Service, Pacific Great Basin Support Office,
Washington, D.C.

National Park Service. 2003C. Lassen Volcanic National Park Map and
Guide. Government Printing Office, U.S. Department of the Interior,
Washington, D.C.

National Park Service, Lassen Volcanic National Park. 2004A. Southwest
Visitor Services Facility, Ranger Operations Building, Equipment Storage
Facility and Southwest Entrance Station Environmental Assessment.
Prepared by Debra Frein. Report on file, Lassen Volcanic National Park.

National Park Service, Pacific West Regional Office. August 2004. Report
on Lassen Volcanic National Park Pre-50% Design Field Review. Prepared
by Rose Rumball-Petre, Environmental Protection Specialist, Mount
Rainier National Park. Report on file, Lassen Volcanic National Park.

Pinder, J.E., G.C. Kroh, J.D. White, and A.M.B. May. 1997. (from Fire
Management Plan) The relationships between vegetation type and
topography in Lassen Volcanic National Park. *Plant Ecology* 131:17-29.

Parker, A.H. 1991. (from Fire Management Plan) Forest environment
relationships in Lassen Volcanic and Yosemite National Parks,
California, USA. *Journal of Biogeography* 18:543-552.

Riddell, F.A. 1978. (from Fire Management Plan)Maidu and Konkow In,
Robert .F Heizer (ed.) *Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8:
California* Washington DC, Smithsonian Institution.

Schultz, P.E. 1954. (from Fire Management Plan) *Indians of Lassen
Volcanic National Park and Vicinity* Mineral, CA. Loomis Museum
Association, Lassen Volcanic National Park.

Treganza, A.E. 1963. (from Fire Management Plan) *An Archaeological
Survey of the Aboriginal and Early Historic Sites of Lassen Volcanic
National Park, California.*

U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration.
October 2004. Report on Lassen Volcanic National Park Pre-70% Field
Review. Prepared by Mark Talvitie, Consultant Project Manager. Reference
CA PRA LAVO 10 (2). Report on file, Lassen Volcanic National Park.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998. Endangered Species Act
Consultation Handbook. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and
Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.

**Appendix 1**

**Summary of Impact Avoidance, Minimization and Mitigation
Measures**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253921 .anchor}

The mitigation measures listed below would be implemented as part of the
Preferred Alternative. These measures have been developed to lessen the
potential adverse effects of the Preferred Alternative. The
rehabilitation of the Lassen Volcanic National Park Highway would be
phased to avoid the rainy season and snow conditions, thus construction
would occur over 2-3 seasons and typically occur from May through
November or December. Phasing construction is necessary due to heavy
snows, which close the road during the winter and to avoid the wetter
periods when road construction has the potential for adding to natural
erosion and sedimentation. Other general measures include: (1) Limiting
rehabilitation work within the existing road prism (area affected by
road construction activities), (2) Using construction materials (design,
types, and colors) that blend with the surroundings, and (3) Roughening
cut and fill slopes and revegetating disturbed areas to blend with the
natural environment.

The following overall strategies would be employed to minimize impacts
to park resources:

-   The contractor would conduct a project orientation for all workers
    to increase their understanding and sensitivity to the challenges of
    working in a national park environment. At this training,
    construction workers and supervisors would be informed about the
    sensitivity of park values, regulations, and appropriate
    housekeeping.

-   All protection measures would be clearly stated in the construction
    specifications and workers would be instructed to avoid conducting
    activities beyond the construction zone.

-   Contractor-selected non-commercial material source, staging or
    spoils areas not identified within this Environmental Assessment for
    project work would, at a minimum, prior to any use have written
    documentation submitted by the contractor (under the laws noted) to
    ensure that potential effects on rare, threatened or endangered
    species (Endangered Species Act), waters of the United States (Clean
    Water Act), or prehistoric or historic resources (National Historic
    Preservation Act) have been evaluated as to presence and effects of
    the proposed activity(ies).

The following Construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be
used to control impacts from construction:

-   Construction limits would be clearly marked with stakes prior to the
    beginning of ground disturbing activities. No disturbance would
    occur beyond these limits. Temporary construction fencing would be
    installed where determined necessary by FHWA and NPS.

-   Vegetation and soil disturbance would be minimized to the maximum
    extent possible.

-   Erosion control measures would include the use of some or all of the
    following: sediment traps, silt fencing, and check dams. Disturbed
    and/or stockpiled soils may be temporarily covered with straw, jute
    matting, and erosion control netting, or plastic sheeting.

-   Waste and excess excavated materials would be stockpiled outside of
    drainages.

-   Regular site inspections would be conducted during construction to
    ensure that erosion control measures remain in place and are
    functioning properly.

-   Controls would be implemented to eliminate the discharge of
    pollutants into storm water and into streams, lakes reservoirs or
    other waters from project construction materials.

-   Chemicals, fuels, and other toxic materials would be properly
    stored, used and disposed of.

-   Construction equipment would be refueled only in upland areas only
    to prevent fuel spills near drainages and would be inspected for
    hydraulic and oil leaks regularly as well as prior to use in the
    park.

-   The application of water would be used to control dust during
    land-disturbing activities.

-   The asphalt batch plant would be located outside the park.

Measures specific to potential impacts on soils would include:

-   Limiting work to the existing road prism (area affected by road
    construction activities);

-   Using excavated soil from the proposed grading treatments within
    other grading treatments;

-   Scarifying (ripping) soils to decrease compaction wherever
    restoration treatments are prescribed;

-   Sculpting revegetated areas to blend with surrounding terrain;

-   Applying hydromulch and seed or plants to areas to be restored;

-   Reusing of excavated material to construct berms or to use in
    regrading areas of impact;

-   Revegetating obliterated pullouts through seeding or planting (using
    soil additives where appropriate or needed);

-   Constructing naturally appearing undulating berms and scattered
    random rock placement in obliterated pullouts; and

-   Importing only weed-free specified clean fill materials.

To minimize the potential for water resources (water quality and
wetlands) impacts to occur, the following Best Management Practices
(BMPs) would include:

-   Using temporary sediment control devices such as filter fabric
    fences, sediment traps, or check dams as needed during culvert
    replacement.

-   Limiting dust formation from construction activities. Magnesium
    chloride would not be used; however, dust abatement may include use
    of a dust palliative, such as a lignin based product to reduce the
    amount of water used on disturbed areas.

-   Covering stockpiled soil and rock throughout the duration of the
    project with semi-permeable matting or another type of erosion
    control material as needed.

-   Minimizing soil disturbance and re-seeding or revegetating disturbed
    areas as soon as practical.

-   Retaining silt fencing in disturbed areas until stabilization by
    reseeding or revegetation.

-   Using swales, trenches, or drains to divert storm water runoff away
    from disturbed areas.

-   Locating staging areas away from areas where water would runoff to
    adjacent rivers and streams.

-   Using tackifier, paper mulch, silt fencing or seed-free curlex logs
    as needed for erosion control in revegetated areas.

-   Submitting an erosion control plan and storm water pollution
    prevention plan (required by California Water Quality Control
    Board).

To minimize effects on vegetation, the following measures would be used:

-   In many areas soils and vegetation are already impacted to various
    degrees by various human and natural activities. Construction would
    take advantage of these previously disturbed areas wherever
    possible.

-   Staging areas would be protected from spillover impacts by the
    placement of silt fencing or other barriers as appropriate and would
    be returned to preconstruction conditions following use.

-   Revegetation work would use topsoil conserved along the corridor and
    seeds of propagules from native species (genetic stock originating
    in Lassen Volcanic National Park).

-   Sources of rock, sand, gravel, earth, topsoil or other natural
    material would be inspected for noxious weeds prior to use in the
    proposed project.

-   Materials used in project work would be transported and stored so as
    not to acquire noxious weed seeds from adjacent areas.

-   Revegetation plantings would use native species that are slower to
    establish naturally (e.g. red/white fir, ponderosa pine, pinemat
    manzanita) and would be from genetic stocks originating in the park.

-   Undesirable plant species (exotics) would be monitored and control
    strategies implemented if such species occur.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Soil disturbance would be minimized and revegetation of disturbed
    sites would follow construction.

-   Construction equipment would be washed to thoroughly removal all
    dirt, plant and other foreign material before it is brought into the
    park and prior to working with or transporting weed free materials.
    Particular attention would be shown to the under carriage and any
    surface where soil containing exotic seeds may exist.

-   No straw mulch would be used for erosion control.

-   Tree wells, or other protection measures, would be used around trees
    to be retained, especially those within or directly adjacent to the
    limits of construction.

-   Construction vehicle parking would be limited to existing roads,
    pullouts and parking lots, and the staging area(s).

-   Aggregate would be supplied from solid rock or deep layers of quarry
    sites to avoid material potentially contaminated with weed seeds and
    to minimize the potential introduction of exotic species. Or, the
    contractor would control exotic species prior to importing materials
    from quarries or borrow areas outside the park.

-   Topsoil and duff would generally be acquired from within the project
    area. The use of conserved topsoil would help preserve
    micro-organisms and seeds of native plants. The topsoil would be
    spread in as near the original location as possible, and
    supplemented with scarification, mulching, seeding, and/or planting
    with species native to the immediate area.

-   The treatment of exotic vegetation would be completed in accordance
    with NPS-13, Integrated Pest Management Guidelines.

-   Salvage of vegetation would occur to the degree possible, staff
    time, money and need permitting.

-   A monetary damage clause for impacts to trees/vegetation not within
    the project area would be part of the contact for road
    rehabilitation.

Wildlife Effects would be minimized through the following measures:

-   Above ambient noises from road repair would coincide with the busy
    summer season.

-   Evening work would not occur or would be rare, subject to specific
    approval from the superintendent.

-   The potential for sedimentation would be avoided through the use of
    best management practices in work near water.

-   There would be no widening of the road which would encroach on
    intact habitat.

Archeological, historic and cultural landscape resources conservation
measures would include:

-   Work in the vicinity of the Sunflower water flume and Nobles
    Emigrant Trail would not affect these resources.

-   Project work would not commence until archeological surveys are
    complete and documented.

-   Any contributing feature that is to be modified or removed would be
    documented before and after construction to HABS/HAER standards.

-   Documentation of culverts and their modifications would occur prior
    to construction to ensure as much as possible is known about the
    historic culverts and headwalls and the non-historic additions.

-   Rehabilitation and new construction affecting historic resources
    would be done in conformance with the Secretary of the Interior's
    Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.

The following measures would pertain to the disposition of archeological
resources, should they be uncovered during construction:

-   Should presently unidentified archeological resources be discovered
    during construction, work in that location would be halted, the park
    Cultural Resources Program Manager contacted, the site secured, and
    the park would consult according to 36 CFR 800.11 and, as
    appropriate, provisions of the Native American Graves Protection and
    Repatriation Act of 1990. Any archeological site would properly
    recorded by an archeologist and evaluated under the eligibility
    criteria of the National Register of Historic Places.

-   If the resources are determined eligible, appropriate measures would
    be implemented either to avoid further resource impacts or to
    mitigate their loss or disturbance (e.g., by data recovery
    excavations or other means) in consultation with the California
    State Historic Preservation Office.

-   In compliance with the Native American Graves Protection and
    Repatriation Act of 1990, the National Park Service would also
    notify and consult concerned Native American representatives for the
    proper treatment of human remains, funerary and sacred objects,
    should these be discovered during the course of the project.

The following measures would be taken to limit impacts on park visitors
and park operations:

-   Construction delays and one-lane closures would be enacted but would
    be no longer than 30 minutes per passage through the project.

-   Evening, weekend and holiday work/construction delays or total road
    closures could occur with permission of the superintendent.

-   Materials deliveries would (to the degree possible) take place in
    the early morning and late evening hours and would proceed along the
    shortest route possible.

-   Press releases to local media, signs in the park and state highway
    information recordings would inform visitors about road conditions
    in the park during the project.

-   Work that would affect or close major visitor use areas would be
    scheduled at the end of the primary visitor use season to avoid
    impact to the greatest number of people.

-   Road rehabilitation would be accompanied by increased opportunities
    for interpretation, increased road safety features, and delineated
    parking, with more accessible and large vehicle parking.

**Appendix 2**

**Proposed Pullout Modifications**[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253922
.anchor}

+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| **St         | **Side of    | **Ap        | **Ant      | **Type**    |
| ation/Name** | Road**       | proximate** | icipated** |             |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              | **Length**  | **T        |             |
|              |              |             | reatment** |             |
+==============+==============+=============+============+=============+
| 21112        | R            | 32 m        | Construct  | n/a         |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 21300+       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 21800+       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 22168        | L            | 30 m        | Construct  | n/a         |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 22150+       | R            |             |            | Gravel      |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 23004+       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 23447        | R            | Match       | Repave     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 23503        | R            | Match       | Repave     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 23878        | R            | 25          | Construct  | n/a         |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 24737        | R            | Match       | Repave     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 24916        | R            | Match       | Repave     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 25100-       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 25389+       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 25641        | L            | 45          | Repave     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 25770        | L            | 30          | Regrade    | Paved       |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Repave     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 26332+       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 1     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 26744        | R            | 33          | Repave     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 27368        | R            | 17          | Repave     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 27537+       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 27657+       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 27829        | L            | Match       | Repave     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 28269        | L            | 27          | Repave     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 28627-       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 28669-       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 1     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 28822-       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             | Type 1     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 28890        | L            | 25          | Reduce     | Paved       |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Repave     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 29138        | L            | Match       | Repave     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 29562        | R            | 28          | Repave     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 30109        | L            | Match       | Repave     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 30524        | R            | 35          | Construct  | Gravel      |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 30618        | L            |             | Construct  | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 30669+       | L            |             | Remove     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 30923+       |              |             | Remove     | G           |
|              |              |             |            | ravel/Paved |
|              |              |             | Type 2     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 30950+       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 2     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 30993        | R            | Match       | Repave     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 31090        | L            |             | Regrade    | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
| Kings Creek  |              |             | Pave       |             |
| Trailhead    |              |             |            |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 31090        | R            |             | Regrade    | G           |
|              |              |             |            | ravel/Paved |
| Kings Creek  |              |             | Repave     |             |
| Trailhead    |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Pave       |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 31573+/-     | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 31692        | R            | 45          | Pave       | Gravel      |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 31820+       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 31889-       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 32204+       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 32658+       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 33000        | R            | Match       | Repave     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 33852+       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 34410-       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 34460+       | R            |             | Remove     | Paved       |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 34564+       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 34857-       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 35295        | R            | Match       | Regrade    | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Pave       |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 35300+       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 35900+       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 36000+       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 36653-       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
| Summit Lake  |              |             | Type 4     |             |
| North        |              |             |            |             |
| Entrance     |              |             |            |             |
| Road         |              |             |            |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 36970-       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 37118        | R            | 20          | Repave     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 37167        | L            | Match       | Repave     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 38600+       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 38959-       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 39124        | R            | 72          | Repave     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 39600+       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 40500+       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 40692        | R            | 72          | Repave     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 41100+       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 41243+       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 41510        | R            |             | Retain,    | Gravel      |
|              |              |             | pave       |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 41652-       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
| Devastated   |              |             | Type 2     |             |
| Area         |              |             |            |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 42,900-      | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 43103        | R            | Match       | Repave     | Paved       |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 43126+       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 43460-       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 43516+       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 43758        | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 43758        | R            | 50          | Pave       | Gravel      |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 43861+       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 44172+       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 44700-       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 2     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 44800+       | L            |             | Regrade    | P           |
|              |              |             |            | aved/Gravel |
| Hot Rock     |              |             | Repave     |             |
| Pullout      |              |             |            |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 44900+       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 2     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 45000+       |              |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 2     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 45300-       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 2     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 45548+/-     | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 46709-       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 48132+       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 48950        | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 2     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 49200+       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 49400        | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 2     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 49500+       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 49600-       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 50500+       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 2     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 50700+       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 50800+       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 51981-       | L            |             | Reduce     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
| Sunflower    |              |             | Pave       |             |
| Flats        |              |             |            |             |
| Pullout      |              |             |            |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 52900+       | R            |             | Remove     | Gravel Loop |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 2     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 54087        | R            | 40          | Repave     | Paved       |
|              |              |             |            |             |
| Chaos        |              |             |            |             |
| Jumbles      |              |             |            |             |
| Pullout      |              |             |            |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 54400+       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 55200        | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 3     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 55473+       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+
| 55554+       | L            |             | Remove     | Gravel      |
|              |              |             |            |             |
|              |              |             | Type 4     |             |
+--------------+--------------+-------------+------------+-------------+

**Appendix 3**

**Culvert Modifications**

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc99253923 .anchor}

+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **Cul  | **T   | *   | **     | **Con  | **Remove** | **Construct |
| vert** | ype** | *Cl | Repair | struct |            | Riprap      |
|        |       | ean | /      | C      | **         | Apron**     |
| **Name | **S   | L/  | Remove | ulvert | /Realign** |             |
| or     | ize** | R** | HDWL** | or     |            |             |
| Sta    |       |     |        | Headw  | *          |             |
| tion** |       |     |        | alls** | */Extend** |             |
+========+=======+=====+========+========+============+=============+
| **2    | CMP   |     | Remove | Con    | Extend (R) | Apron R     |
| 2307** |       |     | R      | struct |            |             |
|        | 600   |     |        | new    |            |             |
| *no    |       |     |        | he     |            |             |
| hi     |       |     |        | adwall |            |             |
| storic |       |     |        | R      |            |             |
| inte   |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| grity* |       |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***22  | *CMP* | *L  |        |        |            |             |
| 502*** |       | /R* |        |        |            |             |
|        | *600* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **2    | ALUM  |     |        | *Con   |            | Riprap      |
| 2525** |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
|        | 1     |     |        | new    |            |             |
|        | 650mm |     |        | cu     |            |             |
|        | arch  |     |        | lvert* |            |             |
|        | pipe  |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***22  | *CMP* | *L  |        |        |            |             |
| 549*** |       | /R* |        |        |            |             |
|        | *600* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **2    | CMP   | L/R |        |        |            |             |
| 3064** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | 600   |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***23  | *CMP* | *L  |        |        |            |             |
| 348*** |       | /R* |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***23  | *CMP* | *L* |        |        |            |             |
| 922*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***25  | *CMP* | *L* |        |        |            |             |
| 005*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***25  | *CMP* | *L* |        |        |            |             |
| 562*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***25  | *CMP* | *L  |        |        |            |             |
| 694*** |       | /R* |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***26  | *CMP* | *R* |        |        |            |             |
| 105*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***27  | *CMP* | *L  |        |        |            |             |
| 105*** |       | /R* |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **2    | CMP   | L   |        | Con    | Remove (R) | Apron R     |
| 7479** |       |     |        | struct | 1.2 m      |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | he     | Extend (R) |             |
|        |       |     |        | adwall | 2.0        |             |
|        |       |     |        | R      |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***28  | *CMP* | *L  |        |        |            |             |
| 330*** |       | /R* |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***28  | *CMP* | *R* |        |        |            |             |
| 480*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **2    | CMP   |     |        |        |            | Apron L     |
| 8784** |       |     |        |        |            | scour hole  |
|        | 600   |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **2    | CMP   |     |        |        | Extend (L) | Apron L     |
| 8867** |       |     |        |        | 2.0        |             |
|        | 600   |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **2    | CMP   | R   |        |        |            |             |
| 9046** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | 600   |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***29  | *CMP* | *   |        |        |            |             |
| 525*** |       | Bur |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* | ied |        |        |            |             |
|        |       | R*  |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***29  | *CMP* | *L* |        |        |            |             |
| 705*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **2    | CMP   |     | Repair |        |            |             |
| 9822** |       |     | L      |        |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        |        |            |             |
| *no    |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| hi     |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| storic |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| inte   |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| grity* |       |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **3    | CMP   |     | Repair |        |            |             |
| 0045** |       |     | L      |        |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        |        |            |             |
| *no    |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| hi     |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| storic |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| inte   |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| grity* |       |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***30  | *CMP* | *L  |        |        |            |             |
| 362*** |       | /R* |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
| *      |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| **pond |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| ing*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***30  | *CMP* | *L  |        |        |            |             |
| 415*** |       | /R* |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
| *      |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| **pond |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| ing*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***30  | *CMP* | *R* |        |        |            |             |
| 656*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***30  | *CMP* | *R* |        |        |            |             |
| 759*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **     |       |     |        | *Con   | *Construct | *Apron R*   |
| *Kings |       |     |        | struct | catch      |             |
| Creek  |       |     |        | new    | basin (R)* |             |
| Falls  |       |     |        | he     |            |             |
| Trailh |       |     |        | adwall |            |             |
| ead*** |       |     |        | R*     |            |             |
|        |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| ***31  |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| 015*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **3    | HDPE  |     |        | Con    | Realign -- | Apron R     |
| 1051** |       |     |        | struct | [outlet    |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    | pipe       | Catch basin |
|        |       |     |        | c      | through    | with 4.0 m  |
|        |       |     |        | ulvert | retaining  | pipe        |
|        |       |     |        | with   | wall]{.    |             |
|        |       |     |        | hea    | underline} |             |
|        |       |     |        | dwalls |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | L/R    |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **3    | CMP   | L/R |        |        |            | [Apron]{    |
| 1147** |       |     |        |        |            | .underline} |
|        | 450   |     |        |        |            |             |
| *hi    |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| storic |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| int    |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| egrity |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| left   |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| (not   |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| r      |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| ight)* |       |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***31  | *CMP* | *L* |        |        |            |             |
| 220*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***31  | *CMP* | *L* |        |        |            |             |
| 325*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **3    | CMP   | R   |        |        | Ditch      |             |
| 1673** |       |     |        |        | excavation |             |
|        | 450   |     |        |        | (L)        |             |
|        |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        |       |     |        |        | 6.0 m      |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **3    | CMP   |     |        | Con    |            | Apron R     |
| 1790** |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | he     |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | adwall |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | R      |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **3    | CMP   |     |        | R      | Remove/    | Apron R     |
| 1901** |       |     |        | eplace |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | with   | Replace    |             |
|        |       |     |        | longer |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | (900   |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | mm)    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | c      |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | ulvert |            |             |
|        |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | Con    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | new    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | hea    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | dwalls |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | L/R    |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **3    | CMP   | L   |        |        |            |             |
| 2108** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **3    | UNK   |     |        |        | Remove     |             |
| 2573** |       |     |        |        | existing   |             |
|        |       |     |        |        | pipe in    |             |
|        |       |     |        |        | roadway    |             |
|        |       |     |        |        | (R)        |             |
|        |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        |       |     |        |        | Backfill   |             |
|        |       |     |        |        | with       |             |
|        |       |     |        |        | aggregate  |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***32  | *CMP* | *L  | *      |        |            |             |
| 895*** |       | /R* | Repair |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     | L*     |        |            |             |
| *no    |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| hi     |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| storic |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| inte   |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| grity* |       |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***33  | *CMP* | *L  |        |        |            |             |
| 034*** |       | /R* |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***33  | *CMP* | *R* |        |        |            |             |
| 402*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***33  | *CMP* | *L* |        |        |            |             |
| 975*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***34  | *CMP* | *R* |        |        |            |             |
| 630*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***34  | *CMP* | *R* |        |        |            |             |
| 762*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *600* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***36  |       | *R* |        | *Con   | *Remove    | *Apron*     |
| 193*** |       |     |        | struct | w/FES's*   |             |
|        |       |     |        | new    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | hea    | *Ditch     |             |
|        |       |     |        | dwalls | excavation |             |
|        |       |     |        | L/R*   | (R) 15.0   |             |
|        |       |     |        |        | m*         |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **     | CMP   |     |        | Con    | Remove/    | Apron (at   |
| Summit |       |     |        | struct |            | outlet)     |
| Lake   | 450   |     |        | new    | Replace    |             |
| South  |       |     |        | hea    | w/FES's    |             |
| Road   |       |     |        | dwalls |            |             |
| 1**    |       |     |        | L/R    | Ditch      |             |
|        |       |     |        |        | excavation |             |
| **3    |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| 6343** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **     | CMP   | L/R |        |        |            |             |
| Summit |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| Lake   | 450   |     |        |        |            |             |
| South  |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| Road   |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| 2**    |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| **3    |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| 6535** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **     | CMP   | R   |        | Con    | Remove/    | Apron       |
| Summit |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
| Lake   | [3    |     |        | new    | Replace    |             |
| North  | 00]{. |     |        | c      |            |             |
| Road** | under |     |        | ulvert | (slightly  |             |
|        | line} |     |        | and    | smaller)   |             |
| **3    |       |     |        | hea    |            |             |
| 6620** |       |     |        | dwalls |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | L/R    |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***36  | *CMP* | *R* |        |        |            |             |
| 640*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***    | *[    |     |        | *Con   | *Remove/*  | *Apron (at  |
| Summit | ?]{.u |     |        | struct |            | outlet)*    |
| Lake   | nderl |     |        | new    | *Replace   |             |
| Tra    | ine}* |     |        | hea    | (smaller)* |             |
| ilhead |       |     |        | dwalls |            |             |
| Park   |       |     |        | L/R*   |            |             |
| ing*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **3    | CMP   |     |        |        |            | Apron R     |
| 7139** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | 750   |     |        |        |            | Scour hole  |
| **wet  |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| land** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **3    | CMP   | R   |        |        | Ditch      |             |
| 7975** |       |     |        |        | excavation |             |
|        | 450   |     |        |        | (R)        |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **     | HDPE  |     |        | Con    |            |             |
| Dersch |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
| Me     | 450   |     |        | new    |            |             |
| adow** |       |     |        | c      |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | ulvert |            |             |
| **3    |       |     |        | and    |            |             |
| 8086** |       |     |        | hea    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | dwalls |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | L/R    |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **De   | HDPE  |     |        | Con    |            |             |
| rsch** |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    |            |             |
| **3    |       |     |        | c      |            |             |
| 8128** |       |     |        | ulvert |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | and    |            |             |
| **wet  |       |     |        | hea    |            |             |
| land** |       |     |        | dwalls |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | L/R    |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **De   | HDPE  |     |        | Con    |            |             |
| rsch** |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    |            |             |
| **3    |       |     |        | c      |            |             |
| 8150** |       |     |        | ulvert |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | and    |            |             |
| **wet  |       |     |        | hea    |            |             |
| land** |       |     |        | dwalls |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | L/R    |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **De   | CMP   |     |        | Con    | Extend NW  |             |
| rsch** |       |     |        | struct | culvert    |             |
|        | 2-    |     |        | new    |            |             |
| **3    | 750   |     |        | c      |            |             |
| 8182** |       |     |        | ulvert |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | and    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | hea    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | dwalls |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | L/R    |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **De   | HDPE  |     |        | Con    |            |             |
| rsch** |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    |            |             |
| **3    |       |     |        | c      |            |             |
| 8185** |       |     |        | ulvert |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | and    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | hea    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | dwalls |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | L/R    |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **De   | HDPE  |     |        | Con    |            |             |
| rsch** |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    |            |             |
| **3    |       |     |        | c      |            |             |
| 8220** |       |     |        | ulvert |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | and    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | hea    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | dwalls |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | L/R    |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***38  | *CMP* | *L* |        |        |            |             |
| 662*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***38  | *CMP* | *R* |        |        |            |             |
| 925*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *300* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***39  | *CMP* | *R* |        |        |            |             |
| 037*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **3    | CMP   | R   |        |        |            | Apron R     |
| 9074** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | 600   |     |        |        |            | Scour hole  |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***39  | *CMP* | *L* |        |        |            |             |
| 230*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *600* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **4    | CMP   | L/R | Repair |        |            |             |
| 0320** |       |     | L      |        |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **4    | CMP   |     |        | Con    | Remove 0.6 | Apron R     |
| 0435** |       |     |        | struct | m          |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | he     |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | adwall |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | R      |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***41  | *CMP* | *R* |        |        |            |             |
| 850*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***42  | *CMP* | *R* |        |        |            |             |
| 193*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***42  | *CMP* | *L  |        |        |            |             |
| 939*** |       | /R* |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***42  | *CMP* | *L* |        |        |            |             |
| 989*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***43  | *CMP* | *R* |        |        |            |             |
| 090*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *600* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***43  | *CMP* | *L  |        |        |            |             |
| 323*** |       | /R* |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***43  | *CMP* | *R* |        |        |            |             |
| 758*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **4    | CMP   | L/R |        |        | Ditch      |             |
| 4128** |       |     |        |        | excavation |             |
|        | 450   |     |        |        | 3.0 m (R)  |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **4    | CMP   | L/R |        |        | Ditch      |             |
| 5239** |       |     |        |        | excavation |             |
|        | 450   |     |        |        |            |             |
|        |       |     |        |        | 23.0 m (L) |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **4    | CMP   |     |        |        | Remove 5.0 |             |
| 5456** |       |     |        |        | m (from    |             |
|        | 300   |     |        |        | top of     |             |
|        |       |     |        |        | slope) (R) |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **4    | CMP   |     |        | Con    | Remove (R) | Apron R     |
| 5703** |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | he     |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | adwall |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | R      |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | (h     |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | anging |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | pipe)  |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **4    | CMP   |     |        | Con    | Remove     | Apron R     |
| 5908** |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    | \(R\)      |             |
|        |       |     |        | he     |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | adwall |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | R      |            |             |
|        |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | (h     |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | anging |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | pipe)  |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***46  | *CMP* | *R* |        |        |            |             |
| 060*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***46  | *CMP* | *L  |        |        |            |             |
| 202*** |       | /R* |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***46  | *CMP* | *L  |        |        |            |             |
| 337*** |       | /R* |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **4    | CMP   |     |        | Con    | Remove (R) | Apron R     |
| 6653** |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    | 2.0 m      |             |
|        |       |     |        | he     |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | adwall |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | R      |            |             |
|        |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | (h     |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | anging |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | pipe)  |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **4    | CMP   |     |        | Con    | Extend (R) | Apron R     |
| 6851** |       |     |        | struct | 1.2 m      |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | he     |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | adwall |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | R      |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **4    | CMP   | L   | Repair |        |            |             |
| 7019** |       |     | L      |        |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        |        |            |             |
| *no    |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| hi     |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| storic |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| inte   |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| grity* |       |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***47  | *CMP* | *R* |        |        |            |             |
| 273*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *600* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***47  | *CMP* | *R* |        |        |            |             |
| 777*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **4    | CMP   |     |        | Con    | Extend (R) | Apron R     |
| 7962** |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    | 1.2 m      |             |
|        |       |     |        | he     |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | adwall |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | R      |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***48  | *CMP* | *L* |        |        |            |             |
| 099*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *750* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **4    | CMP   |     | Repair |        |            |             |
| 8605** |       |     | L      |        |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        |        |            |             |
| *hi    |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| storic |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| inte   |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| grity* |       |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **4    | CMP   |     | Remove |        | Remove     |             |
| 9565** |       |     | L      |        |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        |        | Relocate   |             |
|        |       |     |        |        | pipe Log   |             |
|        |       |     |        |        | road       |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **4    | HDPE  |     |        | Con    |            | Apron R     |
| 9574** |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | c      |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | ulvert |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | and    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | hea    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | dwalls |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | L/R    |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **4    | CMP   | R   |        |        |            |             |
| 9658** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | 750   |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **5    | CMP   |     |        | Con    | Remove (L) | Apron L     |
| 0200** |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    | 0.6 m      |             |
|        |       |     |        | he     |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | adwall | Extend (L) |             |
|        |       |     |        | L      |            |             |
|        |       |     |        |        | 1.2 m      |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **504  | CMP   |     |        | Con    | Extend (L) | Apron L     |
| 5[8]{. |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
| underl | 450   |     |        | new    | 1.2 m      |             |
| ine}** |       |     |        | he     |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | adwall |            |             |
| *hi    |       |     |        | L      |            |             |
| storic |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| inte   |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| grity* |       |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **5    | CMP   |     |        | Con    | Extend (L) | Apron L     |
| 1689** |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    | 2.0 m      |             |
|        |       |     |        | he     |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | adwall |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | L      |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **5    | CMP   |     |        | Con    | Extend (L) | Apron L     |
| 1806** |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    | 2.0 m      |             |
|        |       |     |        | he     |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | adwall |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | L      |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***52  | *CMP* | *L* |        |        |            |             |
| 406*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        | *450* |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **5    | CMP   |     |        | Con    | Extend (L) | Apron L     |
| 2528** |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    | 2.0 m      |             |
|        |       |     |        | he     |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | adwall |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | L      |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **5    | CMP   |     |        | Con    | Extend (R) | Apron R     |
| 3138** |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    | 2.0 m      |             |
|        |       |     |        | he     |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | adwall |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | R      |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **5    | CMP   |     |        | Con    | Extend (L) | Apron L     |
| 5470** |       |     |        | struct |            |             |
|        | 450   |     |        | new    | 2.0        |             |
|        |       |     |        | he     |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | adwall |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | L      |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **     |       |     | Remove | Con    |            | Riprap      |
| Lassen |       |     | pipe   | struct |            |             |
| Peak   |       |     | c      | trench |            |             |
| Trench |       |     | ulvert | drain  |            |             |
| D      |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| rain** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| *      |       |     |        | I      |            |             |
| *Kings |       |     |        | nstall |            |             |
| C      |       |     |        | unde   |            |             |
| reek** |       |     |        | rdrain |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | (L)    |            |             |
| *      |       |     |        | side   |            |             |
| *5196- |       |     |        | of     |            |             |
| 5308** |       |     |        | access |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | road   |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| *      | CMP   |     | Remove | I      | Remove     | Riprap      |
| *Kings |       |     | 2 pipe | nstall | replace    |             |
| C      | 600   |     | cu     | stone  | with arch  |             |
| reek** |       |     | lverts | veneer | plate 2700 |             |
|        |       |     |        | hea    | mm         |             |
| **     |       |     |        | dwalls |            |             |
| 5310** |       |     |        | and    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | win    |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | gwalls |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **     | CMP   |     | Remove |        | Replace    | [Riprap]{   |
| Summit |       |     | pipe   |        | (L) 3.0 m  | .underline} |
| Lake   | 300   |     | c      |        |            |             |
| South  |       |     | ulvert |        | Clean      |             |
| Entr   |       |     |        |        | ditch to   |             |
| ance** |       |     |        |        | main road  |             |
|        |       |     |        |        | (18 m)     |             |
| **     |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| 5065** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| ***    | *CMP* | *L  |        |        |            |             |
| Summit |       | /R* |        |        |            |             |
| Lake   | *460* |     |        |        |            |             |
| South  |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| Entra  |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| nce*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
|        |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| ***5   |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| 149*** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+
| **     | CMP   |     | Remove | Con    | Replace    |             |
| Summit |       |     | pipe   | struct | with HDPE  |             |
| Lake   | 450   |     | c      | new    |            |             |
| Trail  |       |     | ulvert | hea    |            |             |
| head** |       |     |        | dwalls |            |             |
|        |       |     |        | L/R    |            |             |
| **     |       |     |        |        |            |             |
| 5084** |       |     |        |        |            |             |
+--------+-------+-----+--------+--------+------------+-------------+