Soundview Consultants LLC

Transcription

City of Tacoma
Community & Economic Development Department
Building & Land Use Services
747 Market St, Room 345
Tacoma, WA 98402
Applicant:
Railin Peterson, Soundview Consultants LLC, 253-514-8952
Location:
3533 East 11th Street, Parcel Number 5000350040
PUBLIC
NOTICE
Application No: SHR2012-40000191360 & WET2012-40000191361
Proposal:
A Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Fish and Wildlife Conservation Area
(FWHCA) Development Permit to expand barge moorage and loading infrastructure. The
subject property is located within the “S-10” Shoreline District—Port Industrial.
Comments Due:
11/20/2012
Application Received:
11/9/2012
Application Complete:
11/9/2012
Studies Requested:
Biological Evaluation
Other Required Permits:
Building Permits
Applicable Regulations of the Tacoma Municipal Code:
13.05 Land Use Permit Procedures, 13.06 Zoning, 13.10 Shoreline
Management, 13.11 Critical Areas Preservation Ordinance
Public Meeting: A public meeting may be requested by the area
neighborhood council, a qualified neighborhood group, or by written
request of the owners of five or more properties who receive this
notice.
12/20/2012
For further information: Log onto the website at http://govme.org and select "Permit
Information" then "Land Use Notices". The case file may be viewed in Building & Land Use
Services, 747 Market Street, Room 345.
Documents to Evaluate the Proposal:
JARPA, Washington Administrative Code, Tacoma Municipal Code, and Comprehensive
Plan
Staff Contact:
Date of Notification:
A final decision on the proposal will be made following the comment
period. A summary of the final decision will be sent to those parties
who receive this notice. A complete copy of the final decision will be
mailed to those parties who request a copy or to those who have
commented on the project. Appeal provisions will be included with
both the summary and the complete copy of the final decision.
Charla Kinlow, Associate Planner, 747 Market St, Room 345, (253) 594-7971, [email protected]
Environmental Per SEPA, WAC 197-11-340, the City anticipates that the Port of Tacoma, as Lead Agency, will issue an environmental determination for the
Review:
project. For further information regarding SEPA, please contact the project applicant.
To request this information in an alternative format or a reasonable accommodation, please call 253-591-5030 (voice). TTY or STS users please dial 711 to
connect to Washington Relay Services.
City of Tacoma
Community & Economic Development Department
Building & Land Use Services
747 Market St, Room 345
Tacoma, WA 98402
NOTICE OF LAND USE APPLICATION
AGENCY USE ONLY
Date received:
WASHINGTON STATE
Joint Aquatic Resources Permit
Application (JARPA) Form1,2
Agency reference #:
Tax Parcel #(s): 5000350040
USE BLACK OR BLUE INK TO ENTER ANSWERS IN THE WHITE SPACES BELOW.
Part 1–Project Identification
1. Project Name (A name for your project that you create. Examples: Smith’s Dock or Seabrook Lane Development)
[help]
3533 East 11th Street – Barge Loading Facility and Crane Trestle
Part 2–Applicant
The person and/or organization responsible for the project. [help]
2a. Name (Last, First, Middle)
Bill Eskins
2b. Organization (If applicable)
EHW Constructors
2c. Mailing Address (Street or PO Box)
3594 N.W. Byron St., Suite 202
2d. City, State, Zip
Silverdale, WA 98383
2e. Phone (1)
2f. Phone (2)
2g. Fax
2h. E-mail
(360)516-6900
(678)449-8650
()
[email protected]
1
Additional forms may be required for the following permits:
 If your project may qualify for Department of the Army authorization through a Regional General Permit (RGP), contact the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers for application information (206) 764-3495.
 If your project might affect species listed under the Endangered Species Act, you will need to fill out a Specific Project Information Form (SPIF) or
prepare a Biological Evaluation. Forms can be found at
http://www.nws.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/Regulatory/PermitGuidebook/EndangeredSpecies.aspx.
 Not all cities and counties accept the JARPA for their local Shoreline permits. If you need a Shoreline permit, contact the appropriate city or county
government to make sure they accept the JARPA.
2
To access an online JARPA form with [help] screens, go to
http://www.epermitting.wa.gov/site/alias__resourcecenter/jarpa_jarpa_form/9984/jarpa_form.aspx.
For other help, contact the Governor’s Office of Regulatory Assistance at 1-800-917-0043 or [email protected].
JARPA Revision 2012.1
Page 1 of 15
Part 3–Authorized Agent or Contact
Person authorized to represent the applicant about the project. (Note: Authorized agent(s) must sign 11b of this
application.) [help]
Peterson, Railin
2907 Harborview Drive
Gig Harbor, WA 98335
3e. Phone (1)
3f. Phone (2)
3g. Fax
3h. E-mail
( 253)514-8952
(
(253)514-8952
[email protected]
)
Part 4–Property Owner(s)
Contact information for people or organizations owning the property(ies) where the project will occur. Consider both
upland and aquatic ownership because the upland owners may not own the adjacent aquatic land. [help]
Same as applicant. (Skip to Part 5.)
Repair or maintenance activities on existing rights-of-way or easements. (Skip to Part 5.)
There are multiple upland property owners. Complete the section below and fill out JARPA Attachment A for
each additional property owner.
Your project is on Department of Natural Resources (DNR)-managed aquatic lands. If you don’t know,
contact the DNR at (360) 902-1100 to determine aquatic land ownership. If yes, complete JARPA Attachment E
to apply for the Aquatic Use Authorization.
Port of Tacoma, ATTN: Bill Rehe
Port of Tacoma
PO Box 1837
Tacoma, WA 98401-1837
4e. Phone (1)
4f. Phone (2)
4g. Fax
4h. E-mail
(253) 592-6704
(253 ) 377-8665
(253 ) 383-9440
[email protected]
Page 2 of 15
Part 5–Project Location(s)
Identifying information about the property or properties where the project will occur. [help]
There are multiple project locations (e.g. linear projects). Complete the section below and use JARPA
Attachment B for each additional project location.
5a. Indicate the type of ownership of the property. (Check all that apply.)
[help]
Private
Federal
Publicly owned (state, county, city, special districts like schools, ports, etc.)
Tribal
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) – managed aquatic lands (Complete JARPA Attachment E)
5b. Street Address (Cannot be a PO Box. If there is no address, provide other location information in 5p.)
[help]
3533 East 11th Street
5c. City, State, Zip (If the project is not in a city or town, provide the name of the nearest city or town.)
[help]
Tacoma, WA 98421
5d. County
[help]
Pierce County
5e. Provide the section, township, and range for the project location.
¼ Section
Southwest
Section
26
[help]
Township
21 North
5f. Provide the latitude and longitude of the project location.
Range
3 East
[help]
 Example: 47.03922 N lat. / -122.89142 W long. (Use decimal degrees - NAD 83)
47º 16’ 37.82” North latitude, 122º 23’ 49.66” West longitude (WGS 84).
5g. List the tax parcel number(s) for the project location.
[help]
 The local county assessor’s office can provide this information.
5000350040
5h. Contact information for all adjoining property owners. (If you need more space, use JARPA Attachment C.)
Name
Port of Tacoma
Mailing Address
PO Box 1837
Tacoma, WA 98401-1837
City of Tacoma
Fire Station #15 740 St Helens Municipal
Building
[help]
Tax Parcel # (if known)
2275200502 (To south & West)
5000350011 (To South), 5000350021 (To west),
and 2275200420, 0321263046,
and 2275200440 (to East)
2275200430 (to east)
Tacoma, WA 98402
Page 3 of 15
5i. List all wetlands on or adjacent to the project location. [help]
No wetlands exist on or adjacent to the property.
5j. List all waterbodies (other than wetlands) on or adjacent to the project location. [help]
Hylebos Waterway
5k. Is any part of the project area within a 100-year floodplain?
Yes
No
[help]
Don’t know
5l. Briefly describe the vegetation and habitat conditions on the property.
[help]
The site is mostly a graded dirt and gravel lay down area with small amounts of non-native upland vegetation located along the
property lines. The vegetation observed during a site assessment included invasive Himalayan blackberry, butterfly bush, tansy
ragweed, Scotch broom, and reed canarygrass. One madrona, and limited juvenile black cottonwood and red alder are located
outside of the project area on stockpiled fill. The shoreline from the top-of-slope to mean lower low water (MLLW) is covered
by large rock armoring.
5m. Describe how the property is currently used.
[help]
The property, located within the Port of Tacoma, has historically and is currently used as a construction lay-down area and crane
and barge loading facility.
5n. Describe how the adjacent properties are currently used.
[help]
Adjacent properties are used for a variety of commercial purposes, including warehouse/storage, transloading and ship repair.
5o. Describe the structures (above and below ground) on the property, including their purpose(s) and current
condition. [help]
The current structures include a chain-link fence, parking areas, gravel work area, rock armored shoreline, creosote pilings and
water and power utilities.
5p. Provide driving directions from the closest highway to the project location, and attach a map.
[help]
To access the site from interstate 5, Northbound, take the I-705 N/WA-7 S exit towards the city Center/Pacific Avenue
proceed 0.5 mile, take the exit on the left toward City Center/Tacoma Dome and proceed 0.2 mile. Take the WA-509 N exit
toward Port of Tacoma and proceed 0.2 mile. Turn right onto South 21st Street/WA-509. Continue to follow WA-509 N for
3.8 miles. Turn left onto Taylor Way East and proceed 2.2 miles. Turn right onto East 11th Street and proceed approximately
140 ft. The site (3533 East 11TH Street) is located on the left (east) side of East 11th Street.
Page 4 of 15
Part 6–Project Description
6a. Briefly summarize the overall project. You can provide more detail in 6b.
[help]
The goal of the project is to expand barge moorage and loading infrastructure to support the current tenant’s needs. The tenants
will continue the historic use of this site by using it as a project construction lay-down and barge loading area. In order to
accommodate their needs, sixteen steel pile need to be installed to support a trestle structure. Unnecessary creosote pile and
shoreline debris including large tires and loose debris will be removed from approximately seventeen hundred square feet of
shoreline area as compensatory mitigation. Twelve steel pile (two each thirty six-inch above MLLW and ten each twenty fourinch diameter below mean lower low water) will be installed below Ordinary High Water (OHW) and Mean Higher High Water
(MHHW) using vibratory driving methods, and two additional 36-inch steel piles will be driven upland (impact for geotechnical
assessment only), above the top of the existing armored slope and well above OHW using both impact and vibratory pile
driving methods. Two rows of these pile will extend perpendicular to the shoreline to support crane trestle tracks. The trestle
will primarily be an open structure aside from two tracks and one grated walkway approximately three feet wide that spans the
length of the trestle. Crane mat made of 12” by 12” timbers will create a two, each five foot wide tracks which will be installed
over and parallel to the girders. A row of piles will abut the waterward side of the trestle piles and occur parallel to the shoreline
to moor a barge for loading. Less than 20 cubic yards may need to be excavated above OHW to allow the trestle to be situated
relatively flush with the top of slope to allow the crane to access the trestle.
6b. Describe the purpose of the project and why you want or need to perform it.
[help]
EHW Constructors requires a crane trestle and barge loading facility at their construction laydown site located adjacent to the
Hylebos Waterway to allow the loading and transportation of materials for in-water construction projects within or near Puget
Sound. The existing dolphin moorage configuration is not adequate for safe loading of heavy materials onto barges by crane.
The purpose of the proposed project is to develop a crane trestle and barge loading facility adjacent to an existing construction
laydown site for the purpose of safely loading and transporting materials.
6c. Indicate the project category. (Check all that apply)
Commercial
Maintenance
[help]
Residential
Institutional
Environmental Enhancement
Transportation
6d. Indicate the major elements of your project. (Check all that apply)
Recreational
[help]
Aquaculture
Culvert
Float
Bank Stabilization
Dam / Weir
Floating Home
Boat House
Dike / Levee / Jetty
Geotechnical Survey
Boat Launch
Ditch
Land Clearing
Boat Lift
Dock / Pier
Marina / Moorage
Bridge
Dredging
Mining
Bulkhead
Fence
Outfall Structure
Buoy
Ferry Terminal
Piling/Dolphin
Channel Modification
Fishway
Raft
Retaining Wall
(upland)
Road
Scientific
Measurement Device
Stairs
Stormwater facility
Swimming Pool
Utility Line
Other: Crane trestle
Page 5 of 15
6e. Describe how you plan to construct each project element checked in 6d. Include specific construction
methods and equipment to be used. [help]
 Identify where each element will occur in relation to the nearest waterbody.
 Indicate which activities are within the 100-year floodplain.
Pile and debris removal:
Existing creosote piling will be removed with a vibratory hammer and disposed of offsite. Containment booms and absorbent
sausage booms will be placed around the perimeter of the work area to capture wood debris, oil, and other materials. Clean sand
will be used where piles are removed as backfill to maintain substrate integrity and to provide a natural grade. Tires and loose
debris will be removed from the shoreline with a grappling hook deployed from an upland crane or with an excavator and
thumb. The tires will be moved upland and then disposed of in an approved waste facility.
In areas that have been capped under CERCLA actions, pile will be very slowly removed using vibratory methods to ensure
liquefaction of sediments, clean removal of the pile and no disturbance of sediment cap. Should any sediment surface with the
pile, care will be taken to properly dispose of contaminated sediments in an authorized disposal facility.
Pile driving:
All in-water pile will be driven with vibratory methods. Upland pile will be driven with both vibratory and impact methods to
find the depth at which the pile will reach the necessary load capacity. Fourteen total steel piles (four each thirty six inch above
MLLW and ten each twenty four-inch below MLLW) will be driven with a vibratory hammer below ordinary high water and
MHHW. All 36-inch pile will be driven when tidal inundation is not present to eliminate unnecessary noise issues underwater.
Steel beams will be welded in place. For pile driving a crane and construction materials will be staged from upland areas. A silt
fence and other typical overwater construction best management practices (described in 8a) will be used. A total of sixteen
hours of vibratory pile driving is anticipated during of five days of construction.
6f. What are the anticipated start and end dates for project construction? (Month/Year)
[help]
 If the project will be constructed in phases or stages, use JARPA Attachment D to list the start and end dates of each phase or
stage.
Start date: _12/15/2012 _________ End date: ___03/15/2013__
See JARPA Attachment D
6g. Fair market value of the project, including materials, labor, machine rentals, etc.
[help]
$100,000
6h. Will any portion of the project receive federal funding?
[help]
 If yes, list each agency providing funds.
Yes
No
Don’t know
Page 6 of 15
Part 7–Wetlands: Impacts and Mitigation
Check here if there are wetlands or wetland buffers on or adjacent to the project area.
(If there are none, skip to Part 8.) [help]
7a. Describe how the project has been designed to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to wetlands.
[help]
Not applicable
N/A
7b. Will the project impact wetlands?
Yes
No
[help]
Don’t know
7c. Will the project impact wetland buffers?
Yes
No
[help]
Don’t know
7d. Has a wetland delineation report been prepared?
[help]
 If Yes, submit the report, including data sheets, with the JARPA package.
Yes
No
7e. Have the wetlands been rated using the Western Washington or Eastern Washington Wetland Rating
System? [help]
 If Yes, submit the wetland rating forms and figures with the JARPA package.
Yes
No
Don’t know N/A
7f. Have you prepared a mitigation plan to compensate for any adverse impacts to wetlands?
[help]
 If Yes, submit the plan with the JARPA package and answer 7g.
 If No, or Not applicable, explain below why a mitigation plan should not be required.
Yes
No
Not applicable
N/A
7g. Summarize what the mitigation plan is meant to accomplish, and describe how a watershed approach was
used to design the plan. [help]
N/A
7h. Use the table below to list the type and rating of each wetland impacted, the extent and duration of the
impact, and the type and amount of mitigation proposed. Or if you are submitting a mitigation plan with a
similar table, you can state (below) where we can find this information in the plan. [help]
Activity (fill,
drain, excavate,
flood, etc.)
N/A
Wetland
Name1
N/A
Wetland type
and rating
category2
Impact area
(sq. ft. or
Acres)
Duration
of impact3
Proposed
mitigation
type4
Wetland
mitigation area
(sq. ft. or acres)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1
If no official name for the wetland exists, create a unique name (such as “Wetland 1”). The name should be consistent with other project documents, such
as a wetland delineation report.
2
Ecology wetland category based on current Western Washington or Eastern Washington Wetland Rating System. Provide the wetland
rating forms with the JARPA package.
3
Indicate the days, months or years the wetland will be measurably impacted by the activity. Enter “permanent” if applicable.
4
Creation (C), Re-establishment/Rehabilitation (R), Enhancement (E), Preservation (P), Mitigation Bank/In-lieu fee (B)
Page number(s) for similar information in the mitigation plan, if available:
7i. For all filling activities identified in 7h, describe the source and nature of the fill material, the amount in cubic
yards that will be used, and how and where it will be placed into the wetland. [help]
N/A
7j. For all excavating activities identified in 7h, describe the excavation method, type and amount of material in
cubic yards you will remove, and where the material will be disposed. [help]
N/A
Page 7 of 15
Part 8–Waterbodies (other than wetlands): Impacts and Mitigation
In Part 8, “waterbodies” refers to non-wetland waterbodies. (See Part 7 for information related to wetlands.) [help]
Check here if there are waterbodies on or adjacent to the project area. (If there are none, skip to Part 9.)
8a. Describe how the project is designed to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to the aquatic environment.
[help]
Not applicable
Methods and materials have been chosen carefully for this project to avoid and minimize impacts. Creosote piles, on-site tires,
and loose debris will be removed as compensatory mitigation to avoid a net loss of habitat. No excavation or fill of intertidal
areas is proposed aside from a clean sand cap in areas where piles have been removed as part of the mitigation actions.
Creosote piles will be removed whole using a vibratory hammer and disposed of offsite. The project proposes to only use
vibratory driving methods for in-water pile driving and smaller (24-inch) pile will be used where pile driving must occur in-water
to reduce underwater noise impacts. The trestle will be elevated to 17 feet above MLLW. The walkway will be covered with
grated decking to allow light penetration and reduce shading effects.
Best Management Practices will be utilized including:
-The contractor will be required to use work floats or tarps to capture any falling debris associated with project demolition and
construction; such methods will not allow any debris to enter the water body.
-Excess or waste materials will not be allowed to enter waters of the state. All such materials will be collected and recycled or
disposed of at an approved facility.
-The contractor will comply with water quality restrictions as required by law and implement corrective measures if temporary
water quality standards are exceeded.
-Care will be taken to prevent any petroleum products or other toxic or deleterious materials from entering the waters of the
state. Fuel hoses, oil drums, oil or fuel transfer valves and fittings, etc., will be checked regularly for drips or leaks, and shall be
maintained and stored properly to prevent spills.
-The contractor will have a spill kit with oil-absorbent materials on site to be used in the event of a spill or if any oil product is
observed in the water.
-The contractor is responsible for the preparation of a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures (SPCC) plan to be used
for the duration of the project if required by permitting agencies.
- The contractor will follow the Environmental Protection Agency’s guidelines for driving and extracting piles in capped areas.
8b. Will your project impact a waterbody or the area around a waterbody?
Yes
[help]
No
8c. Have you prepared a mitigation plan to compensate for the project’s adverse impacts to non-wetland
waterbodies? [help]
 If Yes, submit the plan with the JARPA package and answer 8d.
 If No, or Not applicable, explain below why a mitigation plan should not be required.
Yes
No
Not applicable
Compensatory mitigation includes the removal of creosote piles, tires and loose debris along the shoreline to compensate for
pile installation and partial overwater coverage. For additional details, please refer to section 4.3 of the Biological Evaluation
for 3533 East 11th Street – Barge Loading Facility and Crane Trestle.
8d. Summarize what the mitigation plan is meant to accomplish. Describe how a watershed approach was
used to design the plan.
 If you already completed 7g you do not need to restate your answer here. [help]
No net loss of habitat and removal of existing pollution generating sources.
The project design follows avoidance, minimization and compensation mitigation sequencing. For impacts that cannot be
avoided or minimized, compensation will be provided by replacing, enhancing or providing substitute resources or
environments. The proposed projects use a combination of all three impact reduction mechanisms. The proposed project is
water dependent and cannot be located elsewhere; therefore short-term impacts to the marine environment area unavoidable.
Page 8 of 15
The following actions have been eliminated from the proposed project to minimize associated impacts. While larger pile are
desired, the project no longer proposes to use thirty-six inch pile in-water which have a much higher noise impact than do the
twenty-four inch pile now proposed. In addition, in-water impact pile driving methods are no longer proposed due to potential
underwater noise impacts on sensitive marine wildlife. Thirty-six inch pile in intertidal areas will be driven in the dry (low-tide)
to further reduce underwater noise impacts; the trestle will be an open structure and walkway decking will be at least sixty
percent grated to allow for light penetration, and the trestle structure will be elevated above seventeen feet mean lower low
water to eliminate shading effects.
The site may not contain enough existing creosote pile for a pile for pile mitigation compensation perspective; therefore this
project proposes to further compensate for the impact by enhancing the shoreline and buffer by removing seven large tires and
loose debris from shoreline areas. The total enhancement area is seventeen hundred square feet, which is approximately ninety
percent greater than the foot print of the proposed pile and three hundred times the area that will be impacted by partial
overwater shading. While the primary impact is installation of pile on approximately seventy-seven square feet of intertidal
habitat, this project seeks to enhance both intertidal habitat and adjacent upland habitat. Removing creosote piles, tires and
loose debris occurring in intertidal and buffer areas will remove potential pollution sources from the action area and will likely
lead to improved water quality and increase habitat function commensurate with the proposed impacts.
8e. Summarize impact(s) to each waterbody in the table below.
Activity (clear,
dredge, fill, pile
drive, etc.)
Waterbody
name1
Impact
location2
Duration
of impact3
Remove creosote
pile and shoreline
debris
Install steel pile
Hylebos
Waterway
Shoreline and
Intertidal areas
Permanent
(Beneficial)
Hylebos
Waterway
Intertidal and
subtidal areas
Permanent
Install Crane trestle
Hylebos
Waterway
Permanent
Excavate approach
footing
NA (upland)
Elevated
above
intertidal areas
Shoulder of
slope above
OHW
Permanent
[help]
Amount of material
(cubic yards) to be
placed in or removed
from waterbody
Removal of creosote pile,
large tires and debris
Area (sq. ft. or
linear ft.) of
waterbody
directly affected
Approximately
1730 sq. ft.
Twelve steel piles (two
each thirty six-inch above
MLLW and ten each
twenty four-inch below
MLLW)
None
Approximately 45
sq. ft.
None (~20 yds from
uplands will be removed
and replaced)
1
726 square feet of
partial overwater
shading
None (~350sq. ft.
of uplands will be
temporarily
disturbed)
If no official name for the waterbody exists, create a unique name (such as “Stream 1”) The name should be consistent with other documents provided.
Indicate whether the impact will occur in or adjacent to the waterbody. If adjacent, provide the distance between the impact and the waterbody and
indicate whether the impact will occur within the 100-year flood plain.
3
Indicate the days, months or years the waterbody will be measurably impacted by the work. Enter “permanent” if applicable.
2
8f. For all activities identified in 8e, describe the source and nature of the fill material, amount (in cubic yards)
you will use, and how and where it will be placed into the waterbody. [help]
No fill material will be added to the waterbody aside from a clean sand cap in areas where piles have been removed.
8g. For all excavating or dredging activities identified in 8e, describe the method for excavating or dredging,
type and amount of material you will remove, and where the material will be disposed. [help]
No dredging will occur, minor excavation of less than 20 cubic yards may be required above OHW and MHHW to allow the
trestle to be situated relatively flush with the top of slope, enabling a smooth crane transition from upland to the trestle
platform. The removed fill will be placed outside the fifty foot FWHCA buffer on the southwest side of the fill pile that is
located in the northeast corner of the subject parcel. Fill will not be taken offsite due to the possible presence of non-native
snail eggs.
Page 9 of 15
Part 9–Additional Information
Any additional information you can provide helps the reviewer(s) understand your project. Complete as much of
this section as you can. It is ok if you cannot answer a question.
9a. If you have already worked with any government agencies on this project, list them below.
Agency Name
Contact Name
Phone
[help]
Most Recent
Date of Contact
WDFW
Chris Waldbillig
(360) 874-7258
6/20/2012
Port of Tacoma
Bill Rehe
(253) 592-6704
10/11/2012
USACOE
Olivia Romano
(206) 764-6960
USACOE
David Shaeffer
(206) 764-6071
7/2012
EPA
Jonathan Williams
(206) 553-1369
9/2012
City of Tacoma
Karla Kluge
(253) 591-5773
8/17/2012
NMFS
Jeff Fisher
(360) 534-9342
8/13/2012
USFWS
Martha Jensen
(360) 753-9545
8/14/2012
9b. Are any of the wetlands or waterbodies identified in Part 7 or Part 8 of this JARPA on the Washington
Department of Ecology’s 303(d) List? [help]
 If Yes, list the parameter(s) below.
 If you don’t know, use Washington Department of Ecology’s Water Quality Assessment tools at:
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/303d/.
Yes
No
Superfund Site adjacent to site and throughout Hylebos Waterway (DOE Toxic Cleanup Program, 2008);
Category 5 Waters: Hylebos Waterway (waters adjacent to the site) is listed for

PCB in tissue

Dieldrin in tissue
9c. What U.S. Geological Survey Hydrological Unit Code (HUC) is the project in?
[help]
 Go to http://cfpub.epa.gov/surf/locate/index.cfm to help identify the HUC.
Puget Sound Watershed -- 17110014
9d. What Water Resource Inventory Area Number (WRIA #) is the project in?
[help]
 Go to http://www.ecy.wa.gov/services/gis/maps/wria/wria.htm to find the WRIA #.
WRIA 10
9e. Will the in-water construction work comply with the State of Washington water quality standards for
turbidity? [help]
 Go to http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/swqs/criteria.html for the standards.
Yes
No
Not applicable
Page 10 of 15
9f. If the project is within the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act, what is the local shoreline
environment designation? [help]
 If you don’t know, contact the local planning department.
 For more information, go to: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/sma/laws_rules/173-26/211_designations.html.
Rural
Urban
Natural
Aquatic
Conservancy
9g. What is the Washington Department of Natural Resources Water Type?
Other
[help]
 Go to http://www.dnr.wa.gov/BusinessPermits/Topics/ForestPracticesApplications/Pages/fp_watertyping.aspx for the Forest
Practices Water Typing System.
Shoreline
Fish
Non-Fish Perennial
Non-Fish Seasonal
9h. Will this project be designed to meet the Washington Department of Ecology’s most current stormwater
manual? [help]
 If No, provide the name of the manual your project is designed to meet.
Yes
No
Name of manual: Surface Water Management Manual, City of Tacoma (2008)
9i. Does the project site have known contaminated sediment?
[help]
 If Yes, please describe below.
Yes
No
No contaminated sediments have been identified on upland portions of the site. A superfund Site is adjacent to site and
throughout Hylebos Waterway (DOE Toxic Cleanup Program, 2008);
Category 5 Waters: Hylebos Waterway (waters adjacent to the site) is listed for

PCB in tissue

Dieldrin in tissue
9j. If you know what the property was used for in the past, describe below.
[help]
The property has always been used for industrial purposes since the tideflats were filled and the waterways created. The
property has historically been used as a construction lay-down area and crane and barge loading facility.
9k. Has a cultural resource (archaeological) survey been performed on the project area?
[help]
 If Yes, attach it to your JARPA package.
Yes
No
9l. Name each species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act that occurs in the vicinity of the project
area or might be affected by the proposed work. [help]
Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
Marbled Murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) - Threatened
Southern resident killer whale (Orcinus orca )(Southern Resident DPS) - Endangered
Chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) (Puget Sound ESU) – Threatened
Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) (Puget Sound DPS) – Threatened
and Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) - Threatened
Page 11 of 15
9m. Name each species or habitat on the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Priority Habitats and
Species List that might be affected by the proposed work. [help]
Puget Sound Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) (Puget Sound ESU)
Puget Sound steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) (Puget Sound DPS)
Coastal/Puget Sound Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus)
Bald Eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
Southern Resident Killer Whale (Orcinus orca )(Southern Resident DPS)
Stellar sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus)
Marbled Murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus)
Common Murre (Uria aalge)
Western Grebe (Aechmophorus occidentalis)
Cormorants (Phalacrocorax melanoleucos)
Storm-petrel and Fulmars (Procellariiformes)
Terns (Laridae)
Alcids (Charadriiformes)
Loons (Gavia pacifica)
Shearwaters (Puffinus gravis)
Species listed may all be present at sometime within the area of the proposed work. There are no priority habitats present within
the project area.
Page 12 of 15
Part 10–SEPA Compliance and Permits
Use the resources and checklist below to identify the permits you are applying for.
 Online Project Questionnaire at http://apps.ecy.wa.gov/opas/.
 Governor’s Office of Regulatory Assistance at (800) 917-0043 or [email protected].
 For a list of addresses to send your JARPA to, click on agency addresses for completed JARPA.
10a. Compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA).
(Check all that apply.) [help]
 For more information about SEPA, go to www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/sepa/e-review.html.
A copy of the SEPA determination or letter of exemption is included with this application.
A SEPA determination is pending with __Port of Tacoma______ (lead agency). The expected decision
date is __12/8/2012____.
I am applying for a Fish Habitat Enhancement Exemption. (Check the box below in 10b.) [help]
This project is exempt (choose type of exemption below).
Categorical Exemption. Under what section of the SEPA administrative code (WAC) is it exempt?
Other:
SEPA is pre-empted by federal law.
10b. Indicate the permits you are applying for. (Check all that apply.)
[help]
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Local Government Shoreline permits:
Substantial Development
Conditional Use
Variance
Shoreline Exemption Type (explain):
Other city/county permits:
Floodplain Development Permit
Critical Areas Ordinance
STATE GOVERNMENT
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife:
Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA)
Fish Habitat Enhancement Exemption – Attach Exemption Form
Effective July 10, 2012, you must submit a check for $150 to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife,
unless your project qualifies for an exemption or alternative payment method below. Do not send cash.
Check the appropriate boxes:
$150 check enclosed. (Check #________________________________)
Attach check made payable to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Charge to billing account under agreement with WDFW. (Agreement #
)
My project is exempt from the application fee. (Check appropriate exemption)
HPA processing is conducted by applicant-funded WDFW staff.
(Agreement #
)
Mineral prospecting and mining.
Project occurs on farm and agricultural land.
Page 13 of 15
(Attach a copy of current land use classification recorded with the county auditor, or other proof of current land use.)
Project is a modification of an existing HPA originally applied for, prior to July 10, 2012.
(HPA # 127960-1 )
Washington Department of Natural Resources:
Aquatic Use Authorization N/A
Complete JARPA Attachment E and submit a check for $25 payable to the Washington Department of Natural Resources.
Do not send cash.
Washington Department of Ecology:
Section 401 Water Quality Certification N/A
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
United States Department of the Army permits (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers):
Section 404 (discharges into waters of the U.S.) N/A
Section 10 (work in navigable waters)
United States Coast Guard permits:
General Bridge Act Permit N/A
Private Aids to Navigation (for non-bridge projects) N/A
Page 14 of 15
Environmental, Natural Resource, and Land Use Consulting
Comprehensive Assessment, Planning, and Permitting Services
Phone: 253.514.8952
Fax: 253.514.8954
Technical Memorandum
To:
Shirley Schultz, Karla Kluge, Charla Heutinck,
and Philip Kao, City of Tacoma
File Number:
1133.0001
From:
Railin Peterson, Soundview Consultants LLC
Date: November 6, 2012
Re:
3533 East 11th Street – Barge loading facility and Crane Trestle, Tacoma, WA,
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Critical Areas Ordinance, Parcel
Number 5000350040
Dear City Staff,
Thank you for working with the Port of Tacoma, Soundview Consultants LLC and
EHW Constructors (Port of Tacoma tenants ) on this project over the last several
months. EHW Constructors require an open crane trestle and barge loading
facility at their construction laydown site located adjacent to the Hylebos
Waterway to allow the loading and transportation of materials for in-water
construction projects within or near Puget Sound. We are assisting with
environmental planning and regulatory support, E ndangered Species Act (ESA)
documentation, and a habitat assessment for local, State and Federal aquatic
permit applications for the proposed project which is located at 3533 East 11 t h
Street 98442. The project exists on one tax parcel (Pierce County Number
5000350040) in the Southwest ¼ of the Southwest quadrant, Section 26, Township
21 North, Range 3 East, W.M. within the City of Tacoma . The proposed project
includes:
1. Installation of ten , twenty four-inch, steel pile below ordinary high w ater
(OHW) and mean higher high water (MHHW) and landward of the
navigational channel using primarily vibratory methods. In addition, two,
thirty six-inch, steel pile will be driven above Mean Lower Low Water
(MLLW) at approximately + 4 feet elevation in the dry (when tidal
inundation is absent) ;
2. Installation of two, thirty six-inch, steel pile above OHW and MHHW using
both vibratory and impact methods to determine necessary dep th for load
bearing capacity of all pile;
3. Construct an open crane trestle with a grated walkway from uplands to the
most waterward row of pile;
1133.0001 3353 E 11 th St – Crane Trestle
Page 1 of 8
Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas Assessment
November 6, 2012
4. Remove approximately seventeen hundred and thirty (1,730) square feet of
creosote pile, large construction tires and loose debris from the action area
as compensatory mitigation for in-water pile placement, and
5. Removal of the overwater trestle crane mat and walkway structures prior to
the expiration of the subject property’s leasing contract between EHW
Constructors and the Port of Tacoma (approximately 5 years) .
This Technical Memorandum has been prepared as a supplementary habitat
assessment and management plan for local regulatory review . The emphasis being
necessary supporting documentation required for compliance with the Critical
Areas Ordinance, and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCA)
regulations. As the pr oposed project include s in-water work and over-water work,
compensatory mitigation and non-compensatory mitigation , such as Best
Management Practices (BMP) , will be used to minimize impacts to protect
sensitive species and habita t. Upland areas where the t restle will be located consist
of dirt gravel yard protected by rock armoring along the shoreline . No significant
grading or removal of vegetation is proposed.
Site overview and History
The subject property is owned by the Port of Tacoma and is leased by EHW
Constructors, EHW Constructors specializes in in -water heavy construction and
require additional transloading facilities capable of loading barges within the
Hylebos Waterway during the time the tenant is leasing the site . Three in-water
creosote dolphins are currently located below MLLW on the western portion of
the property which are adequate for moorage and staging but are not adequate for
loading barges with heavy materials . The site has historically and more recently
been used for storage and barge loading purposes construction with EHW
Constructors current use . The site is zoned S-10 Shoreline District – Port
Industrial. Approved uses for the S-10 area include commercial, water -oriented;
and port, terminal, and industrial, water -dependent or water-related activities
(TMC 13.10.130.D). The project is a port industrial water -dependent activity and
is consistent with historical uses of the property; no change in use is proposed.
Page 2 of 8
November 6, 2012
F i gure 1. Sh o relin e a t 3533 Eas t 11 t h Street.
Regulatory Considerations
The proposed project must comply with the City of Tacoma Shoreline Management
code including TMC 13.10.175.A for public access, parking, signage, and
environmental protection requirements, and criteria under WAC 173 -27-150 for
substantial development permits. A critical areas report and mitigation plan are
required under TMC 13.11. A Biological Evaluation prepared for the project
(Peterson, 2012) provides most of the required information; h owever, this ESA
documentation, prepared for Federal review, does not include additional
documentation on how proposed actions meet legal tests under TMC 13.11.240.
As such, a demonstration of mitigation sequencing under TMC 13.11.260 is
detailed below. For additional information, please see th e Biological Evaluation
for 3533 East 11 t h Street – Barge Loading Facility and Crane Trestle by Soundview
Consultants LLC.
Shoreline Code Requirements
TMC 13.10.175 Regulations
A1. Public Access
This project is zoned industrial c ommercial and is surrounde d by fencing for
security purposes and public safety. A djacent properties are highly secure
Port of Tacoma/US Navy sites and City of Tacoma right -of-way. Due the
nature of site activities (large cranes and movem ent of large materials) there
are significant safety concerns with allowing public access within or near to
the subject property. As the property belongs to the Port of Tacoma, the
Port of Tacoma has already designated Public Access sites in other areas
Page 3 of 8
November 6, 2012
where less safety hazards and security needs exist such as the inlet at the top
of the waterway where Hylebos Creek enters into the Hylebos Waterway.
The proposed project falls under public access exceptions including
13.10.175(1) and 13.10.175(4)(a -c).
A2. Environmental Protection Measures. Langu age from the TMC states:
a. All proposed developments shall include measures to minimize erosion during
and after project construction and for the replanting of the site after
construction.
b. All proposed developments shall include measures to minimize co ntamination
of surface waters, depletion and contamination of ground water supplies, and the
generation of increased surface runoff.
c. All proposed developments shall provide for the disposal of any increased
surface runoff without damage to streams or ot her wetlands.
d. All proposed developments shall provide storm drainage facilities which are
separate from sewage disposal systems and which are constructed and maintained
to meet all applicable standards of water quality, including the Tacoma
Stormwater Management Manual, Chapter 12.08 of the Tacoma Municipal
Code, Health Department Regulations, and other applicable Federal, State, and
local regulations.
e. All proposed developments shall provide facilities or appurtenances for
disposal of sanitary waste a nd shall monitor the use of chemicals, fertilizers and
other pollutants in such a manner so as to not degrade existing levels of water
quality.
In compliance with A2a and A2b , a silt fence will be installed between heavy
equipment areas and the shoreline to contain temporary erosion that may occur
during construction activities. The trestle will be pri marily open space aside
from two five (5) foot wide trestle crane mat tracks and the three (3) foot wide
trestle walkway which will be grated to minimize impervious surfaces . Minor
grading up to twenty (20) cubic yards may be excavated above OHW to create a
small bench for the upland trestle to be placed to allow a smooth transition
from upland to the trestle structure for a crane to transit . As no graded a reas
will be exposed after project completion , the project is not anticipated to cause
any erosion beyond existing conditions. In reference to A2c and A2d, the
project is an open structure with minor amounts of crane mat and grated metal ;
as such the proj ect will not increase surface runoff and does not necessitate
storm drainage facilities. In compliance with A2e the proposed project does
not anticipate an increased need for chemicals, fertilizers, sanitary waste or any
other pollutants.
A3. Parking and Loading Standards. No parking is being proposed. A chain
link fence, with a Port of Tacoma lock , surrounds the site to inhibit the public
from visiting the site. The site is an open construction laydown facility;
therefore, sufficient parking surfaces exist to accommodate the site’s workers.
No signs are proposed with this project ; therefore, A4 is not applicable to this
project.
Page 4 of 8
November 6, 2012
Fish and Wildlife Habitat Critical Areas Requirements.
TMC 13.11.240 (Legal Test)
A. No Practicable Alternatives. An al ternative is considered practicable if the site is
available and the project is capable of being done after taking into consideration cost,
existing technology, infrastructure, and logistics in light of overall project purposes. No
practicable alternatives need be considered if the applicant can demonstrate all of the
following:
1. The project cannot be reasonably accomplished using one or more other sites in the
general region that would avoid or result in less adverse impacts to the wetland or stream
or fish and wildlife habitat conservation area (FWHCA);
No other practicable alternatives have been identified ; the project requires
transferring heavy materials from land to barges which can only occur in the
adjacent intertidal zone.
The site is already fully developed as an open
construction laydown facility and doesn’t require removal of any native vegetation
or modification to the shoreline gradient which would likely be needed at most
other intertidal sites. Please see figure 1 for existing conditions.
2. The goals of the project cannot be accomplished by a reduction in the size, scope,
configuration or density as proposed, or by changing the design of the project in a way that
would avoid or result in fewer adverse effects on the wetland or stream o r FWHCA; and
The proposed project and structure has been designed to minimize impacts to the
greatest extent possible. The proposed project uses the fewest number of piles
necessary to support the intended use. The project proposes to use only vibratory
driving methods and smaller pile sizes in-water to minimize underwater noise
impacts. Trestle crane mat and walkway decking will be elevated seventeen feet
above mean lower low water and the walkway will be grated to allow for the
maximum light penetratio n and eliminate shading effects .
B. Reasonable Use. A Reasonable Use exists when the standards of this chapter deny all
reasonable economic use of the property.
The proposed project is a water -dependent, barge loading facility. The proposed
project seeks to maintain the existing land use of the site as a transloading facility
while allowing the applicant to load barges more safely . 2006 aerial images from
govME show similar structures and floats being used by a previous land tenant.
The site is zoned S -10 Shoreline District – Port Industrial. Approved uses for the
S-10 area include commercial, water -oriented; port, terminal, and industrial, water dependent or water -related activities (TMC 13.10.130.D).
C. Public Interest. In determining whether a pr oposed use or activity in any wetland or stream
or FWHCA is in the public interest, the public benefit of the proposal and the impact
to the wetland or stream or FWHCA must be evaluated by the Land Use
Administrator. The proposal is in the public interest if its benefit to the public exceeds
its detrimental impact on the wetland or stream or FWHCA.
The project is proposed to assist in transporting materials to larger offsite projects
developed for national security purposes. The existence of the structure will
Page 5 of 8
November 6, 2012
promote full use of The Port of Tacoma site and allow for the transloading facility
to be located where zoning promotes industry. The proposed actions will be
mitigated to the maximum p ractical extent by low-impact design and construction
methods, and by removing unnecessary creosote pile, tire and loose debris from
the shoreline eliminating existing pollutant sources and opening up shoreline
habitat.
TMC 13.11.270 General Mitigation Requirements.
Mitigation Sequencing
Under TMC 13.11.270 projects should first attempt to avoid impacts all together
by not taking certain actions. If actions cannot be eliminated, impacts should be
minimized by restraining the magnitude of an action, using different technology or
by taking steps to avoid or reduce impac ts. For impacts that cannot be avoided or
minimized, compensation for the impact should be provided by replacing,
enhancing or providing substitute resources or environments. The proposed
projects use a combination of all three impact reduction mechanism s.
Avoidance
The proposed project is water dependent and cannot be located elsewhere;
therefore impacts to the marine environment area unavoidable.
Long -term
overwater shading impacts are being avoided by the removal of the trestle crane
mat and grated walkway structures upon the completion of the site lease in
approximately 5 years.
Minimization
The following actions have been eliminated from the proposed proje ct to minimize
associated impacts in conjunction wi th TMC 13.11.270.E.2. While larger pile are
desired, the project no longer proposes to use thirty -six inch pile in-water which
have a much higher noise impact than do the twenty -four inch pile now proposed.
In addition, in -water impact pile driving methods are no longer proposed due to
potential underwater noise impacts on sensitive marine wildlife. T hirty-six inch
pile in intertidal areas will be driven in the dry (low-tide) to further reduce
underwater noise impacts ; the trestle will be an open structure and trestle walkway
decking will be grated to allow for light penetration, and the trestle structure will
be elevated above seventeen feet above mean lower low water to eliminate shading
effects.
Compensation
Long-term habitat impacts proposed by this project are limited to placement of
pile and removal of seventeen hundred and thirty (1730) square feet of pollution
generating creosote pile , large construction tires and loose debris along the
shoreline. The site may not contain enough existing creosote pile for a pile for
pile mitigation compensation perspective; therefore this project proposes to
further compensate for the impact by enhancing the shoreline and buffer under
13.11.270.E.5. by removing seven large tires and loose debris from shoreline areas.
The total enhancement area is seventeen hundred and thirty square feet, which is
Page 6 of 8
November 6, 2012
greater than ten times the foot print of the proposed pile and greater than two
times the area that will be temporarily impacted by partial overwater shading .
While the primary impact is installation of pile on approximately forty-five square
feet of intertidal habitat, t his project seeks to enhance both intertidal habitat and
adjacent upland habitat. Removing creosote piles, tires and loose debris occurring
in intertidal and buffer areas will remove potential pollution sources from the
action area and will likely lead to improved water quality and increase habitat
function commensurate with the proposed impacts .
TMC 13.11.270.L Innovative Mitigation Measures .
As the proposed compensatory mitigation actions do not meet a 1:1 pile for pile
compensation ratio the proposed project may need to comply with innovative mitigation
provisions outlined in section 13.11.270.L of the TMC. The following seven concepts
are considered prior to approval of an innovative mitiga tion proposal:
1. Creation or enhancement of a larger system of natural areas and open space is preferable to
the preservation of many individual habitat areas;
2. The applicant demonstrates that long -term protection and management of the habitat area
will be provided;
3. There is clear potential for success of the proposed mitigation at the proposed mitigation
site;
4. Mitigation according to TMC 13.11.270.E is not feasible due to site constraints such as
parcel size, stream type, wetland category, or exce ssive costs;
5. A wetland of a different type is justified based on regional needs or functions and values;
6. The replacement ratios are not reduced or eliminated; unless the reduction results in a
preferred environmental alternative; and
7. Public entity cooperative preservation agreements such as conservation easements are applied.
The proposed action will restore degraded portions of existing intertidal habitat
and shoreline buffer to enhance overall functions and values of fish and wildlife
habitat within and adjacent to the project site . Removing creosote pile , tires and
other debris from nearhore and intertidal areas will op en up habitat as well as
remove various pollutant sources, potentially leading to improved water quality
and habitat.
To achieve success and long-term protection, careful planning, location and
design, described in the legal test section, avoid unnecessary impacts to native
vegetation, minimize overwater shading and open up shoreline habitat . These
technics were chosen to ensure long-term protection of fish and wildlife habitat.
No mitigation monitoring beyond the as-built confirmation of mitigation
completion is required; as all mitigation goals will be achieved upon creosote pile
and shoreline debris removal.
Removal of these negative features will aid in the
return of intertidal functions and values. The proposed compensatory and noncompensatory mitigation actions work toward the recovery of shoreline functions.
Removing creosote pollution sources and debris from interti dal areas has clear
potential for success through opening up habitat and improving water quality .
Page 7 of 8
November 6, 2012
As previously mentioned , there are not enough creosote pile available onsite for a
traditional one to one pile removal per pile installation which means thi s project
qualifies under consideration four. Further, as all pile driving and creosote pile
removal will be conducted from a crane deployed from upland , removal of pile as
mitigation from other areas of the waterway is not feasible. Therefore, this
project proposes to remove all available creosote pile on-site plus additional debris
along the shoreline .
The project does not involve wetlands; therefore, the fifth consideration at
13.11.270.L.5 do es not apply. The project complies with FWHCA mitigation ratio
requirements mentioned in 13.11.270.L.6. All mitigation is proposed to occur
within ¼ mile of project impacts and a larger area of shoreline and intertidal
habitat will be improved than the amount that will be impacted by pile installation.
No conservation easements are applied .
Summary
A full evaluation of the species presence and project impacts for Federal ESA
Section 7 compliance presented in the Biological Evalua tion for this project
indicate No Effect and May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Af fect, determinations
for all ESA listed species that potentially occur in the action area of the project .
For more details on project specifics, impacts and ESA determinations please refer
to the Biological Evaluation for 3533 East 11th Street – Barge loading facility and
Crane Trestle, Tacoma, WA dated November 6, 2012. Hopefully, this Technical
Memorandum sufficiently covers the City of Tacoma’s additional requirements for
the Shoreline Master Plan and Critical Areas Ordinance beyond what is presented
in the Biological Evaluation . If you have any questions or comments, please
contact me as soon as possible .
Sincerely,
Railin Peterson
Environmental Scientist
[email protected]
Page 8 of 8
November 6, 2012
3533 EAST 11TH STREET – BARGE LOADING FACILITY
AND CRANE TRESTLE
BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION
NOVEMBER, 2012
3533 EAST 11TH STREET – BARGE LOADING FACILITY
AND CRANE TRESTLE
BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION
NOVEMBER 6, 2012
PROJECT LOCATION
3533 EAST 11TH STREET
TACOMA, WASHINGTON 98422
PREPARED FOR
EHW CONSTRUCTORS
3594 NW BRYON STREET
SUITE 202
SILVERDALE, WASHINGTON 98315
PREPARED BY
SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC
2907 HARBORVIEW DRIVE
GIG HARBOR, WASHINGTON 98335
(253) 514-8952
Table of Contents
Chapter 1. Introduction................................................................................................................... 2 Chapter 2. Proposed Project ........................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Project Area............................................................................................................................ 3 2.2 Project Description................................................................................................................. 3 2.3 Construction Techniques ........................................................................................................ 4 2.4 Action Area ............................................................................................................................ 5 Chapter 3. Environmental Baseline ................................................................................................. 9 3.1 Existing conditions ................................................................................................................. 9 3.2 Species information .............................................................................................................. 11 Chapter 4. Project Effects ............................................................................................................. 15 4.1 Direct and Short Term Effects ............................................................................................. 15 4.2 Long-term Effects ................................................................................................................ 16 4.3 Conservation measures ......................................................................................................... 16 4.4 Determination of effect ........................................................................................................ 17 4.5 Essential Fish Habitat Analysis for the Proposed Project (EFH analysis).............................. 22 Chapter 5. References ................................................................................................................... 26 Figures
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Vicinity Map ......................................................................................................................3 Terrestrial project noise attenuation to ambient levels. ......................................................6 Underwater project noise attenuation to ambient levels. ....................................................7 Sediment Movement and Deposition Patterns. ................................................................10 Tables
Table 1. ESA-listed species and determination of project effects. .....................................................2 Table 2. Terrestrial noise attenuation calculations. ............................................................................6 Table 3. Underwater noise attenuation calculations. ..........................................................................8 Table 4. ESA-listed species with potential presence in Action Area.* .............................................11 Table 5. Critical Habitat in the Vicinity of the Action Area. ............................................................11 Table 6. Essential Fish Habitat for common Puget Sound (estuaries) species by life history stage.*.23 Appendices
Appendix A — Action Area Appendix B — Project Plans Appendix C – List of Contacts Appendix D – Author Qualifications
1133.0001 3533 E 11th St – Loading Facility & Trestle
1
November 6, 2012
Chapter 1. Introduction
The Port of Tacoma (Applicant), is proposing to construct a crane trestle and barge loading moorage along
the south shore of the Hylebos Waterway in Commencement Bay on leased Port of Tacoma land. The
Hylebos Waterway is a navigable channel, actively used for industrial and commercial uses. The subject
property is located at 3533 East 11th Street Tacoma, Washington 98442. The subject property is situated in
the Southwest ¼ of the Southwest quadrant, Section 26, Township 21 North, Range 3 East, W.M. within the
City of Tacoma, Washington and comprises a portion of one 9.15-acre parcel (Pierce County Tax Parcel
Number 5000350040).
EHW Constructors require a crane trestle and barge loading facility at their existing construction laydown site
located adjacent to the Hylebos Waterway to allow the loading and transportation of heavy materials for inwater construction projects within or near Puget Sound. The purpose of the proposed project is to develop a
barge loading facility adjacent to their existing construction laydown site. The proposed project will upgrade
current upland and in-water loading facilities at the Port of Tacoma commercial property to better meet the
needs of the EHW Constructors. Upgrades include ten 24-inch steel and two 36-inch steel in-water pile, two
36-inch steel pile upland pile, two five (5) foot wide trestle tracks and an overwater grated three (3) foot wide
trestle walkway. The in-water pile will provide secure moorage for a barge and support the trestle tracks to
enable a crane to transfer heavy materials from their upland facilities onto the barges.
Soundview Consultants LLC has prepared this Biological Evaluation (BE) on behalf of EHW Constructors in
order to fulfill requirements of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), which requires that Federal
actions do not jeopardize ESA-listed species or adversely modify or destroy critical habitat. The remainder of
this document contains project details such as description, location, discussion and analysis of the project and
potential effects to ESA-listed species and critical habitat. The summary of the proposed project effect
determinations are listed in Table 1.
Table 1. ESA-listed species and determination of project effects.
Species Name
Eumetopias jubatus
Megaptera novaeangliae
Orcinus orca
Oncorhynchus mykiss
Oncorhyncus tshawytscha
Salvelinus confluentus
Sebastes paucispinis
Sebastes pinniger
Sebastes ruberrimus
Dermochelys coriacea
Strix occidentalis caurina
Brachyramphus marmoratus
Designated Critical Habitat
Orcinus orca
Common Name
Steller Sea Lion
Humpback Whale
Southern Resident killer whale
Steelhead trout
Chinook salmon
Bull Trout
Bocaccio
Canary Rockfish
Yelloweye Rockfish
Leatherback Sea Turtle
Northern Spotted Owl
Marbled Murrelet
Common Name
Southern Resident Killer Whale
Chinook salmon
Determination of Effects
NLAA*
No Effect
NLAA*
NLAA*
NLAA*
NLAA*
NLAA*
NLAA*
NLAA*
No Effect
No Effect
NLAA*
Determination of Effects
NLAA*
NLAA*
*NLAA – Not Likely to Adversely Affect
2
November 6, 2012
Chapter 2. Proposed Project
2.1 Project Area
The site is located at 3533 East 11th Street, within the City of Tacoma, Washington along the Hylebos
Waterway. The Hylebos Waterway is a navigable channel, actively used for industrial and commercial uses.
The subject property is situated in the Southwest ¼, of the Southwest ¼ of Section 26, Township 21 North,
Range 3 East, W.M. and comprises a portion of one 9.15-acre parcel (Pierce County Tax Parcel Numbers
5000350040). The project area along portions of this parcel, are bound by commercially developed shoreline
and city right-of-way.
To access the site from interstate 5, Northbound, take the I-705 N/WA-7 S exit towards the city
Center/Pacific Avenue proceed 0.5 mile, take the exit on the left toward City Center/Tacoma Dome and
proceed 0.2 mile. Take the WA-509 N exit toward Port of Tacoma and proceed 0.2 mile. Turn right onto
South 21st Street/WA-509. Continue to follow WA-509 N for 3.8 miles. Turn left onto Taylor Way East and
proceed 2.2 miles. Turn right onto East 11th Street and proceed approximately 140 ft. The site is located to
the east on the left side of East 11th Street.
Figure 1. Vicinity Map.
PROJECT AREA
2.2 Project Description
The subject property contains marine-dependent industrial activities on the Hylebos Waterway. Properties
adjacent to the Port of Tacoma site are used for industrial, manufacturing, shipping, and transportation
purposes. Upland portions of the property are comprised of compacted dirt, gravel and cobble with some
3
November 6, 2012
sparse vegetation around the perimeter and southwestern areas of the property. The upland areas have very
little if any native vegetation present and are subject to periodic maintenance. In water moorage facilities are
currently limited to three creosote dolphins waterward of the western portion of the property’s shoreline. The
northernmost extent of the upland boundary abuts the Hylebos Waterway where the bank is armored with
angular rock to approximately ten feet (+10) mean lower low water (MLLW).
The proposed actions will include installation of fourteen mooring pile (ten each twenty four-inch steel below
MLLW, two each thirty six-inch between mean higher high water (MHHW) and MLLW and two each thirty
six-inch steel pile upland) installed landward of the navigation channel. These mooring piles will provide
stable vertical moorage to a barge during transloading activities. To facilitate crane to barge loading activity,
two trestle mat tracks each five (5) feet wide made of twelve (12)-inch by twelve (12)-inch timbers and a
grated steel three (3) foot wide walkway will be installed on top of the pile that are perpendicular to the shore.
This trestle will be approximately thirty feet wide, with an approximate twenty (20) foot wide open space in
the middle and sixty-two feet long. Excavation of up to twenty (20) cubic yards of upland fill may be
required at the top-of-slope where the trestle abuts the land. Excavation will allow the trestle structure to sit
relatively flush with the upland grade, creating a smooth transition onto the trestle for the crane.
All work will be conducted between approximately seventeen (+17) feet in elevation on the upland bank and
the pierhead line below minus four (-4) feet MLLW. The Project Area encompasses a rectangular shaped
area of approximately ninety (90) linear feet of the shoreline on the subject property with an overall area of
less than 2,000 square feet on the horizontal plane.
2.3 Construction Techniques
The project proposes to install a crane trestle and barge moorage facility including fourteen steel-piles
including four each thirty six-inch pile located above MLLW and ten each twenty four-inch below MLLW.
Of the four each thirty six-inch piles, two will be located at seventeen (+17) feet elevation on upland. The
other two thirty six-inch pile will be driven in intertidal areas at low tide to prevent in-water noise impacts.
In-water work will occur landward of the pierhead line in the navigation channel. Project plans are provided
in Appendix B. Construction will be accomplished using a crane deployed from the shoreline. During inwater work, the crane may be deployed from a barge if necessary. All in-water pile will be driven using a
vibratory hammer. Upland pile will be driven by a vibratory hammer followed by an impact hammer for
geotechnical assessment of bearing capacity to establish the necessary pile depth for vibratory installation inwater. Over-water work includes the installation of the trestle. Work is anticipated to commence December
15, 2012 and is estimated to be completed in approximately five days.
Only vibratory driving methods will be used for placement and removal of all in-water piles. Where piles are
removed, clean sand will be used to fill any voids in substrate. To minimize impacts, the trestle will be an
open structure and the walkway will be grated to allow maximum light penetration below. The trestle will
also be elevated to approximately seventeen (+17) feet MLLW which will further reduce any shading effects
to intertidal habitat. All construction materials and equipment will be stored upland.
Less than one hour of vibratory pile driving per pile is estimated to be necessary for a total of less than
sixteen hours of vibratory pile driving over the five-day construction period. Impact hammer proofing is
necessary to determine bearing capacity and will be limited to upland pile. No more than three hours of
vibratory pile driving will occur within a twenty-four hour day during the construction period and no more
than three hours of upland impact pile driving will occur over the entire five-day construction period.
Upon completion of the tenant’s lease contract with the Port of Tacoma, EHW Constructors will remove the
trestle crane tracks in the reverse sequence the structures were installed but will leave the pile in place. Trestle
decking will be removed from the pile cap and then the pile caps will be deconstructed. The project activities
previously described encompass the “Project Area” which includes all locations where project activities could
4
November 6, 2012
occur, approximately 2,000 square feet of overwater and shoreline work space. A map of the project area
showing the locations of proposed features is included in Appendix B.
2.4 Action Area
The “Action Area” encompasses the locations where project activities will occur (the Project Area) plus areas
that may be directly or indirectly affected by the proposed project either through physical, chemical, or
biological mechanisms. The geographic limits of the Action Area were defined by considering the potential
spatial extent of mechanisms that may lead to impacts on listed species.
In order to define the Action Area, where potential project effects could occur, this BE primarily discusses
the project actions potentially generating noise levels above normal daily noise found in the vicinity of the
Project Area. Section 2.3 discusses in-water placement of twelve steel pile below OHW using a vibratory
hammer and the placement of two steel pile above OHW using vibratory methods followed by an impact
hammer for proofing and geotechnical assessment. The use of construction equipment in this industrial area
may potentially lead to a higher terrestrial noise level than the ambient sound levels during brief portions of
the project actions, particularly during vibratory and impact hammer pile driving.
Noise from project activities can adversely affect wildlife with various behavioral and/or health-related
consequences (WSDOT, 2010). Underwater sounds are amplified. Vibratory hammers produce noise levels
that are typically less than an impact hammer. To be on the conservative side, pile driving noise impact areas
(terrestrial and underwater) have been assessed at maximum or peak levels. The ambient underwater noise
level is approximately 120 to 135 dB RMS around the Port of Tacoma (BergerABAM, 2012). Terrestrial noise
(transmitted through air) is measured in decibels (dB), on a logarithmic scale. The threshold for human
hearing begins at 0 dBA and the level at which a human would experience irreversible hearing loss is 180
dBA. The area around the Port of Tacoma has an ambient terrestrial noise level of approximately 78 dB
(BergerAMBA, 2012). The terrestrial sound action area is estimated to have a radius of just over 3,500 square
feet as shown in Action Area figure in Appendix A. Other mechanisms with potential for impacts to ESA-listed species or critical habitat include turbidity and
suspension of loose sediments/soils disturbed during project pile driving and pile removal activity. Turbidity
is expected to be localized and temporary similar to other similar consultations in the area (Grette 2011,
BergerABAM 2012). The Action Area for these potential impact mechanisms is depicted in Appendix A2.
2.4.1 Calculating Terrestrial Noise Attenuation
Calculations for the distance to terrestrial noise attenuation to ambient levels were conducted using
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Biological Assessment preparation methods
(WSDOT, 2010). Terrestrial construction noise sources will consist of a vibratory pile driver and an impact
pile driver. These sources will not occur at the same time. Vibratory pile drivers are estimated to have a
terrestrial decibel value of 101 at 50 feet while impact pile drivers are estimated to have a decibel value of 110
at 50 feet. So for further calculations the 110 dBA value will be used to assess terrestrial hammer sound
dissipation. Ambient sound, according to the Port of Tacoma, is estimated to be 78 dBA. The normal
attenuation rate of 6 dBA per doubling distance was applied to obtain attenuation to ambient noise levels
between 3,200 and 6,400 feet from the project actions demonstrated in Table 2.
From the table, a rough break for the terrestrial action area would be at a distance of 3,200 feet. Using the
trend line equation from the chart produces a more accurate result of 2,015 feet. The Action Area for
terrestrial noise is depicted in Appendix A as a yellow oval surrounding the Project Area.
USFWS recommend using a peak value of 115 dB at 50 feet for sound analysis of driving hollow steel piles.
Using this recommended value along with an ambient level of 78 dB (WSDOT, 2010) considering the
5
November 6, 2012
trucking traffic and industrial work along the Hylebos waterway and normal attenuation of 6 dB per doubling,
the following table and graph present the estimated construction noise attenuation distance below.
Figure 2. Terrestrial project noise attenuation to ambient levels.
Impact Terrestrial Attenuation
140
Sound Level (dB)
120
y = ‐8.656ln(x) + 148.86
100
80
Construction Noise
60
Ambient Noise
40
20
0
1
10
100
1000
10000
Distance (ft)
Table 2. Terrestrial noise attenuation calculations.
Impact Terrestrial Attenuation Table
Distance from Source
Construction Noise
Ambient Sound
Measured Noise Pressure
(Feet)
(Miles)
(dBA)
(dBA)
(Micro-Pascals)
(atm)
50
100
200
400
800
1600
3200
6400
0.00947
0.018939
0.037879
0.075758
0.151515
0.30303
0.606061
1.212121
115
109
103
97
91
85
79
73
78
78
78
78
78
78
78
78
11246826.5
5636765.863
2825075.089
1415891.569
709626.7785
355655.882
178250.1876
89336.71843
1.14E-06
5.71E-07
2.86E-07
1.43E-07
7.19E-08
3.6E-08
1.81E-08
9.05E-09
6
November 6, 2012
2.4.2 Calculating Water Noise Attenuation
To minimize in-water impacts, only vibratory driving methods will be used for in-water pile installation. To
determine the Action Area impacted by the sound from the vibratory hammer, an in-water sound area model
was created. The aquatic sound Action Area mostly occurs in the Hylebos Waterway channel; however, a
small wedge of the in-water action area projects out into Commencement Bay and continues until it reaches
land at Brown’s Point (Appendix A). Calculations were conducted using noise methods outlined in the 2010
WSDOT Biological Assessment preparation manual. The Action Area for in-water noise is depicted in
Appendix A1 as a blue polygon extending out from the Project Area into the Hylebos Waterway.
In water construction will consist solely of a vibratory pile driving of 24 inch hollow steel piles. Using
WSDOT Biological Assessment preparation methods, vibratory pile drivers emit sound levels 10-20 dB
below that of impact pile drivers. Per table 7-9 from the WSDOT guidance document, for a 24-inch steel pile
it is recommended to use a value of 189 dB (RMS) at 10 meters (32.81 ft), so vibratory pile driving
underwater noise can be estimated to be somewhere in the range of 169 dB to 179 dB at 10 meters. Ambient
sound, according to the Port of Tacoma, is estimated to be in the range of 120 to 135 dBA (BergerABAM,
2012). Applying the normal attenuation rate of 4.5 dBA per doubling results in an attenuation line as
displayed below.
Figure 3. Underwater project noise attenuation to ambient levels.
Vibratory Underwater Attenuation
200
180
160
y = ‐6.492ln(x) + 201.66
Sound Level (dB)
140
120
100
Construction Noise
80
Ambient Sound Level
60
40
20
0
Distance (ft)
7
November 6, 2012
Table 3. Underwater noise attenuation calculations.
Water Attenuation Table
Construction
Ambient
Distance from Source Noise
Sound
Measured Noise Pressure
(dB)
(dB)
(Feet)
(Miles)
(Micro-Pascals)
(atm)
32.81
0.006214
179
120
17825018763
0.001806
65.62
0.012428
174.5
120
10617688885
0.001076
131.24
0.024856
170
120
6324555320
0.000641
262.48
0.049712
165.5
120
3767298179
0.000382
524.96
0.099424
161
120
2244036909
0.000227
1049.92
0.198848
156.5
120
1336687835
0.000135
2099.84
0.397697
152
120
796214341.1
8.07E-05
4199.68
0.795394
147.5
120
474274741.1
4.81E-05
8399.36
1.590788
143
120
282507508.9
2.86E-05
16798.72
3.181576
138.5
120
168279028.3
1.7E-05
33597.44
6.363152
134
120
100237446.7
1.02E-05
67194.88
12.7263
129.5
120
59707652.38
6.05E-06
134389.76 25.45261
125
120
35565588.2
3.6E-06
268779.52 50.90521
120.5
120
21185074.5
2.15E-06
537559.04 101.8104
116
120
12619146.89
1.28E-06
1075118.08 203.6208
111.5
120
7516748.086
7.62E-07
2150236.16 407.2417
107
120
4477442.277
4.54E-07
4300472.32 814.4834
102.5
120
2667042.864
2.7E-07
8600944.64 1628.967
98
120
1588656.469
1.61E-07
17201889.3 3257.934
93.5
120
946302.5179
9.59E-08
34403778.6 6515.867
89
120
563676.5863
5.71E-08
68807557.1 13031.73
84.5
120
335760.8036
3.4E-08
From the table, a rough break for the water action area would be a range of 1.6 miles to 101 miles. However,
the farthest distance the sound can travel by water before it reaches Brown’s Point is roughly 2.4 miles.
Assuming a conservative value for the distance that the noise travels before it attenuates below ambient
levels, the underwater noise action area would be constrained by land rather than attenuation. Therefore,
only a sliver of action area projects out of the Hylebos and into a small area of Commencement Bay where it
terminates at Browns Point.
8
November 6, 2012
Chapter 3. Environmental Baseline
The topography and site setting, substrate, local watershed information relating to current habitat conditions
and potential species with potential presence within vicinity of the proposed project is detailed below. On
August 24, 2012 and September 13, 2012 Railin Peterson, Environmental Scientist and Jeremy Downs,
Principal Biologist from Soundview Consultants LLC visited the proposed project site to conduct a OHW
delineation and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment for local regulatory review purposes and to assess the
site for the presence of ESA-listed species and habitat. Information discussed below was gathered from
background research and observations taken during site investigation.
3.1 Existing conditions
Topography/Setting
The Action Area, as defined in Section 2.4, is located in an industrial setting within the City of Tacoma, the
Port of Tacoma, and in the Hylebos Waterway. The property is currently used as a construction lay down site
and barge loading facility. Existing features include in-water pile, and three barge mooring dolphins no other
permanent structures are located on site except for an old chain-link fence, tires and other debris. Secure site
moorage is currently limited to the three dolphins which are located waterward of the western portion of the
property’s shoreline with no connection to uplands.
The Action Area is surrounded by industrial and commercial development most of which is associated with
Port of Tacoma industrial activities. Adjacent properties are currently used for industrial, manufacturing, and
shipping purposes. All adjacent uses are water-dependent industrial and consistent within the framework of
the project’s current and proposed use.
Soils/Geology
The proposed project area is considered to have hard soils due to the presence of water and compacted earth
fill. The Natural Resource Conservation Service does not have soil survey data for the City of Tacoma.
Observations during onsite visits showed upland site substrates are primarily dirt, gravel and cobble over
variable fill. Shoreline substrates consist of large rock, silty sand and sandy silt. The shoreline is mostly
armored angular rock with little interspersed non-native vegetation.
Potential Erosion, Sediment movement and deposition patterns
The armored shoreline at the project stabilizes the slope preventing erosion and sediment movement. The
project is located in a no appreciable net shore drift (NAD) drift cell meaning little sediment movement
occurs along the shoreline in this area. The project does not proposed any shoreline armoring, fill or
excavation within intertidal areas; therefore, the project should not affect beach movement or disposition
patterns along this or adjacent sections of shoreline.
9
November 6, 2012
Figure 3. Sediment Movement and Deposition Patterns.
Site Location
Map created by Ecology Coastal Map atlas
Vegetation
Upland areas have very little native vegetation. Minimal vegetation is observed intermittently at the top-of
slope and between rock armoring. Plant species predominantly include Himalayan blackberry, Scotch broom,
butterfly bush and a variety of grasses and forbs of little to no density most of which are also non-native,
invasive plant species. A madrona and limited juvenile cottonwood and red alder are located on the eastern
portion of the property outside of the Project Area in areas subject to periodic maintenance. Intertidal salt
marsh and aquatic vegetation includes seaside plantain, kelp species and some micro-algae species anchored
to rock armoring. The observed shoreline and intertidal vegetation does not appear to provide any quality
habitat for aquatic organisms, salmonids or marine mammals of concern. Hydrology/Wetlands
No wetlands are located in or adjacent to the project area. The Hylebos Waterway is a navigable channel
dredged for port activities. The lower reach of the Hylebos Waterway is listed on the Washington
Department of Ecology 303(d) list for PCBs, DDT, HPAHs, and chlorinated pesticides (DOE, 2008). A
superfund site is located adjacent to the project site and throughout the waterway. The contaminated soils
have been previously excavated and capped. Hylebos Waterway waters adjacent to the site exceed parameters
for PCBs and Dieldrin which were identified through tissue samples (DOE, 2010). The Hylebos Waterway
and inner Commencement Bay waters southeast of the site are characterized as Category 5 waters and exceed
standards for Dieldrin and PCBs which were identified through tissue samples (DOE, 2008). A 2009 EPA
report reviewing the Hylebos Waterway indicates that aside from the Arkema and Occidental sites, Hylebos
cleanup construction has been completed (EPA, 2009).
Watershed/Basin
The Action Area is located within the subwatershed of Northeast Tacoma which is within the Puyallup-White
watershed Basin (Water Resource Inventory Area [WRIA] 10; Hydrologic Unit Code [HUC] 17110014). The
10
November 6, 2012
Northeast Tacoma watershed drains 2,641 acres. Most of the watershed’s stormwater drains directly into
Commencement Bay or the Hylebos Waterway. (City of Tacoma, 2008)
3.2 Species information
The species list is based on data accessed from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
website: http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00165/wdfw00165.pdf. A number of species are present in Pierce
County are listed as federally Endangered or Threatened under the endangered species act (ESA). This
section includes a discussion of priority species with potential for impacts due to the proposed project.
Table 4. ESA-listed species with potential presence in Action Area.*
Species Name
Common Name
Eumetopias jubatus
Steller Sea Lion
Megaptera novaeangliae
Humpback Whale
Orcinus orca
Southern Resident killer whale
Oncorhynchus mykiss
Steelhead trout
Chinook salmon
Salvelinus confluentus
Bull Trout
Bocaccio
Sebastes pinniger
Canary Rockfish
Sebastes ruberrimus
Yelloweye Rockfish
Dermochelys coriacea
Leatherback Sea Turtle
Strix occidentalis caurina
Northern Spotted Owl
Brachyramphus marmoratus
Marbled Murrelet
*From WDFW Priority Species Listed in Pierce County
Table 5. Critical Habitat in the Vicinity of the Action Area.
Species Name
Common Name
Orcinus orca
Killer whale, Southern Resident DPS
Chinook salmon, Puget Sound ESU
Federal Listing Status
Threatened
Endangered
Endangered
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened
Endangered
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened
Area of Potential Impacts
Puget Sound, Commencement Bay
Puget Sound Nearshore Several ESA-listed species listed in Table 4 will not be found on or near the vicinity of the Action Area and
will not be addressed in the Project Effects discussions in Section 4.4 of this document. The proposed
project is surrounded by highly urbanized areas, within an industrial port setting, any terrestrial habitat
includes isolated vegetated patches. Even though the species in Table 4 may occur in Pierce County, it is
highly unlikely that these animals will be found in the vicinity of the Action Area. The ESA-listed species
clearly not affected due to project location and surrounding environment conditions include: spotted owl;
leatherback sea turtle; humpback whale; albatross; Grizzly Bear; Caribou, Deer; Lynx; Otter; Rabbit; sturgeon;
grey wolf; Spalding’s Catchfly; Checker-mellow; Desert-parsley; water howellia, ladies’ tresses; Lupine,
Paintbrush and Stickseed (WDFW, 2008). Leatherback Sea turtles typically inhabit offshore in coastal waters
(NMFS 2012a). Sighting in Washington waters are mostly coastal and pelagic and no U.S. West Coast nesting
sites exist (NMFS and USFWS, 1999) it is reasonable to assume that leatherback sea turtles do not use the
Action Area. The previously discussed species require habitat and other resources not supported by the
Action Area.
Presence and the determination of effect for potentially present ESA-listed species are discussed in Section
4.4. The authors have included relevant life history discussions below for illustrative purposes to this
document. The species discussed below will also be addressed further in Section 4 of this document.
11
November 6, 2012
Marbled Murrelet
Brachyrhampus marmoratus – Threatened, listed 1992.
Critical habitat designated May 1996 (50 CFR Part 17.11)
Marbled murrelet are in the Alcidae family of seabirds such as puffins, murres, and auklets. Marbled murrelet
are found from Aleution Islands of Alaska to central California and may winter as far south as southern
California. In Washington, they are year-round residents on coastal waters. They primarily feed within 500
feet of the shore to 1.2 miles from shore at depths of less than 100 feet. Preferred prey includes small fish
and crustaceans; nestlings may be fed larger fish. Nests and roosts are found in mature and old growth
forests of western Washington. Nesting typically occurs from April to September (WDFW, 1991). Nest
trees are typically greater than 32 inches diameter at breast height (DBH), with nesting preference on large flat
conifer branches, often covered with moss (WDFW, 1991) such as old growth forests. Marbled murrelets
have been found in the largest numbers in marine waters near the coastal waters surrounding the Olympic
Peninsula (Pearson and Lance, 2010). Marbled murrelet are more sparsely distributed elsewhere in this
region. Prey species, sand lance (Ammodytes hexapterus), surf smelt (Hypomesus pretiosus), and Pacific
herring (Clupea harengus pallasi) are important forage fish for marbled murrelets. Critical habitat has been
designated in Oregon and California; no critical habitat has been designated in the Action Area or anywhere
else in Washington.
Steller (Northern) Sea Lion
Eumatopias jubatus eastern population –Threatened, Listed November 26, 1990.
Critical Habitat designated August 1993 (58 FR 45269)
The eastern population of Steller sea lion includes those located east of Cape Suckling, Alaska (144 degrees
West longitude). Critical habitat in the eastern population is located in portions of Alaska, Oregon, and
California and not designated in Washington State. Habitat requirements include islands or isolated
shorelines for breeding and undisturbed waters for feeding (BergerABAM, 2012).
Bull trout
Salvelinus confluentus – Threatened, listed November 1, 1999
Critical Habitat designated October 2010 (75 FR 63898)
Coastal/Puget Sound bull trout Distinct Population Segment have very complex life histories and little is
known about their behavior within Puget Sound and coastal watersheds. Distinct life history forms include
resident, fluvial, adfluvial, and anadramous (WDFW, 2000). Anadromous forms migrate through large rivers
to spawn in tributaries and use marine water or estuaries for the majority of their growth and maturation.
Spawning occurs between late August and November in most Puget Sound and coastal watersheds (WDFW,
2000). The fry emerge in late winter or early spring.
Bull trout occur in less than half their historic range, with scattered populations throughout Oregon,
Washington, Nevada, Idaho, and Montana. Four (4) local bull trout stocks are identified within the southern
Puget Sound as distinct stocks by WDFW based on their geographic distribution. These four include the
Puyallup River, the Puyallup/White River, the Puyallup/Carbon River, and the Nisqually River bull trout
stocks. The stocks are all of native origin, and the production type is wild. Bull trout in general are primarily
threatened by habitat degradation and fragmentation, blockage of migratory corridors, poor water quality, the
effects of climate change, and past fisheries management practices including the introduction of non-native
species (USFWS website 2011). The Project Area in the Hylebos Waterway has been excluded from critical
habitat designation for Bull Trout (70 FR 56212). However, the underwater sound Action Area does extend
into critical habitat for Bull trout in Commencement Bay.
12
November 6, 2012
Puget Sound Chinook Salmon ESU
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha – Threatened, listed (reaffirmed) June 28, 2005 (70FR37160)
Critical Habitat designated September 2005
Chinook salmon may be found in the Action Area during the juvenile life history stage, migration and feeding
in the estuarine environment. Juvenile Chinook salmon may be found in the estuarine environment during
spring, summer, and fall eating epibenthic organisms, insects, and zooplankton such as copepods, euphasiids,
and amphipods. Stream-type Chinook salmon spend a very brief period in estuaries, but ocean-type Chinook
salmon typically spend from one to three months in the estuarine habitats. Fry generally reach upper reaches
of estuaries in late winter or early spring. Important features of estuarine and marine habitat are adequate
water quality; adequate temperature; adequate food; and adequate depth, cover, marine vegetation, and algae
in estuarine and near-shore habitats. While not abundant, (Fisher, 2012) anadromous juvenile fish
populations likely to be present in the Action Area include coho, Chinook and chum. Our impact discussions
are limited to ESA-listed species, which includes Chinook salmon. Juvenile Chinook salmon occurring within
the Action Area are most likely to occur within the month of July according to beach seine sampling efforts
(Downs, 2012).
Puget Sound Steelhead
Oncorhynchus mykiss – Threatened, listed May 11, 2007
Critical habitat designated September 2005 (70FR52630)
NOAA Fisheries has identified fifteen (15) distinct population segments (DPSs) of steelhead in Washington,
Oregon, and California. Steelhead populations can be divided into two (2) basic reproductive ecotypes, based
on the state of sexual maturity at the time of river entry (summer or winter) and duration of spawning
migration. Steelhead trout are iteroparous and adult migration may potentially be found in areas adjacent to
the Action Area, with discussion of species timing below. Steelhead can spend up to 7 years in fresh water
prior to smoltification (NMFS, 2007). The Puyallup River supports winter and summer populations of
steelhead in the mainstem and a population in the Carbon River, a tributary of the Puyallup River. These
populations are considered “Depressed” by WDFW SASSI data (WDFW, 2002).
Southern Resident Killer Whale and Critical Habitat
Orcinus orca – Endangered, listed November 15, 2005
Critical Habitat designated November 2006
The killer whale is found in both open seas and coastal waters. They typically live twenty-five (25) to ninety
(90) years and form family groups called pods. They primarily prey on Chinook and chum salmon and are
threatened by pollution and other human activities. Southern resident Killer whale may be found in the Puget
Sound, Straits of Georgia and Juan de Fuca, including Commencement Bay during spring through fall,
though their movement into Puget Sound waters historically and most likely still, coincides with prey
movement into the Puget Sound (NMFS, 2008). Puget Sound sightings recorded between 1990 and 2008
observed 35 orca in December, January had 17 sightings and February had 2 orca sightings (Fisher, 2012).
The Puget Sound, including Commencement Bay, contains designated critical habitat for the southern
resident killer whale.
Bocaccio rockfish
Sebastes paucispinis - listed Endangered July 27, 2010
Bocaccio rockfish give birth to live larval young, and the main hatching period runs from December through
April (California Department of Fish and Game, 2011). The larvae are found in surface waters and may be
distributed over a wide area. Larvae and small juveniles may remain in open waters for several months, being
passively dispersed by ocean currents. Larval fish feed on diatoms, dinoflagellates, tintinnids, and
cladocerans, and juveniles consume copepods and euphasiids of all life stages. Adults eat demersal
13
November 6, 2012
invertebrates and small fishes, including other species of rockfish, associated with kelp beds, rocky reefs,
pinnacles, and sharp drop-offs (NMFS, 2011). Bocaccio are most common between one hundred sixty (160)
and eight hundred twenty (820) feet depth, in general adults move into deeper water as they grow and age but
usually exhibit strong site fidelity to rocky bottoms and outcrops. Juveniles and subadults may be more
common than adults in shallower water, and are associated with rocky reefs, kelp canopies, and artificial
structures, such as piers and oil platforms. Threats to bocaccio are fishing and bycatch related, and adverse
environmental factors in the early to mid-1990’s led to recruitment failures (NMFS, 2011). Rockfish status in
the Puget Sound (South Sound) is identified as “critical”. This status listing corresponds to limits established
by fishery managers for maintaining healthy spawning biomasses or the criteria for marine fish stocks at risk
(WDFW, 2011).
Canary rockfish
Sebastes pinniger- listed Threatened July 27, 2010
Canary rockfish give birth to live larval young that may be distributed over a wide area in surface waters.
Similar to bocaccio, canary rockfish larvae and small juveniles may remain in open water for several months,
being passively dispersed by ocean currents. Larval rockfish feed on diatoms, dinoflagellates, tintinnids, and
pinnacles, and sharp drop-offs. Approximately fifty (50) percent of adult canary rockfish are mature at about
five (5) to six (6) years of age (approximately 14 inches total length). Canary rockfish can live to be seventyfive (75) years old. Canary rockfish primarily inhabit waters between one hundred sixty (160) and eight
hundred twenty (820) feet depth, juveniles and subadults tend to be more common than adults in shallow
water and area associated with rocky reefs, kelp canopies, and artificial structures, such as piers and oil
platforms. Adults generally move into deeper water as they grow but usually exhibit strong site fidelity to
rocky bottoms and outcrops where they hover in loose groups just above the bottom. Fishing surveys suggest
population decline, as canary rockfish used to be one of the three principal species caught in the Puget Sound
in the 1960’s. Threats to canary rockfish are fishing and bycatch related, and adverse environmental factors in
the early to mid-1990’s led to recruitment failures (NMFS, 2011). Rockfish status in the Puget Sound (South
Sound) is identified as “critical”. This status listing corresponds to limits established by fishery managers for
maintaining healthy spawning biomasses or the criteria for marine fish stocks at risk (WDFW, 2011).
Yelloweye rockfish
Sebastes ruberrimus- listed Threatened July 27, 2010
Yelloweye rockfish give birth to live larval young. Larvae are found in surface waters and may be distributed
over a wide area. Larvae and small juvenile rockfish may remain in open waters for several months, being
passively dispersed by ocean currents. Larval rockfish feed on diatoms, dinoflagellates, tintinnids, and
pinnacles, and sharp drop-offs. Approximately fifty (50) percent of yelloweye rockfish are mature by about
six (6) years of age (approximately 16 inches total length). Yelloweye rockfish are among the longest lived of
rockfishes, living up to one hundred eighteen (118) years old. Yelloweye rockfish occur in waters eighty (80)
to one thousand five hundred sixty (1,560) feet deep, but are most commonly found between three hundred
(300) to five hundred ninety (590) feet deep. Juveniles and subadults tend to be more common than adults in
shallow water and are associated with rocky reefs, kelp canopies, and artificial structures, such as piers and oil
platforms. Adults generally move into deeper water as they grow but usually exhibit strong site fidelity to
rocky bottoms and outcrops. Threats to yelloweye rockfish are fishing and bycatch related, and adverse
environmental factors in the early to mid-1990’s led to recruitment failures (NMFS, 2011). Rockfish status in
the Puget Sound (South Sound) is identified as “critical”. This status listing corresponds to limits established
by fishery managers for maintaining healthy spawning biomasses or the criteria for marine fish stocks at risk
(WDFW, 2011).
14
November 6, 2012
Chapter 4. Project Effects
An analysis of project effects to potential ESA-listed species in the vicinity of the project is detailed below.
Potential project impacts were evaluated based upon specific habitat components that would be altered or
removed and the degree to which the alteration may occur; the distribution and population levels of the
species (if known); the possibility of direct or indirect impacts to the species and/or habitat, and the potential
to mitigate for adverse effects.
4.1 Direct and Short Term Effects
All trestle and moorage structures are proposed for long-term however trestle mat tracks are only proposed
for temporary use (approximately 5 years). The proposed project actions have two main mechanisms for
direct and short-term impacts to areas below MHHW; first, noise from the vibratory hammer and, second,
possible increased turbidity from sediment in-water suspension caused by the driving of steel piles (Section
2.3). Above MHHW, there may be increases in terrestrial noise. This project is proposed for five
construction days planned for the winter months between December 15th and February 15th. During the
winter months, fish presence in the action area is very low. Removal of the structure will also occur during
the in-water work window.
4.1.1 Sound
As previously discussed in Section 2.4, impacts to the local environment from project noise may occur within
a 3,200 foot terrestrial radius of the Project Area as the estimated sound level from the use of project
machinery is higher than the estimated ambient sound level in the industrial port area. Noise from project
activities can adversely affect wildlife with various behavioral and/or health-related consequences (WSDOT,
2010). Underwater sounds are amplified (WSDOT, 2010). Using only vibratory methods in water will reduce
impacts to marine species (Illingworth and Rodkin, 2001). Sounds affect fish species differently. Pulse noise,
such as impact pile driving has a greater likelihood of affecting fish behavior when compared to continuous
noise. Vibratory hammers produce noise levels that are typically less than an impact hammer (WSDOT,
2010).
The ambient underwater noise level is approximately 120 to 135 dB around the Port of Tacoma
(BergerABAM, 2012). Per WSDOT’s 2010 Biological Assessment training model, the current thresholds for
fish injury are 206 dBpeak. The threshold for impacting fish behavior is 150 dBRMS. The WSDOT underwater
sound impacts on fish calculator is applicable to impact pile driving strike peaks which is not applicable to
this project as only vibratory pile driving methods will be used for piles below OHW. Noise for vibratory pile
driving will not exceed the threshold for injury to fish however if a fish is within seven-hundred and fifty
meters of the driving action during action occurrence, using the highest noise projections possible, the fish
could endure sound levels that may impact fish behavior. However, past hydroacoustic monitoring during
vibratory pile driving of 24-inch steel pile within the action area did not produce peaks of higher than 165dB
RMS at eighteen meters (Soundview Consultants, 2012c); therefore, it is highly unlikely that a fish species
would experience noise levels above behavior impact thresholds unless they were within 180 meters of the
underwater pile driving action. Low levels of noise observed during monitoring are likely due to extremely
soft substrates encountered within the Hylebos Waterway. Soft substrates provide little resistance to pile
driving resulting in little noise but may require additional pile length.
4.1.2 Increased Turbidity
Increased turbidity due to pile driving activities is expected to be localized and temporary. The project is
anticipated to comply with turbidity requirements defined in WAC 173-201A-200 and WAC 173-201A-210;
for projects working along estuaries, the point of compliance shall be at a radius of one hundred fifty (150)
feet from the activity causing the turbidity exceedence. Waters in the Hylebos Waterway already exceed water
15
November 6, 2012
quality chemical standards, as discussed in Section 3.1. Pile driving is anticipated to create no more than small
plume of resuspended sediments several feet in diameter around each pile during driving activities.
4.2 Long-term Effects
The project is located on a portion of one 9.15-acre parcel located within the Hylebos Watersway. The
increase in surface area of overwater structures (grated walkway and trestle crane mat tracks) due to trestle
installation is to approximately seven hundred twenty-six (726) square feet. Overwater shading may partially
degrade water column primary productivity during the temporary existence of the trestle crane mat structures;
however, the walkway decking will be grated to allow maximum light penetration and will be elevated to
approximately seventeen (+17) feet MLLW, further reducing any shading effects. Plus seventy-seven (77)
square feet of pile will be located in intertidal and subtidal areas. As compensatory mitigation for these
impacts, all creosote pile aside from the three dolphins will be removed with vibratory methods. In addition,
seven large construction equipment tires present near the shoreline and loose debris in an approximate
seventeen hundred thirty (1,730) square foot area along the shoreline will be removed. Overall, the only
permanent effects upon the marine environment will be from the compensatory mitigation actions of
creosote pile and debris removal which are anticipated to be beneficial.
4.3 Conservation measures
Avoidance measures, aside from the measures discussed in Section 4.2 to lessen shading, install action of inwater steel piles using only vibratory methods, and limiting impact proofing to only upland areas, the original
plan has been modified from using thirty-six inch piles in-water to only using twenty-four inch piles below
MLLW to reduce the sound impacts. Further, no thirty-six inch pile will be driven when tidal water is present
at or near the elevation of intertidal pile and impact proofing will be limited to two upland piles and only to
determine the capacity load depth. In addition, all in-water activity will be conducted during the WDFW
approved work window for Tide Reference Area 4 (July 16 – February 15) and no materials will be stockpiled
below OHW.
Further anticipated best management practices will include contractor use of work floats or tarps to capture
any falling debris associated with the project demolition and construction to prevent debris from entering the
waterway. Excess or waste materials will be kept from entering the waterway to the maximum extent
possible, and all excess or waste materials will be collected and recycled or disposed of at an approved facility.
The contractor will comply with water quality restrictions as required by law and implement corrective
measures if temporary water quality standards are exceeded. Care will be taken to prevent any petroleum
products or other toxic or deleterious materials from entering the water. Fuel hoses, oil drums, oil or fuel
transfer valves and fittings, etc., will be checked regularly for drips or leaks, and shall be maintained and
stored properly to prevent spills. The contractor will have a spill kit with oil-absorbent materials on site to be
used in the event of a spill or if any oil product is observed in the water. The contractor will be responsible
for the preparation of a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures (SPCC) plan to be used for the
duration of the project if required by permitting agencies. As compensatory mitigation creosote pile as well
as large construction tires and loose debris located in a seventeen hundred thirty (1,730) square foot area near
the shoreline will be removed.
16
November 6, 2012
4.4 Determination of effect
Critical Habitat
Critical Habitat is defined in Section 3 of the Endangered Species Act as : (1) The specific areas within the
geographical area occupied by the species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which are
found those physical or biological features: (a) essential to the conservation of the species, and (b) which may
require special management considerations or protection, and (2) specific areas outside the geographical area
occupied by the species at the time it is listed, upon a determination such areas are essential for the
conservation of the species. Critical habitat for a listed species contains Primary Constituent Elements
(PCE’s), as defined below.
Primary Constituent Elements:
In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Endangered Species Act and regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(b), in
determining which areas occupied at the time of listing to propose a critical habitat, we consider the physical
or biological features essential to the conservation of the species and that may require special management
considerations or protection. These features are the PCE’s laid out in the appropriate quantity and spatial
arrangement for conservation of the species. These include, but are not limited to: (1) Space for individual
and population growth for normal behavior. (2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or
physiological requirements; (3) Cover or shelter; (4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, or rearing (or
development) of offspring; and (5) Habitats that are protected from disturbance or are representative of the
historical, geographical, and ecological distributions of a species.
Essential habitat types for salmon and steelhead species can be generally described to include the following:
(1) juvenile rearing areas; (2) juvenile migration corridors; (3) areas for growth and development to adulthood;
(4) adult migration corridors; and (5) spawning areas. Within these areas, essential features of critical habitat
include adequate: (1) substrate, (2) water quality, (3) water quantity (4) water temperature (5) water velocity,
(6) cover/shelter, (7) food, (8) riparian vegetation, (9) space, and (10) safe passage conditions. The actual
regulatory descriptions of CH for each ESU can be found at the end of this Federal Register: Vol. 65, No. 32,
Wednesday February 16, 2000. The following paragraphs discuss the proposed project impact determinations
on ESA-listed species and corresponding critical habitat:
Marbled Murrelet
Brachyrhampus marmoratus – Threatened, listed 1992
Critical habitat designated May 1996 (50 CFR Part 17.11)
The Action Area contains no suitable nesting habitat. The habitat conditions found in the Hylebos Waterway
include a lack of shallow, vegetated shoreline within an industrial area with intense human use that is not
conducive to marbled murrelet foraging presence. Foraging individuals, feeding opportunistically, may occur
in the areas along the north shoreline of Commencement Bay where forage fish prey presence is possible
(Jensen, 2012). However, forage fish are not likely to be present in this area during the winter months. A lack
of suitable habitat and the intense level of human use of the Hylebos Waterway make marbled murrelet
presence in the majority of the Action Area unlikely at any time of year.
Small increases in localized turbulence due to the project actions will have no effect on marbled murrelet as
they are highly unlikely to use the Project Area. Terrestrial sound resulting from vibratory and impact
hammer actions may reach a maximum level of 115 dB at 50 feet from project activities which is well below
precautionary guidelines for ESA-listed species that may be present in the proposed project area; therefore,
this terrestrial noise will likely have no effect on marbled murrelets.
17
November 6, 2012
Projected underwater sound was assessed to find impacts endured by the marbled murrelet when diving in
the Action Area; the underwater threshold for injury is 180 dBpeak, the disturbance guideline is 150 dBRMS.
The WSDOT underwater sound impacts calculator for bull trout and marbled murrelet is applicable to
impact pile driving strike peaks which is not applicable to this project as only vibratory pile driving methods
will be used for piles installed in water. Noise for vibratory pile driving will not exceed the threshold for
injury to marbled murrelet; however, if this species is within seven-hundred and fifty meters of the driving
action during action occurrence, using the highest noise projections possible, a marbled murrelet could
enduring sound levels that could cause impacts to species behavior. However, past hydroacoustic monitoring
during vibratory pile driving of 24-inch steel pile in this action area did not produce peaks of higher than
165dB RMS at eighteen meters (Soundview Consultants LLC, 2012c); therefore, it is highly unlikely that a
marbled murrelet, if present would experience noise levels above behavior impact thresholds unless they were
within 180 meters (2000 feet) of the action. The proposed actions May Affect, but are Not Likely to
Adversely Affect marbled murrelet.
USFWS, 2009, discusses Primary Constituent Elements of Critical Habitat for marbled murrelets: (1) trees
with potential nesting platforms and, (2) forested areas within one half (0.5) mile of potential nest trees with a
canopy height of at least one half (0.5) of the site potential tree height. No critical habitat or essential habitat
elements are found within the vicinity of the Action Area (WDFW, 2009); therefore, there will be No Effect
on critical habitat.
Stellar sea lion
Eumetopias jubatus – Threatened
Critical Habitat designated August 1993 (58 FR 45269)
The nearest Stellar seal lion haul out identified in the WDFW Atlas of Seal and Sea Lion Haulout Sites in
Washington State is located 15 miles south of Commencement Bay (Jeffries, 2000). The haul out is near the
south end of Fox Island at Toliva Shoals. This and all other navigation buoys in the Puget Sound from the
Nisqually Delta to the Strait of Juan de Fuca are considered potential sea lion haulout sites (Jefferies 2000).
However, Stellar sea lion abundance estimates in Washington State found that they only occasionally occur
within the Puget Sound (Jefferies 2000). Based on their infrequent use of southern Puget Sound and the high
level of human use in the Action Area, it is very unlikely that Stellar sea lions would be present in the Action
Area at any time.
Stellar sea lion, typically a coastal and open-ocean species although it does occur in Commencement Bay, may
be found in the vicinity of the Action Area during the months of September through May. Compared with
the California sea lion, Stellar sea lion are thought to be less tolerant of human activity and prefer to feed
offshore in deeper waters, habitat requirements include islands or isolated shorelines for breeding and
undisturbed waters for feeding. If present, it may be for foraging opportunistically in Commencement Bay or
greater Puget Sound. Stellar sea lions are not expected to be present in the highly disturbed areas of the
Hylebos Waterway (BergerABAM 2012).
It is unlikely that sea lions would come into the Hylebos Waterway due to the level of human use or the small
portion along the northwestern cove of Commencement Bay where the sound projects into, during the brief
duration that vibratory pile driving methods will be used. To be affected a Stellar sea lion would have to be in
the small action area in Commencement Bay during the exact moment the vibratory hammer is used, which
will be <1 hour of vibratory hammer per pile used over the course of the five day construction period. The
sound threshold for injury to pinnipeds is 190 dBRMS (WSDOT, 2010). Previous hydroacoustic monitoring
for the same actions within the same action area indicate that sound levels will not exceed the injury
threshold. Due to unlikely presence and the short duration of sound impacts, the proposed actions May
Affect, but are Not Likely to Adversely Affect stellar sea lion.
18
November 6, 2012
No critical habitat is designated in the Action Area or in Washington therefore there will be No Effect on
stellar sea lion critical habitat.
Bull trout
Salvelinus confluentus – Threatened, listed November 1, 1999
Critical Habitat designated October 2010 (75 FR 63898)
The Hylebos Creek does not support a spawning bull trout population (WDFW, 2012); however, the
Puyallup River watershed does support a small or limited number of anadramous bull trout. Adult or large
sub-adult individuals may use the waterways surrounding the Action Area in Commencement Bay or even
into the Hylebos waterway in search of outmigrating juvenile Chinook (Chan, 2012). Juvenile rearing and
outmigration is likely in Commencement Bay and the greater Puget Sound. The likelihood of encountering
bull trout in the vicinity of the Project Area is relatively low, as they are rare in Commencement Bay (Chan,
2012). The timing of the project lends itself to avoiding bull trout encounters.
Sparse suitable habitat and water quality problems associated with the Hylebos Waterway will likely deter bull
trout presence within the Hylebos Waterway portion of the Action Area. Foraging adults and sub-adults are
possible in the Action Area likely between mid-February through mid-July. Adult and/or rearing juvenile bull
trout could be present in Commencement Bay any time of year.
The WSDOT bull trout sound impact calculator was not used since this project does not propose impact pile
driving in the water. Noise from vibratory pile driving will not exceed the threshold for injury to fish species;
however, if a fish is within seven hundred and fifty meters of pile driving activities, they may experience noise
at levels that affect behavior. Due to the low likelihood of an individual bull trout being within seven
hundred and fifty meters during the proposed impact actions, and the short time duration of proposed
vibratory hammer use, proposed actions May Effect, but are not Likely to Adversely Affect bull trout.
Puget Sound Chinook Salmon ESU
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha – Threatened, listed (reaffirmed) June 28, 2005 (70FR37160)
The Puyallup River watershed supports Chinook salmon of “unknown” stock status according to 1992 and
2002 stock information (WDFW, 2012). Presence of Chinook salmon has also been documented in the
Hylebos Creek (WDFW, 2012). Adult Chinook returning to these systems may be found entering the
Puyallup River from mid-June to fall months. Potential adult Chinook presence in the Hylebos Waterway
and surrounding Commencement Bay exists from mid-May to October as they migrate through to their
respective spawning grounds.
Juvenile Chinook outmigrating from local watersheds could potentially use the Action Area and
Commencement Bay from late March to mid-July, with the highest numbers of juvenile Chinook salmon
occurring during July in the Hylebos Waterway (Downs, 2012). Juveniles may move quickly through the
Hylebos waterway and the Commencement Bay waters on their outward migration. Sampling studies in the
vicinity of the Action Area, including beach seine catches of juvenile Chinook in the adjacent Blair Waterway
encounter much lower densities of these fish than at sites near the mouth of the Puyallup River (Duker et al
1989). Juvenile Chinook may be found rearing within Commencement Bay at any time of the year. Spring
Chinook salmon no longer exist in most rivers in the Central/South Sound region. “Fall Chinook populations
in the Central/South Sound, Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca regions are sustained predominately by
hatchery production” (NMFS, 2012b). It is very unlikely that Chinook will be present in the action area
during the time of construction in the months of December, January or February.
19
November 6, 2012
Per WSDOT’s 2010 Biological Assessment training model, the current thresholds for fish injury are 206
dBpeak. The threshold for impacting fish behavior is 150 dB RMS. Noise from vibratory pile driving will not
exceed the threshold for injury to fish species; however, if a fish is within seven hundred and fifty meters of
pile driving activities they may experience noise at levels that affect behavior. Due to the low abundance of
Chinook salmon in the Project Area, the brief duration of sound impacts, and the minimization measures, the
proposed project actions May Affect, but are Not Likely to Adversely Affect Chinook salmon.
Turbidity is expected to be localized and temporary. The removal of creosote pile, seven large tires and
various loose debris near the shoreline is anticipated to provide adequate mitigation for the proposed project.
The project effects are not likely to result in any adverse effects to habitat for Chinook salmon. The
proposed project actions May Affect but are Not Likely to Adversely Affect Chinook salmon Critical
Habitat.
Puget Sound Steelhead
Oncorhynchus mykiss – Threatened, listed May 11, 2007
The Puyallup River supports winter and summer populations of steelhead in the mainstem and a population
in the Carbon River, a tributary of the Puyallup River. These populations are considered “Depressed” by
WDFW SASSI data (WDFW, 2002). Run timing of local steelhead includes adults presence within the
vicinity of the Action Area year round and juvenile outmigration from mid-March through mid-July, with
juvenile rearing possible year round. Steelhead counts in the Puyallup River have declined steadily since the
1980’s (Ford et al, 2010). Spawning ground surveys and juvenile sampling efforts have found steelhead
present in the system in low numbers (Kerwin, 1999). Puget Sound steelhead have been documented in the
Hylebos Waterway (WDFW, 2011).
Per WSDOT’s 2010 Biological Assessment training model, the current thresholds for fish injury are 206
dBpeak. The threshold for impacting fish behavior is 150 dB RMS. Noise from vibratory pile driving will not
exceed the threshold for injury to fish species; however, if a fish is within seven hundred and fifty meters of
pile driving activities they may experience noise at levels that affect behavior. Adults and juvenile most likely
use the Action Area as a migration corridor, and for juvenile rearing and outmigration. Due to the lack of
presence of Steelhead from depleted species and the brief duration of sound impacts, the proposed project
actions May Affect, but are Not Likely to Adversely Affect Puget Sound steelhead.
Turbidity is expected to be localized and temporary. The removal of creosote pile, seven large tires and
various loose debris near the shoreline, is anticipated to provide adequate mitigation for the proposed project.
The project effects are not likely to result in any adverse effects to habitat for Steelhead. The proposed
project actions May Affect but are Not Likely to Adversely Affect Steelhead Critical Habitat.
Southern Resident Killer Whale
Orcinus orca – Endangered, listed November 15, 2005
Critical Habitat designated November 2006
Southern Resident Killer whale may be found in the Puget Sound, Straits of Georgia and Juan de Fuca,
including Commencement Bay during spring through fall, with most likely presence occurring during
Chinook and chum salmon migration to natal streams (NMFS, 2008 and NMFS, 2012a). Southern resident
killer whale occurrence within the Action Area during the project work period is unlikely (Fisher, 2012). Due
to the narrow waterway, low likelihood of available prey near the project, and the high level of human
presence in the Hylebos Waterway, it is extremely unlikely that these species ever use the internal portions of
Action Area.
20
November 6, 2012
Southern resident killer whale sighting compilation from 1990-2008 (Osborne, 2008) has compiled data
regarding the average number of orca sightings per month over an 18 year period. October through February
contained the highest number of sightings per month in southern Puget Sound areas. Orca, if present, would
be limited to the waters of Commencement Bay and adjacent Puget Sound.
It is extremely unlikely an orca would come into the Hylebos Waterway or the small portion along the
northwestern cove of Commencement Bay where the sound projects into, during the brief duration that
vibratory pile driving methods will be used <1 hour of vibratory hammer per pile used over the course of the
five day construction period. The sound threshold for injury to cetaceans is 180 dBRMS the disturbance
threshold is 160 dB (WSDOT, 2010). Due to unlikely presence and the short duration of sound impacts, the
proposed actions May Affect, but are Not Likely to Adversely Affect Southern Resident Killer Whale.
Bocaccio rockfish
Sebastes paucispinis - listed Endangered July 27, 2010
Presence of adult rockfish within the Action Area is unlikely as no habitat features are present to attract these
fish. Bocaccio have not been documented in the Puget Sound since 2001, although it is assumed that an
extant population any exist (NMFS, 2008). Historically, bocaccio were observed as bycatch in the
recreational fisheries in the southern Puget Sound, including Point Defiance and Tacoma Narrows areas
(Palsson et al 2009), with a majority of documented local bocaccio occurring within northern portions of the
Tacoma Narrows (Miller and Borton, 1980). The substrate in the Hylebos Waterway is silty-sand and sandy
silt with bulkheads and unvegetated concrete structures or riprap and do not present a suitable habitat for
these rockfish in either juvenile or adult forms; therefore, and based on current population estimates as being
low in the area, it is extremely unlikely that bocaccio would be present in the Action Area.
Adult bocaccio are not expected to occur within the Hylebos Waterway portion of the Action Area, as it is
too shallow (maximum depth of approximately -51 feet), juvenile or larval bocaccio could be present within
this portion of the Action Area, but water quality conditions and the high shipping activity likely limit the
habitat suitability within the Hylebos Waterway. In addition, the nearshore habitat is largely lacking any
eelgrass, kelp, or other aquatic vegetation that would be preferred by juvenile and larval bocaccio. Deeper
portions of the Action Area within Commencement Bay provide suitable habitat for adult and juvenile
bocaccio any time of year.
The limited potential for occurrence of rockfish within the Action Area may include drift larval and small
juvenile forms that could potentially be present within the Puget Sound waters during the summer months.
Any project effects to larval forms of rockfish are anticipated to be highly unlikely. Due to lack of rockfish
habitat features and distance from deeper water habitat features in greater Puget Sound, the proposed project
actions May Affect, but are Not Likely to Adversely Affect bocaccio DPS of rockfish.
Canary rockfish
Sebastes pinniger- listed Threatened July 27, 2010
Canary rockfish have been documented throughout the Puget Sound (Miller and Borton 1980). Numbers are
relatively low compared to other rockfish species (Palsson et al 2009) with a majority of documented local
bocaccio occurring within northern portions of the Tacoma Narrows (Miller and Borton, 1980). Some
recreational fishing records show that canary rockfish have been frequently caught around the Tacoma
Narrows but more in the north Puget Sound and the San Juan Islands. Similar to bocaccio rockfish, the
substrate in the Hylebos Waterway makes unsuitable habitat for canary rockfish recruitment and juvenile
rearing which is typically associated with vegetated (recruitment) and deeper hard substrate (rearing). Adult
canary rockfish are associated with substantially deeper high-relief hard substrate not found in the Hylebos
21
November 6, 2012
Waterway. Unsuitable habitat conditions and population estimates make it extremely unlikely that canary
rockfish would be present in the Action Area.
Adult canary rockfish are not expected to occur within the Hylebos as water depths are too shallow, the
substrate is undesirable, and no high-relief deep-water habitat occurs. Juvenile or larval canary may be present
within the waterway; however, they tend to move quickly to deep-water habitats, the nearshore lacks eelgrass,
kelp, or other aquatic vegetation that would be preferred by juvenile or larval canary rockfish, and water
quality conditions and the high level of shipping activity likely limit suitability of habitat within this portion of
the Action area. Deep water portions of the Commencement Bay may provide suitable habitat for adult and
juvenile any time of year.
May Affect, is Not Likely to Adversely Affect canary DPS of rockfish.
Yelloweye rockfish
Sebastes ruberrimus- listed Threatened July 27, 2010
Yelloweye rockfish are considered relatively rare in the Puget Sound (NMFS 2008). In general, yelloweye
rockfish have been observed more frequently in north Puget Sound than in southern areas (Miller and Borton
1980). Juvenile rockfish recruitment is likely to be found in areas with shallow high–relief zones with crevices
and sponge gardens (NMFS, 2008). Juveniles move from shallow rocky reefs to deeper pinnacles and rocky
habitats as they mature (NMFS, 2008). Preferred deep water habitats do not occur in the Hylebos Waterway,
and based on population estimates, it is extremely unlikely that yelloweye rockfish would be present in the
Action Area.
Adult yelloweye are not expected to occur within the Hylebos Waterway portion of the action area, as it is too
shallow (maximum depth of approximately -51 feet), substrates consist of silty sand and sandy silt, and no
high-relief deep-water habitat exists in the Hylebos Waterway. Juvenile or larval bocaccio are also likely to
not be found within this portion of the Action Area, as yelloweye give birth in the spring and juvenile
yelloweye tend to move quickly to deep-water habitat. Additionally, water quality conditions and the high
shipping activity likely limit the habitat suitability within the Hylebos Waterway. Juveniles do not use
nearshore habitat frequently, and are most frequently found associated with floating kelp beds and no kelp
beds are likely within the Hylebos waterway. Deeper portions of the Action Area within Commencement
Bay may provide suitable habitat for adult and juvenile yelloweye any time of year.
actions May Affect, are Not Likely to Adversely Affect yelloweye DPS of rockfish.
4.5 Essential Fish Habitat Analysis for the Proposed Project (EFH analysis)
The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery and Conservation Act (MSA) and the 1996 Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996
(SFA)(Public Law 104-267) requires Federal agencies to consult with the National Marine Fisheries (NMFS)
on activities that may adversely affect Essential Fish Habitat (EFH). EFH is defined by the MSA in 50 CFR
22
November 6, 2012
600.905-930 as “those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to
maturity.”
The object of this EFH assessment is to notify NMFS of the project and potential effects and determine
whether or not the proposed actions “may adversely affect” designated EFH for relevant commercially,
federally-managed fisheries species within the proposed action area. It also describes conservation measures
proposed to avoid, minimize, or otherwise offset potential adverse effects to designated EFH resulting from
the proposed action. The following EFH analysis is provided in conjunction with ESA consultation, some
previous sections of the document may be referenced in order to reduce redundancies.
Relevant life history stages with associated EFH for groundfish, salmon, and coastal pelagic species in the
project vicinity are listed for species commonly found in Puget Sound (estuaries).
Table 6. Essential Fish Habitat for common Puget Sound (estuaries) species by life history stage.*
Common Name
Species Name
Adult
Eggs
Juvenile Larvae
Groundfish
Big skate
Raja binoculata
X
X
X
Black rockfish
Sebastes melanops
X
X
Blue rockfish
Sebastes mystinus
X
X
X
Bocaccio rockfish
X
X
Brown rockfish
Sebastes auricaulatus
X
X
Butter sole
Isopsetta isolepis
X
X
X
X
Cabezon
Scorpaenichthys marmoratus
X
X
X
X
China rockfish
Sebastes nebulosus
X
X
Copper rockfish
Sebastes caurinus
X
X
Dover sole
Microstomus pacificus
X
X
English sole
Parophrys vetulus
X
X
X
Flathead sole
Hippoglossoides elassodon
X
X
Greenstriped rockfish
Sebastes elongates
X
X
Kelp greenling
Hexagrammos decagrammus
X
X
X
X
Lingcod
Ophiodon elongates
X
X
X
X
Longnosed skate
Raja rhina
X
Pacific cod
Gadus macrocephalus
X
Pacific hake
Merliccius productus
X
X
Pacific sanddab
Citharichthys sordidus
X
X
X
X
Petrale sole
Eopsetta jordani
X
X
Quillback rockfish
Sebastes maliger
X
X
X
Redstripe rockfish
Sebastes proriger
X
X
X
Rex sole
Glyptocephalus zachirus
X
X
Rock sole
Lepidopsetta bilineata
X
X
X
X
Sablefish
Anoplopoma fimbria
X
X
X
X
Sand sole
Psettichthys melanostictus
X
X
X
X
Spiny dogfish
Squalus acanthius
X
X
Splitnose rockfish
Sebastes diploproa
X
X
X
Spotted ratfish
Hydrolagus colliei
X
X
X
Starry flounder
Platichthys stellatus
X
X
X
X
Tiger rockfish
Sebastes nigrocinctus
X
X
X
Widow rockfish
Sebastes entomelas
X
X
Yelloweye rockfish
Sebastes ruberrimus
X
Yellowtail rockfish
Sebastes flavidus
X
X
23
November 6, 2012
Pacific Salmon
Chinook
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha
Coho
Oncorhynchus kisutch
Puget Sound pink
Oncorhynchus gorbuscha
Coastal Pelagics
Northern anchovy
Engraulis mordax
Pacific sardine
Sardinops sagax caerulea
Pacific mackerel
Scomber japonicas
Market squid
Loligo opalescens
*Data for this table found in PFMC 1998, 1999, and 2005.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
The proposed project actions are detailed in Section 2.2 of the BE. The effects of the actions (Section 4) will
occur within the Action Area defined in Section 2.4 of the BE. Relevant assessment of EFH at the proposed
project site includes the intertidal areas and associated riparian areas located within the estuarine Habitat Area
of Particular Concern. Species of fishes with potential for project effects in the estuarine EFH composite
include groundfish, salmon, and coastal pelagic species of fish. Discussion of impacts to the relevant species’
EFH follows.
Salmon EFH
Effects of pile driving in the proposed project are discussed in Section 4 of this document. Temporary
disturbance to sediments, including the silty sand and sandy silt characteristic of the substrate at the Project
Area will result in temporary increases in turbidity during the construction actions in localized areas within the
Project Area. A potential for unintentional releases of fuel or other fluids from construction equipment
exists, with potential for effects on water quality. Also, potential for effects to salmonids EFH from the noise
associated with pile driving methods exists. These noise effects would be temporary, within the work period
described in Section 2 of this document, and localized to the Action Area, described in Section 2.4 of this
document. Upon completion of the project actions, along with implementation of minimization and
mitigation measures, the direct and short term effects of turbidity and noise created by the project are
anticipated to diminish. The long-term effects are not expected to be negative since the only permanent
impacts proposed are mitigation actions including removal of creosote pile and other debris from the
shoreline and intertidal areas. Mitigation is anticipated to provide more than adequate mitigation for the
temporary existence of seven hundred twenty-six (726) square feet of partially grated over-water structures
and the permanent existence of in-water structures described in Section 2.
Groundfish EFH
Effects of pile driving in the proposed project are discussed in Section 4 of this document. Temporary
disturbance to sediments, including the silty sand and sandy silt characteristic of the substrate at the Project
Area will result in temporary increases in turbidity during the construction actions in localized areas within the
Project Area. A potential for unintentional releases of fuel or other fluids from construction equipment
exists, with potential for effects on water quality. Also potential for effects to groundfish EFH from the
noise associated with pile driving methods exists. These noise effects would be temporary, within the work
period described in Section 2 of this document, and localized to the Action Area, described in Section 2.4 of
this document. Upon completion of the project actions, along with implementation of minimization and
impacts proposed are mitigation actions, including removal of creosote pile and other debris from the
shoreline and intertidal areas. Mitigation is anticipated to provide more than adequate mitigation for the
temporary existence of seven hundred twenty-six (726) square feet of partially grated over-water structures
and the permanent existence of in-water structures described in Section 2.
24
November 6, 2012
Coastal Pelagics EFH
A potential for unintentional releases of fuel or other fluids from construction equipment exists, with
potential for effects on water quality. Also, the potential for effects to coastal pelagics EFH from the noise
associated with pile driving methods exists. These noise effects would be temporary, within the work period
described in Section 2 of this document, and localized to the Action Area, described in Section 2.4 of this
document. Upon completion of the project actions, along with implementation of minimization and
impacts proposed are mitigation actions, including removal of creosote pile and other debris from the
intertidal areas. Mitigation is anticipated to provide more than adequate mitigation for the temporary
existence of seven hundred twenty-six (726) square feet of partially grated over-water structures and the
permanent existence of in-water structures described in Section 2.
EFH Conservation measures
The proposed project will be implemented with the minimization and mitigation measures detailed in Section
4.3, listed as conservation measures, any additional impact minimization measures via EFH Conservation
Recommendations will be determined by NOAA Fisheries per 305(b)(4)(A) of the MSA.
Conclusions
The overall effect on fish habitat will involve a temporary increase in partial shading in the proposed project
area due to a new overwater structure. The trestle will create seven hundred twenty-six (726) square feet of
new overwater structure. The overwater structures will be elevated and the walkway decking will be grated to
reduce shading impacts. The creosote piles and shoreline debris to be removed will permanently open at least
seventeen hundred and thirty (1,730) square feet of intertidal habitat. No other long-term impacts to species
or species habitat are anticipated. Project actions described in Section 2.2 and completion of the project will
not adversely affect the EFH for groundfish, pelagic and salmonids species. Conservation measures that are
incorporated into the project are expected to reduce the potential effects of this project as discussed in
Section 4.3.
25
November 6, 2012
Chapter 5. References
BergerABAM 2012. Programmatic Biological Evaluation. Port of Tacoma – Pile Replacement Program,
NWS-2011-89-WRD. Submitted to US Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District on behalf of Port
Chan, J. 2012. Personal communication between Racheal Villa and Railin Peterson, biologists with Soundview
Consultants LLC and Jeff Chan, USFWS biologist regarding endangered species presence and
potential impacts of pile driving in the Hylebos Waterway, and related impacts into Commencement
Bay and the Puget Sound. March 29, 2012.
City of Tacoma. 2008. Surface Water Management Manual. Watershed Designations. Vol. 1 chap 2
California Department of Fish and Game. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/marine/mspcont4.asp
Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) 2008. 303(d) list of impaired waters.
Downs, J. 2012. Personal communication between Jeremy Downs and Racheal Villa, Soundview Consultants
LLC regarding salmon surveys in Hylebos Waterway. Gig Harbor, Washington. March 29 and April
4, 2012.
Department of Ecology (DOE) 2008. Candidate 2010 Water Quality Assessment and 303(d) list.
http://apps.ecy.wa.gov/wqawa2008/viewer.htm
Department of Ecology (DOE) 2010. Water Quality Assessment for Washington.
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/303d/2010/index.html
Duker, G., Whitmus, C., Salo, E.O., Grette, G.B., and Schuh, W.M. 1989. Distribution of juvenile salmonids
in Commencement Bay, 1983. Prepared for Port of Tacoma: Seattle WA. FRI-UW-8909. Available
from: https://digital.lib.washington.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1773/4111/8908.pdf?sequence=1
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 2009. Third Five-Year Review Report for Commencement Bay
Nearshore/Tideflats Superfund Site Tacoma, Washington. December 23, 2009. USEPA Region 10.
Fisher, J. 2012. Personal communication between Railin Peterson, biologist with Soundview Consultants LLC
and Jeff Fisher, PhD SW Washington Branch Chief NOAA-NMFS regarding endangered species
presence and potential impacts of pile driving and other details of the EHW Constructors Trestle
plans in the Hylebos Waterway, and related impacts into Commencement Bay and the Puget Sound.
August 13, 2012.
Grette 2011. General Metals of Tacoma DBA Schnitzer Steel Pile Replacement Project. Biological
Evaluation and Essential Fish Habitat Assessment. Grette Associates LLC. Tacoma, Washington.
April 13, 2011.
Hanson, Jeanne, Mark Helvey, Russ Strach, Editors. 2003. Non-Fishing Impacts to Essential Fish Habitat
and Recommended Conservation Measures. Version 1. U.S. Department of Commerce, National
Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries), Alaska Region, Northwest Region, Southwest Region.
August 2003.
Jeffries, S.J., P.J. Gearin, H.R. Huber, D.L. Saul, and D.A. Pruett. 200. Atlas of Seal and Sea Lion Haulout
Sites in Washington. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Wildlife Science Division, 600
Capitol Way North, Olympia, Washington.
26
November 6, 2012
Jensen, M. 2012. Personal communication between Railin Peterson, Environmental Biologist with Soundview
Consultants LLC and Martha Jensen, USFWS biologist regarding endangered species presence and
potential impacts of pile driving in the Hylebos Waterway, and related impacts into Commencement
Bay and the Puget Sound. August 14, 2012.
Kerwin, J. 1999. Salmon and steelhead habitat limiting factors: water resources inventory area 11. Final
Report. Washington State Conservation Commission. Olympia, Washington.
Miller, B.S. and S.F. Borton. 1980. Geographical Distribution of Puget Sound Fishes: Maps and Data Source
Sheets. Volume 2. Family Percichthyidae (Temperate Basses) 32.1 through Family Hexigrammidae
(Greenlings) 54.6.
National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998. Recovery Plan for U.S.
Populations of Leatherback Turtle (Dermochelys coriacea). National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver
Spring, MD.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) 2005. Status Review Update for Puget Sound Steelhead. NMFS
Puget Sound Biological Review Team. July 2005.
NMFS 2008. Preliminary scientific conclusions of the review status of 5 species of rockfish: bocaccio
(Sebastes paucispinis), canary rockfish (Sebastes pinniger), yelloweye rockfish (Sebastes ruberrimus),
greenstriped rockfish (Sebastes elongatus), and redstriped rockfish (Sebastes proriger)in Puget Sound,
Washington. NMFS Northwest Fisheries Science Center. Seattle, Washington. December 2008.
NMFS 2008. Recovery Plan for Southern Resident Killer Whales (Orcinus orca). National Marine Fisheries
Service, Northwest Region, Seattle, Washington.
NMFS 2011. Batched Endangered Species Act Section 7 Informal and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Management Act Consultations: Thiesen and McClure Lots, Arcadia Point Seafood, Thurston
County, Washington (4th Field HUC 17110019, Puget Sound). NMFS Tracking Numbers
2011/02657 and 2011/02656. Seattle, Washington. August 2, 2011.
NMFS, 2012a. data accessed from website: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/
NMFS, 2012b. Endangered Species Act Section 7 Formal Consultation and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Consultation for the Tacoma Industrial
Properites-Taylor Way Vessel Stabilization and Moorage Facilities (COE No.: NWS -2012-186),
(Fourth Field HUC 17110019 Puget Sound). NMFS tracking number 2012/001138. April 25, 2012.
Olson, O.P., L. Johnson, G. Ylitalo, C. Rice, J. Cordell, T.K. Collier, and J. Steger 2008. Fish habitat use and
chemical contaminant exposure at restoration sites in Commencement Bay, Washington. U.S. Dept.
Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-88, 117 p.
Osborne, R.. 2008. http://www.whalemuseum.org/education/library/whalewatch/arrivals.html
Palsson, W.A., T. Tsou, G.G. Bargmann, R.M. Buckley, J.E. West, M.L. Mills, Y.W. Cheng, and R.E.
Pacunski. 2009. The Biology and Assessment of Rockfishes in Puget Sound. Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife. September 2009.
Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC). 1998. Essential Fish Habitat Coastal Pelagic Species. Modified
from Coastal Pelagics Species Fishery Management Plan. Pacific Fishery Management Council.
Portland, Oregon.
Peterson, R. 2012. JARPA for the EHW Constructors – Trestle Installation Project.
27
November 6, 2012
PFMC. 1999. Amendment 14 to the Pacific Coast Salmon Plan. Appendix A: Description and Identification
of Essential Fish Habitat, Adverse Impacts and Recommended Conservation Measures for Salmon
(August 1999).
PFMC. 2004. Identification of Essential Fish Habitat for the Pacific Groundfish FMP. Appendix 7.
Development of Profiles of Habitat Suitability Probability based on latitude and depth for species
and life stages in the Groundfish FMP.
PFMC. 2005. For the California, Oregon, and Washington Groundfish Fishery. Appendix B Part 2.
Groundfish Life History Descriptions. Portland, Oregon. November 2005.
Pearson, S. and M. Lance. 2010. Marbled murrelet population trends. Lead scientists, Scott Pearson and
Monique Lance. Data accessed on Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife website:
http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/research/projects/seabird/marbled_murrelet_population/index.
html
Shaeffer, D. 2012. Personal communication with Jeremy Downs of Soundview Consultants LLC and David
Shaeffer, US Army Corps of Engineers.
Soundview Consultants LLC (SVC) 2012a. Biological Evaluation: Tacoma Industrial Properties – Taylor Way
Vessel Stabilization and Moorage Facilities. Gig Harbor, Washington. April 2012.
Soundview Consultants LLC (SVC) 2012b. Technical Memorandum for the EHW Constructors – Trestle
Installation project. Gig Harbor, Washington. September 2012.
Soundview Consultants LLC (SVC) 2012c. Underwater Noise Monitoring Report: Tacoma Industrial
Properties – Taylor Way Vessel Stabilization and Moorage Facilities (NWS-2012-186, HPA 1266491). Gig Harbor, Washington. August 2012.
USFWS 1967. Formerly Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service: Notices. Office of the
Secretary, Native Fish and Wildlife, Endangered Species. Federal Register, Volume 32, Number 48 –
Saturday, March 11, 1967.
USFWS, 1996. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Designation of Critical Habitat for the
Marbled Murrelet; Final Rule50 CFR Part 17
USFWS, 2005 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for
Trout. 50 CFR Part 17
the Bull
USFWS, 2008. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Critical Habitat for the Northern
Spotted
Owl; Final Rule 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised
USFWS. 2010. 75 FR 63898, October 18, 2010. Federal Register Vol. 75, No. 200, Monday October 18,
2010, Rules and Regulations Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service; 50 CFR Part 17.
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for Bull
Trout in the Coterminous United States.
USFWS website 2011. http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout/
WDFW, 1991. Management Recommendations for Washington’s Priority Habitats and Species. May 1991.
WDFW, 2000. Bull Trout and Dolly Varden Management Plan. September 2000.
WDFW, 2002. Salmonscape website. http://fortress.wa.gov/dfw/gispublic/apps/salmonscape/default.htm
28
November 6, 2012
WDFW, 2011. Final Puget Sound Rockfish Conservation Plan. Policies, Strategies and Actions. March
2011.
WDFW, 2012. Data accessed from website: http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/salmonscape/index.html Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List. Olympia, Washington.
177 pp.
Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) 2008. 303(d) list.
Washington State Department of Transportation, (WSDOT) 2010. Advanced Training Manual Version 022010., Biological Assessment Preparation for Transportation Projects. Olympia, Washington.
29
November 6, 2012
Appendix A — Action Area
November 6, 2012
A1. The sediment and sound Action Areas for project actions on a Google Earth aerial photograph.
November 6, 2012
Appendix B — Project Plans
November 6, 2012
Appendix C – List of Contacts
Bill Rehe – Port of Tacoma: [email protected] / 253-592-6704
David Shaeffer – U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: [email protected] / 206-764-6071
Jeff Fisher – National Marine Fisheries Service: [email protected] / 360-534-9342
Jonathan Williams – Environmental Protection Agency: [email protected] / 206-553-1369
Martha Jensen – United States Fish and Wildlife Service: [email protected] / 360-753-9545
Chris Waldbillig – Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife: [email protected] /360-8747258
November 6, 2012
Appendix D – Author Qualifications
Railin Peterson
Railin Peterson is a professional Environmental Scientist with background in both fresh water and marine
ecology. She has experience in fisheries management, assessing marine, shoreline, stream, and wetland
systems, conducting biological evaluations, documentation and coordination of ESA, MSA, and NEPA
compliance efforts, NPDES compliance, GIS mapping and analysis, and regulatory coordination and
permitting. Railin earned a Bachelor’s of Science degree from the Evergreen State College, Olympia and
post-graduate education in Marine and Environmental Affairs from the University of Washington, Seattle.
In addition, she has received formal training in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) from the
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Geographic Information Systems (GIS) for Fisheries and Wildlife
Biology Applications through the Northwest Environmental Training Center, Ordination High Water
Delineation through the Washington State Department of Ecology and various NPDES Phase I and II
stormwater monitoring and data analysis and regulatory subjects. For a list of representative projects, please
contact her at Soundview Consultants LLC.
Jeremy Downs
Jeremy Downs is the Principal Scientist and Environmental Planner for the project with professional training
and extensive experience in land use, site planning and design, project coordination, permitting and
management, marine and wetland ecology, habitat restoration, wetland, stream, and benthic delineations and
assessments, stream assessments, underwater and terrestrial monitoring programs, and mitigation planning
and design since 1987.
Jeremy earned a Bachelor’s of Science degree in Biology from the University of California, Davis. In
addition, he studied under the Environmental Risk and Recovery program at the Australian Institute of
Marine Science. He also holds graduate-level professional certifications in various advanced wetland science
and management programs from both Portland State University and San Francisco State University, and he
has received professional training in Salmonid Biology from the University of California Extension.
Jeremy has been formally trained in the use of the Washington State Wetland Rating System, Determination
of Ordinary High Water Mark, Designing Compensatory Mitigation and Restoration Projects, and Reviewing
Wetland Mitigation and Monitoring Plans from the US Army Corps of Engineers and Washington State
Department of Ecology, and in conducting Biological Assessments from the Washington Department of
Transportation. He is also a Pierce County Qualified Wetland Specialist and Fisheries Biologist, and he holds
similar qualifications from other jurisdictions.
November 6, 2012
Hello Charla,
Thank you for meeting with me this morning. I am under the impression that either you or Karla
will be reviewing the package I submitted this morning so I want to answer some of the questions
that came up in our intake meeting this morning.
Question 1: What is the exact date the trestle crane mat will be removed by?
Answer: The Client said they will remove the trestle crane mat by 12/1/2016.
Question 2: What is the exact number of piles that will be removed?
Answer: We will commit to removing at least 6 creosote pile.
Please let me know if any other questions come up during review or if you need me to provide any
other information.
Also, do you know if this structure will require a building permit? If so, who should I talk to about
requirements and fees?
Thanks,
Railin Peterson
Environmental Scientist
Office: 253.514.8952
Fax: 253.514.8954
[email protected]
Environmental, Natural Resource, and Land Use Consulting
Comprehensive Assessment, Planning, and Permitting Services
1133.0001

Soundview Consultants LLC

Transcription

Similar documents

Brochure - Habitat for Zoomanity A Life Science Webquest

C ontracting C ompany GUIDE TO SERVICES

Habitat Hammerings - Northwoods Habitat for Humanity

2014_June_habitat Happenings Newsletter_WEB

Activity 22

open cell sheet pile

To this: Davidsonville Wildlife Sanctuary Wetland Restoration Best

Jewelry Trunk Show

A Loan Origination and Servicing Solution For Habitat for Humanity

Fall 2012 - Habitat for Humanity