Biological Evaluation and Essential Fish Habitat Evaluation
Port of Everett South Terminal Berth Improvements/Mill A Interim Action
Everett, Washington for Port of Everett
October 29, 2018 Biological Evaluation and Essential Fish Habitat Evaluation
Port of Everett South Terminal Berth Improvements/Mill A Interim Action
Everett, Washington for Port of Everett
October 29, 2018
2101 Fourth Avenue, Suite 950 Seattle, Washington 98121 206.728.2674 Biological Evaluation and Essential Fish Habitat Evaluation Port of Everett South Terminal Berth Improvements/Mill A Interim Action Everett, Washington
File No. 0676-020-06
October 29, 2018
Prepared for:
Port of Everett 1205 Craftsman Way #200 Everett, Washington 98201
Attention: Erik Gerking
Prepared by:
GeoEngineers, Inc. 2101 Fourth Avenue, Suite 950 Seattle, Washington 98121 206.728.2674
Lydia Baldwin, MS Emily R. Duncanson Staff Biologist Environmental Scientist
Shawn M. Mahugh, PWS Jason P. Stutes, PhD Senior Habitat Biologist Senior Marine Ecologist
Joseph O. Callaghan, MS, PWS Associate Biologist JLD:SMM:JOC:tt:cam Disclaimer: Any electronic form, facsimile or hard copy of the original document (email, text, table, and/or figure), if provided, and any attachments are only a copy of the original document. The original document is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official document of record. Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 Project Location ...... 1 Existing Conditions ...... 2 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 3 Infrastructure Improvements ...... 3 2.1.1. Mooring Dolphins ...... 3 2.1.2. Fender System ...... 3 2.1.3. Dolphin Trestle ...... 3 Maintenance Dredging ...... 4 Slope Armoring ...... 5 Mitigation ...... 5 Project Construction ...... 7 2.5.1. Construction Methods ...... 7 2.5.2. Mooring Dolphins ...... 7 2.5.3. Fender System ...... 8 2.5.4. Dolphin Trestle ...... 8 2.5.5. Construction Area ...... 9 2.5.6. Equipment Used ...... 9 3.0 IMPACT AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION MEASURES ...... 9 General Construction Impact Minimization Measures ...... 9 Additional Construction Measures to Reduce Impacts to Species and Habitats ...... 11 In-Water Work Window ...... 12 4.0 ACTION AREA ...... 12 Baseline Conditions for Assessing the Action Area ...... 13 4.1.1. Underwater Noise ...... 13 4.1.2. In-Air/Terrestrial Noise ...... 13 Construction Conditions for Assessing the Action Area ...... 13 4.2.1. Underwater Noise ...... 13 4.2.2. In Air/Terrestrial Noise ...... 14 Turbidity ...... 15 Habitat Alteration ...... 15 Action Area Summary ...... 16 Baseline Environmental Conditions ...... 16 4.6.1. Hydromodifications ...... 16 4.6.2. Water Quality ...... 16 4.6.3. Habitat and Biota ...... 16 4.6.4. Contaminants and Sediments ...... 18 5.0 SPECIES AND HABITAT INFORMATION ...... 19 Species and Critical Habitat that May be Present in the Action Area ...... 19 Species and Critical Habitat Not Addressed in the BE ...... 19 Utilization of Habitats by Listed Species ...... 20
October 29, 2018 | Page i File No. 0676-020-06
5.3.1. Bull Trout ...... 20 5.3.2. Puget Sound Chinook Salmon ...... 20 5.3.3. Puget Sound Steelhead ...... 21 5.3.4. Rockfish (Bocaccio and Yellow Rockfish) ...... 21 5.3.5. Southern Resident Killer Whale ...... 22 5.3.6. Marbled Murrelet ...... 22 Occurrence of Critical Habitat in the Action Area ...... 23 5.4.1. Bull Trout Critical Habitat ...... 23 5.4.2. Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat ...... 24 5.4.3. Steelhead Critical Habitat ...... 25 5.4.4. Southern Resident Killer Whale Critical Habitat ...... 25 5.4.5. Rockfish Critical Habitat ...... 25 6.0 ANALYSIS OF EFFECTS ON SPECIES AND HABITAT ...... 25 Construction Disturbances ...... 26 6.1.1. Direct Effects ...... 26 6.1.2. Indirect Effects ...... 28 6.1.3. Net Effects ...... 29 Water Quality Disturbances ...... 29 6.2.1. Direct Effects ...... 29 6.2.2. Indirect Effects ...... 30 6.2.3. Net Effects ...... 30 Sediment Disturbances ...... 30 6.3.1. Direct Effects ...... 30 6.3.2. Indirect Effects ...... 31 6.3.3. Net Effects ...... 31 Habitat and Biota Disturbance ...... 31 6.4.1. Direct Effects on Benthic Habitat ...... 32 6.4.2. Eelgrass Habitat Impacts ...... 32 6.4.3. Mitigation Actions ...... 33 6.4.4. Indirect Effects ...... 35 6.4.5. Net Effects ...... 35 Summary of Effects ...... 36 7.0 EFFECT DETERMINATIONS ...... 36 Effect on Species ...... 36 7.1.1. Bull Trout ...... 37 7.1.2. Bull Trout Designated Critical Habitat ...... 37 7.1.3. Puget Sound Chinook Salmon ...... 37 7.1.4. Puget Sound Chinook Salmon Designated Critical Habitat ...... 38 7.1.5. Puget Sound Steelhead ...... 38 7.1.6. Boccaccio and Yelloweye Rockfish ...... 39 7.1.7. Boccaccio and Yelloweye Rockfish Designated Critical Habitat ...... 39 7.1.8. Southern Resident Killer Whale ...... 39 7.1.9. Southern Resident Killer Whale Designated Critical Habitat ...... 40 7.1.10. Marbled Murrelet ...... 40
October 29, 2018 | Page ii File No. 0676-020-06
8.0 CONCLUSIONS ...... 40 9.0 REFERENCES ...... 41
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figure 2. Action Area
APPENDICES Appendix A. JARPA Drawings Appendix B. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Evaluation Appendix C. USFWS and NMFS Critical Habitat and Species Lists
October 29, 2018 | Page iii File No. 0676-020-06
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This document presents a Biological Evaluation (BE) and Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Evaluation for the Port of Everett (Port) proposed maintenance dredging and infrastructure improvements at the South Terminal Wharf in Everett, Washington (Figure 1). The project purpose is to improve navigation at South Terminal for larger vessels and over-sized cargo that is anticipated by the Port in response to the changing shipping requirements of their existing customers. The Port is continuing to modernize its facilities in maintaining its role as a critical gateway supporting international trade and regional manufacturing and construction activities. Significant supply chain and other economic drivers are spurring current and anticipated Port customers to utilize larger vessels. Accommodation of these vessels necessitates that the Port improve dockage and cargo handling facilities. The larger vessels require changes to dockage, cargo handling and terminal layout not only to support vessel size, but also to handle increases in volume, size and weight of the cargo. Opportunity to meet the requirements of larger ships is limited at the Port’s other marine terminals. Utilization of the Port’s other cargo facilities, including Piers 1 and 3, and Pacific Terminal, was evaluated based on structural capacity to handle heavier and oversized loads, cargo handling equipment capabilities, berth depths and dredge requirements, and other factors. South Terminal Wharf has been identified as being able to accommodate these improvements while avoiding expansion of in- water facilities, reducing environmental impacts, minimizing costs of improvements, and not impacting the upland operations configuration for storing and moving cargoes. This project will include maintenance dredging of sediment adjacent to the berth (last dredged in the 1970s) and structural improvements for vessel moorage. These improvements are shown in detail in Appendix A.
Dredging and infrastructure upgrades will occur in the marine waters of Possession Sound within “Waters of the United States” and will therefore, require a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under their authority to administer Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Because of this federal nexus, the project will also need to comply with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Management Act (MSA). GeoEngineers, Inc. (GeoEngineers) was contracted by the Port to provide a BE and EFH Evaluation for the South Terminal Berth Improvements and Mill A Interim Action (the Project). The purpose of this BE is to present a description of proposed project actions and their effects on project-specific listed species and critical habitats pertinent to the consultation process for ESA compliance. An EFH evaluation is also included separately as Appendix B.
In addition, since the proposed project is located within the shorelines of the City of Everett (City), under the City’s Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Director’s Initiative 2-2000, the Port must prepare a BE to analyze the potential influence of the operation’s actions on listed species and their critical habitat. This document is intended to meet both the requirements of a Section 7(c) Consultation under ESA, and of the City’s SMP for an assessment of potential impacts on ESA-listed species and their habitats within the City’s shorelines.
Project Location The Port’s South Terminal is within the Weyerhaeuser Mill A Former Site and is generally located at the southern end of the Port’s international Seaport (Figure 1). The South Terminal is located at 3210 Terminal Avenue, Everett, Snohomish County, Washington. The property associated with the South
October 29, 2018 | Page 1 File No. 0676-020-06
Terminal facility (henceforth referred to as the “Property”) consists of three tax parcels (Snohomish County Parcel No. 29053000201800, 29053000203400, and 29042500400200).
The Port is located within Possession Sound, Port Gardner, which connects the main Puget Sound basin to the south with Saratoga Passage and Port Susan Bay to the north. The project site is located within the northwest quarter of Section 30 in Township 29 North and Range 5 East and the northeast quarter of Section 25 in Township 29 North and Range 4 East. The “action area,” where direct or indirect effects of the proposed action may occur, is defined as a 20-mile-radius from shore to account for the potential effects from pile driving noise. The “project area” includes the nearshore footprint near South Terminal where dredging and construction activities will occur.
Existing Conditions The Port of Everett is the third largest container port in the state, handling high-value, over dimensional cargoes in support of the aerospace, manufacturing, construction, agriculture, energy and forest products industries. The overall Port consists of four shipping terminals and two piers. The project area is part of the larger international seaport which is used for maritime shipping, cargo handling, and features links to rail and roadway transport networks. South Terminal is a cargo wharf with a deep draft vessel berth for the off and onloading of cargo. The wharf is currently under construction to double its strength in preparation of receiving two 100-foot gauge rail mounted gantry cranes suitable for handling oversized and heavy aerospace cargoes.
The South Terminal is a large flat upland area with several building structures, a single deep–water berth (referred to as South Terminal Wharf) featuring a pile supported wharf with a concrete deck, a finger/dolphin pier on the north end for the mooring of waiting vessels (referred to as the South Terminal Dolphin Trestle), and a berthing dolphin on the south side connected to the wharf via concrete decked catwalk. All are in operable condition. There is a derelict multi-pile timber dolphin south of the berthing dolphin. Large portions of the shoreline associated with South Terminal are armored to maintain shoreline integrity.
Shoreline vegetation is very sparse. Intertidal habitat within the marine shoreline is characterized by heavy development, including the Port and Navy ship traffic, overwater pier structures and hard armored shoreline. Beyond the terminal to the south, the intertidal zone is flat and sandy out to approximately -5 feet mean lower low water (MLLW), where water depth rapidly increases in a steep shelf. This area represents the Pigeon Creek delta deposit.
A habitat survey was completed in the project area in July 2018 (Appendix B). Small individual patches of eelgrass were observed directly south of the wharf, at approximately -3 to -5 feet MLLW. Further south beyond the Pigeon Creek delta, a large continuous eelgrass bed is located parallel to the shoreline (Sheet 4, Appendix A). Eelgrass observed in this area is generally dense and robust, spanning several vertical feet of tidal elevation range. A few sparse patches of rockweed (Fucus distichus) and sea lettuce (Ulva spp.) are present in shallow water areas. Aquatic vegetation is limited by the dynamic nature of the deltas, persistent ship traffic, and the low light conditions caused by the Snohomish River plume.
October 29, 2018 | Page 2 File No. 0676-020-06
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project can be divided into four main components: infrastructure improvements, maintenance dredging, slope armoring and mitigation.
Infrastructure Improvements The proposed infrastructure improvements include construction of two new mooring dolphins with associated catwalks, the removal and replacement of portions of the existing South Terminal Wharf fender system, and upgrades to mooring hardware on the existing dolphin berth trestle (Sheet 3, Appendix A).
2.1.1. Mooring Dolphins Mooring dolphin improvements include construction of two new cast in place 15-foot square concrete mooring dolphins supported on a total of 18, 24-inch-diameter permanent batter coated steel pipe piles. The new dolphins will be located just south of the existing South Terminal dolphin within the proposed dredge footprint. These new dolphins include new mooring hardware, railings, and a protective fender system consisting of eight (total), 12-inch-diameter uncoated steel pipe fender piles with High-density polyethylene (HDPE) protective sleeves. The dolphins will be connected to each other and the existing South Terminal southern dolphin with aluminum, fully grated catwalks (two 100-foot lengths by 6 feet wide). The catwalks will be located in deep water, elevated approximately 7 feet above mean higher high water (MHHW) and fully grated, creating no hard shadow on the surface of the water and therefore, no shading impacts.
The proposal also includes demolition of the existing derelict dolphin structure located south of the South Terminal Wharf. The derelict dolphin is comprised of approximately 15 creosote treated piles ranging from 16-inch to 18-inches in diameter.
2.1.2. Fender System Improvements to the existing wharf fendering system will include construction of new fender points along the South Terminal wharf face. These improvements will begin with the removal of five, 35-foot-long portions of the existing fender system (175 feet total). This will include removal and disposal of existing creosote treated timber chocks and walers, removal and salvaging or disposal of the existing rubber arch fenders, and extraction (using a vibratory hammer) of 20 existing fender piles.
The existing fender piles consist of a mix of both 12-inch-diameter steel and creosote treated timber piles. These piles will be replaced with 10, 16-inch HP16 piles at each of five, 35-foot-long portions of the existing fender system (for a total of 50 piles). The piles will be fitted with Ultra-high-molecular-weight (UHMW) rub strips along the face of each pile. These piles will be backed by a galvanized steel waler and four rubber arch fenders per location. The purpose of these new piles is to provide a reaction point for five new 15-foot-diameter, 30-foot-long, floating, removable pneumatic fenders. The pneumatic fenders will be placed in front of these new fender piles for vessel berthing and mooring but are temporary and can be hauled out of the water at the Port’s discretion, as needed.
2.1.3. Dolphin Trestle Improvements to the Dolphin Trestle includes replacement of portions of the deck along the existing South Terminal Dolphin Berth Trestle to accommodate installation of two new higher capacity mooring bollards.
October 29, 2018 | Page 3 File No. 0676-020-06
Addition of the new mooring hardware at the existing Dolphin Berth Trestle will consist of removing two each of the existing deck panels in two spans (four panels total). This removal will also require temporarily detaching and bracing the existing mooring system for reattachment after the deck has been replaced. The removed panels will then be replaced by forming and pouring a cast-in-place deck replacement to increase the deck capacity for upgraded mooring hardware. Temporary piling may be required for the concrete pour on the dolphin trestle for the new mooring hardware. Approximately 18, uncoated 24-inch-diameter temporary steel pipe piles may be installed and subsequently removed following completion of the mooring hardware upgrades (Sheet 3, Appendix A).
Maintenance Dredging The Port proposes to conduct maintenance dredging of the area adjacent to the South Terminal Wharf to accommodate larger vessels planned to call on the Port by 2020. The proposed dredge area is located within the Weyerhaeuser Mill A Former cleanup site that is being administered by Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) under the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA). The cleanup site is subject to a MTCA Agreed Order between the Ecology, the Port, Weyerhaeuser, and the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) (No. DE 8979). The Port will conduct the contaminated dredging portion of this project as a formal interim cleanup action with Ecology and in conformance with an Ecology-approved Interim Cleanup Action Work Plan. In addition, an Agreed Order Amendment or new Agreed Order is required for the Interim Action.
The proposed dredging will remove sediments and wood debris (if encountered) from an area of South Terminal within the existing historical Constructed Dredged Area (last dredged in the 1970s) to a depth of -40 to -42 feet MLLW. The target elevation for the base of the dredge footprint is -40 feet (MLLW) plus a 1-foot over-dredge allowance to meet the required navigation depth for South Terminal. The dredging includes construction of a keyway at the toe of the transition slope that will be dredged to -45 feet MLLW to allow armor placement. The armor is necessary for slope stability and to provide isolation and protection of contaminated sediments that may be exposed but not fully removed by the dredging as required by Ecology. The functional depth of the navigation area will be -40 MLLW, which is consistent with the original dredge design depth.
The transition slope extending up from the base of the dredge prism will be constructed between approximately 2H:1V and 2.5H:1V (horizontal to vertical) to meet the existing elevations along the eastern portion of the dredge cut and includes a 1-foot over-dredge allowance. In the area of dredging adjacent to the south end of the South Terminal Wharf on the upper section of the slope, dredging will extend 5 vertical feet to allow for placement of armor rock to protect the wharf from potential erosion due to wave energy.
The project is within the boundaries of a MTCA cleanup site, therefore additional sediment removal beyond the base of the proposed dredge prism may be required for the placement of cap material to isolate contaminated sediment if exposed. This is consistent with the approach required by Ecology for the recent and nearby Pacific Terminal Interim Action dredging project completed by the Port. Sampling for the suitability determination is underway and volumes will be further defined based on Dredged Material Management Office (DMMO) review.
Preliminary calculations for the dredge material volume is approximately 25,840 cubic yards (CY) including the 1-foot over-dredge allowance. Less than approximately 20 percent of the material is anticipated to be unsuitable for open water disposal. Total dredge area is approximately 81,435 square feet (sf) of which
October 29, 2018 | Page 4 File No. 0676-020-06
approximately 4,600 sf will be armored below -20 feet MLLW and 4,500 sf will be armored above -20 feet MLLW. Dredging will be conducted using a barge-mounted dredge. Dredged material that is suitable for open water disposal will be loaded into a bottom dump barge for transport and disposal at the Port Gardner Bay open-water disposal site located in Everett, Washington. Dredged material unsuitable for open-water disposal will be removed as an interim cleanup action and will be offloaded at an upland transload facility located either at the South Terminal or an offsite facility appropriate for transloading. The dredged material that is offloaded to the transload facility will be transported via trucks and/or train for disposal at an appropriate permitted upland landfill facility. The removal of contaminated material will be coordinated with Ecology Toxics Cleanup Program (TCP) staff who oversee the overall cleanup activities at the site. Final calculations of the volumes of material suitable for open water and material that must be disposed of upland will be provided upon completion of the suitability determination through the Dredged Material Management Program (DMMP). Sediment sampling for the purposes of DMMP characterization will occur in October 2018.
Slope Armoring Slope armoring will be constructed on the dredge transition slopes to maintain slope stability, contain any exposed contaminated materials (as required by Ecology TCP) and protect against propeller scour. The transition slopes will be constructed at an assumed slope between 2H:1V and 2.5H:1V. The entirety of the northern engineered slope is expected to be constructed with placement of a 3-foot layer of armor rock at 2.5H:1V. The southern engineered slope is expected to be constructed with placement of 3-foot layer of armor rock for the bottom half of the slope (extending from toe of slope at -40 feet MLLW to -20 feet MLLW) at slopes between 2H:1V and 2.5H:1V. At the base of the transition slopes a keyway will be filled with armor rock to support the dredged slope.
A small area immediately adjacent to the southern end of South Terminal will be armored from -20 feet to approximately 0 feet MLLW. A 5-foot layer of armor rock will be placed at an assumed slope of approximately 2.5H:1V. This design feature is necessary to ensure the integrity of the existing South Terminal Wharf pier structure while maintaining the minimal size and side slope of the dredge footprint. The surface area of new rip rap fill at elevations is approximately 3,022 sf of the total riprap area above -20 feet MLLW. A layer of fish mix will be used to fill the interstices and cover this southern section of armoring down to elevation -20 feet MLLW. The northern section of armoring down to -20 feet MLLW (1,587 sf) will not have fish mix placed because it is within a contaminated area with compromised habitat value.
Mitigation The Port plans to mitigate for unavoidable adverse impacts to the estuarine systems due to increases in overwater coverage, displacement of benthic habitat due to pile installation and side slope armoring, and displacement of eelgrass habitat due to dredging. There are several project activities that are temporary and will not cause permanent habitat impacts (e.g. increased turbidity, elevated underwater noise levels). The armor rock identified for the dredge slopes that occurs in deep water (-20 feet MLLW) displaces no significant habitat features therefore no permanent habitat impacts have been identified. The project has been designed to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to the estuarine system, however, some impacts are unavoidable.
Permanent impacts will result from a combination of increases in overwater coverage and displacement of benthic habitat from both dredging and infrastructure installation. Total increase of overwater coverage has
October 29, 2018 | Page 5 File No. 0676-020-06
been estimated at 2,848 sf. These impacts will be from the installation of five temporary pneumatic Yokohama fenders (2250 sf), two new dolphins including piles, pile caps and fenders (598 sf) and the new catwalk structure (1,200 sf). Because the catwalks will be located in deep water, approximately 7 feet above MHHW and fully grated (creating no hard shadow on the surface of the water), therefore its square footage is not counted for the total square footage impacted by overwater coverage. Mitigation for overwater coverage is based on the need to retain shallow benthic productivity and juvenile salmon migration corridors. Since this increase in overwater coverage would occur in deeper water where benthic productivity is minimal, the increases in overwater coverage would only affect juvenile salmonid behavior through avoidance of the shaded area. Thus, the effect of loss of habitat function is discounted by half of the total area resulting in 1,424 sf of habitat loss due to shading that will be compensated for by the use of Union Slough advanced mitigation credits.
Permanent benthic habitat displacement will result due to armoring and pile installation for a total of 3,176 sf of displaced habitat. These impacts will be from the installation of 50 HP16 fender piles (90 sf), 18 permanent 24-inch steel batter piles (57 sf), 8, 12-inch steel fender piles (7 sf), and nearshore armoring to the north end of the dredge prism (1,560 sf) and at the south end of the terminal (3,022 sf). As part of the project, a derelict creosote dolphin will be removed resulting in a net enhancement of 23.5 sf as well as the removal of 20, 12-inch fender piles resulting in a net habitat benefit of 15.8 sf. The 1,560 sf of nearshore that will be armored north of the pier is within a previously documented contaminated area with compromised habitat value and is not counted toward the total benthic habitat displacement impact. In the northern area, the removal of contaminated material is enhancing the existing degraded conditions in this area. This beneficial action provides mitigation for the northern rock armor installation; therefore, no fish mix is proposed within the rock armoring in this northern area. The armoring proposed for the south end of the terminal will be filled and covered with coarse sand and pea gravel mix (i.e. fish mix) and will provide similar habitat value after construction. Based on the above, the net functional benthic habitat displaced by this project which will require mitigation is approximately 115 sf which will be compensated for by the use of Union Slough advanced mitigation credits.
The proposed dredge is a maintenance activity to restore navigation to the South Terminal and is within the historic dredge footprint of the South Terminal. It was last dredged by the former site owner in the 1970s. Although the proposed dredge is within the historic dredge footprint, several small patches of eelgrass have established within the proposed dredge cut (approximately 900 sf). After dredging is completed, the Port will transplant 1,800 sf of eelgrass to the Pigeon Creek delta using donor stock from surrounding healthy eelgrass habitat. The newly transplanted eelgrass habitat is predicted to reach full function within 5 years. The proposed transplant location has similar tidal elevation, wave energy, and substrate as the existing eelgrass location and will provide the necessary environment for success of the transplants. This transplant is proposed to occur during the spring/summer of 2020. The Port performed similar mitigation actions in 2009 at the Mt. Baker Terminal project where eelgrass was transplanted, and success criteria were met in 4 years.
In addition to the above, prior to dredging the Port will salvage the isolated patches of eelgrass (approximately 900 sf) that are within the proposed dredge prism and move them to the nearby Pigeon Creek delta. This action will create 1,000 sf of eelgrass habitat, enhancing existing eelgrass habitat located on the Pigeon Creek delta. The resulting total square footage will more than compensate for the loss of temporal function from transplanting the eelgrass and any additional unforeseen project related impacts to nearshore benthic function.
October 29, 2018 | Page 6 File No. 0676-020-06
The Port will monitor both area and density of the new eelgrass beds to identify mitigation success. To reach full ecosystem function, in 5 years the planted area should equal 1,800 sf with a density approaching or the same as pre-project densities. The Port will also establish reference monitoring plots in an eelgrass bed in the vicinity to account for any stochastic variability that could locally affect eelgrass area and density. To ensure that ecosystem function is being met in perpetuity, the Port will monitor up to four times in the 5 years after the eelgrass transplant. If success criteria are not met, the Port will supplement the existing planting or enter into adaptive management with applicable resource agencies.
Project Construction
2.5.1. Construction Methods Infrastructure Improvements:
The proposed infrastructure improvements will require the installation and demolition of 201 piles of various material and sizes. Most of the piles (183) will be installed/removed using a vibratory hammer. The permanent batter piles (18) associated with the mooring dolphins, will require proofing with an impact hammer. Overall there will be 67 to 100 days of pile driving with 85 hours of vibratory hammer time and 9 hours of impact time. Where contamination is found to be present, prior to pile driving along the South Terminal wharf face, a sand cover will be placed at the pile location per requirements of Ecology to minimize the potential for disturbance and transport of contamination. A cover at least three times the diameter of the pile and 6 inches deep will be placed on the sediment surface where the pile is to be driven using a barge-mounted dredge bucket. The construction requirements of each element of the infrastructure improvements are identified in more detail below.
2.5.2. Mooring Dolphins Construction of the mooring dolphins is expected to require the use of 18, 24-inch-diameter, uncoated, temporary, steel pipe piles installed and removed utilizing a vibratory hammer. Each pile will require 30 minutes to drive and 30 minutes to extract for a total of 18 hours over 15 to 20 days. The purpose of the temporary piles is to construct templates for driving the batter piles and temporarily support the dolphin cap concrete pours. Falsework would then be constructed on the temporary piling and the dolphin pile caps would be formed, reinforcement tied, and concrete placed atop the falsework. The eight, 12-inch-diameter, uncoated, dolphin protective fender pipe piles with UHMW sleeves will be installed using a vibratory hammer only. The fender piles will require 3 hours of vibratory driving over 2 to 5 days. Installation of these piles may occur before or after the concrete for the dolphins is placed. The piles will be backed by a galvanized steel waler and rubber arch fender elements.
The 18 permanent 24-inch-diameter coated steel pipe batter piles supporting the dolphin would be installed utilizing a vibratory hammer as far as practicable leaving of the remaining required length of the pile to be installed utilizing an impact hammer (with a bubble curtain or equivalent noise reduction features) to proof the capacity of the piling. The batter piles will be permanently installed by vibratory and then impact hammer if necessary on a land- or barge-based crane. Driving the dolphin 24-inch open-ended steel piles utilizing a vibratory hammer could occur over approximately 10 to 15 days (18 batter piles). Each pile will take approximately 30 minutes to drive for a total of 9 hours of driving over 10 to 15 days. Proofing these 24-inch open-ended steel piles utilizing an impact hammer and bubble curtain (or equivalent) would occur over an additional 10 to 15 days. Each pile will take approximately 30 minutes including restrikes for a total of 9 hours of impact driving over 10 to 15 days. Once the dolphins are constructed, the falsework will
October 29, 2018 | Page 7 File No. 0676-020-06
be removed, the temporary piles will be pulled with a vibratory hammer, and the catwalks will be installed which may require some moderate demolition and reconstruction at the interface of the existing South Terminal.
2.5.3. Fender System Construction of the fender system will include pulling existing fender piles and the derelict dolphin utilizing a vibratory hammer resulting in 5 to 10 days of pile demolition activity (35 piles). It will typically take approximately 20 minutes to remove each pile with the vibratory hammer for a total of 12 hours over 5 to 10 days. The existing fender piles consist of a mix of both 12 to 16-inch-diameter steel and creosote-treated timber piles. Demolition will also include removal and disposal of existing creosote treated timber chocks and walers, and removal and salvaging or disposal of the existing rubber arch fenders. The project will also require pile driving of approximately 50, HP16 fender piles. Driving new HP16 fender piles utilizing a vibratory hammer is expected to occur over approximately 10 to 15 days (50 piles). Each pile will take approximately 30 minutes to drive for a total of 25 hours of vibratory driving over 10 to 15 days.
2.5.4. Dolphin Trestle Improvement to the existing South Terminal Dolphin Berth Trestle will include replacement of portions of the deck along to accommodate installation of two new higher capacity mooring bollards. Addition of the new mooring hardware at the existing Dolphin Berth Trestle will consist of removing two each of the existing deck panels in two spans (four panels total). Most of this work will occur above the MHHW elevation with care being taken to ensure debris does not enter surface water. Temporary piling may be required for the concrete pour on the dolphin trestle for the new mooring hardware. Approximately 18, uncoated 24-inch-diameter temporary steel pipe piles will be installed using a vibratory hammer. Falsework and formwork will be constructed on the temporary piles to accommodate the concrete pour. Falsework will be removed, and temporary piles will be removed using a vibratory hammer. Each pile will require 30 minutes to drive and 30 mins to extract for a total of 18 hours over 15 to 20 days.
Maintenance Dredging:
Dredging will be conducted using a barge-mounted clamshell dredge or long reach excavator that fully closes and moves through the water column carefully. The dredge area will be protected with a silt curtain or other appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to protect water quality and reduce the potential for suspended sediments to leave the dredge area. A Water Quality Monitoring Plan (WQMP) will detail implementation of these BMPs, as well as points of compliance to ensure water quality will be maintained during all dredge operations and that potential spread of contaminated sediments are minimized. Dredged material will be loaded onto a barge for transport and disposal. Dredged sediment that is suitable for open-water disposal is expected to be disposed at the Port Gardner Bay open-water disposal site located in Everett, Washington. Dredged material unsuitable for open-water disposal will be offloaded at an upland transload facility located either at the South or Pacific Terminal or an offsite facility appropriate for transloading. The dredged material that is offloaded to the transload facility will be transported via trucks and/or train for disposal at an appropriate permitted upland landfill facility.
For dredging activities underneath the South Terminal Dolphin Berth Trestle, dredging will be completed using equipment with extended reach. Dredging in this area will be completed to protect the in-place structure and with appropriate BMPs to protect water quality. Dredged material will not be allowed to slough underneath the trestle.
October 29, 2018 | Page 8 File No. 0676-020-06
Slope Armoring:
Stabilization of the underwater transition slope and the area adjacent to the southern portion of the South Terminal Wharf will be completed by importing armor rock via barge to the dredging location. Armor rock be placed along the transition slopes using a barge-mounted dredge bucket. Fish mix will be imported and transported to the Site by barge. A barge-mounted dredge bucket will be used to place the fish mix to fill the interstices and cover the southern section of armoring down to elevation -20 feet. The northern section of nearshore armoring does not require fish mix as mitigation because it is within a currently contaminated area with compromised habitat value.
2.5.5. Construction Area The overall project footprint is approximately 270 feet wide by 1,300 feet long. See Joint Aquatic Resource Permit Application (JARPA) drawings (Appendix A) for the construction area.
2.5.6. Equipment Used Below is a list of anticipated equipment that would be used to implement the project:
■ Barge for transport of excavated sediment to upland ■ Bottom-dump disposal barge(s) for open-water sediment disposal ■ Extended Reach Excavators ■ Clamshell dredge or hydraulic excavator ■ Support vessels ■ Other general construction tools ■ Vibratory hammer ■ Impact hammer ■ Barge mounted dredge bucket ■ Derrick crane barge for pile and catwalk installation ■ Pile/catwalk delivery barges (likely a single barge at a time, but multiple deliveries) ■ Concrete delivery and concrete pump trucks operating from the South Terminal deck with pump lines passing over the water ■ Crawler crane operated from the South Terminal deck
3.0 IMPACT AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION MEASURES
General Construction Impact Minimization Measures The following general conservation measures will be taken to ensure that environmental impacts are minimized throughout the duration of the Project.
October 29, 2018 | Page 9 File No. 0676-020-06
■ Disturbance will be limited to those areas necessary for construction, which will be identified on site plans and marked on the site before construction begins as shown on Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) drawings (Appendix A). ■ Pneumatic fenders will be used at the berth to push larger ships away from the dock thus reducing the area that needs to be dredged. ■ During impact pile driving, noise attenuation BMPs (i.e. confined bubble curtain or similar) will be utilized to reduce underwater sound pressures. ■ Fresh concrete or concrete by-products shall be prevented from entering waters of the state. All forms used for concrete shall be completely sealed to prevent leaching of fresh concrete and to prevent concrete from getting into state waters. Impervious materials shall be placed over any exposed concrete not lined with impervious forms that will come in contact with waters of the state. Forms and impervious materials shall remain in place until concrete is cured. ■ Multiple bites of the clamshell dredge will be eliminated to retain sediment within the clamshell bucket and to not release it into the water column. ■ Bottom stockpiling of the dredged sediment will be limited to avoid and increase in the volume of sediment released into the water column. ■ Longer cycle time of the dredge reduces the velocity of the ascending loaded bucket through the water column, which reduces potential to wash sediment from the bucket. However, limiting the velocity of the descending bucket reduces the volume of sediment that is picked up and requires more total bites to remove the project material. The majority of the sediment resuspension, for a clamshell dredge, occurs when the bucket hits the bottom. Therefore, cycle time will be increased as much as is possible and safe. ■ A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control (TESC) Plan will be developed and implemented as part of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) required under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater regulations for construction sites. Construction techniques will utilize BMPs such as those described in Ecology’s Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (Ecology 2014). Measures that will be employed to achieve this purpose may include silt fencing, straw bales/wattles, retention of runoff and/or other similar BMPs that are determined to meet erosion control objectives. ■ A WQMP will be developed to ensure mixing zone compliance and maintain water column turbidity during dredging and pile driving and extraction activities as part of the Ecology 401 Water Quality Certification process. ■ The contractor will prepare a construction Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) Plan for this project. Any potential spills will be handled and disposed of in a manner that does not contaminate the surrounding area. Adequate materials and procedures to respond to unanticipated weather conditions or accidental releases of materials (sediment, petroleum hydrocarbons, etc.) will be available on site. This will include materials necessary to cover stockpiles (e.g., tarpaulins), isolate pollutants from the environment (e.g., protective containers), and contain and absorb spills (e.g., disposable absorbent materials). ■ An emergency spill containment kit must be located on-site along with a pollution prevention plan detailing planned fueling, materials storage and equipment storage.
October 29, 2018 | Page 10 File No. 0676-020-06
■ To reduce the potential for spills and leaks, the barge will contain an adequate supply of materials (such as a vacuum pump, booms, diapers and other absorbent material) to control and contain deleterious materials in the event of an accidental spill. ■ The contractor will limit work at the site to daylight hours and comply with local, state and federal permit restrictions. ■ All construction-related debris will be cleaned up on a daily basis. Proper conservation measures will be taken to ensure that debris will not contaminate the marine shoreline or marine waters. ■ All equipment used for construction activities will be cleaned and inspected prior to arriving at the project site, and daily thereafter prior to commencing work, to ensure no potentially hazardous materials are exposed, no leaks are present, and the equipment is functioning properly. Fueling of land-based equipment will be limited to upland areas. ■ Waste materials, including any riprap, derelict piles, miscellaneous garbage and/or other debris removed from the shoreline environment, will be transported off site for disposal in accordance with applicable regulations. ■ Work will be in compliance with all other local, state and federal regulations and restrictions (e.g., WDFW Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA), local Critical Areas Ordinance and land use regulations, Shoreline Master Plan, State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), and USACE Individual Permit (Section 10, RHA and Section 404 of the CWA).
Additional Construction Measures to Reduce Impacts to Species and Habitats The following conservation measures will be implemented to ensure that impacts to plants, fish and wildlife are minimized during Project construction.
■ The project will obtain and comply with conditions that will be outlined in the HPA permit issued for the project by WDFW and the Nationwide Permit issued by the USACE. ■ All work below the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) will be conducted during the approved work windows for fish species that may occur in the project area, which is anticipated to be July 16 through February 15. ■ All debris resulting from construction shall be removed from the project area and prevented from entering the water. ■ Contract documents (plans and specifications) will not allow for grounding of the barge. Work at high tide, low draft barges and/or other engineering controls will be employed. ■ Dredging will stay within the boundaries of the historic dredging area from the 1970s. No new area will be dredged. ■ Pneumatic fenders will be used at the berth to push larger ships away from the dock thus negating the need for a deeper dredge.
The contractor will avoid impacts to adjacent eelgrass and limit construction impacts to the minimum area necessary to complete the project.
October 29, 2018 | Page 11 File No. 0676-020-06
In-Water Work Window Dredging and construction will occur once the appropriate permits have been acquired. The in-water construction activities are currently planned for the 2019 to 2020 in-water construction season. All in-water work will be conducted during the approved windows for in-water work corresponding to fish species that may occupy marine areas within the action area (July 16 through February 15). Compliance with these work windows will avoid or minimize potential impacts to listed salmonids. Work windows for Pacific herring (Clupea harengus pallasii), surf smelt (Hypomesus pretiosus) or sand lance (Ammodytes hexapterus) do not apply for this project because spawning habitat for these species is not documented within the project area. The nearest spawning habitat is approximately 0.75 miles to the southwest at Howarth Park. Site preparation, mobilization to the site and specific construction activities that do not require in-water work may be conducted outside of the in-water work window. The final in-water work window for the project will be identified in the approved local, state and federal permit documents. The following table identifies the proposed in-water work period for the Port’s South Terminal Berth Improvements.
TABLE 1. DESIGNATED IN-WATER WORK WINDOWS FOR CONSTRUCTION
Species Construction Work Windows1 Salmon Work Window July 2 – March 2 Bull Trout Work Window July 16 – February 15 Overall Project Work Window July 16 – February 15 Note: 1 Work windows provided for Tidal Reference Area 7 (available at: http://www.nws.usace.army.mil/Portals/27/docs/regulatory/ ESA%20forms%20and%20templates/work_windows_-_all_marine_&_estuarine.pdf).
4.0 ACTION AREA
The action area for the project is defined by the geographical extents of effects of the action on the environment. The potential effects include:
■ Temporary construction-related noise; ■ Temporary and permanent alteration of near-shore and intertidal habitat from dredging, dredge slope armoring, pile removal, and pile installation; ■ Exposure to suspended sediments (turbidity); and ■ Exposure to contaminated sediments.
Construction-related noise will occur as a result of maintenance dredging, pile installation (vibratory and impact), and the operation of general construction equipment. Construction-related noise will permeate both aquatic (underwater) and terrestrial (in-air) environments and may carry into the surrounding environment beyond the project site. Noise impacts will extend furthest from the project location since benthic displacement and suspension of sediments that will occur as a result of dredging, are not expected to extend beyond impacts from construction related in-air noise, as discussed below in Section 4.3. The Port Gardner Bay open-water disposal site is not included within the project action area because open-water disposal sites have undergone separate ESA consultation for the Puget Sound Dredge Disposal Analysis (PSDDA) program ([National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration] NOAA 2007).
October 29, 2018 | Page 12 File No. 0676-020-06
The overall action area includes the spatial extent of all project effects on the environment and is presented in Figure 2. The action area includes the zones of influence for areas affected by construction-related noise and habitat alteration. The action area is three dimensional and the spatial extent of project effects differs between areas above and below water level (defined by the MHHW). Above land and/or water surfaces, the action area extends 1.04 miles over land and 3.66 miles over water from the project site, which encompasses the zones of influence for in-air noise and habitat alteration (above MHHW). Below the water surface (the plane defined by the MHHW level), the action area has been calculated to extends 533 miles from the portion of the project site where pile driving activities will occur, which encompasses the zones of influence for underwater noise, habitat alteration (below MHHW), benthic shading, and the possible exposure of contaminated sediments. However, underwater and overwater noise will encounter land masses within approximate 20.3 miles of the site and is expected to attenuate at the shoreline of these land masses. The action area includes developed land in the Port of Everett and marine and shoreline environments in Possession Sound.
Baseline Conditions for Assessing the Action Area
4.1.1. Underwater Noise The 2015 WSDOT Biological Assessment Preparation Manual (BA Manual) states that marine sound levels near developed shorelines have an approximate broadband background sound level of 120 root mean square decibel (dBRMS). Therefore, for the purposes of our project it is assumed our site has an underwater background sound level of 120 dBRMS, because the work will be done during day hours when boating and industrial activity will be the most active. The WSDOT BA Manual provides an equation for the practical spreading loss method which was used to identify the distance point source underwater noise will travel before it attenuates to marine animal thresholds and/or the broadband background sound level of 120 dBRMS (WSDOT 2018).
4.1.2. In-Air/Terrestrial Noise The WSDOT BA Manual cites the 1998 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) document for urban areas having a dBA level that ranges from 60 to 65 (2018) in-air. Since the project is located in an area adjacent to boating traffic, industrial activities, businesses and residential homes, the ambient baseline levels are estimated to be 60 dBA.
The project site is surrounded by buildings and water, creating both a hard (water) and soft site (buildings) that would attenuate noise at an approximate rate of 6.0 dBA per doubling distance for the hard portion of the site and 7.5 dBA per doubling distance for the soft site. The WSDOT manual provides an equation to determine the distance point source construction noise will travel before it attenuates to the ambient baseline sound level of 60 dBA (2018).
Construction Conditions for Assessing the Action Area
4.2.1. Underwater Noise Tables within the WSDOT BA manual were used to identify noise levels for steel pile driving. The project will install 50, 16-inch steel HP16 piles, 18, 24-inch steel pipe batter piles, 36, 24-inch temporary steel pipe piles (removed with vibratory hammer) , eight, 12-inch steel pipe piles and extract 35 existing 12- to 16-inch piles by a combination of vibratory and impact hammering. The individual noise levels for these piles have been analyzed and are discussed below. Whenever possible, pilings will be installed by vibratory hammer
October 29, 2018 | Page 13 File No. 0676-020-06
to the greatest extent possible to reduce overall noise generation at the site. It is anticipated that impact hammering may be necessary at times during installation of each piling when vibratory hammering is not adequate to advance pilings to the proper depth. To ensure flexibility during construction the following noise assessment was completed with the following conservative assumptions, that impact pile driving will be necessary for up to 2,000 strikes per day (only the 18 permanent 24-inch batter piles to be installed with impact hammer) and vibratory pile driving will be necessary for up to 8 hours per day (for all pile types). These are conservative assumptions; this number of strikes and this length of vibratory driving may not be achievable due to other construction constraints.
4.2.1.1. VIBRATORY DRIVING The 2014 report titled, Compendium of Pile Driving Sound Data, prepared for the California Department of Transportation, identifies that a vibratory hammer will have a 150 dBRMS with a 12-inch steel H pile (used as a proxy for the 16-inch H pile) and 155 dBRMS with a 12-inch steel pipe pile. A vibratory hammer will have a sound level of 175 dBRMS for 36-inch steel pipe piles. The sound levels for the 12-inch and 36-inch pipe piles were averaged to serve as a proxy for 24-inch steel pipe piles (165 dBRMS). Therefore, it is assumed that the vibratory pile installation for the project will be approximately 165 dBRMS at the highest level.
Based on the above information and the practical spreading loss equation, the vibratory installation of 24-inch piles should attenuate to baseline conditions (120 dBRMS) at approximately 6.2 miles (10,000 meters) from the project site. See Table 2 below for the distances for ambient noise level attenuation.
4.2.1.2. IMPACT DRIVING Table 7-13 within the WSDOT BA Manual was used to identify noise levels for steel pile impact driving. It is assumed that 24-inch steel pipe piles have a noise level of 194 dBRMS at a distance of 10 meters (WSDOT 2018). A bubble curtain will be utilized to decrease the noise level during impact driving of 24-inch piles. The bubble curtain may reduce by 6 to 10 dBRMS at a distance of 10 meters for a maximum noise level of 184 dBRMS; however, this reduction was not used in noise calculations for this BE in order to present the most conservative estimate.
Based on the above information and the practical spreading loss equation, the impact hammer noise should attenuate to baseline conditions (120 dBRMS) at approximately 533 miles (857,696 meters) from the project site (WSDOT 2018). Due to the adjacent land configurations, the noise will in reality, attenuate at the coast line of the adjacent and opposite land masses (approximately 20 miles). See Table 2 below for the distance for underwater noise level attenuation.
TABLE 2. UNDERWATER NOISE DISTANCES TO AMBIENT ATTENUATION
Location Distance to Attenuation Vibratory Distance to Attenuation Impact Underwater Ambient Noise Levels 6.2 miles 533 miles Note: 1 Will not actually extend 533 miles; will extend to adjacent coastlines (approximately 20 miles)
4.2.2. In Air/Terrestrial Noise The impact and vibratory hammers and excavators are the loudest pieces of equipment, generating 101 dBA, 110 dBA and 81 dBA respectively at a distance of 50 feet (WSDOT). Due to the behavior of in air noise; pile material and size does not change the noise levels. Due to the possibility of multiple pieces of
October 29, 2018 | Page 14 File No. 0676-020-06
other machinery being operated simultaneously, the rule of decibel addition was applied to the construction noise assessment based on these three loudest pieces of equipment that generate noise levels of 101, 110 and 81 dBA. Therefore, construction noise is estimated to be up to 111 dBA if all three of the loudest pieces of equipment are run simultaneously.
(110 + 1) = 111 dBA
Based on the above-mentioned parameters and equation, the distances from the project site at which the loudest equipment would become indistinguishable from background in-air ambient noise conditions of 60 dBA is approximately 1.04 miles (5,483 feet) for the soft site conditions (i.e. over the land) and approximately 3.36 miles (17,741 feet) for the hard site conditions (i.e. over the water).
TABLE 3. IN-AIR DISTANCES TO AMBIENT ATTENUATION
Location Distance to Attenuation1 Over Land (soft side conditions) 1.04 mile Over Water (hard site conditions) 3.36 mile Note: 1 Determined using the practical spreading loss method within the WSDOT BA manual (WSDOT 2018)
Turbidity Dredging will result in localized suspension of sediments (turbidity) in the South Terminal area and potentially affect the adjacent East Waterway of Port Gardner Bay. However, these effects will be minimized by following the guidelines of the 401 WQC to be issued by Ecology. There is potential for resuspension of anthropogenically contaminated sediments during dredging especially the northern portion of the proposed dredge prism. Silt curtains will be used to minimize and contain turbidity generated during dredge activities and ensure that contaminated particles remain in the delineated zone of contamination. Compliance with State of Washington Water Quality Standards (WAC 173-201A) will be monitored during construction as specified in the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for the Project. Implementation of BMPs, including those identified in Section 3.0 of this report, will help the Project meet these requirements and limit temporary water quality effects during construction.
Habitat Alteration The effects of habitat alteration will be limited to the areas within the proposed dredge prism adjacent to South Terminal. The zone of influence for habitat alteration will be limited to those areas where dredging will occur. The Port has identified approximately 900 sf of eelgrass habitat within this area which will be removed and relocated to adjacent existing eelgrass habitat prior to dredging activities (Sheet 13, Appendix A). Habitat alteration will not result in a significant net shift in habitat functions since the area has been previously dredged and the heavily disturbed condition of the existing low quality, subtidal habitat.
In addition to the proposed dredge activities, infrastructure improvements will result in a net increase of 1,374 sf of overwater coverage and a net 3,176 sf of benthic habitat displacement through the addition of piles and near shore armoring. The nearshore armoring in the northern area consists of 1,560 sf of material and is being placed in a previously contaminated area with currently compromised habitat value and is therefore not counted as habitat alteration. However, habitat alteration due to the other 3,022 sf of
October 29, 2018 | Page 15 File No. 0676-020-06
armoring in the southern area will be mitigated by applying 3,022 sf of fish mix on top of the armoring after installation.
Action Area Summary The overall action area includes the spatial extent of all project effects on the environment and is presented in Figure 2. The action area includes the zones of influence for areas affected by construction-related noise and potential habitat alteration. The action area is three dimensional and the spatial extent of project effects differs between upland and shoreline areas. Because of the construction sequencing and the planned BMPs, sediments and debris will largely be; therefore, the in-water noise effects will extend the furthest and set the boundary for the action area.
Baseline Environmental Conditions
4.6.1. Hydromodifications South Terminal is in an area that has been altered by dredging and filling over many decades to convert portions of the shoreline to industrial and commercial uses. From 1996 to 1997, during a large Marine Terminals Improvement (MTI) project, sediments south of Pier 1 and between Piers 1 and 3 were voluntarily cleaned up. The shoreline around the project area (South Terminal) has been armored with bulkheads since the middle of the last century when the area was developed as a pulp mill.
4.6.2. Water Quality The Port of Everett waterfront immediately adjacent to South Terminal is listed as impaired (Category 5 – 303d) by Ecology. This is likely due to the elevated ammonia and bacteria found in the water column along with depressed levels of dissolved oxygen (DO). Salinities in Port Gardner Bay are generally between 20 and 28 parts per thousand with occasional periods when lower salinity plumes from the Snohomish River extend to the Site. No industrial discharges currently occur within the project area, but stormwater discharges and off-shore discharges from the City of Everett and Naval Station Everett occur within the action area.
4.6.3. Habitat and Biota
4.6.3.1. JUVENILE AND ADULT SALMONIDS No sampling of juvenile salmonids has occurred at South Terminal, but data from adjacent areas are representative of the timing and nature of use that can be expected in the project area. Out-migrating juvenile salmon were found during the spring and early summer months of the survey (Pentec 1996a). Chum and pink salmon were the most common by far; pink salmon were present and abundant because of the odd-year timing of the sampling. Juvenile Chinook salmon were also commonly observed and maintained the longest residence period.
Adult salmonid use of Port Gardner Bay has not been studied extensively. Healey (1991) reported that if river flows were not adequate for upstream migration, adult salmon may extend their stay in estuaries until river flows increase. This situation has not been documented in the Snohomish River system.
Adult Chinook move through Port Gardner Bay from June through September. Adult bull trout move through Port Gardner Bay and Port Susan Bay from April through July, while subadults may remain until mid-September. Upstream migrating summer and winter run adult steelhead are known to move through the area almost throughout the year.
October 29, 2018 | Page 16 File No. 0676-020-06
4.6.3.2. BULL TROUT As reported, very few data have been collected for anadromous bull trout; however, an acoustic tagging and tracking study within the Snohomish Estuary and adjacent marine nearshore was completed (Goetz, et al. 2004). Results from this study indicate that subadult and adult bull trout first enter the lower estuary and marine nearshore by early to mid-April. Presence in the estuary occurred through mid-summer, after which fish began moving back to fresh water (Figure 2). The latest that fish were observed in the lower estuary or marine nearshore was the first week in August (Starkes, J., Hart Crowser, personal observation, September 10, 2002). This is consistent with bull trout monitoring conducted from late summer through winter 2001 in the Snohomish River. No bull trout were collected at locations at north Jetty Island and Priest Point; these stations were sampled weekly from mid-August, through the following winter (Pentec 2002a).
Acoustic tracking data also indicate that the Snohomish River delta north of Jetty Island was used by bull trout to a greater degree than the navigation channel between Jetty Island and the mainland, although some use occurred in the channel. Fish tended to move north into Port Susan rather than south into Port Gardner Bay during spring and summer marine residence periods (Goetz, et al. 2004).
4.6.3.3. STEELHEAD TROUT Very few juvenile steelhead trout have been found in the many nearshore studies conducted within the Snohomish estuary and adjacent marine nearshore. This is consistent with what is known about the early life history of the species. Most native steelhead rear in fresh water for 2 or more years, out-migrating at a large size relative to the other salmonid species. Juvenile steelhead residence in the nearshore is brief, as they quickly migrate to open waters.
4.6.3.4. VEGETATION Shoreline vegetation is very sparse in the vicinity of South Terminal. Intertidal habitat within the marine shoreline is characterized by heavy development, including the Port and Navy ship traffic, overwater pier structures, and hard armored shoreline. Beyond the terminal to the south, the intertidal zone is flat and sandy out to approximately -5 feet MLLW, where water depth rapidly increases in a steep shelf. This area represents the Pigeon Creek delta deposit.
Recently a habitat survey was completed in the project area in June 2018. Small patches of eelgrass were observed directly south of the wharf, extending approximately 600 feet from the wharf at approximately -3 to -5 feet MLLW. Further south beyond the Pigeon Creek delta, a large continuous eelgrass bed is parallel to the shoreline (Appendix A, Sheet 4). Eelgrass observed in this area is generally dense and robust, spanning several vertical feet of tidal elevation range. A few sparse patches of rockweed (Fucus distichus) and sea lettuce (Ulva spp.) are present in shallow water areas. Aquatic vegetation is limited by the dynamic nature of the deltas, persistent ship traffic, and the low light conditions caused by the Snohomish River plume.
4.6.3.5. SUBSTRATES Intertidal areas at South Terminal are composed principally of a riprapped shoreline from approximately +15 feet to -40 feet MLLW. No unaltered beach environments are present in the vicinity of the terminal. South of the terminal, the Pigeon Creek delta is composed of fine sands and silts presumably deposited over time through output from the creek. The delta and associated habitat value seems to be dynamic in nature with documented sloughing events visible on bathymetry and transient vegetation (eelgrass and sea lettuce) seen on aerial photographs over time.
October 29, 2018 | Page 17 File No. 0676-020-06
4.6.3.6. FORAGE FISH Forage fish documented in the Port Gardner Bay area include Pacific herring (Clupea pallasii), Pacific sand lance (Ammodytes hexapterus), and surf smelt (Hypomesus pretiosus). All three species have been observed in the nearby Snohomish estuary during beach seine studies. Spawning areas for the three species have not been documented in the project area. The riprap armoring in the upper intertidal zone is not suitable spawning habitat for any of the species. The nearest spawning areas for surf smelt and sand lance are located approximately 0.75 miles southwest of the project area along beaches between Port Gardner Bay and the city of Mukilteo (Pentilla 2000; WDFW 2002). The nearest spawning area for Pacific herring is in Port Susan Bay, over 10 miles northwest of the project area.
4.6.3.7. ROCKFISH USE OF PORT GARDNER BAY Limited documentation exists pertaining to the use of adult rockfish species in Port Gardner Bay. A multivolume report by Miller and Borton (1980) on the geographic distribution of fish in Puget Sound indicate that each of the three listed rockfish species (Sebastes paucispinis, S. ruberrimus, S. pinniger) have been observed in nearby Possession Sound. At present, no known data exist on actual observations of these three rockfish species in Port Gardner Bay. Basic life history patterns of these rockfish species suggest that adult populations occupy depths greater than that of the nearshore project area. Juveniles typically use shallow water areas associated with eelgrass, kelp, and other marine macrovegetation, which is not prevalent in the project area.
4.6.3.8. SOUTHERN RESIDENT KILLER WHALES USE OF PORT GARDNER BAY According to the Whale Museum, numerous killer whale sightings have occurred between Port Susan and the southern tip of Whidbey Island, so the animals have access to the action area. However, no actual sightings have been made within industrial portions of Port Gardner Bay and the East Waterway where proposed dredging will occur.
4.6.3.9. MARBLED MURRELET USE OF PORT GARDNER BAY According to WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) maps, no marbled murrelets are known to reside within the action area (WDFW 2009), though they may forage in the waters of Port Gardner Bay and Possession Sound. Marbled murrelet are occasionally seen during the Everett Christmas Bird Count (n = 15 from 1996 to 2003; National Audubon Society 2004). Marbled murrelets were observed foraging in the water within the project area during a site reconnaissance visit in June 2018.
4.6.4. Contaminants and Sediments The site is located immediately adjacent to an area with a long history of commercial and industrial use. These uses caused releases of environmental contamination across the upland and nearshore areas at the site. Within or adjacent to the northern portion of the project site sediment sampling characterization as part of the environmental cleanup has found several contaminants that exceed MTCA/Sediment Management Standards sediment screening levels for the protection of human health and ecological receptors including: polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), chlorinated hydrocarbons, miscellaneous extractables (e.g., dibenzofuran), phenols, phthalates, dioxins/furans, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and metals.
October 29, 2018 | Page 18 File No. 0676-020-06
5.0 SPECIES AND HABITAT INFORMATION
Species listed under the ESA fall under the jurisdiction of one of two federal agencies: the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for terrestrial and freshwater species, and the NMFS for marine species. We identified the possible presence of listed species and critical habitat in the general Project vicinity by compiling data provided by the USFWS (2018a), NOAA-NMFS (2018), and the PHS Database (WDFW 2018). Official species lists are presented in Appendix C.
Species and Critical Habitat that May be Present in the Action Area This BE addresses bull trout, Chinook salmon, steelhead trout, two species of rockfish, southern resident killer whale, and marbled murrelet. These species have been listed as threatened or endangered. This section provides environmental baseline information, including biological data on salmonids, and information regarding the presence of all species in the vicinity of the action area.
Species and Critical Habitat Not Addressed in the BE The following ESA-listed species may occur in Port Gardener and/or Puget Sound, but are not expected to occur in the project area and are therefore, not addressed in this BE.
■ Yellow billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus). Yellow billed cuckoos are associated with open deciduous woodlands and deciduous forests that are at least 25 acres in size (NatureServe 2018). Yellow billed cuckoos are not expected to occur in the developed marine shoreline environment where there are no forested areas. The likelihood of a yellow billed cuckoo entering the action area is minimal to none. ■ North American Wolverine (Gulo gulo luscus). There are no known North American wolverine inhabiting Everett or the surrounding area. Wolverines are not expected to occur in the developed shoreline environment of the Port. The likelihood of a wolverine entering the action area is minimal to none. ■ Streaked Horned Lark (Eremophila alpestris strigata). There are no mapped populations of streaked horned lark in Everett or the surrounding area. Streaked horned larks are associated with prairies and open, undeveloped coastal habitat and are not expected to occur in the developed shoreline environment of the Port. The likelihood of a streaked horned lark entering the action area is minimal to none. ■ Humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae). Critical habitat for humpback whale has not been designated. Humpback whales use coastal habitats because of their productivity. They are not expected to be routinely present in Puget Sound because of the lack of appropriate habitat and food availability for these large mammals. However, humpbacks have been recently observed more frequently within Puget Sound. During late September 2018, humpback sightings were recorded near the north end of Bainbridge Island in Port Madison (Orca Network, 2018). Given the condition and lack of habitat, it is very unlikely that humpback whales would be found in the action area. ■ Golden paintbrush (Castilleja levisecta). Golden paintbrush is rare and there are currently no known locations in Snohomish County (NatureServe 2018). Historically, this species was found west of the Cascade Mountain range from southern British Columbia to central Oregon. Currently there are only 11 known locations where the plant is found. WDNR’s Washington Natural Heritage Program (WNHP) database (WDNR 2018) confirms that there are no known locations for this plant in the Action Area.
October 29, 2018 | Page 19 File No. 0676-020-06
Utilization of Habitats by Listed Species
5.3.1. Bull Trout The Coastal-Puget Sound Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of bull trout was designated as threatened under ESA on December 1, 1999. Bull trout spawn in the fall in streams containing clean gravel and cobble substrate and gentle slopes, with cold, unpolluted water. Bull trout require long incubation periods (4 to 5 months) compared with other salmon and trout. Fry hatch in late winter or early spring and remain in the gravel for up to 3 weeks before emerging. Small bull trout eat terrestrial and aquatic insects. Large bull trout are primarily piscivores, feeding on whitefish, sculpins and other salmonids. Bull trout are more sensitive to changes in temperature, poor water quality, and low-flow conditions in fresh water than many other salmon because of their life history requirements (75 FR 63897-64070).
Little is known about the anadromous form of bull trout or their movements in estuarine waters of Puget Sound. Limited data (e.g., Pentec 2002a; Goetz, et al. 2004) and anecdotal information from larger stocks, such as those present in the Snohomish and Skagit River Basins, indicate that fish have annual migrations to marine areas beginning in late winter and peaking in spring to mid-summer. Larger subadult and adult bull trout migrate to marine areas and occupy shallow nearshore habitats (adults are reproductively mature, and subadults are immature fish that have migrated to salt water). Anecdotal information in central Puget Sound suggests that bull trout aggregations are associated with surf smelt spawning beaches, presumably because the fish feed on this forage fish species.
Most anadromous bull trout move back to fresh water by late summer, although not necessarily into the same river systems from which they emigrated. Tagging data indicate that bull trout do not always spawn and overwinter in the same systems. Most mature adults migrate to upper-river spawning grounds beginning in late May and continuing through mid-July. Subadults may remain in marine areas as late as September before migrating to lower-river freshwater habitats, where they reside during the winter months (Goetz, et al. 2004). Overwinter habitats for subadults have been identified in the Snohomish River between river miles (RMs) 12 and 16 (Pentec 2002a).
The bull trout population in the Snohomish River has been separated into two populations, those found in the Snoqualmie River Basin and Skykomish River Basin. Although adult population numbers are unknown for the Snoqualmie River Basin, adult populations have been estimated by the WDFW using redd counts for the Skykomish River Basin (Kraemer 1999; Pentec 2002a). The WDFW used red count data from 1988 to 2012 and visual observations to estimate adult char population at between 53 (1988) and 1,345 (2002).
5.3.2. Puget Sound Chinook Salmon The Puget Sound evolutionarily significant unit (ESU) of Chinook salmon was designated as threatened under ESA on May 24, 1999. Similar to other Pacific salmon, Chinook salmon reproduce in fresh water, but most of their growth occurs in marine waters. Chinook salmon prefer to spawn and rear in the mainstem of rivers and larger streams (Williams, et al. 1975; Healey 1991). In watersheds with an unaltered estuary, and currently in the Snohomish River Estuary (Pentec 1992), Chinook salmon smolts spend a prolonged period (several days to several weeks) during their spring outmigration, feeding in saltmarshes and distributary channels as they transition gradually into more marine waters (Simenstad, et al. 1982). Chinook salmon fry and subyearlings in saltmarsh and other shallow habitat predominantly prey on emergent insects and epibenthic crustaceans such as gammarid amphipods, mysids and cumaceans. As
October 29, 2018 | Page 20 File No. 0676-020-06
Chinook salmon mature and move to neritic habitat, they feed on small nekton (decapod larvae, larval and juvenile fish, and euphausiids) and neustonic drift insects (Simenstad, et al. 1982; see also detailed life history review in Healey 1991).
When juvenile Chinook leave their natal streams and are generally found in Puget Sound between March and June, during which time they would tend to stay relatively close to shore and use woody debris and other nearshore habitat features for refuge. Thus, although the extent, duration and abundance of Chinook use of the developed nearshore habitat within the action area may be limited by poor habitat quality, both adults and juveniles of this species are expected to be present at certain times of year.
5.3.3. Puget Sound Steelhead The Puget Sound DPS of steelhead trout was designated as threatened under ESA on May 7, 2007. Steelhead is the name commonly applied to the anadromous form of rainbow trout. The species exhibits perhaps the most complex suite of life-history traits of any of the Pacific salmon. Steelhead can be anadromous or freshwater residents, and in some circumstances yield offspring of the opposite life-history form. The anadromous form can spend up to 7 years in fresh water prior to smoltification, although 2 years is most common, and then spend up to 4 years in salt water prior to first spawning. Unlike the Pacific salmon species, steelhead are iteroparous (individuals can spawn more than once; Behnke 1992).
Within the Snohomish and Puget Sound basins, steelhead can be divided into two basic reproductive ecotypes, based on the state of sexual maturity at the time of river entry. The summer-run steelhead is a stream maturing fish that enters fresh water in a sexually immature condition between May and October and requires several months to mature and spawn. The winter-run steelhead is an ocean-maturing fish that enters fresh water between November and April with well-developed gonads and spawns shortly after entrance. In basins with both summer and winter steelhead runs, the summer run generally occurs where habitat is not fully utilized by the winter run, or where an ephemeral hydrologic barrier separates them such as a seasonal velocity barrier or at a waterfall. Summer-run steelhead usually spawn farther upstream than winter run (72 FR 26722-26735).
Summer-run and winter-run steelhead stocks are present in the Snohomish basin and both summer and winter fish are composed of wild and hatchery-raised steelhead. The winter-run is the larger of the two stocks. Three wild winter steelhead stocks have been identified—Snohomish/Skykomish, Snoqualmie and Pilchuck Rivers. Wild winter-run fish run predominantly in the late winter through spring (February through April), while hatchery fish run from the late-fall through early winter (mid-November through mid-February). Spawning occurs through most of this entire winter/spring period.
Three summer steelhead stocks are present in the Snohomish River Basin—in the upper Tolt, North Fork Skykomish and South Fork Skykomish rivers. Wild juveniles typically spend two full years in fresh water before out-migrating during the spring. Because of the larger size at out migration, steelhead do not typically spend a large amount of time in the nearshore, rather they tend to quickly out-migrate to open-water (Behnke 1992).
5.3.4. Rockfish (Bocaccio and Yellow Rockfish) Habitat information in this section is summarized from the information presented in the proposed listing (74 FR 18516) and final rule (75 FR 22275) published in the Federal Register. NOAA has issued a final rule to remove the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin canary rockfish (Sebastes pinniger) DPS from the Federal
October 29, 2018 | Page 21 File No. 0676-020-06
List of Threatened and Endangered Species and remove its critical habitat designation (82 FR 7711). This final rule is effective on March 24, 2017. In general, adult rockfish are benthic but may also venture into mid-water pelagic habitats in deeper water. Most species are associated with rocky bottoms and outcrops and feed on bottom and mid-water dwelling invertebrates and small fishes. Rockfish are generally slow-growing, long-lived and late-maturing. Rockfish larvae are more common than adults in shallow water and are generally associated with rocky reefs, kelp canopies and artificial structures, such as piers. Juveniles feed primarily on zooplankton.
5.3.4.1. BOCACCIO (SEBASTES PAUCISPINIS) Adults are most commonly found at depths ranging from 160 to 820 feet, but are known to sometimes inhabit waters as shallow as 40 feet in depth. This species is most common around the Point Defiance and Tacoma Narrows area in the South Puget Sound. Larvae are pelagic at first, settle on the bottom within 3.5 to 5.5 months after birth and move to deeper waters within several weeks after settling.
5.3.4.2. YELLOW ROCKFISH (SEBASTES RUBERRIMUS) Adults are most commonly found in much deeper waters from 300 to 590 feet depth and are not known to occupy habitats less than 80 feet in depth. This species is highly associated with rocky, high-relief areas and is more common in the North Puget Sound. After the pelagic period, juveniles settle into high relief zones, crevices and sponge gardens in shallow areas before moving into deeper waters.
5.3.5. Southern Resident Killer Whale Southern resident killer whales (SRKW, Orcinus orca) were designated as “endangered” under ESA on November 18, 2005 (Federal Register Vol. 70, No. 222, pp. 69903–69912). Two sub-populations of killer whales are found in Puget Sound: “residents” and “transients.” These two groups of killer whales have different behavior and movement patterns, but both can be found seasonally in Puget Sound. Transient killer whales travel in smaller groups (called “pods”) and hunt other marine mammals for food. SRKW spend more time in Puget Sound, travel in larger pods and eat mostly fish (Krahn, et al. 2004). The Puget Sound southern residents consists of three social groups, identified as the J, K, and L pods, and are most often seen in Puget Sound from late fall through the winter (Wiles 2004).
The population of SRKW has gone through several periods of growth and decline since 1974. Between 1974 and 1980, total whale numbers expanded by 19 percent from 70 to 83 animals. This was followed by 4 consecutive years of decrease from 1981 to 1984, when counts fell by 11 percent (to 74 whales). Beginning in 1985, the southern residents entered an 11-year growth phase peaking at 98 animals in 1995, representing a population increase of 32 percent during the period. Yet another period of decline began in 1996, declining to 80 whales by 2001, representing an 18 percent decrease. This decline appears to have resulted from an unprecedented 9-year span of relatively poor survival in nearly all age classes, as well as from an extended period of poor reproduction. The current population of the SRKW is 74 animals.
According to the Whale Museum, which manages SRKW sightings within Puget Sound, SRKW have been sighted in Possession Sound and Port Susan near the mouth of the Snohomish River.
5.3.6. Marbled Murrelet The marbled murrelet, a small seabird that nests in the coastal old-growth forests of the Pacific Northwest, inhabits the Pacific coast of North America from the Bering Sea to central California. In contrast to other seabirds, murrelets do not form dense colonies, and may fly 75 kilometers (46.6 miles) or more inland to
October 29, 2018 | Page 22 File No. 0676-020-06
nest, generally in older coniferous forests (Rodway, et al. 1995). They are more commonly found inland during the summer breeding season, but make daily trips to the ocean to gather food, primarily fish and invertebrates, and have been detected in forests throughout the year. When not nesting, the birds live at sea, spending their days feeding and then moving several miles offshore at night (SEI 1999).
The breeding season of the marbled murrelet generally begins in April, with most egg laying occurring in late May and early-June. Peak hatching occurs in July after a 27- to 30-day incubation. Chicks remain in the nest and are fed by both parents. By the end of August, chicks have fledged and dispersed from nesting areas (Hamer and Nelson 1995). The murrelets typically appear to exhibit high fidelity to their nesting areas and have been observed in forest stands for up to 20 years (Divoky and Horton 1995).
Marbled murrelets have not been known to nest in other habitats, such as alpine forests, bog forests, scrub vegetation or screen slopes (Marks and Bishop 1999). At sea, foraging murrelets are usually found as widely spaced pairs. In some instances, murrelets form or join flocks that are often associated with river plumes and currents. These flocks may contain sizable portions of local populations (Strachan, et al. 1995).
The total North American population of marbled murrelets is estimated to be 360,000 individuals. Approximately 85 percent of this population breeds along the coast of Alaska. Estimates for Washington, Oregon, and California vary between 16,500 and 35,000 murrelets (Ralph and Miller 1999). In British Columbia, the population was estimated at 55,000 to 78,000 birds (Marbled Murrelet Recovery Team 2003). In recent decades the murrelet population in Alaska and British Columbia has apparently suffered a marked decline, by as much as 50 percent. Between 1973 and 1989, the Prince William Sound, Alaska, murrelet population declined 67 percent. Trends in Washington, Oregon, and California are also down, but the extent of the decrease is unknown. Current data suggest an annual decline of at least 4 to 6 percent throughout the species’ range (Beissinger 1995).
The most serious limiting factor for marbled murrelets is the loss of habitat through the removal of old-growth forests and fragmentation of forests. Forest fragmentation may be making nests near forest edges vulnerable to predation by other birds such as jays, crows, ravens and great-horned owls (USFWS 1996). Marbled murrelets may rest or feed in waters of Port Gardner Bay and may occasionally be found in the action area.
Occurrence of Critical Habitat in the Action Area
5.4.1. Bull Trout Critical Habitat The USFWS identified five DPS of bull trout in the western states and, in 1999, listed bull trout in the Coastal Puget Sound DPS as threatened. The coastal bull trout DPS is composed of 34 sub-populations, including the only anadromous bull trout runs within the contiguous United States (64 FR 58909). The more common life history forms presently recognized for bull trout are resident and fluvial, neither of which use marine waters. Critical habitat was designated on September 26, 2005 (70 FR 56212) and revised on October 18, 2010 (75 FR 63897).
Estuarine and marine areas of Port Gardner Bay lie within the designated critical habitat for bull trout.
USFWS identified nine PCEs that are considered to be essential for the conservation of bull trout. While most of these are relevant only to freshwater life history phases of bull trout, those that are, at least in part, relevant to marine areas include:
October 29, 2018 | Page 23 File No. 0676-020-06
■ Migration habitats with minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments between spawning, rearing, overwintering, and freshwater and marine foraging habitats, including but not limited to permanent, partial, intermittent, or seasonal barriers; ■ An abundant food base, including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic macroinvertebrates, and forage fish; ■ Complex river, stream, lake reservoir, and marine shoreline aquatic environments, and processes that establish and maintain these aquatic environments, with features such as large wood, side channels, pools undercut banks and unembedded substrates, to provide a variety of depths, gradients, velocities and structures; ■ Water temperatures ranging from 2 to 15 degrees Celsius (°C), with adequate thermal refugia available for temperatures that exceed the upper end of this range; ■ Sufficient water quality and quantity such that normal reproduction, growth and survival are not inhibited; and ■ Sufficiently low levels of occurrence of nonnative predatory, interbreeding, or competing species that, if present, are adequately isolated temporally and spatially from bull trout.
The project and action areas provide several of the PCEs of bull trout critical habitat. First, water temperature in the project area below MHHW is generally below 15°C during most periods of the year. Second, Port Gardner Bay is within the nearshore migration corridor and is generally free of biological or water quality impediments to bull trout and juvenile salmon migration. Extensive overwater structures may, however, provide impediments to normal nearshore behavior. Food resources, particularly epibenthic invertebrates associated with surface sediments or pilings, are present. Complex habitats such as side channels or large woody debris are not present within the project area.
5.4.2. Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) for Chinook salmon (70 FR 52630) that are marine-specific include:
■ Estuarine areas free of obstruction with water quality, water quantity and salinity conditions supporting juvenile and adult physiological transitions between fresh and saltwater; natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, and side channels; and juvenile and adult forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation; ■ Near-shore marine areas free of obstruction with water quality and quantity conditions and forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation; and natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, and side channels; and ■ Offshore marine areas with water quality conditions and forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation.
The action area includes all of these marine-specific PCEs for Chinook salmon.
October 29, 2018 | Page 24 File No. 0676-020-06
5.4.3. Steelhead Critical Habitat Critical habitat has been designated for steelhead (81 FR 9251-9325) but not within the project area and only includes freshwater systems. Since there is no freshwater habitat within the action area, there are no effects from these project activities to steelhead critical habitat.
5.4.4. Southern Resident Killer Whale Critical Habitat Designated critical habitat of southern resident Puget Sound DPS killer whale includes the summer core area in Haro Strait and waters around the San Juan Islands, Puget Sound, and the Strait of Juan de Fuca, which comprise approximately 2,560 square miles of marine habitat (71 FR 69054-69070).
Critical habitat is designated for areas containing the physical and biological habitat features, or PCEs, essential for the conservation of the species or that require special management considerations. PCEs include sites that are essential to supporting one or more life stages of the DPS and that contain physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the DPS. Specific sites and features designated for SRKW DPS include the following:
■ Water quality to support growth and development; ■ Prey species of sufficient quantity, quality, and availability to support individual growth, reproduction, and development, as well as overall population growth; and ■ Passage conditions to allow for migration, resting and foraging.
The project and action areas provide all of the above PCEs of SRKW critical habitat.
5.4.5. Rockfish Critical Habitat Critical habitat has been designated for rockfish (79 FR 68042) but not within the project area. Deepwater habitat has been designated within the action area, but in-water noise will not have an impact at that distance from the action. Therefore, effects from this project to rockfish critical habitat are considered insignificant.
6.0 ANALYSIS OF EFFECTS ON SPECIES AND HABITAT
The effects of proposed dredging and construction on ESA-listed species and their habitats are described in this section. The discussion describes how activities associated with the project will contribute to improvement, maintaining, or degradation of habitats used by listed species. Potential disturbances caused by project activities are presented in Table 5, along with measurable indicators of habitat.
Presented below is a discussion of short-term and long-term direct and indirect effects of project activities as well as the net effects of those activities. Net effect is considered to be the overall effect on the species and habitat in the long term. For example, a short-term adverse condition (e.g., loss of infauna during the dredging of sediments) may be necessary to achieve a long-term improvement in benthic habitat and quality; in such a case, the net effect is positive and would contribute toward improvement in the infauna indicator. Moreover, if short-term adverse conditions occur when few or no listed species are present, and if those conditions are no longer present when listed species return to the area, those conditions do not constitute adverse modification of the indicator of habitat quality.
October 29, 2018 | Page 25 File No. 0676-020-06
TABLE 5. SUMMARY OF NET EFFECTS OF PROJECT ACTIVITIES
Net Effects of Action Project Activities Habitat Component Improve Maintain Degrade Noise ◊ Construction Entrainment ◊ Disturbances Stranding ◊ Turbidity ◊
Water Quality Chemical contamination/nutrients ◊ Disturbance Temperature ◊ Dissolved oxygen ◊
Sediment Sedimentation sources/rates ◊ Disturbance Sediment quality ◊ Fish access/refugia ◊ Substrate ◊ Habitat Riparian conditions ◊ Disturbance Flow and hydrology/current patterns/saltwater- ◊ freshwater mixing patterns Overwater structures ◊ Prey-epibenthic and pelagic zooplankton ◊ Infauna ◊ Prey-forage fish ◊ Biota Disturbance Aquatic/wetland vegetation ◊ Nonindigenous species ◊ Ecological diversity ◊
Construction Disturbances
6.1.1. Direct Effects Underwater noise generated during project construction may travel up to a maximum of 20 miles from the location where the steel piles will be installed to the point where it encounters adjacent land masses. The duration of underwater noise impacts due to pile driving is anticipated to be approximately 35 to 50 days with a maximum of total of 50 hours of pile driving due to the limited number of piles and will not be a lasting effect. Use of an impact hammer to install steel piles to the appropriate depth will only be employed after the vibratory hammer has installed the piles as far as possible. Piles will be initially driven by a vibratory method in order to reduce the duration of impact hammering, which produces louder sound levels.
The Practical Spreading Loss model was used to estimate the distance impact and vibratory pile driving sound will travel before it attenuates below species-specific injury and disturbance thresholds (WSDOT 2018; NOAA 2017). Sound thresholds for disturbance and injury to aquatic species that may occur in the action area are provided in Table 6. Our assumptions for these analyses are based on the best available
October 29, 2018 | Page 26 File No. 0676-020-06
science at the time of preparation of this report. The methods the contractor uses may vary slightly from those described, but are not expected to significantly change the outcome of these analyses. We have prepared this BE assuming the worst-case scenario and greatest potential noise output. All efforts will be made to reduce the extent that impact hammering is used on the project whenever possible. Our model assumptions for underwater noise include the following:
■ Impact pile driving for 24-inch steel piles produces single-strike sound levels of 207 peak decibel (dBPEAK), 194 dBRMS, and 178 sound exposure decibel (dBSEL) when measured at 10 meters (32.8 feet) from the source (WSDOT 2018). 18, 24-inch-diameter piles are proposed to be driven/proofed by impact hammer for the project.
■ Vibratory pile removal and installation will have an underwater noise level of 146 dBRMS for 24-inch steel pipe (typical) piles, 155 dBRMS for 12-inch steel pipe piles, and 150 dBRMS for 16-inch steel H piles (data was only available for 12-inch wide piles, which was used as a surrogate for 16-inch H piles). ■ A bubble curtain will be employed during impact pile driving. Proper implementation of a bubble curtain is anticipated to reduce noise levels by a minimum of 6-10 dBRMS at 10 meters (Laughlin 2009). However, the following noise calculations did not incorporate reduced underwater noise values from bubble curtain sound attenuation since the effectiveness of the bubble curtain on batter piles is unknown. If the bubble curtain is effective the number of strikes per day could be adjusted accordingly.
The practical spreading loss method was used to identify the distances to attenuation at each threshold level (WSDOT 2017). These thresholds levels and the injury or disturbance distances are provided in Table 6 below.
October 29, 2018 | Page 27 File No. 0676-020-06
TABLE 6. ANIMAL THRESHOLDS AND UNDERWATER DISTANCES TO ATTENUATION
Species Threshold Levels 16-inch H Piles 24-inch Piles 12-inch Piles Disturbance (V) 1,000 m (V) 10,000 m (V) 2,154.4 m (V)1 Vibratory: 120 dBRMS Marine (I) 1,847.8 m (I) Impact: 160 dBRMS Mammals MF Cetaceans 185 (V) 0.4 m (V) 4.5 m (V) 1.0 m Injury1 dBSEL(CUM) (I) 34.3 m Disturbance N/A2 (I) 8,577 m N/A 150 dBRMS Injury Fish Fish ≥ 2 Grams N/A (I) 6,092 m N/A 187 dB SEL(CUM) Injury- Fish < 2 Grams N/A (I) 8,577 m N/A 183 dB SEL(CUM) Disturbance N/A (I) 8,577 m N/A Impact: 150 dBRMS Marbled Murrelet Injury N/A (I) 736 m N/A Impact: 202 dBRMS
Notes: 1. (V) = Vibratory and (I) = Impact 2. Noise analyses not available for impacts of vibratory driving on fish and marbled murrelet
Resident fish species that occupy the action area within the disturbance threshold could be behaviorally disturbed during construction and will likely avoid the project area. ESA-listed species that use marine habitats are not expected to occur in the nearshore environment within the project area. The project will be completed within the approved in-water work period for salmonids, which will minimize the likelihood for potential impacts to listed species. Other ESA-listed marine species such as SRKW and rockfish, are not expected to occur within the zone of injury but may pass through the zone of disturbance. Marine mammal monitoring will be conducted to avoid impacts to SRKW. A marine mammal monitoring plan will be prepared for the project.
Most seabird activity is somewhat removed from the project area, mostly occurring within the Snohomish Delta north of Jetty Island, approximately 3 miles north of the project area. Marbled murrelets that could venture into the project area during pile driving could be exposed to slight increases in background noise levels (recently measured in the lower Snohomish Channel, approximately 0.8 miles from the project area) at between 144 and 155 dBRMS re 1 μPa (Hart Crowser and Evans Hamilton 2010).
SRKWs are medium frequency (MF) cetaceans and are unlikely to occur in the project area during the in-water work window. The small size of piles limits the injury zone for MF cetaceans to a very small area around the driven pile. Since these activities are occurring within a highly developed area, it is very unlikely that an animal will occur in the injury zone during construction activities.
6.1.2. Indirect Effects Potential indirect effects from in-water construction disturbances are predominantly related to short-term predator prey relationships with altered fish behavior potentially occurring within the action area during the project activities. Fish present during project activities may avoid the area and have short-term effects on
October 29, 2018 | Page 28 File No. 0676-020-06
the dynamics within the existing habitat, however these are short-term and will not have any long-term negative effects following construction completion.
6.1.3. Net Effects Dredging and berth construction activities will result in minor and temporary increases in noise in the project area, possibly causing salmonids, rockfish and bird species to avoid the nearshore for the duration of activities. However, all work will be conducted during approved work windows, and previous acoustic monitoring of dredge activities show noise levels well below those shown to injure fish. The net effect of these project activities will be to maintain (neither improve nor degrade) the present condition (Table 5).
Water Quality Disturbances
6.2.1. Direct Effects Dredging may produce localized impacts to water quality in the form of elevated turbidity plumes that would last from a few minutes to a several hours. Elevated turbidity plumes from dredging are likely to occur in the immediate vicinity of the South terminal and may extend throughout outer portions of the East Waterway. An increase in turbidity has the potential to have direct effects on fish behavior. However, fish present in the Action Area have evolved in Pacific Northwest systems that periodically experience short-term pulses of high suspended sediment, they are adapted to such exposures. Increases in turbidity that result from dredging activities are typically of much less magnitude than increases caused by natural storm events (Nightingale and Simenstad 2001).
Juvenile salmon have been shown to avoid areas of unacceptably high turbidities (Servizi 1988), although they may seek out areas of moderate turbidity (10 to 80 nephelometric turbidity units [NTU]), presumably as cover against predation (Cyrus and Blaber 1987a and 1987b). Feeding efficiency of juveniles is impaired by turbidities in excess of 70 NTU, well below sublethal stress levels (Bisson and Bilby 1982). Reduced preference by adult salmon homing to spawning areas has been demonstrated where turbidities exceed 30 NTU (20 milligrams per liter [mg/L] suspended sediments; Sigler 1990). However, Chinook salmon exposed to 650 mg/L of suspended volcanic ash were still able to find their natal water (Whitman, et al. 1982).
In addition, turbidity due to dredging will be short-term, temporary and localized. The mechanisms by which mechanical clamshell dredging causes increased suspended sediment concentrations include the impact and withdrawal of the bucket from the substrate, the washing of material out of the bucket as it moves through the water column, and the loss of water as the sediment is loaded onto the barge (Hayes, et al. 1984; Nightingale and Simenstad 2001). The duration of the highest turbidity is expected to be on the order of hours as construction operations take place. Therefore, the turbid conditions will be reduced during times of no construction activity and will increase again during the next construction period. This condition will be sustained over short periods of the in-water work window during the dredging event.
Studies and data indicate that turbidity effects to listed juvenile salmonids will be highly unlikely and discountable because work will occur during the approved in-water work window for the area when juvenile salmonids are not expected to be present. Adult salmonids and larval rockfish could be present year-round in low numbers; however, the extent of turbidity will not be expected to reach the level where disturbances occur and can thus be labeled as discountable. Adult and juvenile rockfish are not expected in the Action Area, and effects will be discountable.
October 29, 2018 | Page 29 File No. 0676-020-06
During dredging, suspension of anoxic sediment may result in reduced DO in the water column as the sediments oxidize, but any reduction in DO above background is expected to be limited in extent and temporary in nature. Based on a review of four studies on the effects of dredging on DO levels, LaSalle (1988) showed little or no measurable reduction in DO around dredging operations. In addition, impacts to listed fish due to any potential DO depletion around dredging activities is expected to be minimal for several reasons (LaSalle 1988; Simenstad 1988):
■ The relatively low levels of suspended material generated by dredging operations; ■ Counterbalancing factors in the area, such as tidal or current flushing; ■ DO depletion typically occurs low in the water column; and ■ High sediment biological oxygen demand created by suspended sediment in the water column is not common.
Based on this information, dredging is not expected to result in a change in sediment oxygen demand (and resulting DO reduction) during transport through the water column. There may be minor resuspension of sediments at the point of impact of the placed materials; however, this condition is expected to be temporary and localized, and the activity will be monitored by water quality testing. Based on the above information, DO is not expected to drop to a level that will be significant to fish that may occur in the area.
There is a chance that other short-term water quality effects could occur related to fuel or contaminant spills; however, BMPs will be in place to minimize the potential for these to occur and to minimize the effect to listed salmonids if they do occur. These effects are therefore expected to be insignificant.
The direct habitat benefits by removing contaminated sediment from the project area has long-term net benefit for salmonids and other species that utilize this area as a migratory pathway and rearing habitat.
6.2.2. Indirect Effects For this Project, most effects are direct. Indirect effects of the Project on the environment will be slight. Given the short-term and highly localized nature of turbidity, no indirect effects to ESA-listed fish, bird or marine mammal species are anticipated. The Project will not result in changes to ecological systems resulting in altered predator-prey relationships or negative long-term alteration of fish habitat.
6.2.3. Net Effects Short-term effects resulting from increased turbidity and sediment resuspension may be expected during dredging activities, but are expected to be minor and temporary, with the positive long-term effects of contaminated sediment removal. Therefore, the net effects of dredging will be to maintain water quality in the project and action area (Table 3).
Sediment Disturbances
6.3.1. Direct Effects This site is subject to a MTCA Agreed Order between Ecology, the Port, Weyerhaeuser, and WDNR (No. DE 8979). Physical resuspension of contaminated sediments will occur during dredging and has the potential to release these contaminants into the water column and potentially cause acute or chronic toxicological effects on ESA-listed species that may be present during dredge activities. Samples collected
October 29, 2018 | Page 30 File No. 0676-020-06
from adjacent marine sediments were found to contain a large volume of wood waste as well as contaminants including metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), phenols, phthalates, chlorinated hydrocarbons, miscellaneous extractables (e.g, dibenzofuran) and dioxins/furans.
A sediment investigation is being completed and preparation of a Dredged Material Characterization Report will be submitted to the DMMO to determine the suitability of dredged material for open-water disposal.
Resuspension of sediments contaminated with these substances would have a low risk of exposure to ESA-listed fish due to the limited exposure duration and effective BMPs in place to minimize any potential exceedances in turbidity in the area.
Dredging activities will occur during an in-water work window when few juvenile salmon would be present, further minimizing exposure. The proposed dredge footprint does not contain the deep high relief habitats used by ESA-listed rockfish adults, but there are shallow habitats with eelgrass or other areas of marine macrovegetation most often used by juvenile fish species. These areas of eelgrass habitat will be moved and replanted prior to dredging. Highly bioaccumulative contaminants such as PCBs, dioxin/furans, and the metals would not be in the water column for a sufficient period for fish or higher trophic level wildlife, such as marbled murrelet, or marine mammals, to accumulate these substances. These data and analyses indicate that the potential effects of sediment resuspension to ESA-listed fish, marbled murrelet and SRKW will be discountable.
Long-term direct effects of proposed dredging are expected to be positive. Dredging and placement of a cap along the dredge prism edge will either remove or isolate contaminated sediments. Left in place, existing sediment contamination may produce chronic long-term effects to the benthic and epibenthic communities within the dredge footprint and contribute to the bioaccumulation of contaminants within upper trophic level species. Removal of this long-term source of contamination will likely allow the recolonization of a more robust benthic community within the dredge footprint. It would also remove a source of bioaccumulation to higher trophic level animals.
6.3.2. Indirect Effects Removal of contaminated sediment has indirect beneficial effects to the overall habitat within the project area. Dredging and capping actions will change the substrate and will provide an improved substrate for benthic colonization, compared to the existing degraded, historically contaminated conditions currently at the site.
6.3.3. Net Effects The net effects on sediment quality will be positive with the removal of contaminated sediment. Toxicological effects associated with contaminated sediment resuspension will be low because of the relatively low concentrations that are present, the temporary nature of resuspension, the small area that resuspension will occur in, and work window restrictions during periods when few listed salmonids will be present.
Habitat and Biota Disturbance The project will result in permanent impacts to benthic and eelgrass habitat. In general, within proposed impact areas, existing habitat functions are moderate to low with large areas of bare sand that are subject
October 29, 2018 | Page 31 File No. 0676-020-06
to prior dredging activity and frequent disturbance due to ship traffic. Further discussion on the impacts to each of these habitat types is provided below. It should be noted that the impact estimates presented below are conservative and the actual impact areas will likely be smaller.
6.4.1. Direct Effects on Benthic Habitat Impacts to benthic habitat can be divided into two categories: 1) habitat displacement; and 2) shading due to increased overwater coverage.
6.4.1.1. BENTHIC HABITAT DISPLACEMENT Permanent benthic habitat displacement will result due to armoring and pile installation for a total of 3,176 sf of displaced benthic habitat. These impacts will be from the installation of 50 HP16 fender piles (90 sf), 18, 24-inch steel batter piles (57 sf), eight, 12-inch steel fender piles (7 sf), and nearshore armoring to the north end of the dredge prism (1,560 sf) and at the south end of the terminal (3,022 sf). There will also be temporary impacts from the installation of 36 temporary piles related to the construction of the mooring dolphins and improvements to the dolphin trestle. As part of the project, a derelict creosote dolphin (15 piles) will be removed resulting in a net enhancement of 23 sf as well as the removal of 20, 12-inch fender piles resulting in a net habitat benefit of 15.8 sf. The 1,560 sf of nearshore that will be armored north of the pier is within a previously documented contaminated area with compromised habitat value and is not counted toward the total benthic habitat displacement impact. The armoring proposed for the south end of the terminal will be filled and covered with fish mix and will provide similar habitat value after construction. Based on the above, the net functional habitat displaced by this project which will require mitigation is approximately 115 sf.
6.4.1.2. BENTHIC HABITAT SHADING Permanent shading impacts from increased overwater coverage will result due to wharf equipment upgrades for a total of 2,848 sf. These impacts will be from the installation of five pneumatic fenders (2,250 sf), and the construction of two new dolphins (498 sf). The proposed new catwalk structure (875 sf) will be located in deep water, constructed at an elevation of approximately 7 feet above MHHW, and fully grated. No hard shadow will be created on the water surface and therefore with no shading impacts, its square footage is fully discounted.
The remaining areas with increased overwater coverage are proposed to occur in what is currently considered deep water (below -20 MLLW). Typically, mitigation for overwater coverage is based on the need to retain shallow benthic productivity and juvenile salmon migration corridors. Given this, the remining increases of overwater coverage associated with the pneumatic fender system would not affect benthic productivity due to shading. The increases in overwater coverage would only affect juvenile salmonid behavior through avoidance of the shaded area. Thus, the effect of loss of habitat function is discounted by half of the total area to result in 1,424 sf of habitat loss due to shading that would require further mitigation.
6.4.2. Eelgrass Habitat Impacts The proposed dredge is within the historic dredge prism of the south terminal and is a maintenance activity to restore navigation to the South Terminal. Although the proposed dredge is within the historic dredge prism, it was last dredged in the 1970s, and several small patches of eelgrass (approximately 900 sf total) have since established within the proposed dredge cut (Sheet 4 and 13, Appendix A). The Port is proposing to relocate/recreate these small patches to the south outside of the proposed dredge prism to enhance
October 29, 2018 | Page 32 File No. 0676-020-06
existing eelgrass habitat. This 900 sf of loss will be mitigated at a ratio of 2:1 to result in 1,800 sf habitat created as a result of this loss.
6.4.3. Mitigation Actions The Port plans to mitigate for adverse impacts to the estuarine systems due to increases in overwater coverage, displacement of benthic habitat due to pile installation, and dredging. A summary of the impacts and their proposed mitigation actions are provided in Table 7 below. Further detail on the mitigation is provided separately in GeoEngineers 2018.
Unavoidable benthic and eelgrass habitat impacts associated with the Project will be compensated for using advanced credits from the Union Slough mitigation site, derelict dolphin removal, fender pile removal, the application of fish mix in nearshore armoring, and the transplantation of existing eelgrass patches. All efforts will be made to minimize impacts to benthic and eelgrass habitats.
October 29, 2018 | Page 33 File No. 0676-020-06
TABLE 7. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED PERMANENT BENTHIC AND EELGRASS HABITAT AND PROPOSED MITIGATION
Square Square Discount Area Footage Footage Rate impacted Impact Action Impacted Mitigation Action Mitigated Five, 15- by 30-foot pneumatic Yokohama 2250 50% fenders1 Dolphin walers and rubber Union Slough 48 50% Overwater fenders advanced mitigation 1,374 coverage credits Two, 15- by 15-foot concrete 550 50% dolphin caps Grated aluminum catwalk2 875 100% Total Impact 1,424 Total Mitigation 1,424 50 HP16 fender piles 90 0% Dolphin removal (eight, 16-inch and 18, 24-inch steel batter 23.5 57 0% seven, 18-inch piles creosote treated piles) Removal of 20, Eight, 12-inch steel fender 7 0% 12-inch steel and 15.8 Benthic pile with HDPE sleeve timber fender pile habitat displacement Union Slough Near shore armoring 1560 100% advanced mitigation 1154 (northern area)3 credits Near shore armoring Fish Mix in nearshore 3022 0% 3022 (southern area) armoring Total impact 3,176 Total Mitigation 3,176 Eelgrass Dredging 900 2:1 Transplanting 1800 habitat displacement Total impact 1,800 Total Mitigation 1,800 Notes: 1 Mitigation for overwater coverage is based on the need to retain shallow benthic productivity and juvenile salmon migration corridors. These areas with increased overwater coverage are proposed to occur in what is currently considered deep water (below -20 MLLW), below where benthic productivity would be affected by shading. Therefore, the increase in overwater coverage would only affect juvenile salmonid behavior through avoidance of the shaded area. Thus, the effect of loss of habitat function is discounted by half of the total area. 2 These catwalks will be placed in deep water (deeper than -20 MLLW), located approximately 7 feet above MHHW and fully grated. These structures will cast no hard shadow on the water and will therefore have no shading impacts. 3The northern armoring portion is in a previously contaminated area with compromised habitat value and is not counted in total impact 4.Credits needed to fully mitigate for benthic habitat displacement from pile installation.
6.4.3.1. BENTHIC HABITAT/OVERWATER COVERAGE All the additional overwater coverage as tabulated in Table 2 will be mitigated using 1,424 credits from the Union Slough Advanced Mitigation Site. All adverse effects to benthic habitat as tabulated in Table 2 will be mitigated using a combination of derelict pile and dolphin removal and 115 credits from the aforementioned mitigation site. A total of 1,539 credits from the Union Slough Advanced Mitigation Site will be used. These are high quality credits issued against mature, productive intertidal habitat in the Snohomish River estuary.
October 29, 2018 | Page 34 File No. 0676-020-06
6.4.3.2. EELGRASS MITIGATION AREA The proposed dredge is a maintenance activity to restore navigation to the South Terminal and is within the historic dredge footprint of the South Terminal. It was last dredged by the former site owner in the 1970s. Although the proposed dredge is within the historic dredge footprint, several small patches of eelgrass have established within the proposed dredge cut (approximately 900 sf). After dredging is completed, the Port will transplant 1,800 sf of eelgrass to the Pigeon Creek delta using donor stock from surrounding healthy eelgrass habitat. The newly transplanted eelgrass habitat is predicted to reach full function within 5 years. The proposed transplant location has similar tidal elevation, wave energy, and substrate as the existing eelgrass location and will provide the necessary environment for success of the transplants. This transplant is proposed to occur during the spring/summer of 2020. The Port performed similar mitigation actions in 2009 at the Mt. Baker Terminal project where eelgrass was transplanted, and success criteria were met in 4 years.
In addition to the above, prior to dredging the Port will salvage the isolated patches of eelgrass (approximately 900 sf) that are within the proposed dredge prism and move them to the nearby Pigeon Creek delta. This action will create 1,000 sf of eelgrass habitat, enhancing existing eelgrass habitat located on the Pigeon Creek delta. The resulting total square footage will more than compensate for the loss of temporal function from transplanting the eelgrass and any additional unforeseen project related impacts to nearshore benthic function.
The Port will monitor both area and density of the new eelgrass beds to identify mitigation success. To reach full ecosystem function, in 5 years the planted area should equal 1,800 sf with a density approaching or the same as pre-project densities. The Port will also establish reference monitoring plots in an eelgrass bed in the vicinity to account for any stochastic variability that could locally affect eelgrass area and density. To ensure that ecosystem function is being met in perpetuity, the Port will monitor up to four times in the 5 years after the eelgrass transplant. If success criteria are not met, the Port will supplement the existing planting or enter into adaptive management with applicable resource agencies.
6.4.4. Indirect Effects Indirect short-term effects, such as a temporary decrease in prey species to ESA-listed salmonids are expected to be discountable as a result of placement of fish mix material within rock armoring. This placement of fish mix changes the habitat within the project area has the potential to provide indirect effects to the existing predator prey relationships. This improved substrate provides opportunity for colonization of invertebrate prey species and potentially more feeding opportunities for rearing juvenile salmon long term.
6.4.5. Net Effects Net effects to biota and listed salmonid habitats are expected to be insignificant or positive (Table 5). The loss of the benthic community as the result of dredging will be temporary; multiple studies of dredged areas show a relatively rapid recolonization of the community from adjacent areas. Dredging will also remove a potential source of sediment contamination from the area. The 900 sf of impacted eelgrass beds will be transplanted to enhance existing eelgrass habitat to the south in the Pigeon Creek delta and Union Slough advanced mitigation credits will compensate for benthic habitat degraded or lost to shading and pile driving.
October 29, 2018 | Page 35 File No. 0676-020-06
Summary of Effects The net effect of the proposed dredging and construction in the project area will be to maintain or improve overall habitat quality for ESA-listed fish, SRKW and marbled murrelet. In the long-term, the dredging of contaminated sediments will remove a contaminant source from the area. This will improve habitats for benthic and epibenthic recolonization and reduce the potential for food web impacts to higher trophic level species such as SRKW and marbled murrelet.
Short-term, localized water quality degradation during dredging will not impact habitat for juvenile salmonids because of the short-term nature of the effects and because of in-water work restrictions; thus, current water quality conditions will be maintained or improved in the long term.
The loss of benthic habitat to shading or pile driving and the conversion of degraded shallow water habitat to deep water habitat and will be completely offset by the use of advanced mitigation credits within the Union Slough Restoration Site and eelgrass habitat enhancement. Sediment quality will be improved considerably, with the removal of sediments exceeding sediment screening levels. Given the short duration of dredging and the tightly bound nature of contaminants to the sediment matrix, the potential for toxicological effects resulting from resuspended sediments would be discountable.
7.0 EFFECT DETERMINATIONS
Based on the Project effects presented in Section 6.0, the following effect determinations are proposed for each ESA-listed species and designated critical habitat that may occur in the Action Area. Effect determinations take into account all of the possible Project effects. The determinations are summarized in Table 8 and the rationale discussed below.
TABLE 8. EFFECT DETERMINATIONS FOR LISTED SPECIES
Effect Effect Determination Federal Federal Determination for Critical Common Name Status Jurisdiction Status for Species Habitat Bull Trout Threatened USFWS Threatened NLAA NLAA Puget Sound Chinook Salmon Threatened NMFS Threatened NLAA NLAA Puget Sound steelhead Threatened NOAA Threatened NLAA Not Present Georgia Basin bocaccio rockfish Endangered NOAA Endangered NLAA NLAA Georgia Basin yelloweye rockfish Threatened NOAA Threatened NLAA NLAA Southern Resident Killer Whale Endangered NOAA Endangered NLAA NLAA Marbled murrelet Threatened USFWS Threatened NLAA Not Present Notes: NE =No Effect; NLTAA = Not Likely to Adversely Affect.
Effect on Species The following is a summary of the effects of the project actions on ESA species present within the action area.
October 29, 2018 | Page 36 File No. 0676-020-06
7.1.1. Bull Trout Although bull trout may be present within the action area, proposed project actions are not likely to adversely affect bull trout because:
■ The absence of any data indicating the presence of bull trout within the shoreline of the project area combined with the timing of the in-water work will reduce the likelihood of exposing bull trout to the effects of pile driving. ■ Conversion of a small amount of shallow water habitat to deep and loss of shallow water due to shading and pile installation will be fully offset by available advanced mitigation credits within the basin. ■ Direct loss of eelgrass habitat through dredging will be offset through eelgrass mitigation in the nearby existing eelgrass bed and by enhancing nearby eelgrass habitat. ■ Loss of epibenthic prey will be temporary during construction activities and will recolonize following disturbance. ■ All proposed construction activities (pile driving and construction of the pier) will be in the same general site location as the existing pier structure and the timing of in-water work will be completed within the approved in-water work period for salmonids. ■ Timing of the in-water work will reduce the likelihood of exposing bull trout to the effects of pile driving. ■ During impact pile driving, noise attenuation BMPs (i.e. bubble curtain or similar) will be utilized to reduce underwater sound pressures.
7.1.2. Bull Trout Designated Critical Habitat Although bull trout critical habitat is present within the action area, proposed project actions are not likely to adversely affect bull trout because:
■ Minor and temporary habitat disturbances in the form of increased turbidity during dredging activities will occur during a brief time period; occur after the juvenile salmon outmigration period and effectively managed and minimized through the use of proper BMPs. ■ The new catwalk will include grated decking and not have shading impacts to bull trout critical habitat. ■ Mitigation actions such as removal of creosote pilings, placement of fish mix and intertidal debris removal will result in a net benefit to bull trout habitat at the project site by improving existing substrate for invertebrate colonization.
7.1.3. Puget Sound Chinook Salmon Although Chinook salmon may be present within the action area, proposed project is not likely to adversely affect Chinook salmon because:
■ Conversion of a small amount of shallow water habitat to deep and loss of shallow water due to shading and pile installation will be fully offset by available advanced mitigation credits within the basin. ■ Direct loss of eelgrass habitat through dredging will be offset through eelgrass mitigation in the nearby existing eelgrass bed and by enhancing nearby eelgrass habitat.
October 29, 2018 | Page 37 File No. 0676-020-06
■ Loss of epibenthic prey will be temporary during construction activities and will recolonize following disturbance. ■ All proposed construction activities (pile driving and construction of the pier) will be in the same general site location as the existing pier structure and the timing of in-water work will be completed within the approved in-water work period for salmonids. ■ Timing of the in-water work will reduce the likelihood of exposing Chinook salmon to the effects of pile driving. ■ During impact pile driving, noise attenuation BMPs (i.e. bubble curtain or similar) will be utilized to reduce underwater sound pressures.
7.1.4. Puget Sound Chinook Salmon Designated Critical Habitat Although Chinook salmon critical habitat is present within the action area, proposed project actions are not likely to adversely affect Chinook salmon because:
■ Minor and temporary habitat disturbances in the form of increased turbidity during dredging activities will occur during a brief time period; occur after the juvenile salmon outmigration period and effectively managed and minimized through the use of proper BMPs. ■ Impact minimization measures including noise attenuation while pile driving, silt curtain and oil boom will reduce potential impacts to critical habitat. ■ The project will have a beneficial long-term effect on the intertidal and shoreline estuarine habitat due to: (1) removal of contaminated sediments through dredging actions and (2) placement of fish mix material in the nearshore environment. ■ No long-term impacts to offshore marine areas will result from the project.
7.1.5. Puget Sound Steelhead Although steelhead may be present within the action area, proposed project is not likely to adversely affect steelhead because:
■ Minor and temporary habitat disturbances in the form of increased turbidity during dredging activities will occur during a brief time period; occur after the outmigration period and will be effectively managed and minimized through the use of proper BMPs. ■ Conversion of a small amount of shallow water habitat to deep and loss of shallow water due to shading and pile installation will be fully offset by available advanced mitigation credits within the basin. ■ Direct loss of eelgrass habitat through dredging will be offset through eelgrass mitigation in the nearby existing eelgrass bed and by enhancing nearby eelgrass habitat. ■ Loss of epibenthic prey will be temporary during construction activities and will recolonize following disturbance. ■ All proposed construction activities (pile driving and construction of the pier) will be in the same general site location as the existing pier structure and the timing of in-water work will be completed within the approved in-water work period for salmonids. ■ Timing of the in-water work will reduce the likelihood of exposing steelhead to the effects of pile driving.
October 29, 2018 | Page 38 File No. 0676-020-06
■ During impact pile driving, noise attenuation BMPs (i.e. bubble curtain or similar) will be utilized to reduce underwater sound pressures.
7.1.6. Boccaccio and Yelloweye Rockfish The project is not likely to adversely affect boccacio and yelloweye rockfish because:
■ The project site does not contain deep-water rocky habitat suitable for adult rockfish. ■ Adult and juvenile rockfish, if present in the action area, could exhibit noise induced avoidance behavior causing them to temporarily vacate the vicinity during pile driving activities. However, neither adult nor juvenile rockfish are expected to be present within the project area and the effects of the project will be short-term, localized and temporary. ■ During impact pile driving, noise attenuation BMPs (i.e. bubble curtain or similar) will be utilized to reduce underwater sound pressures. ■ The low abundance of listed rockfish in South Puget Sound indicates that the likelihood of significant larval rockfish presence in the action area is discountable.
7.1.7. Boccaccio and Yelloweye Rockfish Designated Critical Habitat The project is not likely to adversely affect boccacio and yelloweye rockfish critical habitat because:
■ Impacts minimization measures including mitigation actions including: (1) removal of contaminated sediment; and (2) placement of fish mix material, will improve habitat for lower trophic level prey species for rockfish (Feature 1). ■ The project may generate minor, short-term turbidity, but will not affect long-term water quality or DO in the action area (Feature 2). ■ The project will not alter structure or rugosity that supports feeding opportunities and predator avoidance (Feature 3).
7.1.8. Southern Resident Killer Whale The project is not likely to adversely affect SRKW because:
■ Removal of contaminated sediments will reduce the probability of bioaccumulation from this Site in this higher tropic level species. ■ SRKW have not been documented within the highly industrialized South Terminal. ■ During impact pile driving, noise attenuation BMPs (i.e. bubble curtain or similar) will be utilized to reduce underwater sound pressures. ■ Bioaccumulation to apex predators such as SRKW would not occur given the short duration of resuspension; increased concentration within the tissues of fish would not occur. ■ Long-term removal of contaminated sediments will improve food web dynamism and contributes to the lowering contaminant burdens in higher level trophic species such as SRKW.
October 29, 2018 | Page 39 File No. 0676-020-06
7.1.9. Southern Resident Killer Whale Designated Critical Habitat The project is not likely to adversely affect SRKW critical habitat because:
■ Short-term effects on water quality will occur related to dredging and potentially during placement of any fill material, but turbidity is expected to be limited, short-term and localized and is not expected to result in any long-term effects. ■ In-water work for the project will comply with the timing restrictions specified to provide protection to juvenile salmon, the adults of which are principal prey of SRKW.
7.1.10. Marbled Murrelet The project is not likely to adversely affect marbled murrelets because:
■ Pile driving will cause increases in airborne noise, and will be most significant within the highly industrialized project area, occur over a limited window. ■ During impact pile driving, noise attenuation BMPs (i.e. bubble curtain or similar) will be utilized to reduce underwater sound pressures. ■ Removal of contaminated sediments will reduce the probability of bioaccumulation from this Site in these higher tropic level species.
8.0 CONCLUSIONS
The proposed Port of Everett South Terminal Improvements Project includes maintenance dredging of approximately 25,840 CY of accumulated sediments from the South Terminal Berth, construction of a new fender system, and construction of two new mooring dolphins. Dredging and wharf improvements will be conducted using a clamshell dredge and/or excavator, vibratory and impact hammers, barges, and other construction tools. These activities will create in-air and in-water noise and suspended sediments within the project area and the immediately surrounding vicinity. Dredging, pile installation, and overwater shading due to new structures will also result in limited habitat alteration. BMPs and impact minimization measures will avoid or minimize impacts of project on species and habitat and will include compliance with Ecology’s WQC requirements, working within the approved fish work windows, and other BMPs to prevent and control spills.
Overall, the project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect bull trout, Chinook salmon, steelhead, boccacio and yelloweye rockfish, SRKW, and marbled murrelet. The project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect designated critical habitat for bull trout, Chinook salmon, boccacio and yelloweye rockfish, and SRKW.
October 29, 2018 | Page 40 File No. 0676-020-06
9.0 REFERENCES
64 FR 14308-14328. 1999. 50 CFR Parts 223 and 224. Endangered and Threatened Species; Threatened Status for Three Chinook Salmon Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESUs) in Washington and Oregon, and Endangered Status for One Chinook Salmon ESU in Washington. Federal Register, Vol. 64, No. 56.
64 FR 41835-41839. 1999. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Listing of Nine Evolutionarily Significant Units of Chinook Salmon, Chum Salmon, Sockeye Salmon, and Steelhead. Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal Register, Vol. 64, No. 147. August 2, 1999.
64 FR 58909-58933. 1999. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Threatened Status for Bull Trout in the Coterminous United States. Federal Register, Vol. 64, No. 210.
65 FR 7764-7787. 2000. 50 CFR Part 226. Designated Critical Habitat: Critical Habitat for 19 Evolutionarily Significant Units of Salmon and Steelhead in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and California. National Marine Fisheries Service. Federal Register, Vol. 65, No. 32. February 16, 2000.
66 FR 1628-1632. 2001. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Rule to List the Dolly Varden as Threatened in Washington Due to Similarity of Appearance to Bull Trout. Federal Register, Vol. 66, No. 6.
70 FR 37160-37204. 2005. 50 CFR Parts 223 and 224. Endangered and Threatened Species: Final Listing Determinations for 16 ESUs of West Coast Salmon, and Final 4(d) Protective Regulations for Threatened Salmonid ESUs. National Marine Fisheries Service. Federal Register, Vol. 70, No. 123. June 28, 2005.
70 FR 52630-52853. 2005. 50 CFR Part 226. Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for 12 Evolutionary Significant Units of West Coast Salmon and Steelhead in Washington, Oregon and Idaho. National Marine Fisheries Service. Federal Register, Vol. 70, No. 170. September 2, 2005.
70 FR 56212-56311. 2005. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened and Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Bull Trout. Federal Register, Vol. 70, No. 185.
70 FR 69903-69070. 2006. 50 CFR Part 224. Endangered and Threatened Species; Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Threatened Status for Southern Resident Killer Whale. Federal Register, Vol. 70, No. 222.
71 FR 15666-15680. 2006. 50 CFR Part 223. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Listing Endangered and Threatened Species and Designating Critical Habitat: 12-Month Finding on Petition to List Puget Sound Steelhead as an Endangered or Threatened Species under the Endangered Species Act. Federal Register, Vol. 771, No. 60.
October 29, 2018 | Page 41 File No. 0676-020-06
71 FR 69054-69070. 2006. 50 CFR Part 226. Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for Southern Resident Killer Whale. Federal Register, Vol. 71, No. 229. November 29, 2006.
72 FR 26722-26735. 2007. 50 CFR Part 223. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Endangered and Threatened Species: Final Listing Determination for Puget Sound Steelhead. National Marine Fisheries Service. Federal Register, Vol. 72, No. 92. May 11, 2007.
74 FR 18516-18542. 2009. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Proposed Endangered, Threatened, and Not Warranted Status for Distinct Population Segments of Rockfish in Puget Sound. NMFS, NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce. Federal Register, Vol. 74, No. 77. April 23, 2009.
75 FR 22275-22290. 2010. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Threatened Status for the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin Distinct Population Segments of Yelloweye and Canary Rockfish and Endangered Status for the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin Distinct Population Segment of Bocaccio Rockfish. NMFS, NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce. Federal Register, Vol. 75, No. 81. April 28, 2010.
78 FR 2726-2796. 2013. 50 CFR Part 226. Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for Lower Columbia River Coho Salmon and Puget Sound Steelhead; Proposed Rule. National Marine Fisheries Service. Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 9. January 14, 2013.
79 FR 68042-68087. 2014. Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin Distinct population Segments of Yelloweye Rockfish, Canary Rockfish and Bocaccio; Final Rule. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Federal Register, Vol. 79, No. 219. November 13, 2014.
81 FR 9252-9325. 2016. Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for Lower Columbia River Coho Salmon and Puget Sound Steelhead. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Federal Register, Vol. 81, No. 36. February 24, 2016.
82 FR 7711- 7731. Endangered and Threatened Species; Removal of the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin Distinct Population Segment of Canary Rockfish from the Federal List of Threatened and Endangered Species and Removal of Designated Critical Habitat, and Update and Amendment to the Listing Descriptions for the Yelloweye Rockfish DPS and Bocaccio DPS. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Federal Register, Vol. 82, No. 13. January 23, 2017.
Behnke, R.J. 1992. Native Trout of Western North America. American Fisheries Society Monograph 6. Bethesda, Maryland.
Beissinger, S. 1995. Population Trends of the Marbled Murrelet Projected from Demographic Analyses. Pages 385–394 In: C.J. Ralph, G.L. Hunt, M.G. Raphael, and J.F. Piatt, editors. Ecology and Conservation of the Marbled Murrelet. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-152. Pacific Southwest Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Albany, California.
October 29, 2018 | Page 42 File No. 0676-020-06
Bisson, P.A. and R.E. Bilby 1982. Avoidance of Suspended Sediment by Juvenile Coho Salmon. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 4:371–374.
Cyrus, D.P. and S.J.M. Blaber 1987a. The Influence of Turbidity on Juvenile Marine Fishes in Estuaries. Part 1: Field Studies at Lake St. Lucia on the Southeastern Coast of Africa. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 109:53–70.
Cyrus, D.P. and S.J.M. Blaber 1987b. The Influence of Turbidity on Juvenile Marine Fishes in Estuaries. Part 2: Laboratory Studies, Comparisons with Field Data and Conclusions. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 109:71–91.
Divoky, G.J. and M. Horton 1995. Breeding and Nest Dispersal, Nest Habitat Loss, and Implications for the Marbled Murrelet. In: C.J. Ralph, G.L. Hunt, M.G. Raphael, and J.F. Piatt, editors. Ecology and Conservation of the Marbled Murrelet. General Technical Report PSW-GTR-152. Southwest Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Albany, California.
GeoEngineers, 2018. Mitigation Plan, Port of Everett South Terminal Berth Improvements/Mill A Interim Action. Everett, Washington. Prepared for Port of Everett. October 17, 2018.
Goetz, F.A., E. Jeanes, and E. Beamer 2004. Bull Trout in the Nearshore. Preliminary Draft. Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, Seattle, Washington.
Hayes, D. F., G. L. Raymond, and T. N. McLellan. 1984. Sediment resuspension from dredging activities. Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers Specialty Conference on Dredging. Clearwater, FL.
Hart Crowser and Evans Hamilton 2010. Maintenance dredging in the lower Snohomish River acoustic and water quality monitoring. Everett, Washington. Prepared for the Port of Everett, Everett, Washington.
Healey, M.C. 1982a. Juvenile Pacific Salmon in the Estuaries: The Life Support System. V.S. Kennedy, editor. Estuarine Comparisons. Academic Press, New York, New York.
Healey, M.C. 1982b. Timing and Relative Intensity of Size-Selective Mortality of Juvenile Chum Salmon (Oncorhynchus keta) During Early Sea Life. Canadian Journal of Fisheries Research Board Canada, 39:952–957.
Healey, M.C. 1991. Life History of Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). C. Groot and L. Margolis, editors. Pacific Salmon Life Histories. UBC Press, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Kraemer, C. 1999. Bull Trout in the Snohomish River System. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Mill Creek, Washington.
Krahn, M.M., and 10 co-authors 2004. 2004 Status Review of Southern Resident Killer Whales Under the Endangered Species Act. NOAA Tech Memo. NMFS NWFSC-62.
October 29, 2018 | Page 43 File No. 0676-020-06
LaSalle, M.W. 1988. Physical and chemical alterations associated with dredging: an overview. In: Effects of dredging on anadromous Pacific coast fishes. Edited by C.A. Simenstad. University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. pp. 1–12.
Marks, D. and M.A. Bishop 1999. Interim Report for Field Work Conducted May 1996 to May 1997: Habitat and Biological Assessment Shepard Point Road Project – Status of the Marbled Murrelet Along the Proposed Shepard Point Road Corridor [online report]. U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Copper River Delta Institute, Cordova, Alaska. http://www.pwssc.gen.ak.us/shepard/docs/reports/final/crdi/96mur.html
National Audubon Society 2004. The Christmas Bird Count Historical Results [Online]. Available http://www.audubon.org/bird/cbc.
NatureServe, 2018. Golden paintbrush profile. Accessed at: http://explorer.natureserve.org/servlet/NatureServe?searchName=Castilleja+levisecta
Nightingale, B., and C. Simenstad 2001. White Paper – Dredging Activities: Marine Issues. Submitted to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology, and Washington Department of Transportation. University of Washington, School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, Wetland Ecosystem Team. Seattle, Washington.
Orca Network, 2018. Recent Sightings – September 2018. Accessed on October 17, 2018.
Pentec 1992. Port of Everett Snohomish Estuary Fish Habitat Study 1991–1992. Final Report. Prepared for the Port of Everett, Washington, by Pentec Environmental, Edmonds, Washington.
Pentec 1996a. Use of the Maulsby and 12th Street Channel Mudflats by Juvenile Salmonids, Dungeness Crab, and Birds. Spring and Summer 1994. Prepared for the Port of Everett, Washington, by Pentec Environmental, Edmonds, Washington.
Pentec 2002a. Bull Trout Monitoring in the Snohomish River During Historical Periods of Hydraulic Dredging. Draft report. Seattle District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Pentec 2002b. Union Slough Restoration Site Year 1 Annual Report. Prepared for the Port of Everett, Washington, by Pentec Environmental, Edmonds, Washington.
Pentilla, D.E. 2000. Documented Spawning Seasons of Populations of the Surf Smelt, Hypomesus, in the Puget Sound Basin. Briefing Report. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Marine Resources Division, La Conner, Washington.
Ralph, C.J. and S. Miller 1999. 1994 Research Highlight: Marbled Murrelet Conservation Assessment [online report]. U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Redwood Sciences Laboratory, Arcata, California. http://www.pswfs.gov/highlights/94 murrelet.html
Rodway, M.S., J.L. Savard, D.C. Garner, and M.J.F. Lemon 1995. At-Sea Activity Patterns of Marbled Murrelets Adjacent to Probably Inland Nesting Areas in the Queen Charlotte Islands, British Columbia. In: Nelson, S.K. and S.G. Spencer, editors. Biology of Marbled Murrelets: Inland and at Sea – A Symposium of the Pacific Seabird Group 1993. Northwest Naturalist.
October 29, 2018 | Page 44 File No. 0676-020-06
SEI 1999. Endangered Species: Marbled Murrelet [online report]. Sustainable Ecosystem Institute, Portland, Oregon. http://www.sei.org/ murrelet.html
Servizi, J.A. 1988. Sublethal Effects of Dredged Sediments on Juvenile Salmon. C.A. Simenstad, editor. Effects of Dredging on Anadromous Pacific Coast Fishes. University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Sigler, J.W. 1990. Effects of chronic turbidity on anadromous salmonids; recent studies and assessment techniques. In, C.A. Simenstad editor. Effects of Dredging on Anadromous Salmonids Pacific Coast Fishes. University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Simenstad, C.A. 1988. Effects of dredging on anadromous Pacific Coast fishes. Workshop Proceedings Sept 8–9, 1988. University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Simenstad, C.A., K.L. Fresh, and E.O. Salo 1982. The Role of Puget Sound and Washington Coastal Estuaries in the Life History of Pacific Salmon: An Unappreciated Function. V.S. Kennedy, editor. Estuarine Comparisons. Academic Press, New York, New York.
Strachan, G., M. McAllister, and C.J. Ralph 1995. Marbled Murrelet At-Sea and Foraging Behavior. Pages 247–253 In: C.J. Ralph, G.L. Hunt, M.G. Raphael, and J.F. Piatt, editors. Ecology and Conservation of the Marbled Murrelet. General Technical Report PSW-GTR-152. Southwest Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Albany, California.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service 1996. Primarily Federal Lands Identified as Critical for Rare Seabird; Minimal Effects Predicted from Habitat Designation. Online report. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. http://www.r1.fws.gov/news/ 9625nr.htm
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2017a. Official Species List. Consultation Tracking Number 01EWFW00-2019-E-SLI-0072.
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife 2002. Washington State Forage Fish: Sand Lance [online report]. http://www.wa.gov/wdfw/ fish/forage/lance.htm
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2018. Priority Habitat and Species Interactive Map Viewer. Available at: http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/phs/
Washington Department of Natural Resources 2018. Washington Rare Plants, Golden Paintbrush Profile. Accessed at: https://www.dnr.wa.gov/publications/amp_nh_cale27.pdf?8cgglb
Whitman, R.P., T.P. Quinn, and E.L. Brannon 1982. Influence of Suspended Volcanic Ash on Homing Behavior of Adult Chinook Salmon. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 111:63–69.
Wiles 2004. Washington State Status Report for the Killer Whale. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington.
Williams, R.W., R.M. Laramie, and J.J. Ames 1975. A Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization. Volume 1. Puget Sound Region. Washington State Department of Fisheries, Olympia, Washington.
October 29, 2018 | Page 45 File No. 0676-020-06 FIGURES Date: 9/12/2018
GeoEngineers, Mapbox
3,000 0 3,000 Feet µ Vicinity Map Notes: 1. The locations of all features shown are approximate. 2. This drawing is for information purposes. It is intended to Port of Everett South Terminal Berth 1 Improvements assist in showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, Inc. cannot guarantee the Everett, Washington accuracy and content of electronic files. The master file is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official record of this communication. Data Source: Mapbox Open Street Map 2016, ESRI 2016 Figure 1 Projection: WGS 1984 Web Mercator Auxiliary Sphere Legend
Action Area 12,000 0 12,000 In Air Noise: Soft Site (1.04 miles), Hard Site (3.36 miles) Feet µ In Water Noise (up to 533 miles; encounters land at 20.3 miles)
Notes: 1. The locations of all features shown are approximate. Action Area 2. This drawing is for information purposes. It is intended to assist in showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, Inc. cannot guarantee the Port of Everett South Terminal Berth 1 accuracy and content of electronic files. The master file is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the Everett, Washington official record of this communication.
Data Source: ESRI world imagery Figure 2 Projection: NAD 1983 StatePlane Washington North FIPS 4601 Feet P:\0\0676020\GIS\0676020006_ActionArea.mxd Date Exported: 10/29/18 by smahugh by Exported: Date 10/29/18 P:\0\0676020\GIS\0676020006_ActionArea.mxd APPENDICES
APPENDIX A JARPA Drawings
N
W E
S PROJECT SITE
VICINITY MAP
PORT GARDNER US NAVY
OUTER HARBOR LINE PORT MANAGEMENT AREA (PMA) WA STATE DEPT. OF PROJECT AREA NATURAL RESOURCES
PIER 1
INNER HARBOR LINE SOUTH TERMINAL WHARF CITY OF EVERETT PARCEL #: 29042500400200 SOUTH TERMINAL PACIFIC PARCEL #: TERMINAL 29053000201800 BNSF RAILWAY CO. 29053000203400 PARCEL #: 29053000201700
Datum: Reference: Base aerial from Aerials Express Seattle, 2009. Elevation datum for this project is 0.0 Mean Lower PLAN Low Water (MLLW)
Total Data Plane - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Tidal Benchmark W True at the Historic Everett Station 944-7659. North Project SN Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) +11.09 ft North Mean High Water (MHW) +10.21 ft Mean (Half) Tide Level (MTL) + 6.51 ft Mean Sea Level (MSL) + 6.48 ft E Mean Low Water (MLW) + 2.80 ft NAVD88 + 2.03 ft 500 0 500 Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) + 0.00 ft Extreme Low Water (ELW) - 4.50 ft FEET PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING MAINTENANCE DREDGING. TO -40 FT MLLW IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: SITE PLAN AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:1 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\067602006_S01_VM and Site Plan.dwg TAB:S01 Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 9:39 by tmichaud - 9:39 by Exported: 10/19/18 Date Site Plan.dwg TAB:S01 and Dredging\067602006_S01_VM S Terminal P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA JETTY
ISLAND
NAVAL STATION EVERETT
HEWITT PIER 3 WHARF
PIER 1 PACIFIC PORT GARDNER HEWITT TERMINAL TERMINAL BERTH
PROJECT PACIFIC SITE TERMINAL
SOUTH
TERMINAL
N
W E
S
1000 0 1000
FEET
PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING MAINTENANCE DREDGING. TO -40 FT MLLW STRUCTURES IN IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT NEARBY VICINITY NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:2 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\067602006_S02_Structures in Vicinity.dwg TAB:S02 Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 9:39 by tmichaud 0 Legend -10 -20
-30 EXISTING DOLPHIN -40
-50 BERTH TRESTLE -45 Existing Bathymetric Contours
-60 MHHW
-70 (MLLW - feet) -80 -80
Historical Berth 1 Construction DREDGE TRANSITION Dredge Area SLOPE AND PLACE ARMOR EXISTING (SEE SHEETS 7,9,12) DOLPHIN Existing Eelgrass Areas
DOLPHIN BERTH TRESTLE NEW MOORING HARDWARE UPGRADES (ABOVE WATER Note: WORK ONLY) SEE SHEETS 16 AND 23) Dredge material to be disposed in accordance with suitability DREDGE TO -40 FT MLLW determination (see Sheet 13).
NEW 15'Øx30' LONG FLOATING, REMOVABLE, -40 PNEUMATIC FENDER, TYP. SEE SHEET 22 -50 NEW FENDER REACTION SYSTEM, -60 TYP. SEE SHEET 22
-70
-80-80 EXISTING SOUTH TERMINAL
WHARF -40 -60 -50 703' EXISTING SOUTH TERMINAL
-70 FENDER SYSTEM. FOR -70
-70 DEMOLITION REQUIRED AT PORT NEW FENDER REACTION GARDNER SYSTEM SEE SHEET 16
DREDGE TO -40 FT MLLW -60 -50
EXISTING CATWALK EXISTING EELGRASS TO BE SALVAGED AND TRANSPLANTED DOLPHIN CL EXISTING MOORING DEMOLISH DERELICT DOLPHIN 100' DOLPHIN CL NEW MOORING NEW CATWALK. SEE SHEET 20
0 10 100'
-50 -60 -70 -80 MHHW -80 DREDGE TRANSITION SLOPE AND PLACE ARMOR True North DOLPHIN
CL NEW MOORING North (SEE SHEETS 6,8,10,11) Project N EXISTING EELGRASS TO BE NEW MOORING DOLPHIN. SALVAGED AND TRANSPLANTED SEE SHEET 18 W E
-40 -30 -20 -10 S INNER HARBOR LINE 200 0 200 EELGRASS TRANSPLANT MITIGATION AREA OUTER HARBOR LINE (SEE SHEET 13) FEET
PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING MAINTENANCE DREDGING. TO -40 FT MLLW OVERVIEW OF IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: SOUTH TERMINAL AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:3 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\067602006_S03_Improvements Project.dwg TAB:S03 Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 9:44 by tmichaud SEE SHEET 5
Legend -40
-45 -55 -50 -65 -60 -45 Existing Bathymetric Contours (MLLW - feet) OUTER Historical Berth 1 Construction HARBOR LINE
-70 Dredge Area -70
-70 Approximate Existing Rip Rap SOUTH TERMINAL
FENDER SYSTEM Existing Eelgrass Areas RIP RAP RIP
-65
-60 -55 -50 -45 SOUTH TERMINAL WHARF SOUTH TERMINAL
MHHW RIP RAP CATWALK 59'
DOLPHIN -5 -10
-15 16'
-20
-25
PORT MHHW EXISTING DERELICT GARDNER -30 DOLPHIN CONSISTING OF
-35 (15) 16"-18" CREOSOTE
TREATED TIMBER PILES 15
INNER TO BE REMOVED 5 10
HARBOR LINE 0 -40
-45 -50
-45 True
North North Project N
-45 W E
S -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 100 0 100 -10 -5 FEET
PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING MAINTENANCE DREDGING. TO -40 FT MLLW EXISTING CONDITIONS IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: (SOUTH END) AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:4 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\067602006_S04-S13_JARPA.dwg TAB:S04 Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 9:44 by tmichaud Legend
INNER -45 Existing Bathymetric HARBOR LINE Contours (MLLW - feet) Historical Berth 1 Construction Dredge Area
Approximate Existing
Rip Rap 0
-5
-10 -15
-20
-25
-30
-35 -40
-45 24' -50
-65 -55 -60 DOLPHIN 24'
48' RIP RAP
DOLPHIN MHHW
316'
DOLPHIN BERTH PORT TRESTLE GARDNER
RIP RAP
OUTER HARBOR LINE SOUTH TERMINAL
-40
-45 True
North North -50
Project
-55 N -60
RIP RAP W E SOUTH TERMINAL -65 FENDER SYSTEM S -70
SOUTH TERMINAL WHARF 100 0 100
FEET SEE SHEET 3 PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING MAINTENANCE DREDGING. TO -40 FT MLLW EXISTING CONDITIONS IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: (NORTH END) AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:5 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\067602006_S04-S13_JARPA.dwg TAB:S05 Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 9:45 by tmichaud SEE SHEET 7
Legend -40
-45 -55 -50 -65 -60 -45 Existing Bathymetric Contours (MLLW -feet) OUTER Dredging Contour (feet) HARBOR LINE
-70
-70 Historical Berth 1 Construction Dredge Area -70
Area to be Dredged to the Shown Elevations Plus 1-FT Overdredge INNER Allowance HARBOR LINE -40 RIP RAP RIP Approximate Existing Rip Rap
A A' Cross-Section Location
-65
-60 -55 -50 -45 SOUTH TERMINAL WHARF SOUTH TERMINAL
-40
EXISTING DOLPHIN AND CATWALK TO BE PROTECTED IN PLACE -5 MHHW RIP RAP
DREDGE TO -45 FT FOR -10
KEYWAY AT TOE OF SLOPE -5 -10
B -15 B'
-20 -20
-25
PORT MHHW
GARDNER -30 -30 -45 -40 -35 DREDGE SLOPE
-40 -45 -40
5 10 15
A 0 -40
-45 -50
-45 True
North North Project N
-45 W E A' S -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 100 0 100 -10 -5 FEET
PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING MAINTENANCE DREDGING. TO -40 FT MLLW DREDGING PLAN IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: (SOUTH END) AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:6 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\067602006_S04-S13_JARPA.dwg TAB:S06 Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 9:45 by tmichaud Legend
INNER -45 Existing Bathymetric Contours HARBOR LINE (MLLW - feet) Dredging Contour (feet)
Historical Berth 1 Construction
Dredge Area 0
-5 Area to be Dredged to the Shown
-10 Elevations Plus 1-FT Overdredge -15
-20
-25 -30
-35 Allowance -40
-45 -50
-65 -55 -60 Approximate Existing Rip Rap DOLPHIN C'C Cross-Section Location
DOLPHIN BERTH TRESTLE PROTECTED IN PLACE
C' RIP RAP MHHW
PORT C
GARDNER -20 DREDGE SLOPE -30 -45 -40 -40 -45 RIP RAP DREDGE TO -45 FT FOR KEYWAY AT TOE OF SLOPE
OUTER HARBOR LINE SOUTH TERMINAL -40
-40
-45 True
North North -50
Project
-55 N -60
RIP RAP W E
-65 S -70
SOUTH TERMINAL WHARF 100 0 100
FEET SEE SHEET 6 PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING MAINTENANCE DREDGING. TO -40 FT MLLW DREDGING PLAN IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: (NORTH END) AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:7 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\067602006_S04-S13_JARPA.dwg TAB:S07 Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 9:45 by tmichaud SEE SHEET 9 Legend
-45 Existing Bathymetric Contours -40
-45 -55 -50 -65 -60 (MLLW -feet)
OUTER Fill Contour (MLLW - feet) HARBOR LINE -70 Historical Berth 1 Construction
-70 Dredge Area
-70 Area to be Dredged to the Shown Elevations Plus 1-FT Overdredge Allowance INNER -40 HARBOR LINE Approximate Area for Placement RIP RAP RIP of Rock
Approximate Area for Placement
-65 of Armor Rock with Fish Mix to Fill -60 -55 Interstitial Voids -50
-45 SOUTH TERMINAL WHARF Approximate Existing Rip Rap SOUTHA'A TERMINAL Cross-Section Location
-40 SOUTH -40 EXISTING DOLPHIN TERMINAL AND CATWALK TO BE PROTECTED IN PLACE 0 MHHW RIP RAP
-5
-5 -10
B -15 B'
-20 -20 -10
-25
PORT MHHW -20 GARDNER -30 -30
-35 -40
-40 15 5 10 A 0
-40 NEW MOORING DOLPHINS TO BE INSTALLED BEFORE
-45 -50 ROCK PLACEMENT
-45 True
North North Project -40 N
-45 W E A' S -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 100 0 100 -10 -5 FEET
PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING MAINTENANCE DREDGING. TO -40 FT MLLW FILL PLAN IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: (SOUTH END) AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:8 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\067602006_S04-S13_JARPA.dwg TAB:S08 Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 11:58 by tmichaud Legend -45 Existing Bathymetric Contours INNER (MLLW - feet) HARBOR LINE Dredging Contour (MLLW - feet)
Historical Berth 1 Construction Dredge Area
Area to be Dredged to the Shown 0
-5 Elevations Plus 1-FT Overdredge
-10 Allowance -15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45 -50
-65 -55 Approximate Area for Placement -60 of Rock DOLPHIN Approximate Existing Rip Rap
C'C Cross-Section Location
DOLPHIN BERTH TRESTLE
C' MHHW RIP RAP
PORT
C -20 GARDNER -30 -40 -40 RIP RAP -40
OUTER HARBOR LINE SOUTH -40 TERMINAL
-40
-45 True
North North -50
Project
-55 N -60
RIP RAP W E
-65 S -70
SOUTH TERMINAL WHARF 100 0 100
FEET SEE SHEET 8 PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING MAINTENANCE DREDGING. TO -40 FT MLLW FILL PLAN IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: (NORTH END) AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:9 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\067602006_S04-S13_JARPA.dwg TAB:S09 Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 11:51 by tmichaud P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\067602006_S04-S13_JARPA.dwg TAB:S10 Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 9:54 by tmichaud 1. PURPOSE: .USNAVY 3. .BNSFRAILWAY CO. 2. .CITYOFEVERETT 4. ADJACENT PROPERTYOWNERS: OF NATURALRESOURCES WASHINGTON STATEDEPARTMENT Elevation (Feet) IMPROVEMENTS AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING SOUTH TERMINALBERTH TO -40FTMLLW -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 10 20 0 (North) A 0 1-FT OVERDREDGE DREDGE LIMIT MHHW MLLW 30 KEYWAY ROCK AS SHOWNON SHEET 8 1 2.5 10' 30 60 CROSS SECTIONA-A' VERTICAL EXAGGERATION: SOUTH TERMINALBERTH IMPROVEMENTS /MILLA 2.5 HORIZONTAL SCALE:1"= 1 3210 TERMINAL AVE EVERETT, WA98201 VERTICAL SCALE:1"= INTERIM ACTION SOUTH TERMINAL Distance (Feet)
PLACE 3' ROCK FEET 90 0 2 1 1X 30' 30' 120 30 DREDGE LIMIT EXISTING MUDLINE IN: MAINTENANCE DREDGING. MOORING HARDWAREIMPROVEMENT, AND DOLPHINS, FENDERSYSTEMMODIFICATION, PORT OFEVERETT -(425)388-0720 NE 1/4OFSEC25,T29N,R4E-NW SEC 30,T29N,R5E HE:DATE: 10/19/18 SHEET: PROPOSED: APPLICATION BY: AT: 2.5 ADJ.TOPORTGARDNER EVERETT,WA 1 10 OF23 150 1-FT OVERDREDGE TWO(2)NEWMOORING (South) 180 A' 10 20 0 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10
Elevation (Feet) P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\067602006_S04-S13_JARPA.dwg TAB:S11 Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 9:54 by tmichaud 1. PURPOSE: .USNAVY 3. .BNSFRAILWAY CO. 2. .CITYOFEVERETT 4. ADJACENT PROPERTYOWNERS: OF NATURALRESOURCES WASHINGTON STATEDEPARTMENT Elevation (Feet) IMPROVEMENTS AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING SOUTH TERMINALBERTH TO -40FTMLLW -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 10 20 0 (Northwest) B 0 1-FT OVERDREDGE DREDGE LIMIT MHHW MLLW 30 KEYWAY ROCK AS SHOWNON 1 SHEET 8 2.5 10' 30 60 CROSS SECTIONB-B' VERTICAL EXAGGERATION: SOUTH TERMINALBERTH IMPROVEMENTS /MILLA 2.5 HORIZONTAL SCALE:1"= 1 3210 TERMINAL AVE EVERETT, WA98201 VERTICAL SCALE:1"= INTERIM ACTION SOUTH TERMINAL
PLACE 3' ROCK Distance (Feet) FEET 90 0 2 1 1X 30' 30' 120 30 EXISTING MUDLINE DREDGE LIMIT IN: PORT OFEVERETT -(425)388-0720 DOLPHINS, FENDERSYSTEMMODIFICATION, MAINTENANCE DREDGING. MOORING HARDWAREIMPROVEMENT, AND NE 1/4OFSEC25,T29N,R4E-NW SEC 30,T29N,R5E HE:DATE: 10/19/18 SHEET: APPLICATION BY: AT: PROPOSED: 2.5 ADJ.TOPORTGARDNER EVERETT,WA 1 11 OF23 150 1-FT OVERDREDGE TWO(2)NEWMOORING (Southeast) 180 B' 10 20 0 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10
Elevation (Feet) P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\067602006_S04-S13_JARPA.dwg TAB:S12 Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 9:55 by tmichaud 1. PURPOSE: .USNAVY 3. .BNSFRAILWAYCO. 2. .CITYOFEVERETT 4. ADJACENT PROPERTYOWNERS: OF NATURALRESOURCES WASHINGTON STATEDEPARTMENT Elevation (Feet) IMPROVEMENTS AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING SOUTH TERMINALBERTH TO -40FTMLLW -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 10 20 0 (Northwest) C 0 MHHW MLLW 30 DOLPHIN BERTHTRESTLE(TOBEPROTECTED-IN-PLACEDURINGDREDGING KEYWAY ROCK AS SHOWNON 1 SHEET 9 2.5 EXISTING MUDLINE 30 60 10' CROSS SECTIONC-C' VERTICAL EXAGGERATION: SOUTH TERMINALBERTH IMPROVEMENTS /MILLA HORIZONTAL SCALE:1"= 3210 TERMINAL AVE 2.5 EVERETT, WA98201 VERTICAL SCALE:1"= INTERIM ACTION SOUTH TERMINAL DREDGE LIMIT 1 Distance (Feet) FEET 90 0
PLACE 3' ROCK 1X 30' 30' 120 30 IN: PORT OFEVERETT -(425)388-0720 DOLPHINS, FENDERSYSTEMMODIFICATION, MAINTENANCE DREDGING. MOORING HARDWAREIMPROVEMENT, AND NE 1/4OFSEC25,T29N,R4E-NW SEC 30,T29N,R5E HE:DATE: 10/19/18 SHEET: PROPOSED: APPLICATION BY: AT: ADJ.TOPORTGARDNER EVERETT,WA 12 OF23 150 1-FT OVERDREDGE TWO(2)NEWMOORING (Southeast) 180 C' 10 20 0 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10
Elevation (Feet) -60 -55 -50 -45 SOUTH TERMINAL WHARF SOUTH INNER TERMINAL HARBOR LINE
OUTER HARBOR
LINE MHHW
-5
-10 -15
-20
-25
-30 EXISTING 900 SF OF EELGRASS TO BE SALVAGED AND TRANSPLANTED
-35
15 PORT 5 10 MANAGEMENT 0 -40 MHHW AREA (PMA)
-45 -50
-45
AREA TO BE -45 DREDGED
-40 -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 Legend -45 Existing Bathymetric Contours EXISTING EELGRASS (MLLW - feet) BED TO REMAIN AND PROTECTED IN PLACE Existing Eelgrass Areas DURING DREDGING
True
North North Project N PROPOSED EELGRASS TRANSPLANT W E MITIGATION AREA S
100 0 100 0
0 0
-5
-10 -15 -20 FEET -25 -30 -35 -40
PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING MAINTENANCE DREDGING. TO -40 FT MLLW MITIGATION PLAN IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:13 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\067602006_S04-S13_JARPA.dwg TAB:S13 Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 9:56 by tmichaud PORT GARDNER DISPOSAL SITE
TYPE: NONDISPERSIVE AREA: 318 ACRES DEPTH: 420 FT SITE DIMENSIONS: 4200 FT x 4200 FT CIRCULAR DISPOSAL ZONE: 1800 FT DIAMETER CIRCEL TARGET AREA: 1200 FT DIAMETER CIRCLE BARGE POSITIONING METHOD: VTS
GEDNEY ISLAND
PORT GARDNER DISPOSAL SITE EVERETT
DISPOSAL ZONE
TARGET AREA PROJECT SITE
DISPOSAL COORDINATES WHIDBEY LAT: 47° 58.85' LONG: 122° 16.74' NAD 83 ISLAND
MUKILTEO
N
W E
S
6000 0 6000
FEET
PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING MAINTENANCE DREDGING. TO -40 FT MLLW PORT GARDNER IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DISPOSAL SITE AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:14 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\067602006_S14_Disposal Site.dwg TAB:S14 Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 9:56 by tmichaud
Legend 0
-10 -45 Existing Bathymetric Contours
-20 EXISTING DOLPHIN
-30 -40
-50 BERTH TRESTLE (MLLW - feet) -60
-70
MHHW -80
EXISTING DOLPHIN
DOLPHIN BERTH TRESTLE NEW MOORING HARDWARE UPGRADES (ABOVE WATER WORK ONLY) SEE SHEETS 17 AND 23 30' TYP
(5) NEW 15'Øx30' LONG FLOATING, REMOVABLE, PNEUMATIC FENDER, -40
TYP. SEE SHEET 22 -50 -60 (5) NEW FENDER REACTION SYSTEM, TYP.-70 SEE SHEET 22
-80 EXISTING SOUTH SOUTH TERMINAL
WHARF -40 -50 -60 TERMINAL 703'
-70
EXISTING SOUTH TERMINAL FENDER SYSTEM. FOR DEMOLITION REQUIRED AT NEW FENDER REACTION SYSTEM SEE SHEET 16
-60 -50
EXISTING DERELICT TIMBER DOLPHIN CONSISTING OF (15) 16" TO 18" CREOSOTE TREATED TIMBER PILES TO BE REMOVED
DOLPHIN EXISTING CATWALK
CL EXISTING MOORING NEW CATWALK. SEE SHEET 21 100' DOLPHIN CL NEW MOORING
0 10 100' -50 MHHW -60 -70 -80-80 DOLPHIN
CL NEW MOORING N NEW MOORING DOLPHIN. SEE SHEET 18
-40 -30 -20 -10
PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING. MAINTENANCE DREDGING TO -40 OVERVIEW OF FT MLLW IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER MOORING/BERTHING UPGRADES ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT TO SOUTH TERMINAL NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:15 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\KPFF Sheets\15_PLAN.dwg TAB:Layout Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 10:00 by tmichaud B
EXISTING WALERS, CHOCKS, FENDERS AND STEEL OR TIMBER FENDER PILES 35' TYP TO BE REMOVED AT (5) NEW FENDER REACTION SYSTEM LOCATIONS
EXISTING CRANE BEAM
1 EXISTING PARTIAL FENDER DEMOLITION PLAN, TYP (5) LOCATIONS SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"
FACE OF EXISTING FENDER SYSTEM EXISTING WALERS, CHOCKS AND FENDERS TO BE REMOVED AT NEW (5) FENDER REACTION SYSTEM LOCATIONS
TOP OF BULLRAIL EL. 19.35' EHW = 14.35' EXISTING CRANE BEAM
WCB SOFFIT AT DROP DOWN EL. 11.60'± EXISTING WHARF DECK
MHHW = 11.10'
MHW = 10.21'
MLW = 2.80' EXISTING CONCRETE MLLW = 0.00' OR STEEL PILE
ELW = -4.11'
EXISTING STEEL OR EXISTING RIP RAP TIMBER FENDER PILE TO UNDER SOUTH NOTE: BE REMOVED AT NEW TERMINAL WHARF EXACT LOCATIONS OF DEMOLITION FOR FENDER REACTION NEW FENDER REACTION SYSTEMS MAY SYSTEM LOCATIONS VARY, BUT EXTENTS OF EACH LOCATION AND THE QUANTITY OF LOCATIONS WILL BE EXISTING STEEL AS SHOWN. PILE, TYP
B EXISTING PARTIAL FENDER DEMOLITION SECTION, TYP (5) LOCATIONS SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0"
PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING TO -40 MAINTENANCE DREDGING. FT MLLW PARTIAL DEMOLITION OF SOUTH IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: TERMINAL FENDER SYSTEM AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:16 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\KPFF Sheets\16_PARTIAL DEMO.dwg TAB:Layout Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 13:10 by tmichaud 44'-0" TYP C DEMO DEMO AREA AREA
EXISTING DOLPHIN BERTH TRESTLE
2 MOORING HARDWARE UPGRADES - EXISTING DEMOLITION PLAN SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0"
PROTECT EXISTING FENDER SYSTEM IN PLACE
D REMOVE PANELS, BULLRAIL & WEARING SURFACE
PROTECT EXISTING PILE CAPS IN PLACE
C SECTION D SECTION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING TO -40 MAINTENANCE DREDGING. FT MLLW DEMOLITION FOR DOLPHIN BERTH IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: TRESTLE MOORING HARDWARE AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT UPGRADES NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:17 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\KPFF Sheets\17_NORTH ROAD DEMO SEC.dwg TAB:Layout Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 10:04 by tmichaud F
E NEW COMPOSITE CHOCKS & UHMW FACING (4) NEW 12"Ø STEEL FENDER PILE PER DOLPHIN, W/ HDPE SLEEVE, TYP NEW 16" GALVANIZED STEEL WALER NEW RUBBER FENDER ELEMENT, TYP
NEW BOLLARD
(9) NEW 24"Ø COATED STEEL BATTER PILE PER DOLPHIN, TYP 15'-0"
NEW CATWALK ON NORTHERNMOST NEW DOLPHIN. NEW CATWALK SEE SHEET 21 SEE SHEET 21 15'-0" NEW GALVANIZED STEEL HANDRAIL, TYP
3 NEW MOORING DOLPHIN PARTIAL PLAN, TYP SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING TO -40 MAINTENANCE DREDGING. FT MLLW SOUTHERN DOLPHINS TYPICAL IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: PARTIAL PLAN AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:18 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\KPFF Sheets\18_DOLPHIN PLAN.dwg TAB:Layout Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 10:05 by tmichaud NEW BOLLARD NEW RUBBER FENDER ELEMENT, TYP NEW GALVANIZED STEEL HANDRAIL, TYP
NEW 16" GALVANIZED STEEL WALER TOP OF DECK EL 18.20
NEW COMPOSITE CHOCKS AND UHMW FACING, TYP 5'-0" SOFFIT EL 13.20
MHHW EL. = 11.11
NEW CONCRETE CAP, TYP
(4) NEW 12"Ø STEEL FENDER PILE PER DOLPHIN W/HDPE SLEEVE, TYP 15'-0"
(9) NEW 24"Ø COATED STEEL BATTER PILE PER DOLPHIN, TYP
MLLW EL. = 0.00
ELW EL. = -4.11
BOTTOM OF HDPE SLEEVE AT EL. -10.00
NOTE: CATWALK NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY
APPROXIMATE EXISTING MUD LINE
APPROXIMATE DREDGE LINE
E NEW MOORING DOLPHIN SECTION, TYP SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING TO -40 MAINTENANCE DREDGING. FT MLLW SOUTHERN DOLPHINS TYPICAL IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: CROSS SECTION AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:19 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\KPFF Sheets\19_DOLPHIN SEC.dwg TAB:Layout Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 10:06 by tmichaud 15'-0" NEW CONCRETE CAP, TYP
NEW RUBBER FENDER NEW BOLLARD ELEMENT, TYP NEW GALVANIZED STEEL HANDRAIL, TYP NEW 16" GALVANIZED STEEL WALER TOP OF DECK EL 18.20
NEW COMPOSITE CHOCKS AND UHMW FACING, TYP 5'-0"
SOFFIT EL 13.20
MHHW EL. = 11.11
(4) NEW 12"Ø STEEL FENDER PILE PER DOLPHIN W/HDPE SLEEVE, TYP
(9) NEW 24"Ø COATED STEEL BATTER PILE PER DOLPHIN, TYP
MLLW EL. = 0.00
ELW EL. = -4.11
BOTTOM OF HDPE SLEEVE AT EL. -10.00
NOTE: CATWALK NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY
APPROXIMATE EXISTING MUD LINE
APPROXIMATE DREDGE LINE
F NEW MOORING DOLPHIN SECTION, TYP SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING TO -40 MAINTENANCE DREDGING. FT MLLW SOUTHERN DOLPHINS TYPICAL IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: CROSS SECTION AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:20 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\KPFF Sheets\20_DOLPHIN SEC B.dwg TAB:Layout Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 10:07 by tmichaud NEW GALVANIZED STEEL, COATED STEEL, OR 4" 5'-0" ALUMINUM HANDRAIL MAX CLR 4'-4"
NEW STEEL OR ALUMINUM GRATED DECKING
TOP OF DECK EL 18.20
SOFFIT ABOVE EL 13.20
NEW GALVANIZED STEEL, COATED STEEL OR ALUMINUM CATWALK STRINGERS
G SECTION AT NEW CATWALK, TYP SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"
PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING TO -40 MAINTENANCE DREDGING. FT MLLW CATWALK STRUCTURE IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AND DETAILS AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:21 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\KPFF Sheets\21_CATWALK.dwg TAB:Layout Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 10:08 by tmichaud 30' TYP
H NEW 15'Ø x 30' LONG FLOATING, REMOVABLE, PNEUMATIC FENDER
(10) NEW GALVANIZED OR COATED HP16x141 PILES PER LOCATION W/ UHMW FACING
EXISTING FENDER SYSTEM
NEW GALVANIZED STEEL WALER
3'-0" TYP
4 PARTIAL PLAN AT (5) NEW FENDER REACTION SYSTEM LOCATIONS, TYP SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"
NEW 15'Ø x 30' LONG FLOATING, REMOVABLE, TOP OF BULLRAIL PNEUMATIC FENDER EL. 19.35' EHW = 14.35' EXISTING CRANE BEAM WCB SOFFIT AT DROP DOWN EL. 11.60'± EXISTING WHARF DECK
MHHW = 11.10'
ELW = 10.21'
MHW = 2.80'
MLLW = 0.00' EXISTING CONCRETE OR STEEL PILE ELW = -4.11'
UHMW FACING EXTENDS TO -10' NOTE: EXACT LOCATIONS OF NEW FENDER NEW GALVANIZED FENDER REACTION SYSTEMS MAY VARY, BUT REACTION SYSTEM HP PILES EXTENTS OF EACH LOCATION AND THE W/ UHMW FACING QUANTITY OF LOCATIONS WILL BE SHOWN. EXISTING STEEL PILE, TYP
H SECTION AT NEW FENDER REACTION SYSTEM LOCATIONS SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0"
PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING. MAINTENANCE DREDGING TO -40 FENDER SYSTEM FT MLLW IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER MODIFICATION PLAN AND ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT CROSS SECTION NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:22 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\KPFF Sheets\22_PARTIAL PLAN.dwg TAB:Layout Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 10:09 by tmichaud I NEW BOLLARD, TYP
EXISTING DOLPHIN BERTH NORTH TRESTLE
5 PARTIAL PLAN AT MOORING HARDWARE UPGRADES SCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0"
NEW BOLLARD, TYP REATTACH EXISTING FENDER SYSTEM NEW REINFORCED CONCRETE SPAN & EDGE APPROX. EL. 19ft BEAM
I SECTION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
PURPOSE: SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH PROPOSED: TWO(2) NEW MOORING SOUTH TERMINAL BERTH IMPROVEMENTS / MILL A DOLPHINS, FENDER SYSTEM MODIFICATION, IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERIM ACTION MOORING HARDWARE IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING TO -40 MAINTENANCE DREDGING. FT MLLW DOLPHIN BERTH TRESTLE IN: ADJ. TO PORT GARDNER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: MOORING HARDWARE UPGRADES AT: EVERETT, WA 1. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT NE 1/4 OF SEC 25, T29N, R4E - NW 1/4 OF SEC 30, T29N, R5E OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPLICATION BY: SOUTH TERMINAL 2. BNSF RAILWAY CO. PORT OF EVERETT - (425) 388-0720 3. US NAVY 3210 TERMINAL AVE 4. CITY OF EVERETT EVERETT, WA 98201 SHEET:23 OF 23 DATE: 10/19/18 P:\0\0676020\CAD\06\JARPA S Terminal Dredging\KPFF Sheets\23_NORTH ROAD SEC.dwg TAB:Layout Date Exported: 10/19/18 - 10:10 by tmichaud
APPENDIX B Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Evaluation
APPENDIX B ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT (EFH) EVALUATION
The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation Management Act (MSA), as amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996, established procedures designed to identify, conserve, and enhance EFH for those species regulated under a Federal Fisheries Management Plan (FMP). EFH is defined by the MSA as “those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity.” For the Pacific West Coast there are three FMPs covering (1) groundfish; (2) coastal pelagic species; and (3) Pacific salmon.
The objective of this EFH evaluation is to describe potential adverse impacts to designated EFH for federally managed fish species within the proposed action area. It also describes conservation measures proposed to avoid, minimize or otherwise offset potential adverse impacts to designated EFH resulting from the proposed action.
The project is located over shoreline habitats in Possession Sound within Puget Sound. Groundfish and Pacific salmon, but not coastal pelagic species, may occur in waters of Possession Sound. Pacific salmon that may occur at the project site include Puget Sound chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), Puget Sound coho (O. kisutch), Puget Sound chum (O. keta), Resident Coastal Cutthroat (Oncorhynchus clarkii), and pink salmon (O. gorbuscha). The project is situated along the shoreline of the Puget Sound and does not provide suitable habitat for coastal pelagic species or juvenile or adult groundfish species. These species are primarily associated with deeper, more offshore waters and are unlikely to be found in the work area. There is a potential for larval groundfish and multiple life stages of Pacific salmon to occupy the project area. This assessment focuses on potential project impacts to the Pacific salmon FMP.
Proposed Action For more details concerning the proposed actions for the project, please refer to Project Description section in the main text of the Biological Evaluation (BE).
Potential Effects of Proposed Action on EFH
Effects on Pacific Salmon EFH As described above and in the main body of the BE, the project site includes nearshore marine environments which could support adult or juvenile salmon, including shoreline, intertidal and subtidal habitats. The project actions include dredging 81,435 sf of benthic and near shore areas, armoring 4,582 sf of the near shore, and installation of 50 HP16 steel fender piles, 18, 24-inch steel batter piles, eight, 12-inch steel fender piles, a new catwalk, two new mooring dolphins, and a new fender reaction system. There will be a net increase of 1,424 sf of overwater coverage, 3,176 sf of benthic habitat displacement, and 900 sf of eelgrass habitat displacement. Mitigation proposed for the project includes intertidal debris removal, derelict dolphin removal, removal of 20 piles (a mixture of 12-inch steel and timber fender piles), applying 3,022 sf of fish mix over nearshore armoring, transplanting eelgrass, and using Union Slough advanced mitigation credits.
Dredging activities will result in localized increases in turbidity that will not persist beyond the dredging season of mid-July through mid-February. All dredging will also take place during agency-approved work windows when few juvenile salmon are expected to be present and potentially displaced from EFH.
October 29, 2018 | Page B-1 File No. 0676-020-06
It is expected that most epibenthic invertebrates that form the base of juvenile salmon prey resources will be eliminated by dredging. Multiple studies in Puget Sound indicate that this will be temporary, and the recolonization of the community will be rapid. There will be a small (approximately 900 sf) impact to eelgrass habitat within the historic dredge prism which may reduce foraging and rearing areas for juvenile salmon. This impact will be offset by transplanting eelgrass from the impact area prior to dredging and creating 1,800 sf of eelgrass habitat at the nearby Pigeon Point eelgrass bed.
Samples collected from adjacent marine sediments were found to contain a large volume of wood waste as well as contaminants including metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), phenols, phthalates, chlorinated hydrocarbons, miscellaneous extractables (e.g, dibenzofuran) and dioxins/furans. The proposed dredge actions will remove sediment contamination, greatly reducing the potential exposure of to EFH salmonids and coastal pelagic species and improve the ecological function of EFH.
Effects of the project on designated critical habitat for Chinook salmon, which includes nearshore marine areas in Puget Sound, is covered in the main text of the BE. Conservation measures that will be implemented to offset project impacts, as described in the BE, will result in no change to the EFH of Pacific salmons. The project was determined to not likely to adversely affect the designated critical habitat for Chinook salmon. Effects of the project on EFH for Pacific salmon will be the same as those for Chinook salmon critical habitat. Therefore, an effect determination of not likely to adversely affect applies to EFH for Pacific salmon.
Effects on Groundfish EFH Dredging activities will result in localized increases in turbidity that will not persist beyond the dredging season of mid-July through mid-February. Dredging may displace bottom dwelling ground fishes from the dredge footprint, but this will be temporary. Removal of contaminated sediment through the dredge actions will improve the ecological functions of groundfish EFH long term.
It is expected that most all benthic invertebrates within the proposed dredge prism will be eliminated by dredging, removing a potential prey source for ground fishes. However, multiple studies in Puget Sound indicate that this will be temporary, and the recolonization of the benthic community will be rapid. Recolonization of benthic and epibenthic communities in clean sediments will likely be more robust, providing long-term improvements to groundfish EFH (see the BE).
Conservation measures that will be implemented to offset project impacts, as described in the BE and below, will result in no change to the EFH for groundfish species. Therefore, the project will not adversely affect groundfish EFH.
Effects on Coastal Pelagic Species EFH No effects on the coastal pelagic EFH are anticipated for the project. EFH for coastal pelagic species does not occur in the project action area.
EFH Conservation Measures A number of measures will be implemented to minimize the potential adverse effects to fish habitat in general. These measures are listed below:
October 29, 2018 | Page B-2 File No. 0676-020-06
■ The contractor will develop and implement a Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC) Plan and a Source Control Plan. The contractor will use the best management practices (BMPs) to control sediments from all vegetation removal or ground disturbing activities. ■ The contractor shall prepare a Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) Plan prior to beginning construction. The SPCC Plan shall identify the appropriate spill containment materials, which will be available at the project site at all times. ■ All equipment used for construction activities will be cleaned and inspected prior to arriving at the project site to ensure no potentially hazardous materials are exposed, no leaks are present, and the equipment is functioning properly. ■ All work below the MHHW level will be conducted during the approved work windows for fish species that may occur in the project area. ■ All in-water work will be performed according to the requirements and conditions of the Section 10 permit and Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) issued by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW).
See the main text of the BE for additional information regarding conservation measures.
Conclusions The proposed action will not adversely affect EFH for Pacific salmon, groundfish, or coastal pelagic species, including both managed species and prey species, occurring at or near the project site. If more detailed information is desired concerning the determination of effect of all listed species occurring within the action area, please refer to Determination of Effects section in the main text of the BE.
October 29, 2018 | Page B-3 File No. 0676-020-06 APPENDIX C USFWS and NMFS Critical Habitat and Species Lists Critical Habitat Puget Sound Chinook Salmon
BRITISH COLUMBIA WASHINGTON
OKANOGAN WHATCOM
SAN JUAN
SKAGIT
ISLAND
CLALLAM
SNOHOMISH CHELAN
JEFFERSON
KITSAP KING
MASON KITTITAS
GRAYS HARBOR
PIERCE
THURSTON
PugetPACIFIC Sound Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat Puget Sound Chinook Salmon Nearshore Marine Area Critical Habitat YAKIMA
County Boundary LEWIS Puget Sound Chinook Salmon Evoluntionarily Significant Unit Accessible - ESU Boundary
HistoricalWAHKIAKUM Watershed: Anthropogenically Blocked SKAMANIA
0 ¯ 50 See Federal Register Notice for detailed description of critical habitat (70 FR 52630) Miles DOC-NOAA Fisheries-West Coast Region Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Washington Fish And Wildlife Office 510 Desmond Drive Se, Suite 102 Lacey, WA 98503-1263 Phone: (360) 753-9440 Fax: (360) 753-9405 http://www.fws.gov/wafwo/
In Reply Refer To: October 18, 2018 Consultation Code: 01EWFW00-2019-SLI-0072 Event Code: 01EWFW00-2019-E-00170 Project Name: Port of Everett Mill A
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, and proposed species, designated and proposed critical habitat, and candidate species that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. The species list is currently compiled at the county level. Additional information is available from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Priority Habitats and Species website: http://wdfw.wa.gov/ mapping/phs/ or at our office website: http://www.fws.gov/wafwo/species_new.html. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or designated critical habitat. 10/18/2018 Event Code: 01EWFW00-2019-E-00170 2
A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) (c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether or not the project may affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12.
If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed species, and proposed critical habitat be addressed within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at: http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF
Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.). You may visit our website at http://www.fws.gov/pacific/ eagle/for information on disturbance or take of the species and information on how to get a permit and what current guidelines and regulations are. Some projects affecting these species may require development of an eagle conservation plan: (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/ eagle_guidance.html). Additionally, wind energy projects should follow the wind energy guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing impacts to migratory birds and bats.
Also be aware that all marine mammals are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). The MMPA prohibits, with certain exceptions, the "take" of marine mammals in U.S. waters and by U.S. citizens on the high seas. The importation of marine mammals and marine mammal products into the U.S. is also prohibited. More information can be found on the MMPA website: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/laws/mmpa/.
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit to our office.
Related website: National Marine Fisheries Service: http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/protected_species/species_list/ species_lists.html
Attachment(s):
▪ Official Species List
10/18/2018 Event Code: 01EWFW00-2019-E-00170 1
Official Species List This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action".
This species list is provided by:
Washington Fish And Wildlife Office 510 Desmond Drive Se, Suite 102 Lacey, WA 98503-1263 (360) 753-9440
10/18/2018 Event Code: 01EWFW00-2019-E-00170 2
Project Summary Consultation Code: 01EWFW00-2019-SLI-0072
Event Code: 01EWFW00-2019-E-00170
Project Name: Port of Everett Mill A
Project Type: DREDGE / EXCAVATION
Project Description: The project includes maintenance dredging and pier upgrades along South Terminal at the Port of Everett facility.
Project Location: Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:// www.google.com/maps/place/48.062139676000044N122.38037002629616W
Counties: Island, WA | Snohomish, WA
10/18/2018 Event Code: 01EWFW00-2019-E-00170 3
Endangered Species Act Species There is a total of 6 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries1, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions.
1. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.
Mammals NAME STATUS North American Wolverine Gulo gulo luscus Proposed No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Threatened Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5123
Birds NAME STATUS Marbled Murrelet Brachyramphus marmoratus Threatened Population: U.S.A. (CA, OR, WA) There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4467
Streaked Horned Lark Eremophila alpestris strigata Threatened There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7268
Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus Threatened Population: Western U.S. DPS There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3911
10/18/2018 Event Code: 01EWFW00-2019-E-00170 4
Fishes NAME STATUS Bull Trout Salvelinus confluentus Threatened Population: U.S.A., conterminous, lower 48 states There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location overlaps the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8212
Flowering Plants NAME STATUS Golden Paintbrush Castilleja levisecta Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7706
Critical habitats There is 1 critical habitat wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction.
NAME STATUS Bull Trout Salvelinus confluentus Final https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8212#crithab
Steelhead Trout Critical Habitat 124"W 12OoW 116"W
50°N
46"N
42"N
al habitat has not yet determined for the
38"N
34"N DPS Boundaries
of Protected Resources
124"W 120°W 116"W