Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
SHX2017-00014 SEPA2017-00017 - SHX Permit / Conditions - 3/21/2017
oN.STATE MASON COUNTY BPS C ° Department of Community Services o A o 9N Planning Division >- o N ? 615 W Alder St, Shelton,WA 98584 s� N y y (360)427-9670 OJ a0 1864 Exemption from Shoreline Management Act Case No.: SHX2017-00014 Substantial Development Permit Requirement The Proposal By: INTEGRATED NW CONSTRUCTION PO BOX 1008 HOODSPORT, WA 98548 Parcel Number: 423325000002 Site Address: 311 N MARINE VIEW DR HOODSPORT To undertake the following development: DEMO: remove & dispose of existing shoreline structures. CONSTRUCT NEW: staircase, bulkhead, retaining wall, floating dock, and pier per engineered drawings Within Lake Cushman and/or its associated wetlands is exempt from the requirement of substantial development because the development is categorized under WAC 173-27-040(2) as being category: B-normal maintenance Please contact Kell McAboy at ext 365 if you have any questions. �b.2 Issued:3/21/2017 Authorized Loc overnment Official SHX2017-00014 March 21, 201, RECEIVED t US Army Corps WASHINGTON STATE otleDew " S! Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) FormI,2 USE BLACK OR BLUE INK TO ENTER ANSWERS IN THE WHITE SPACES BELOW. / Part 1—Project Identification MOM Sandoval Bulkhead Repair and Pier& Float Replacement Project Part 2—Applicant The person and/or organization responsible for the project. them Sandoval, Barbara & Randolph MOMMM, 7302 278th PI NE NEWSOME ii Stanwood, WA 98292 Additional forms may be required for the following permits: • If your project may qualify for Department of the Army authorization through a Regional General Permit(RGP),contact the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers for application information(206)764-3495. • If your project might affect species listed under the Endangered Species Act,you will need to fill out a Specific Project Information Form(SPIF)or prepare a Biological Evaluation. Forms can be found at http//www nws usace armv mil/Missions/GivilWorks/Reculatory/PermitGuidebook/EndangeredSi)ecies.asi)x. • Not all cities and counties accept the JARPA for their local Shoreline permits.If you need a Shoreline permit,contact the appropriate city or county government to make sure they accept the JARPA. 2To access an online JARPA form with[help]screens,go to htt //www.ei)ermitting.wa.-gov/site/alias resourcecenter/iarpa iarpa form/9984/iarpa form.asox. For other help,contact the Governor's Office of Regulatory Assistance at 1-800-917-0043 or help0ora.wa.gov. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 1 of 15 Part 3—Authorized Agent or Contact Person authorized to represent the applicant about the project. (Note: Authorized agent(s) must sign 11 b of this application.) [help] Valdeman, Caralyn Integrated NW Construction, LLC 60 N Lake Cushman Rd, Suite 109 Hoodsport, WA 98584 253 888-5314 �( ) (206) 319-4239 caralyn@integratednwconstruction.com Part 4—Property Owner(s) Contact information for people or organizations owning the property(ies)where the project will occur. Consider both upland and aquatic ownership because the upland owners may not own the adjacent aquatic land. [ham ❑ Same as applicant. (Skip to Part 5.) ❑ Repair or maintenance activities on existing rights-of-way or easements. (Skip to Part 5.) ❑ There are multiple upland property owners. Complete the section below and fill out JARPA Attachment A for each additional property owner. ❑ Your project is on Department of Natural Resources (DNR)-managed aquatic lands. If you don't know, contact the DNR at (360) 902-1100 to determine aquatic land ownership. If yes, complete JARPA Attachment E to apply for the Aquatic Use Authorization. Tacoma Power P.O. Box 11007 Tacoma, WA 98411-0007 JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 2 of 15 Part 5—Project Location(s) Identifying information about the property or properties where the project will occur. [help] ❑ There are multiple project locations (e.g. linear projects). Complete the section below and use JARPA Attachment B for each additional project location. 1111101101 X ❑ Private ❑ Federal ❑ Publicly owned (state, county, city, special districts like schools, ports,etc.) ❑ Tribal ❑ Department of Natural Resources (DNR)—managed aquatic lands (Complete JARPA Attachment E) 311 Marine View Drive North Hoodsport, WA 98548 Mason i i 32 23N 4W 47.43564 N -123.21898 W 42332-50-00002 Daniel & Robin Reed 11638 NE Pacific St, Portland OR 97220- 42332-50-00001 2273 .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Janet Anderson, Anderson PO Box 1358, Hoodsport WA 98548- 42332-50-00003 REV Living Trust 1358 ................................................................ ...................................................................................................................................................................... .... JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 3 of 15 No wetlands on or adjacent to the project location. =akeCushman. X❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know \\ Site is moderately vegetated with native vegetation. Recreational. MENUMMENION Recreational. The proposed project site is located in a residential neighborhood on a 0.28 acre shoreline lot, which supports a single-family residence located approximately (approx.) ninety-five (95) feet horizontally and fifty (50) feet vertically from the shoreline of Lake Cushman. Existing shoreline appurtenances (Attachments 5-8) include an approx. sixty-two-foot (62') failing wood bulkhead, an approx. five by eighteen-foot (57' x 18'2") pier, an approx. ten by twenty-foot (107' x 20'6") float, an approx. ten by twenty-foot (10' x 20'5") pier, an approx. twenty-two by two to three-foot (22' x 2' to 3') overhanging deck, an approx. three by eight-foot (3' x 8') set of overwater/i n-water beach access stairs, a six by ten-foot (6' x 10') shed, and wood shoreline access stairs with associated landings. \.\ JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 4 of 15 From Shelton, take SR 101 North to Hoodsport, turn left on Lake Cushman Rd and follow up the hill. Turn left onto Marine View Drive. After approx. .3 mi bear left onto Marine View Drive North and follow addresses to the site. Part 6—Project Description SUN The proposed action is the repair of an existing wood bulkhead and the installation of a replacement pier and float. New shoreline access stairs and an upland shoreline retaining wall will also be installed, and an existing shoreline shed and shoreline access stairs with associated landings will be removed. Overwater coverage at the site will be reduced by approximately (approx.) 290 square feet (sf), and the number of piling posts will be reduced from a rox. sixteen 16 to ten 10 . The bluff toe at the site exhibits erosion damage that is common to the Lake Cushman shoreline. The primary cause of this erosion and concomitant shoreline instability is the seasonal raising and lowering of Lake Cushman, a reservoir with two functioning dams, and the lake's unique landscape features, including a steep, unnatural lakebed topography that lacks a shallow foreshore to diminish wave energy generated by strong prevailing winds and approx. eight miles of fetch, and a steep terrestrial shoreline that receives an average of approx. 100 inches of rainfall per year. As a result, the existing bulkhead is in danger of failing and needs to be repaired. Additionally, the existing piers, float, overhanging deck, and beach access stairs are poorly constructed and unsafe, and the float's floatation is un-encapsulated, making it a potential source of Styrofoam® pollution. The applicants wish to extend the life of all of their existing shoreline structures, making them safer for both humans and the environment. Therefore, the project objective is to repair the bulkhead, remove the overhanging deck and stairs, and replace the two piers and float with a single float and pier, all-the-while avoiding or minimizing impacts to ESA-listed species and improving shoreline habitat at the site. ❑ Commercial x❑ Residential ❑ Institutional ❑ Transportation ❑ Recreational ❑ Maintenance ❑ Environmental Enhancement ❑ Aquaculture TFEJ Culvert X❑ Float X❑ Retaining Wall ❑ Bank Stabilization Dam/Weir ❑ Floating Home (upland) ❑ Boat House ❑ Dike/ Levee/Jetty ❑ Geotechnical Survey ❑ Road ❑ Boat Launch ❑ Ditch ❑ El Scientific Land Clearing Measurement Device ❑ Boat Lift X❑ Dock/ Pier ❑ Marina/ Moorage X❑ Stairs ❑ Bridge ❑ Dredging ❑ Mining ❑ Stormwater facility X❑ Bulkhead ❑ Fence ❑ Outfall Structure ❑ Swimming Pool JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 5 of 15 ❑ Buoy ❑ Ferry Terminal ❑ Piling/Dolphin ❑ Utility Line ❑ Channel Modification ❑ Fishway ❑ Raft ❑ Other: As per the engineered design Steven P. Morta (Attachments 2-4), the approx. 62' failing post and plank wood bulkhead will be refaced using 3" x 12" lumber. Additionally, the bulkhead's existing backfill will be excavated to a width and depth of approx. 18 inches and six feet respectively. Following excavation, a layer of filter fabric will be pinned to the back and bottom of the excavated area (landward of the existing bulkhead) using rebar stakes, then one-man rip- rap rock will be installed, which will be topped with an approx. one foot layer of native soil. The proposed overwater structures will consist of an approx. eight by seventeen-foot (8' x 17'6") pier, and a ten by sixteen-foot (10' x 16') float. The pier and float will be constructed of galvanized steel or aluminum hardware, and yellow cedar posts,joists, decking, and trim. The float will be fitted with polyethylene encapsulated Styrofoam®floats. A float landing cradle constructed of Alaska yellow cedar will prevent the float from resting on the lakebed during the low water season. The pier and float will utilize approx. ten (10) Alaska yellow cedar posts (8"x 8"); all of the existing piling posts (approx. sixteen) will be removed from the site. The decking of the pier and float will have grating installed (fifty percent total with 60 percent light passage, as per the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife [WDFW] stipulations). Overwater coverage of the pier (140 sf) and float (160 sf)will total approx. 300 square feet. All post holes will be approx. six feet (6') deep, two feet (2') wide and filled with concrete and rebar. No pressure treated lumber will be used in this project. Sustainably harvested Alaska yellow cedar, which is insect and decay resistant, will be utilized instead. All overwater structures will be grated with ThruFlow decking panels, which are made of reinforced polypropylene, contain no toxic preservatives, and are recyclable. To aid in mitigating erosion, basalt riprap (1/2 man rock) will be placed along the bulkhead toe and around all pier and float posts to a width of one foot 11) following construction. The JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 6 of 15 proposed quantity will be the minimal quantity required to provide protection, approx. eight (8) cubic yards. Construction of the upland shoreline access stairs and retaining wall will likely be completed prior to commencement of work on the bulkhead, pier, and float. A circular saw and various hand tools will be used throughout the proposed project. All workers, equipment, debris, and materials will be transported to and from the site by car, truck, or boat. The float may be constructed off-site and transported to the site by boat when the lake's waters are high. Geo-textile fabric will be spread over the dry lakebed before commencement of project construction in order to contain any manmade construction debris. At the completion of construction, the geo-textile fabric will be removed from the shoreline at the site, along with all construction debris and other existing manmade debris. All debris will be disposed of at a licensed landfill or other licensed disposal site. Start date: _The shoreline access stairs and upland retaining wall will be constructed asap after receiving all required State and Tacoma Power permits. The bulkhead and pier/float will require a Federal permit andwill be installed after receiving USCOE approval, when the lake is lowered. End date: Two weeks for the upland work, and three weeks for the bulkhead and pier/float. ❑ End date: See JARPA Attachment D . ............. Unknown. Z I ❑ Yes x❑ No ❑ Don't know Part 7—Wetlands: Impacts and Mitigation ❑ Check here if there are wetlands or wetland buffers on or adjacent to the project area. (If there are none, skip to Part 8.) h[ ui I 101111 1111; MAN WAN. X❑ Not applicable Page 7 of 15 JARPA Revision 2012.1 ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Not applicable Activity (fill, Wetland Wetland Impact Duration Proposed Wetland drain, excavate, Name' type and area (sq. of impact3 mitigation mitigation area flood, etc.) rating q• ft ft. or type (s . or category2 Acres) acres) If no official name for the wetland exists,create a unique name(such as"Wetland 1"). The name should be consistent with other project documents,such as a wetland delineation report. Z Ecology wetland category based on current Western Washington or Eastern Washington Wetland Rating System.Provide the wetland rating forms with the JARPA package. 3 Indicate the days,months or years the wetland will be measurably impacted by the activity.Enter"permanent"if applicable. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 8 of 15 Creation(C),Re-establishment/Rehabilitation(R),Enhancement(E),Preservation(P),Mitigation Bank/In-lieu fee(B) Page number(s)for similar information in the mitigation plan, if available: Mil i EMIR! U1111 IN W 007 WAWA Part 8—Waterbodies (other than wetlands): Impacts and Mitigation g1nart 8, "waterbodies" refers to non-wetland waterbodies. (See Part 7 for information related to wetlands.) [help] Check here if there are waterbodies on or adjacent to the project area. (If there are none, skip to Part 9.) ❑ Not applicable In addition to the proposed mitigation, BMPs will be followed during project construction. i x❑ Yes ❑ No Page 9 of 15 JARPA Revision 2012.1 x❑ Yes [:] No ❑ Not applicable A BE has been prepared (Sandoval bulkhead repair and pier& float replacement project 3-1-17). Mitigation for the proposed project includes reducing overwater coverage at the site by approximately (approx.) 290 square feet (sf), and reducing the number of piling posts from approx. sixteen (16) to ten (10). In addition, all lumber in this project will be untreated and sustainable Alaska yellow cedar. Activity (clear, Waterbody Impact Duration Amount of material Area (sq. ft. or dredge, fill, pile name' location of impact3 (cubic yards) to be linear ft.) of drive, etc.) placed in or waterbody removed from directly affected waterbody Lake shoreline Three Approx. 8 cubic 62' Cushman weeks yards to be added If no official name for the waterbody exists,create a unique name(such as"Stream V)The name should be consistent with other documents provided. 2 Indicate whether the impact will occur in or adjacent to the waterbody. If adjacent,provide the distance between the impact and the waterbody and indicate whether the impact will occur within the 100-year flood plain. 3 Indicate the da s,months or ears the waterbod will be measurabl im acted b the work. Enter" ermanent"if a licable. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 10 of 15 Riprap rock will be added for erosion protection (approx. 8 cu/yds) along the existing bulkhead's toe and around all ten piling post footings. I : Him Excavating will only occur landward of the existing bulkhead. Part 9—Additional Information Any additional information you can provide helps the reviewer(s) understand your project. Complete as much of this section as you can. It is ok if you cannot answer a question. ❑ Yes XD No 17110018 UN .... . 01111AM Page 11 of 15 JARPA Revision 2012.1 • � fi�?€m :��;p�' ��= ear �:: �l. ■ Yes No XEI Not applicable Se P •i^��.•\ �• aE�^ • El Rural XEI Urban El Natural Aquatic Conservancy Other ed ■ Shoreline ■ Fish ■ Non-Fish ■ Non-Fish Seasonal ��a sff •�'•o ■ Yes . No Name of Stormwater Management Prior • the earlySoo's it was aforest. • 1 The Chinook salmon, the bull trout, the Puget Sound steelhead, the marbled murrelet, streaked horned lark, yellow-billed cuckoo, and the spotted owl are the ESA listed threatened or endangered species in the area. i See above, plus cutthroat trout, Kokanee, and fisher. Part 10—SEPA Compliance and Permits Use the resources and checklist below to identify the permits you are applying for. • Online Project Questionnaire at http://apps ecy.wa.gov/opas/. • Governor's Office of Regulatory Assistance at(800) 917-0043 or help(Wora.wa.gov. For a list of addresses to send your JARPA to, click on agency addresses for completed JARPA. ❑ A copy of the SEPA determination or letter of exemption is included with this application. X❑ A SEPA determination is pending with _Mason County (lead agency). The expected decision date is ❑ 1 am applying for a Fish Habitat Enhancement Exemption. (check the box below in 10b.)[help] ❑ This project is exempt(choose type of exemption below). ❑ Categorical Exemption. Under what section of the SEPA administrative code (WAC) is it exempt? ❑ Other: Local Government Shoreline permits: X❑ Substantial Development ❑ Conditional Use ❑ Variance ❑ Shoreline Exemption Type (explain): Other city/county permits: ❑ Floodplain Development Permit X❑ Critical Areas Ordinance Page 13 of 15 JARPA Revision 2012.1 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife: X ❑ Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) ❑ Fish Habitat Enhancement Exemption —Attach Exemption Form Effective July 10, 2012, you must submit a check for$150 to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, unless your project qualifies for an exemption or alternative payment method below. Do not send cash. Check the appropriate boxes: X ❑ $150 check enclosed. (Check# ) Attach check made payable to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. ❑Charge to billing account under agreement with WDFW. (Agreement# ) ❑My project is exempt from the application fee. (Check appropriate exemption) ❑ HPA processing is conducted by applicant-funded WDFW staff. (Agreement # ❑ Mineral prospecting and mining. ❑ Project occurs on farm and agricultural land. (Attach a copy of current land use classification recorded with the county auditor,or other proof of current land use.) ❑ Project is a modification of an existing HPA originally applied for, prior to July 10, 2012. (HPA# Washington Department of Natural Resources: ❑ Aquatic Use Authorization Complete JARPA Attachment E and submit a check for$25 payable to the Washington Department of Natural Resources. Do not send cash. Washington Department of Ecology: ❑ Section 401 Water Quality Certification United States Department of the Army permits (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers): ❑ Section 404 (discharges into waters of the U.S.) ❑ Section 10 (work in navigable waters) United States Coast Guard permits: ❑ General Bridge Act Permit ❑ Private Aids to Navigation (for non-bridge projects) ❑ SEPA is pre-empted by federal law. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 14 of 15 Part II—Authorizing Signatures Signatures are required before submitting the JARPA package. The JARPA package includes the JARPA form, project plans, photos, etc. bg-121 11a. Applicant Signature (required) he(�I ] ion is I certify that to the best of mythat tknowledge the authority belief,to cainformation provided in rry out the proposed activities,! pandtI agree to start work and accurate. I also certify that I have Y only after I have received all necessary permits. I hereby authorize the agent named in Part 3 of this application to act on my behalf in matters related to this application. (initial) By initialing here, I state that I have the authority to grant access to the property. I also give my consent to the permitting agencies entering the property where the project is located to inspect the project site or any work related to the project. (initial) Applicant Printed Name Applicant Signature Date 11 b. Authorized Agent Signature [help] I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief, the information provided in this application is true, complete, and accurate. I also certify that I have the authority to carry out the proposed activities and I agree to start work only after all necessary permits have been issued. 3 � l 72 Authorized Agent Signature ate Authorized Agent Printed Name 11 c. Property Owner Signature (if not applicant). hel 1 Not required if project is on existing rights-of-way or easements. I consent to the permitting agencies entering the property where the project is located to inspect the project site or any work. These inspections shall occur at reasonable times and, if practical, with prior notice to the landowner. Property Owner Printed Name Property Owner Signature Date 18 U.S.0§1001 provides that:Whoever,in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly falsifies,conceals, or covers up by any trick,scheme,or device a material fact or makes any false,fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false,fictitious,or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined not more than$10,000 or imprisoned not more than 5 years or both. If you require this document in another format, contact the Governor's Office of Regulatory Ass�1 � t(800)917-0043. People with hearing loss can call 711 for Washington Relay Service. People with a speech disa77)833-6341. ORA publication number: ENV-019-09 rev.06-12 Page 15 of 15 JARPA Revision 2012.1 oN.STA MASON COUNTY �P5 C ° Department of Community Services o n° y= Planning Division o T z 615 W Alder St, Shelton,WA 98584 z� N Y (360)427-9670 pJ � 1864 O DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (WAC 197-11-340) SEP2017-00017 Description of Proposal: DEMO: remove & dispose of existing shoreline structures. CONSTRUCT NEW: staircase, bulkhead, retaining wall, floating dock, and pier per engineered drawings Proponent: BARBARA& RANDOLPH SANDOVAL Location of Proposal: 311 N MARINE VIEW DR HOODSPORT Parcel Number: 423325000002 Legal Description: LAKE CUSHMAN #11 TR 2 Directions to Site: From Shelton, US HWY 101 N to N Lake Cushman Rd/SR119 and turn left; proceed up hill to Marine View Dr and turn left, left on Marine View Loop, house is on right, shoreline on left Lead Agency: Mason County The Lead Agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed Environmental Checklist and other information on file with the Lead Agency. This information is available to the public upon request. Please contact Kell McAboy at ext. 365 with any questions. This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2). The Lead Agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date shown below, when the determination is final. Comments must be submitted to Dept. of Community Development, 615 W Alder St, Shelton WA 98584 by 4/5/2017. Appeal of this determination must be filed within a 14-day period following this final determination date, per Mason County Code Chapter 15.11 Appeals. AuthoirieSd Local Gov ent Official Date S L-T 2 0 66 0/ MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST RECEIVED MASON CO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST f - 9 2017 A. BACKGROUND 615 W.AkJer S tW 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Sandoval Bulkhead Repair and Pier & Float Replacement Project. 2. Name of applicant: Barbara & Randolph Sandoval. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 7302 278tn PI NE, Stanwood, WA 98292. 4. Date checklist prepared: 03-01-17. 5. Agency requesting checklist: Mason County 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Replacement shoreline access stairs and upland retaining wall to be installed asap after receiving required permits. Bulkhead and pier/float repair/ replacement to be installed after the lake is lowered and upon receiving required State and Federal permits. 7. Do you have any plans for future expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal: if yes, explain. No. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. A Biological Evaluation (BE). 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No. 10.List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. A Mason County shoreline substantial permit, an HPA from the WDFW, a Tacoma Power permit, and a USACE permit. 11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2 agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description). The proposed action is the repair of an existing wood bulkhead and the installation of a replacement pier and float. New shoreline access stairs and an upland shoreline retaining wall will also be installed, and an existing shoreline shed and shoreline access stairs with associated landings will be removed. Overwater coverage at the site will be reduced by approximately (approx.) 290 square feet (sf), and the number of piling posts will be reduced from approx. sixteen (16) to ten (10). As per the engineered design Steven P. Morta (Attachments 2-4), the approx. 62' failing post and plank wood bulkhead will be refaced using 3" x 12" lumber. Additionally, the bulkhead's existing backfill will be excavated to a width and depth of approx. 18 inches and six feet respectively. Following excavation, a layer of filter fabric will be pinned to the back and bottom of the excavated area (landward of the existing bulkhead) using rebar stakes, then one-man rip-rap rock will be installed, which will be topped with an approx. one foot layer of native soil. The proposed overwater structures will consist of an approx. eight by seventeen-foot (8' x 17'6") pier, and a ten by sixteen-foot (10, x 16') float. The pier and float will be constructed of galvanized steel or aluminum hardware, and yellow cedar posts,joists, decking, and trim. The float will be fitted with polyethylene encapsulated Styrofoam®floats. A float landing cradle constructed of Alaska yellow cedar will prevent the float from resting on the lakebed during the low water season. The pier and float will utilize approx. ten (10) Alaska yellow cedar posts (8"x 8"); all of the existing piling posts (approx. sixteen) will be removed from the site. The decking of the pier and float will have grating installed (fifty percent total with 60 percent light passage, as per the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife [WDFW] stipulations). Overwater coverage of the pier (140 sf) and float (160 sf) will total approx. 300 square feet. All post holes will be approx. six feet (6') deep, two feet (2') wide and filled with concrete and rebar. No pressure treated lumber will be used in this project. Sustainably harvested Alaska yellow cedar, which is insect and decay resistant, will be utilized instead. All overwater structures will be grated with ThruFlow decking panels, which are made of reinforced polypropylene, contain no toxic preservatives, and are recyclable. To aid in mitigating erosion, basalt riprap (112 man rock) will be placed along the bulkhead toe and around all pier and float posts to a width of one foot (1') following construction. The proposed quantity will be the minimal quantity required to provide protection, approx. eight (8) cubic yards. Construction of the upland shoreline access stairs and retaining wall will MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 3 likely be completed prior to commencement of work on the bulkhead, pier, and float. A circular saw and various hand tools will be used throughout the proposed project. All workers, equipment, debris, and materials will be transported to and from the site by car, truck, or boat. The float may be constructed off-site and transported to the site by boat when the lake's waters are high. Geo-textile fabric will be spread over the dry lakebed before commencement of project construction in order to contain any manmade construction debris. At the completion of construction, the geo- textile fabric will be removed from the shoreline at the site, along with all construction debris and other existing manmade debris. All debris will be disposed of at a licensed landfill or other licensed disposal site. 12. What is the location of the proposal? Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist The site is located on Lake Cushman 311 Marine View Drive North, Hoodsport. Section 32, Township 23N, Range 04W. Parcel number 42332-50-00002. The legal description is: Lake Cushman #11 TR. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: 1. EARTH: a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approx. percent slope)? Greater than 100 percent. C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Sand, gravel, and clay. MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 4 d. Are there surface indications of history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity: If so, describe. No. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Riprap rock will be added for protection (approx. 8 cu/yds) along the existing bulkhead's toe and around all ten piling post footings. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use: If so, generally describe. BMPs will be followed during construction. g. About what percentage of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project constructions (for example, asphalt or buildings)? No new impervious surface area will be created by the project. Approx. 60 sf of impervious surface area will be removed (an existing shoreline shed). h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: BMPs will be followed. See BE please. 2. AIR: a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e. duct, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities, if known N/A b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odors that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. N/A C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: N/A 3. WATER: a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Lake Cushman. MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 5 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes, see BE entitled Sandoval Bulkhead Repair and Pier & Float Replacement Project 3-01-17. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Riprap rock will be added erosion protection (approx. 8 cu/yds) along the existing bulkhead's toe and around all ten piling post footings. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Yes, the proposed project site is located on the shoreline of Lake Cushman. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. N/A. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. N/A. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: domestic sewage, industrial, containing the following chemicals...,agricultural, etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. N/A. C. Water runoff(including storm water): MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 6 1) Describe the source of runoff(including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this flow into other waters? If so, describe. N/A. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters: if so, generally describe. N/A. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: N/A. 4. PLANTS: a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: X_deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other x_evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other x_shrubs —x_ grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other _water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? None. C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Unknown. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: None. 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 7 Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. The Chinook salmon, the bull trout, the Puget Sound steelhead, the northern spotted owl, the Hood Canal summer-run chum, the streaked horned lark, and the yellow-billed cuckoo. C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No, Lake Cushman is land-locked due to two dams. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: See above (4d). 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES: a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. N/A. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties: If so, generally describe. N/A. C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: N/A. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH: a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, which could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. NIA. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. An ambulance in the event of a construction accident. MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 8 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: N/A. b. Noise: 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? N/A. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. N/A 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any" N/A 8) LAND AND SHORELINE USE: a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Residential and recreational. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. C. Describe any structures on the site. The proposed project site is located in a residential neighborhood on a 0.28 acre shoreline lot, which supports a single-family residence located approximately (approx.) ninety-five (95) feet horizontally and fifty (50) feet vertically from the shoreline of Lake Cushman. Existing shoreline appurtenances (Attachments 5-8) include an approx. sixty- two-foot (62') failing wood bulkhead, an approx. five by eighteen- foot (57' x 18'2") pier, an approx. ten by twenty-foot (107' x 20'6") float, an approx. ten by twenty-foot (10' x 20'511) pier, an approx. twenty-two by two to three-foot (22' x 2' to 3') overhanging deck, an approx. three by eight-foot (3' x 8') set of overwater/i n-water beach access stairs, a six by ten-foot (6' x 10') shed, and wood shoreline access stairs with associated landings. 9 MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Yes, the wood face of the existing bulkhead, two piers, a float, an overhanging deck, beach access stairs, an existing shoreline shed and shoreline access stairs with associated landings will be removed. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Unknown. 2IF-S f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Unknown. g. If applicable, what is the current Shoreline Master Program designation of the site? Urban residential. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "Environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Lake Cushman is a "lake of statewide significance." i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? NIA. j. Approximately how may people would the completed project displace? NIA. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: NIA. i. Proposed measure to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: NIA. g. HOUSING: a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. NIA. MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 10 b. Approximately how many units, if any would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. N/A. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: N/A. 10. AESTHETICS: a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The stairs will be approx. 5' above grade in height. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? The project does not obstruct any views. C. Proposed measure to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: N/A. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a• What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The project does not produce any light or glare. b.Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? N/A. C. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal: N/A. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: N/A. 11 MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Boating, fishing, hiking, etc. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreational opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: NIA. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION: a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. Not that the applicants know of. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: NIA. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. N/A. MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 12 b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not what is the a distance to the existing street system? Show on site plans, ifany imate Unknown. C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? N/A. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No. e• Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Some materials may be transported to the site by boat. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project. If known, indicated when peak volumes would occur. N/A. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: N/A. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public service (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe: No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any: N/A. 13 MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currentservicee telelable at phone,s electricity,e site: natural water, refuse sanitary sewer, system, other: , b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. NIA. Signature: The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Date submitted: 3/��� RECEIVED MAR - 9 2017 615 W.Alder S# Biological Evaluation Sandoval Bulkhead Repair and Pier & Float Replacement Project Lake Cushman, Hoodsport WA For: Barbara and Randolph Sandoval 7302 2781h PI NW Stanwood,WA 98292 Prepared by: BioResources,LLC Kim Schaumburg Fisheries biologist,University of Washington, 1981 10112 Bay View Rd.KPN Vaughn,WA,98394 (253) 884-5776 or 225-2973 Email: kimbcrly035(0 centurytel.net March 1,2017 Table of Contents 1.0 Proposed Action.............................................................................. 3 1.1 Background ................................................................................... 3 1.2 Project Need and Objectives................................................................ 4 2.0 Project Description........................................................................... 4-5 2.1 Project Activities.............................................................................. 5-6 2.2 Timing........................................................................................... 7 2.3 Conservation Measures........................................................................7 2.4 Best Management Practices.................................................................. 7-9 3.0 Action Area.................................................................................... 10-11 4.0 ESA Species and Habitat Information..................................................... 11-12 4.1 ESA Listed Species.......................................................................... 12-14 5.0 Environmental Baseline Conditions....................................................... 14 5.1 Action Area.................................................................................... 14-15 5.2 Proposed Project Area....................................................................... 15-16 6.0 Effects of the Action.......................................................................... 16 6.1 Direct Effects.................................................................................. 16-18 6.2 Primary Constituent Elements............................................................ 18-19 6.3 Direct Effects to ESA Listed Species...................................................... 20-21 6.4 Indirect Effects................................................................................. 21-23 6.5 Primary Constituent Elements............................................................ 23-24 6.6 Direct Effects to ESA Listed Species....................................................... 24 6.7 Interrelated/Interdependent Effects......................................................... 24 6.8 Primary Constituent Elements............................................................ .. 24-25 6.9 Cumulative Effects............................................................................ 25 7.0 Conclusion...................................................................................... 26 7.1 Take Analysis............................................................ 25-26 ...................... 7.2 Determination of Effect....................................................................... 26 8.0 References....................................................................................... 27-30 Attachments 1. Project location................................................................................... 31 2. Site plan with existing&proposed development.............................................32 3. Cross section for proposed pier and float..................................................... 33 4. Cross section for proposed bulkhead repair...................................................34 5. Site Photograph,,,,,,, ..................................................... 35 6. Site Photograph................................................................................. 36 7. Site Photograph...................................................................................37 8. Site Photograph.................................................................................. 38 9. Essential Fish Habitat............................................................................ 39-40 Sandoval Biological Evaluation 2 1.0 Proposed Action This Biological Evaluation has been submitted on behalf of Barbara and Randolph Sandoval at the request of the Seattle District United States Army Corps of Engineers to comply with Endangered Species Act(ESA)regulations regarding shoreline development. The proposed action is the repair of an existing wood bulkhead and the installation of a replacement pier and float.New shoreline access stairs and an upland shoreline retaining wall will also be installed, and an existing shoreline shed and shoreline access stairs with associated landings will be removed; however,these latter projects will not be discussed in detail in this report. Mitigation for the proposed project includes reducing overwater coverage at the site by approximately(approx.) 290 square feet(sf), and reducing the number of piling posts from approx. sixteen (16)to ten (10). In addition, all lumber in this project will be untreated and sustainable Alaska yellow cedar. 1.1 Background The proposed project site is located in Mason County at 311 Marine View Drive North, Hoodsport Washington (Attachment 1). The Mason County tax parcel number is 42332- 50-00002. The property is located in Section 32, Township 23N,Range 04 of the Western Meridian. The latitude is 47.43564 north, and the longitude is -123.21898 west. The proposed project site is on Lake Cushman in the Skokomish/Dosewallips Water Resource Inventory Area 16 (WRIA 16) on a shoreline designated Urban Residential by the Shoreline Master Program of Mason County. Lake Cushman is regulated under the Mason County Shoreline Master Program and the Mason County Resource Ordinance as a Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area. The Shoreline Management Act of 1971 designated Lake Cushman as a Shoreline of Statewide Significance. In addition, Lake Cushman is regulated by Tacoma Public Utilities (aka Tacoma Power),which has designated Shoreline Management Classification (SMC) zones. The proposed project site is located in an SMC zone classified as "A." Tacoma Power defines the "A" management classification as shoreline areas with no known significant environmental/cultural resources or associated resource management goals precluding existing or future shoreline uses; this classification acknowledges existing private uses and anticipates potential future private and light commercial shoreline uses (Kleinschmidt 2012). The proposed project site is located in a residential neighborhood on a 0.28 acre shoreline lot,which supports a single-family residence located approximately (approx.) ninety-five (95) feet horizontally and fifty (50) feet vertically from the shoreline of Lake Cushman. Existing shoreline appurtenances (Attachments 5-8) include an approx. sixty-two-foot (62')failing wood bulkhead, an approx. five by eighteen-foot(57'x 18'2")pier, an approx.ten by twenty-foot(10'2"x 20'6") float, an approx. ten by twenty-foot(10' x 20'5")pier, an approx.twenty-two by two to three-foot(22' x 2' to 3') overhanging deck, an approx.three by eight-foot(3' x 8') set of overwater/in-water beach access stairs, a six by ten-foot(6' x 10') shed, and wood shoreline access stairs with associated landings. Sandoval Biological Evaluation 3 1.2 Project Need and Objectives The bluff toe at the site exhibits erosion damage that is common to the Lake Cushman shoreline. The primary cause of this erosion and concomitant shoreline instability is the seasonal raising and lowering of Lake Cushman, a reservoir with two functioning dams, and the lake's unique landscape features, including a steep, unnatural lakebed topography that lacks a shallow foreshore to diminish wave energy generated by strong prevailing winds and approx. eight miles of fetch, and a steep terrestrial shoreline that receives an average of approx. 100 inches of rainfall per year. As a result,the existing bulkhead is in danger of failing and needs to be repaired. Additionally, the existing piers, float, overhanging deck, and beach access stairs are poorly constructed and unsafe, and the float's floatation is un-encapsulated, making it a potential source of Styrofoam® pollution. The applicants wish to extend the life of all of their existing shoreline structures, making them safer for both humans and the environment. Therefore,the project objective is to repair the bulkhead, remove the overhanging deck and stairs, and replace the two piers and float with a single float and pier, all-the-while avoiding or minimizing impacts to ESA-listed species and improving shoreline habitat at the site. 2.0 Project Description As per the engineered design Steven P. Morta(Attachments 2-4), the approx. 62' failing post and plank wood bulkhead will be refaced using 3"x 12" lumber. Additionally, the bulkhead's existing backfill will be excavated to a width and depth of approx. 18 inches and six feet respectively. Following excavation, a layer of filter fabric will be pinned to the back and bottom of the excavated area(landward of the existing bulkhead) using rebar stakes,then one-man rip-rap rock will be installed, which will be topped with an approx. one foot layer of native soil. The proposed overwater structures will consist of an approx. eight by seventeen-foot(8' x 17'6")pier, and a ten by sixteen-foot(10' x 16')float. The pier and float will be constructed of galvanized steel or aluminum hardware, and yellow cedar posts,joists, decking, and trim. The float will be fitted with polyethylene encapsulated Styrofoam® floats. A float landing cradle constructed of Alaska yellow cedar will prevent the float from resting on the lakebed during the low water season. The pier and float will utilize approx. ten (10)Alaska yellow cedar posts (8"x 8"); all of the existing piling posts (approx. sixteen)will be removed from the site. The decking of the pier and float will have grating installed (fifty percent total with 60 percent light passage, as per the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife [WDFW] stipulations). Overwater coverage of the pier(140 sf) and float(160 sf)will total approx. 300 square feet. All post holes will be approx. six feet(6') deep,two feet(2')wide and filled with concrete and rebar. No pressure treated lumber will be used in this project. Sustainably harvested Alaska yellow cedar, which is insect and decay resistant, will be utilized Sandoval Biological Evaluation 4 instead. All overwater structures will be grated with ThruFlow decking panels,which are made of reinforced polypropylene, contain no toxic preservatives, and are recyclable. To aid in mitigating erosion,basalt riprap (1/2 man rock)will be placed along the bulkhead toe and around all pier and float posts to a width of one foot(11) following construction. The proposed quantity will be the minimal quantity required to provide protection, approx. eight(8) cubic yards. Construction of the upland shoreline access stairs and retaining wall will likely be completed prior to commencement of work on the bulkhead,pier, and float. A circular saw and various hand tools will be used throughout the proposed project. All workers, equipment, debris, and materials will be transported to and from the site by car, truck, or boat. The float may be constructed off-site and transported to the site by boat when the Jake's waters are high. Geo-textile fabric will be spread over the dry lakebed before commencement of project construction in order to contain any manmade construction debris. At the completion of construction,the geo-textile fabric will be removed from the shoreline at the site, along with all construction debris and other existing manmade debris. All debris will be disposed of at a licensed landfill or other licensed disposal site. 2.1 Project Activities Excavation of the Bulkhead's Backfill Due to the difficulty of accessing the site with heavy machinery, it will be necessary to manually excavate the bulkhead's existing backfill to a width and depth of approx. 18 inches and six feet respectively. The excavated backfill may be used as backfill behind the proposed upland shoreline retaining wall; if the backfill includes soil of an appropriate quality, it may also be used to top the bulkhead's replacement rip-rap backfill. In the event of heavy precipitation, silt fencing(see Best Management Practices 2.5)will be utilized to contain all stockpiled project sediments. Demolition of the Bulkhead's Face, Piers, Float, Overhanging Deck, and Beach Stairs Wood components of the existing piers, float, overhanging deck, and beach access stairs, and the horizontal face boards of the existing bulkhead will be disassembled using a circular saw and various hand tools. The existing approx. sixteen concrete post footings will be excavated to a depth of at least one foot and removed or trimmed off using a concrete (circular) saw. The holes will be filled(later)using excavated material from the excavation of the new piling posts. Following demolition, all debris will be gathered from 5 Sandoval Biological Evaluation the geo-textile fabric and placed in an appropriate disposal bin prior to removal from the site. Bulkhead Repair The approx. 62' failing post and plank wood bulkhead will be refaced using 3"x 12" Alaska yellow cedar lumber and existing pier posts. Afterwards, a layer of filter fabric will be pinned to the back and bottom of the excavated area (landward of the bulkhead's face) using rebar stakes, then one-man rip-rap rock will be installed, which will be topped with an approx. one foot layer of native soil. The rip-rap will be delivered to the shoreline via a plastic chute or wheelbarrows. Excavation of the Posts Holes for the Pier& Float Due to the difficulty of accessing the site with heavy machinery, it will be necessary to manually excavate approx. ten 0 0)post holes to a depth and diameter of approx. six and two feet, respectively. Excavated material will be used to fill depressions from the previously removed piling posts and the newly installed posts or be removed from the shoreline at the site, as per Tacoma Power's rules and regulations. In the event of heavy precipitation, silt fencing (see Best Management Practices 2.5)will be utilized to contain all stockpiled project sediments. Concrete Pouring of the Piling Post Holes Concrete will be delivered via a concrete pump truck. Before concrete is poured, the yellow cedar posts and rebar will be positioned in the post holes. Construction of the Pier & Float The pier will be constructed on site. The float may be constructed on site or off site and delivered to the site by boat. After construction is completed, rip-rap will be delivered to the shoreline, via a plastic chute or by wheelbarrow and placed along the toe of the repaired bulkhead and around all pier and float piling posts to a width of one foot(1'). At the completion of the riprap installation, the geo-textile fabric will be removed from the shoreline at the site, along with all construction debris and any other existing manmade debris. All debris will be disposed of at a licensed landfill or other licensed disposal site. Sandoval Biological Evaluation 6 2.2 Timing Project work will be completed over an approx.thirty(30) day period during daylight working hours normal to a rural residential neighborhood. Work will only take place when the water level of Lake Cushman is low,which is generally between October and April. 2.3 Conservation Measures 1. No construction on the bulkhead or overwater structures to occur unless Lake Cushman's waters are low. 2. No pressure treated lumber will be used in this project. Sustainably harvested Alaska yellow cedar,which is insect and decay resistant, will be utilized for all wood members of the bulkhead,pier, float, and shoreline access stairs. 3. Grating will be installed on the pier and float(fifty percent total with 60 percent light passage, as per WDFW's provisions)using ThruFlow decking panels,which are made of reinforced polypropylene, contain no toxic preservatives, and are recyclable. 4. Construction to take place as per the HPA provisions from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 5. Previously discussed BMPs to be strictly adhered to. 6. Overwater coverage at the site will be reduced by approximately(approx.) 290 square feet(sf), and the number of piling posts will be reduced from approx. sixteen (16)to ten(10). 2.4 Best Management Practices In order to maintain the present water quality of Lake Cushman during project construction,Best Management Practices (BMPs)will be implemented. BMPs are defined as physical, structural, and/or managerial practices that prevent or reduce the pollution of water(WDOE). The following source control BMPs, which are detailed in the WDOE's Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, Volume II Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention (2012),will be implemented for long-term protection of water quality at the site: BMP C154: Concrete Washout Area Sandoval Biological Evaluation 7 Purpose: Prevent or reduce the discharge of pollutants to stormwater from concrete waste by conducting washout off-site, or performing on-site washout in a designated area to prevent pollutants from entering surface waters or ground water. Conditions of Use: Concrete washout area best management practices are implemented on construction projects where: *Concrete is used as a construction material. •It is not possible to dispose of all concrete wastewater and washout off-site (ready mix plant, etc.). *Concrete trucks,pumpers, or other concrete coated equipment are washed on-site. *Note: If less than 10 concrete trucks or pumpers need to be washed out on-site,the wash water may be disposed of in a formed area awaiting concrete or an upland disposal site where it will not contaminate surface or ground water. The upland disposal site shall be at least 50 feet from sensitive areas such as storm drains, open ditches, or water bodies, including wetlands. •A temporary washout facility shall be constructed on-site or the concrete truck will be washed out off-site. *When temporary concrete washout facilities are no longer required for the work, the hardened concrete, slurries and liquids shall be removed and properly disposed of. *Materials used to construct temporary concrete washout facilities shall be removed from the site of the work and disposed of or recycled. BMP C151: Concrete Handling Purpose: Concrete work can generate process water and slurry that contain fine particles and high pH, both of which can violate water quality standards in the receiving water. Concrete spillage or concrete discharge to surface waters of the State is prohibited. Use this BMP to minimize and eliminate concrete, concrete process water, and concrete slurry from entering waters of the state. Conditions of Use:Any time concrete is used, utilize these management practices. *Wash out concrete truck chutes,pumps, and internals into formed areas only. Assure that washout of concrete trucks is performed offsite or in designated concrete washout areas. DO not wash out concrete trucks onto the ground, or into storm drains, open ditches, streets, or streams. *Return unused concrete remaining in the truck and pump to the originating batch plant for recycling. Do not dump excess concrete on site, except in designated concrete washout areas. •Wash off hand tools including, but not limited to, screeds, shovels, rakes, floats, and trowels into formed areas only. •Wash equipment difficult to move in areas that do not directly drain to natural or constructed stormwater conveyances. Sandoval Biological Evaluation 8 ' •Do not allow washdown from areas, such as concrete aggregate driveways,to drain directly to natural or constructed stormwater conveyances (or Puget Sound). *Contain washwater and leftover product in a lined container when no formed areas are available.Dispose of contained concrete in a manner that does not violate ground water or surface water quality standards. *Always use forms or solid barriers for concrete pours, such a pilings, within 15-feet of surface waters. BMP C101: Preserving Natural Vegetation Wherever practical, native vegetation shall be preserved to reduce erosion.Natural vegetation should be preserved on steep slopes,near perennial and intermittent watercourses or swales, and on building sites in wooded areas. BMP C233: Silt Fence Silt fence may be used downslope of all disturbed areas. Silt fence shall prevent soil carried by runoff water from going beneath,through, or over the top of the silt fence but shall allow the water to pass through the fence. The following additional BMP shall be used to insure that water quality is not degraded during and after construction: 1. Equipment will be cleaned and checked for leaks, offsite and daily,before commencing work. In addition,the following Spill Prevention Control measures will also be followed: 1) The applicant will supply the site with a portable bathroom or allow workers access to an onsite bathroom so that solid or liquid waste will not become a source of stormwater pollution. 2)The applicant will be responsible for alerting the appropriate authorities in the event of a hazardous spill. 3) The applicant will have a spill kit and be able to perform basic control, containment, and/or confinement operations within the capabilities of the resources and personnel protective equipment available. In other words, small spills, such as paint or oil,will be promptly and fully collected and disposed of at a suitable disposal site. In the event of a significant spill, a fish kill, and/or if fish are observed in distress the Washington State Department of Ecology(800.258.5990) and the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife's Area Habitat Biologist, Joshua Benton(360.602.0364), will be notified immediately. 9 Sandoval Biological Evaluation 7 3.0 Action Area The action area is located on the shoreline.of Lake Cushman at the proposed project site. Besides the proposed project location, the action area includes the surrounding area within a designated distance from the site in order to account for construction impacts that may affect species listed under the Endangered Species Act by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service as either endangered or threatened. The limits of the action area are based upon the geographic extent(in both aquatic and terrestrial environments) of the physical, chemical, and biological effects resulting from the proposed action, including direct and indirect effects, as well as effects of interrelated and interdependent activities (WSDOT 2010). Turbidity and noise are expected to be the most detrimental project effects. Because work will occur when Lake Cushman is lowered,project turbidity is expected to be no greater than turbidity that is common to the area during heavy rains, when various ephemeral and perennial streams and the north fork of the Skokomish River discharge sediment laden water into Lake Cushman. It is probable that the project's distance from the lake's lowered shoreline will be great enough that disturbed sediments will disperse gradually(via precipitation) over the exposed lakebed without ever reaching water until the lake is raised. Therefore, terrestrial noise is expected to be the most far-reaching effect from the proposed project. The action area for terrestrial noise effects is based upon an ambient sound level of 40 dBA for an area with a population of less than 100 people per mile (WSDOT 2010). In addition, the Olympic National Forest programmatic biological assessment uses an estimated ambient level of 40 dBA for undisturbed forested areas (USDI 2003). Noise frequency and levels for the proposed project is expected to be short term and moderate, as the contractor will be using hand tools such as a skill saw. The noise levels for the rip- rap delivery and installation will be intermittent and short-term. Assuming noise from the latter, which will be muted by the plastic chute or, if delivered by wheelbarrow, unloaded via manual labor, will be less than that of a circular saw,the sawing of the lumber will produce the proposed project's maximum noise level. The noise level of a chain saw was used to ascertain the noise level of a circular saw. The noise level at 50 feet from a chain saw is 84 dBA (WSDOT 2014). The noise level of a chain saw at three feet is 110 dBA, while a circular saw is 100 dBA. Assuming that a chain saw is between approx. five and ten percent noisier than a circular saw, the noise level of a circular saw at fifty feet was assigned 79 dBA (at 50 feet). To determine the distance that the proposed project's maximum point source construction noise will travel before it attenuates to the ambient sound level; the following Practical Spreading Loss Model equation was used: D=Do * 10((Construction Noise—Ambient Sound Level in dBA)/a) Where D =the distance from the noise & Do=the reference measurement distance of 50'. Average construction noise from the proposed project will travel approx. 3,970 feet over hard site conditions (Lake Cushman) and 1,656 feet over soft site conditions (forested Sandoval Biological Evaluation 10 areas)before it(the noise) attenuates to the ambient sound level. Therefore,the extent of the action area is 3,970 feet or 0.75 mi. over the Jake's surface and 1,656 feet or 0.31 mi. inland from the proposed project site and adjacent shorelines. In addition,the action area includes unnamed fish-bearing streams located approx. 0.65. mi. east, and 0.47 mi. north of the site.Numerous ephemeral streams are located throughout the action area. 4.0 ESA Species and Habitat Information In the proposed project area,there are five species listed under the Endangered Species Act by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as either threatened or endangered. The bull trout(Salvelinus confluentus),marbled murrelet(Brachyramphus marmoratus), northern spotted owl (Stridex occidentalis), streaked horned lark(Eremophila alpestris strigata), and yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) are listed as threatened and critical habitat has been designated for the former four species. The project area is located on Lake Cushman,which has been designated critical habitat for the bull trout. Two other species in the project area are listed as proposed. The fisher(Martes pennanti) is listed as proposed threatened, and the Dolly Varden (Salvelinus malma) is listed as proposed under the ESA "similarity of appearance" provision. In the proposed project area,there is one species listed under the Endangered Species Act by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as either threatened, endangered, or a candidate species. The Puget Sound Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) is listed as threatened and critical habitat has been designated. Lake Cushman is a historical watershed of the Chinook that has been anthropogenically blocked; however, it has been designated critical habitat. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) GIS maps reveal the documented presence of two other species of salmonids on the State's Priority Habitat and Species list within the action area: Kokanee (Oncorhynchus nerka) and the Puget Sound/Coastal cutthroat trout(Oncorhynchus clarki clarki). The presence of these two species has been documented in Lake Cushman. WDFW data reveals that Lake Cushman was stocked with 23,896 cutthroat trout in 2005 and 205,800 Kokanee (landlocked sockeye salmon) in 2004. A WDFW biologist reported that other species that inhabit the lake include rainbow trout(Oncorhynchus mykiss) and non-native largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides). Additionally,Tacoma Power is presently working in association with the Skokomish Tribe and the WDFW to reestablish migrating salmonid runs in the North fork of the Skokomish River. The North Fork Skokomish Powerhouse and Fish Facility has recently been completed. This facility collects adult fish at the base of Cushman Dam No. 2 and transports them to the top of the dam for sorting. It also provides sorting facilities for juvenile fish and transports them to the base of the dam for release into the river. The fry will be released in Lake Cushman, and smolts will be collected and released into the Sandoval Biological Evaluation 11 lower North Fork Skokomish River. Returning adult sockeye will eventually be collected at the base of Cushman Dam No. 2. Two new hatcheries are also under construction, one on the Hood Canal at Potlatch for sockeye,the other on Lake Kokanee for Chinook, coho, and steelhead. Hatchery construction is planned to be complete in 2015 (Tacoma Public Utilities 2015). 4.1 ESA Listed Species BULL TROUT Bull trout are members of the char subgroup of the salmon family and are native to the Pacific Northwest and western Canada. Water temperature above 15 degrees Celsius is believed to limit bull trout distribution, as eggs and juveniles require extremely cold water for survival. Bull trout are also vulnerable to degraded stream habitat,poor water quality, dams and other stream blocking structures, and predation by non-native fish. Critical habitat includes Lake Cushman and the upper North Fork of the Skokomish River(70 FR 56304). Critical Habitat in the former includes spawning and rearing habitat,while the latter provides rearing, foraging, and migration habitat, so it is expected that bull trout may be found in the action area of the proposed project site. MARBLED MURRELET A small, diving seabird in the family Alcidae,the marbled murrelet forages for small fish and invertebrates almost exclusively in nearshore marine waters, while nesting inland in old-growth or mature conifer forests. Threats include loss of habitat,predation, gill-net fishing operations, oil spills, marine pollution, and disease. The USFWS assembled a team of scientists in October 2011 to investigate causes for the continued decline in murrelet populations. The outcome of these discussions listed many factors, chiefly loss of potential nesting habitat as the main reason for hindrance of population recovery goals (WDFW 2012). Potential nest trees are coniferous trees within 55 mi (88.5 km) of marine waters that support at least one 4-inch(10.2-cm) diameter platform located at least 33 feet(10 meters)above the ground, with horizontal and vertical cover(USFWS 2012). If a tree or forested area does not support these habitat features, it is "extremely unlikely"to support a murrelet nest(USFWS 2012). Nest success is influenced by forest structure, the spatial mix of habitat and non-habitat, human disturbance,prey availability, and marine foraging conditions. Human disturbance can lead to higher predation levels by Steller's and gray jays, crows, ravens, and other species that seek human-related foods and refuse at high- use recreational areas (Peery et al. 2004, Marzluff and Neatherlin 2006). Critical habitat for the marbled murrelet, which was designated in May of 1996 and revised in October of 2011, is not located within the proposed project's action area. Critical habitat is located approx. 4.25 mi. north of the site. Sandoval Biological Evaluation 12 NORTHERN SPOTTED OWL The Northern Spotted Owl is one of the largest owls in North America, and the average adult female is approx. 18 inches tall with a 48-inch wingspan.Northern spotted owls are strictly nocturnal, and require old-growth forests with multi-layered canopies of trees, including large trees with broken tops, deformed limbs, and large holes and cavities to nest in.The Northern spotted owl is very territorial and intolerant of habitat disturbance, and a pair requires a large amount of forest for hunting and nesting. Habitat loss has occurred as a result of forest conversion,timber harvest, fire,windthrow, insect outbreak and disease (WDFW 2012). The USFWS designated revised critical habitat for the northern spotted owl under the Endangered Species Act. In total, approx. 9,577,969 acres (ac) (3,876,064 hectares (ha)) in 11 units and 60 subunits in California, Oregon, and Washington fall within the boundaries of the 2 critical habitat designations. Critical habitat for the Northern spotted owl,which was designated in May of 1996 and revised in October of 2011, is not located within the proposed project's action area. Critical habitat is located approx. 4.25 and 1.4 mi. to the north and east of the site,respectively. STREAKED HORNED LARK Horned larks are birds that utilize wide open spaces with no trees and few or no shrubs. The streaked horned lark nests on the ground in sparsely vegetated sites dominated by grasses and shrubs. Historically this type of habitat was found in prairies in western Oregon and Washington, in dune habitats along the coast of Washington, on the sandy beaches and spits along the Columbia and Willamette Rivers, and in grasslands, estuaries, and sandy beaches in British Columbia(WDFW 2012). Today the streaked horned lark nests in a broad range of habitats, including native prairies, coastal dunes, fallow and active agricultural fields,wetland mudflats, sparsely-vegetated edges of grass fields, recently planted Christmas tree farms with extensive bare ground, moderately-to heavily- grazed pastures, gravel roads or gravel shoulders of lightly-traveled roads, airports, and dredge deposition sites in the lower Columbia River(WDFW 2012). It is expected that the action area contains unsuitable habitat for the streaked horned lark. YELLOW-BILLED CUCKOO The yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) is a neotropical migrant bird that winters in South America and breeds in western North America. The yellow-billed cuckoo is insectivorous and lives in riparian woodlands (USFWS 2014). Reports of individual cuckoos have been very rare in recent decades, with only three known reports since 2000,these being near Lind(Adams Co.) in 2001,near Eureka(Walla Walla Co.) in June 2007, and from Little Pend Oreille National Wildlife Refuge (Stevens Co.) in 13 Sandoval Biological Evaluation June 2012. Habitat loss and pesticide use are thought to be two of the main causes for the precipitous decline of western yellow-billed cuckoos.Agriculture, grazing, reservoir construction, flood control, urbanization, and other factors across the West have caused the large-scale loss and degradation of lowland riparian forest,which is the cuckoo's primary habitat. It is expected that the action area contains unsuitable habitat for the yellow-billed cuckoo. CHINOOK SALMON Chinook salmon in Lake Cushman are a land-locked population that originated from anadromous fish, although loss of genetic variation makes it difficult to determine whether they are descended from historical Hood Canal populations or introduced hatchery fish (NOAA 2006). Lake Cushman Chinook are genetically different, smaller in size(and presumably less fecund)than their anadromous counterparts (Myers et al. 1998). On Jan. 12, 2009, Tacoma Power, the Skokomish Tribal Nation and state and federal agencies signed a settlement agreement that resolved a$5.8 billion damages claim and long-standing disputes over the terms of a long-term license for Cushman Hydroelectric Project. Tacoma Power has proposed to introduce sockeye and spring Chinook and enhance the existing winter steelhead and coho populations in the North Fork in cooperation with the WDFW and the Skokomish Tribe (Tacoma Public Utilities 2014). In addition, Tacoma Power will annually release up to 100,000 rainbow trout for sport harvest(TPU 2014). Lake Cushman has been designated Critical habitat, and the site provides rearing, foraging, and migration habitat, so it is expected that adult and/or juvenile Chinook salmon may be found in the action area. 5.0 Environmental Baseline Conditions 5.1 Action Area The environmental baseline represents the existing set of conditions,to which the effects of the proposed action are then added. The environmental baseline is defined as "the past and present impacts of all Federal, state, and private actions and other human activities in the action area, the anticipated impacts of all proposed Federal projects in the action area that have already undergone formal or informal section 7 consultation, and the impact of state or private actions which are contemporaneous with the consultation process"(50 CFR 402.02). The proposed project site is in WRIA 16 on Lake Cushman in Mason County. The majority of the fresh and marine waterbodies in WRIA 16 suffer from water quality issues; however Lake Cushman is not listed on the state's 2016 Water Quality 303(d)-5 list of impaired waterbodies for any parameters. The current Environmental Protection Agency(EPA)approved Water Quality Assessment data for Washington State reveals that tissue samples from fish(various species, including salmonids)were tested Sandoval Biological Evaluation 14 for twenty(20)pesticides and other pollutants, including mercury, PCBs, DDT, Toxaphene,Lindane, Dieldrin, and Hexachlorobenzene. The twenty tested parameters (all)met the FTEC (fish tissue equivalent concentration) and received Category 1 water quality listings. The FTEC is the concentration of a contaminant in fish tissue that Washington equates to the National Toxics Rule water quality criterion for the protection of human health(WDOE 2016).Fish tissue data from the most recent year showed that the FTEC was met;therefore the Assessment Unit meets the requirements for a Category 1 determination(WDOE 2016). The water quality criterion for a Category 1 water quality listing is defined by the Washington Department of Ecology (WDOE), as: Meets tested standards.for clean waters:placement in this category does not necessarily mean that a water body is free of all pollutants. Most water quality monitoring is designed to detect a specific array of pollutants, so placement in this category means that the water body met standards for all the pollutants for which it was tested. The proposed project site is located in a rural neighborhood on a lot with approx. 62' of frontage on Lake Cushman, in an area classified as an Urban Residential shoreline environment by the Shoreline Master Program of Mason County.Neighboring parcels support single-family residences (or recreational cabins),bulkheads,piers, and floats. Forested land in the vicinity of Lake Cushman has been logged heavily.Erosion impacts from surface flows have been particularly damaging in the logged areas above the Jake's west shore. Before the completion of two dams in 1926 and 1930, Lake Cushman was a natural oligotrophic lake with a mean depth of 200 feet.Now Lake Cushman is 4,010-acre water body in the Olympic National Forest,having been altered in size to accommodate the hydroelectric dams.Because of the dams,water levels in Lake Cushman can fluctuate up to 21 meters (69 feet),with peak levels occurring during summer and minimum levels during winter. The magnitude of these fluctuations results in periodic inundation of 12 hectares (30 acres) of land surrounding the inlet to the reservoir,resulting in high water temperatures in the shallow waters of the inlet during the summer months (Brenkman 1998). Currently,the reservoir inundates 17.2 kilometers (10.7 miles) of river, including areas of the original Lake Cushman(Brenkman 1998). 5.2 Proposed Project Area A field investigation was conducted during the afternoon of September 23, 2016, and the project area was surveyed visually on foot. The elevation of the lake's water level was approx. 725 feet,which is thirteen feet lower than the current ordinary high water mark of 738 feet. The site supports a residential structure located approx. 50 feet vertically and 95' feet horizontally from the shoreline of Lake Cushman. The neighborhood's access road, Marine View Drive North, cuts across the applicant's parcel, running parallel to and 15 Sandoval Biological Evaluation approx. 38 feet from the shoreline. The slope between the residence and the shoreline is moderately steep and there are numerous large native trees on both the shoreline and upland sections of the parcel. The shoreline was accessed via wood stairs that are proposed for replacement. The shoreline of Lake Cushman at the site is steep and rocky, and exposed to significant fetch. No fish, invertebrates, or macroalgae were observed. 6.0 Effects of the Action 6.1 Direct Effects Direct effects to the shoreline include: 1)Loss of benthic habitat from the installation of the pier and float piling posts, and riprap along the bulkhead's toe and around all post footings. 2) Creation of shade from the pier and float. 3)No contamination to Lake Cushman from the leaching of wood preservatives. 1)As per the engineered design by engineer Steven P. Morta(Attachments 2-4),),each pier and float post piling (with a concrete base) will occupy approx. four sf, so the approx. ten Posts will occupy 40 square feet. However, the area of the posts (approx. 0.45 sf for each post,totaling 4.5 sf)will constitute the only lost surface area, as the concrete bases for each piling will be covered by the lake's (bottom) substrate and basalt riprap (1/2 man igneous rock), the latter to aid in alleviating erosion. The riprap will be placed along the bulkhead's toe (approx. 62 sf) and around the post piling footings to a width of one foot (l'). The riprap will occupy approx.102 square feet. Therefore the project will occupy a total of 102 square feet of benthic habitat. Due to the seasonal fluctuations of the Jake's water level, it is probable that benthic species do not thrive in the nearshore areas of the lake that lack permanent water. No empirical evidence was found to document if both terrestrial and aquatic species utilize the upper shoreline habitat, or if it has been too altered to support normal concentrations of either species. Additionally, the basalt riprap to be placed along the bulkhead's eroded toe is natural rock that will create habitat, similar to cobble and other rock on the shorelines of Lake Cushman. It is expected that angular rock such as basalt is a common and abundant habitat component of all Olympic Mountain alpine lakes. The proposed riprap installation will have significant interstitial spaces that provide refuge habitat for juvenile salmonids or other aquatic species. In addition,rock provides habitat for bacteria (some involved in nitrification and denitrification processes), macroalgae, and invertebrates. Rock is also a source of minerals that are used in redox (oxidation/reduction) reactions, (which are critical for clean water quality) and elements and minerals used by aquatic invertebrates to form their skeletons. Chemical weathering of basalt rock releases readily water-soluble cations such as calcium, sodium and magnesium, which gives basalt a strong buffer capacity against acidification. Calcium released by basalts binds UP CO2 from the atmosphere and forms calcium carbonate,thus acting as a CO2 trap. The Sandoval Biological Evaluation 16 angular shape of basalt does not impede these processes and, in fact, presents a greater surface area for chemical weathering. 2) Another direct effect is the creation of shade from the proposed pier and float. These overwater structures will produce a reduction in light to the underlying aquatic environment by creating a light/dark boundary that may give piscivorous species an advantage over their prey. The use of over-water structures in western Washington waters by bass, a common,non-native predator of juvenile salmonids,has been documented by several authors.Largemouth bass in Lake Washington prefer areas of heavy log and brush cover over other habitat types; however,they are commonly found under docks in early spring and are thought to be present until late summer(Stein 1970). Substrate type typically determines the acceptability of an area for bass spawning,but adjacent cover and structural complexity are also necessary for protection while the fish are concentrated in shallow water(Stein 1970; Cooper and Crowder 1979;Helfman 1981b; Pflug and Pauley 1984). The substrate type in the vicinity of the bulkhead and landing is gravel, cobble, and rock. Largemouth bass prefer moderate to dense vegetation and silt or sand substrate, and nests are constructed at depths from 0.6 to 1.5 meters, in vegetated areas with soft sediment or gravel substrate on moderate to steep slopes (Pflug 1981). The project site possesses unsuitable habitat for bass, so it is doubtful that the proposed pier and float will increase the concentration of bass at the site or the occurrence of juvenile salmonid predation by bass. The project site supports no existing macrophyte vegetation and has no potential to support macrophyte vegetation, due to the lake's (anthropogenic) seasonal water fluctuations. In addition,White (1975) determined that phytoplankton primary production is not significantly reduced by narrow residential piers, due to the presence of more optimal light conditions than found in surface waters,where light intensities are higher than those in which algae thrive. Data suggests that other fish species, including salmonids, are also attracted to the shade produced by over-water structures, so it is possible that adult salmonids could prey on juveniles at the site.However,researchers have indicated that structural complexity can moderate predator-prey interactions by providing more refuges for prey species as well as reducing the foraging efficiency of the predator(Cooper and Crowder 1979). This moderation may apply to naturally occurring structural habitat complexity, as well as habitat complexity due to the presence of docks,piers,boathouses and associated pilings (WDFW,WDOE, WSDOT 2001). Shade can also affect migrating salmonids. It is not known whether over-water structures disrupt the migration of salmonids in lakes.Numerous studies suggest that docks,piers, and floats attract fish, and that the attraction of fish is linked to shade produced by the object not tactile stimulus. While the effects of shade on migrating juvenile salmonids in lakes is unknown, it is also unclear in marine waters, and there is no empirical evidence of mortality. The significance of predation to migrating populations has never been empirically assessed (Simenstad et al. 1999).No studies have examined mortality due to predation much less that mortality is attributable to overwater structures (Nightingale & Simenstad 2001). 17 Sandoval Biological Evaluation As previously noted, the proposed project will result in an approx. 290 sf decrease of overwater structure coverage at the site. The proposed pier and float will be grated to allow 60 percent light passage (as per WDFW's stipulations). In conclusion, shade created by the proposed project is expected to have discountable and insignificant direct effects on ESA listed salmonids that may be in the action area. 3) The leaching of wood preservatives is a common contaminant-related issue with the construction of shoreline SFR appurtenances. As previously note, no pressure treated lumber will be used in this project. Sustainably harvested Alaska yellow cedar, which is insect and decay resistant, will be utilized for posts, facing,joists, decking, and trim. Temporary Direct Effects Temporary direct effects caused by the proposed project include: 1) Turbidity and sedimentation in Lake Cushman. 2)Noise. 3) Water pollution from incidental release of fuel, oil, or other contaminants. 1)Disturbed substrate from the bulkhead repair and pier/float installation may result in increased turbidity and sedimentation. As previously discussed, BMPs will be strictly adhered to during construction in order to maintain the present water quality of Lake Cushman and prevent runoff and pollution. In addition, the proposed project will take place when the water level in the lake is much lower than the OHWM(738'), so it is probable that rainfall will slowly disperse any disturbed substrate before it comes into direct contact with the lake's waters. Therefore, it is expected that turbidity and sedimentation will be minimal. 2) The main source of construction noise will be from the sawing of lumber. Noise will be intermittent and is expected to be a maximum of 79 dBA at 50 feet. 3) Potential water pollution from accidental release of fuel, oil, or other contaminants is another possible temporary direct effect. As previously discussed, Spill Prevention Control measures and BMPs shall be implemented during the proposed project 6.2 Primary Constituent Elements PRIMARY CONSTITUENT ELEMENTS In order to properly analyze the effects on designated critical habitat, a logical framework must be utilized. In determining what areas possess critical habitat, agency regulations require the NMFS to focus on the principal biological or physical constituent elements that are essential to the conservation of the species. The regulations identify Primary Constituent elements (PCEs) as including, but not limited to: "roost sites, nesting Sandoval Biological Evaluation 18 grounds, spawning sites, feeding sites, seasonal wetland or dryland,water quality or quantity,host species or plant pollinator, geological formation,vegetation type,tide, and specific soil types (69 FR 71888)." In 2003 NMFS biologists developed a list of PCEs specific to salmon, based on a decision matrix(NMFS, 1996)that describes general parameters and characteristics of most of the essential features under consideration when critical habitat is designated. There are six specific types of sites essential to support one or more life stages of an ESU (sites for spawning, rearing,migration, and foraging). Each site names physical or biological features (PCEs) essential to the conservation of salmonids. In 2010, USFWS biologists developed a list of PCEs specific to bull trout, based on a decision matrix(NMFS, 1996)that describes general parameters and characteristics of most of the essential features under consideration when critical habitat is designated. Lakes and reservoirs figure prominently in meeting the life-cycle requirements of adfluvial bull trout. Lake Cushman is designated critical habitat for the bull trout and the Chinook salmon;therefore,the direct effects on the designated critical habitat of bull trout and Chinook salmon have been analyzed using the appropriate PCEs for the nearshore lacustrine environment. BULL TROUT PCEs: Water temperatures that support bull trout use. Bull trout have been documented in streams with temperatures from 32 to 72 degrees F but are found more frequently in temperatures ranging from 36 to 59 degrees F--the project will have no direct effect on water temperatures that support bull trout use. Migratory corridors with minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments between spawning, rearing, overwintering, and foraging habitats, including intermittent or seasonal barriers induced by high water temperatures or low flows— passage will not be altered during construction as no construction will occur unless the waters of Lake Cushman are low. The project will remove approx. 290 sf of overwater structures that may be negatively impacting the movement of bull trout along the shoreline. An abundant food base including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, and aquatic macroinvertebrates—the project is expected to have a minimal direct effect on an abundant food base for bull trout. Construction will take place when the lake's waters are lowered. Riprap will provide habitat for potential prey. Permanent water of sufficient quantity and quality such that normal reproduction, growth, and survival are not inhibited--project construction is unlikely to cause temporary turbidity or sedimentation as work will occur when the lake's waters have been lowered. BMPs are expected to prevent or moderate potential water pollution during construction. In addition, no pressure treated lumber will be used. 19 Sandoval Biological Evaluation CHINOOK SALMON PCEs: Unobstructed passage passage will not be altered during construction as no construction will occur unless the waters of Lake Cushman are low. The project will remove approx. 290 sf of overwater structures that may be negatively impacting the movement of Chinook along the shoreline. Water Quality—the project is not expected to significantly impact water quality. Project construction is unlikely to cause temporary turbidity or sedimentation as work will occur when the lake's waters have been lowered. BMPs are expected to prevent or moderate potential water pollution during construction. In addition, no pressure treated lumber will be used. Water Quantity—the project will have no effect on water quantity. Forage--riprap will provide habitat for potential prey. Natural Cover—rip-rap will provide natural cover for juvenile Chinook. 6.3 Direct Effects to ESA Listed Species The direct effect from the proposed project to other ESA listed species that are likely to be found in the action area have been analyzed as follows: NORTHERN SPOTTED OWL Due to the close proximity of human habitation and the small size of the action area, it is unlikely that any Northern spotted owls may be found in the action area of the proposed project site. With the extensive acreage of undeveloped forest land nearby, it seems unlikely that Northern spotted owls will be nesting, roosting, or foraging in the vicinity of anthropogenic development. MARBLED MURRELET The primary threats to marbled murrelet from anthropogenic activities include loss of nesting habitat, gill-net fishing operations, oil spills, and marine pollution. Previously noted BMPs and Spill Prevention Control Measures will be adhered to during project construction to protect the water quality of Lake Cushman.Noise impacts to any nesting or foraging murrelets in the action area are expected to be negligible. With the extensive acreage of undeveloped forest land nearby, it seems unlikely that marbled murrelet will be nesting, roosting, or foraging in the vicinity of anthropogenic development. Sandoval Biological Evaluation 20 6.4 Indirect Effects Indirect effects are those effects that are caused by or will result from the proposed action and are later in time,but are still reasonably certain to occur(50 CFR 402.02). Possible indirect effects from the proposed project include: 1) The loss of shoreline aquatic vegetation. 2) The riprap along the bulkhead's toe exacerbates passive erosion and impoundment of shoreline sediments. 3) The pier and float results in an increased motorized boat presence at the site. 1) The pier and float will cause a reduction in light to the underlying aquatic environment,which can have significant impacts on the health and productivity of both native and non-native macrophytes and algae. Macrophytes and algae are the foundation for most freshwater food webs and their presence or absence affects many higher trophic levels (NMFS 2004). As previously noted, overwater coverage at the site will be reduced by approx. 290 sf, and the replacement pier and float will be grated to allow 60 percent light passage. However, because the lakebed beneath both existing and proposed structures lacks water for approx. six to seven months each year, it is doubtful that it (lakebed) is capable of supporting macrophytic vegetation that will be benefited by the reduction in overwater coverage or grating. In conclusion, it is expected that the impact of the Jake's seasonal fluctuating water level on littoral productivity will overshadow the impacts of shading from the pier and float at the site. 2) When waves reflect off shoreline armoring structures, particularly concrete or other types of flat-faced bulkheads,they can cause scouring and hardening of the substrate and steepening of the beach. The sediment in front of a bulkhead will gradually become coarser as wave action and littoral drift removes the finer sediment and there is no sediment available for replenishment because it is impounded behind the bulkhead (Macdonald et al. 1994). Hard-armored bulkheads cut off sediment that was once available to feed the beach,thus adversely affecting natural beach-forming processes. The steep, unnatural topography of the majority of Lake Cushman's shorelines (and at the proposed project site) are routinely subjected to substantial wave action from the lake's long fetch (approx. 8 mi.) and strong prevailing winds. Accordingly,these abiotic habitat features cause significant scouring and erosion, as there is no shallow foreshore to diminish the energy from incoming waves. Cobble and rock,therefore, are the predominant sediments along the shoreline at both bulkheaded and un-bulkheaded sites. Additionally, Lake Cushman is relatively deep with a maximum depth of approx. 275 feet, so it is expected that sediment movement along the foreshore moves primarily one- way: into deeper waters. In addition to the previously discussed abiotic habitat features and the seasonal raising and lowering of Lake Cushman,the footing of the proposed bulkhead will likely suffer some erosion from its own flat face, which exacerbates wave reflection. The proposed addition of riprap to the existing bulkhead's footing is expected to alleviate scouring, as the rock will create interstitial spaces and roughness that help to absorb and dissipate 21 Sandoval Biological Evaluation wave energy. However, because of the lake's unnaturally steep foreshore, it is expected that the addition of riprap will neither exacerbate nor alleviate steepening of the lakebed. Referenced materials for this report primarily assess bulkhead impacts to marine shorelines and, in particular, Puget Sound. While some impacts are applicable to lake shorelines, beach feeding/forming processes appear to differ significantly and be site specific. Like most lakes, Lake Cushman has an inlet source of water(the North Fork of the Skokomish River) and an outlet one (the same river funneled through Cushman Dam No. 1), so it is probable that the primary source of sediments to the lake is the North Fork of the Skokomish River, while numerous smaller streams and eroding shorelines contribute smaller sediment quantities. A 2012 study by Stanford University on a large, deep Alpine lake in Italy revealed that suspended sediment concentrations (SSC) can significantly affect the ecological health and function of lakes and reservoirs for several reasons, including the following: 1) Sediments can regulate primary production by limiting light availability and also by acting as a source of nutrients (Schallenberg and Burns 2004). 2)High sediment concentrations in a lake or reservoir can lead to poor water quality from high turbidity levels as well as decreased basin volume through sedimentation (Morris e al. 2008). 3) Lakes and reservoirs can act as sinks for many sediment-bound contaminants that can accumulate and deleteriously affect aquatic ecosystems (Mariani et al. 2008). Additionally, a 2004 USDA Forest Service Technical Report(PSW-GTR-193) revealed that another large, deep Alpine lake, Lake Tahoe, was found to be very sensitive to the input of fine sediments (less than 63 micrometers in size). Because of its slow settling rate and the long hydraulic residence time in the lake,the impact of fine sediment on water clarity is persistent: a 2 micrometer particle takes 2 years to settle out of the water column(in Lake Tahoe). In conclusion, regarding Lake Cushman, a lake whose shorelines lack water for roughly six to seven months each year, it seems counterproductive to consider beach feeding a positive habitat process as the lake was significantly enlarged to accommodate two hydroelectric dams that produce environmentally friendly electric power free of carbon emissions. 3) The pier and float may result in an increased motorized boat presence in the area. Fuel spills from powerboats can contaminate water quality and potentially affect listed salmonids directly or indirectly through their prey source (NMFS 2005). Powerboats also create amplified wave action that can erode the shoreline, and prop scouring can erode benthic habitat, although benthic habitat in the littoral zone is already significantly marginalized by the lake's fluctuating water levels. Powerboats also provide some oxygenation of surface waters, although the extent is probably negligible at best. Overall, the indirect effects of powerboat usage on Lake Cushman is likely insignificant due to the lake's large size, the small number of boats that access the remote lake, and the short boating season (primarily May thru September). Sandoval Biological Evaluation 22 6.5 Primary Constituent Elements PRIMARY CONSTITUENT ELEMENTS The indirect effects on the designated critical habitat of Bull trout and Puget Sound Chinook have been analyzed using the appropriate PCEs for the nearshore lacustrine environment. BULL TROUT PCEs: Water temperatures that support bull trout use. Bull trout have been documented in streams with temperatures from 32 to 72 degrees F but are found more frequently in temperatures ranging from 36 to 59 degrees F--the project will have no indirect effect on water temperatures that support bull trout use. Migratory corridors with minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments between spawning, rearing, overwintering, and foraging habitats, including intermittent or seasonal barriers induced by high water temperatures or low flows-- Basalt riprap will help buffer acidification of the lake's waters from CO2 emissions. An abundant food base including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic macroinvertebrates, and forage fish--the project will have no indirect effect on foraging opportunities for bull trout. Permanent water of sufficient quantity and quality such that normal reproduction, growth, and survival are not inhibited—the project will have no indirect effect on water quality. CHINOOK SALMON PCEs: Unobstructed passage—the project will not have any indirect effect on unobstructed passage. Water Quality—basalt riprap will help buffer acidification of the lake's waters from CO2 emissions. Water Quantity—the project will not have any indirect effect on water quantity. Forage—the project will have no indirect effect on foraging opportunities for Chinook. Natural Cover—the project will not have any indirect effect on natural cover. AAI Sandoval Biological Evaluation 23 6.6 Indirect Effects to ESA Listed Species The indirect effects from the proposed project to other ESA listed species that are likely to be found in the action area have been analyzed as follows: NORTHERN SPOTTED OWL &MARBLED MURRELET While it is highly unlikely that either species would nest in trees that are located in a rural neighborhood, the proposed project may result in increased recreational usage at the site, which could prompt both species to nest elsewhere. 6.7 Interrelated/Interdependent Effects Interrelated and interdependent effects are described as the effects of the action under consultation analyzed together with the effects of other activities that are interrelated to, or interdependent with,that action. An interrelated activity is an activity that is part of the proposed action and depends on the proposed action for its justification. An interdependent activity is an activity that has no independent utility apart from the action under consultation (FWS &NMFS 1998). The project will have no obvious interrelated or interdependent effects. 6.8 Primary Constituent Elements BULL TROUT PCEs: Water temperatures that support bull trout use. Bull trout have been documented in streams with temperatures from 32 to 72 degrees F but are found more frequently in temperatures ranging from 36 to 59 degrees F--the project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on water temperatures that support bull trout use. Migratory corridors with minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments between spawning, rearing, overwintering, and foraging habitats, including intermittent or seasonal barriers induced by high water temperatures or low flows—the project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on migratory corridors that support bull trout use. An abundant food base including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic macroinvertebrates, and forage fish--the project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on the bull trout's food base. Sandoval Biological Evaluation 24 Permanent water of sufficient quantity and quality such that normal reproduction, growth, and survival are not inhibited--the project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on water supply or quality. CHINOOK SALMON PCEs: Unobstructed passage—the project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on unobstructed passage. Water Quality—the project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on unobstructed passage. Water Quantity the project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on water quantity. Forage the project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on water quantity. Natural Cover—the project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on natural cover. 6.9 Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects are defined as "those effects of future state or private activities, not involving Federal activities,that are reasonably certain to occur within the action area of the action subject to consultation" (50 CFR 402.02). Cumulative impacts are difficult to access. Continued growth and urbanization is likely to detrimentally impact fish and wildlife resources. Global warming could raise the water level of Puget Sound, leaving many waterfront properties underwater. Global warming could also result in warmer water temperatures,to the detriment of species such as bull trout. Additionally, over- fishing may deplete stocks of salmon, even as restoration of habitat in the watershed furthers their likelihood of survival. 7.0 Conclusion 7.1 Take Analysis Section 9 of the ESA prohibits take of endangered or threatened species, "take"being defined in Section 3 as to harass,harm,pursue, hunt, shoot,wound,trap, capture, or collect listed species, or attempt to engage in any such conduct. "Harm" is further defined as a significant habitat modification or degradation that actually kills or injures listed species by"significantly impairing behavioral patterns such as breeding, spawning, rearing, migrating, feeding, and sheltering" (50 CFR 222.102). "Harass" is further defined as an intentional or negligent act which creates the likelihood of injury to wildlife 25 Sandoval Biological Evaluation by annoying it to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavior patterns which include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding, or sheltering(50 CFR 17.3). In regards to the proposed project and the existing development activities, it is extremely unlikely that any"take"will occur. Previously listed conservation measures will further insure the likelihood that no "take"will occur 7.2 Determination of Effect A determination of May affect, not likely to adversely affect is the appropriate conclusion when effects on the species or their critical habitat are expected to be beneficial, discountable, or insignificant. After reviewing the appropriate data and survey information, I have concluded that the proposed project will have an insignificant impact on the previously discussed Endangered or Threatened species if the previously discussed conservation measures are implemented. In my most honest and professional opinion, while the proposed project may impact individual Endangered or Threatened species in the project area, it is not likely to adversely affect or jeopardize the continued existence of those species or their designated Critical Habitat. The determination of effect for each of the listed species is: 1. Bull trout and their designated Critical Habitat May affect, not likely to adversely affect. 2. Chinook salmon--May affect, not likely to adversely affect. 3. Marbled murrelet May affect, not likely to adversely affect. 4. Northern spotted owl No effect. 5. Streaked horned lark---No effect. 6. Yellow-billed cuckoo No effect. Sandoval Biological Evaluation 26 8.0 References Individuals I would like to thank the following individual for her help: Wynnae Wright, Tacoma Power, Shoreline and Lands Coordinator Literature Federal Register/Vol. 70,No. 170/September 2, 2005/Rules and Regulations Federal Register/Vol. 70,No.185 /September 26, 2005/Rules and Regulations Federal Register/Vol. 71,No. 176/Tuesday, September 12, 2006/Proposed Rules Federal Register/Vol. 75,No. 200/October 18, 2010/Rules and Regulations Federal Register/77 FR 14062/March 8, 2012/Proposed Rules Federal Register/Vol. 77,No. 106/June 1, 2012/Proposed Rules Federal Register/Vol. 76,No. 193/October 5, 2011/Rules and Regulations Coats, R. 2004.Nutrient and sediment transport in the streams of the Lake Tahoe Basin: a 30-year retrospective. USDA Forest Services general technical report PSW-GTR-193. Deal, R.L., tech. ed. 2008. Integrated restoration of forested ecosystems to achieve multiresource benefits: proceedings of the 2007 national silviculture workshop. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-733. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,Pacific Northwest Research Station. 306 p. Geology.com. 2016. Basalt igneous rock. URL: http://p-eology.com/rocks/basait.shtmi Google Earth. 2016. Aerial Imagery. Internet report. URL: https://www.google.com/earth/ Johannessen, J., A. MacLennan, A. Blue, J. Waggoner, S. Williams, W. Gerstel,R. Barnard, R. Carman, and H. Shipman. 2014. Marine Shoreline Design Guidelines. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. Sandoval Biological Evaluation 27 Kelty, R.A. and S. Bliven. 2003. Environmental and Aesthetic Impacts of Small Docks and Piers, Workshop Report: Developing a Science-Based Decision Support Tool for Small Dock Management, Phase 1: Status of the Science. NOAA Coastal Ocean Program Decision Analysis Series No. 22.National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, Silver Spring, MD. 69pp. Kleinschmidt. 2012. Shoreline Management Plan, Cushman Project, FERC Project Number 460. Tacoma Power, Tacoma Washington. Leigh, M. 1996. Grow your own native landscape: a guide to identifying,propagating, and landscaping with Western Washington native plants. Washington State University Cooperative Extension/Thurston County, Olympia, WA. Mason County, Washington. 2016. Assessor-Treasurer Electronic Property Information Profile. Internet report. URL: http://property.co.mason wa us/Taxsifter/Search/results aspx?q=42307-50-00025 Menashe, E. 1983. Vegetation Management:A Guide for Puget Sound Bluff Property Owners. Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program, Washington Department of Ecology. Olympia.Publication 93-31. Morta, S.P. 2017. Sandoval engineered drawings, 1-13-17. Unpublished document. 6 p. Myers, Rian D. 1993. Slope Stabilization and Erosion Control Using Vegetation:A Manual of Practice for Coastal Property Owners. Shorelines and Coastal Zone Management Program, Washington Department of Ecology. Olympia. Publication 93-30. National Marine Fisheries Service. 2014. Distribution of Threatened and Endangered Species. Internet report. URL: http://www.nwr.noaa.gov NOAA. 2016. Endangered and Threatened Marine Species. Internet report. URL: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/esa/ Nightingale, B. and C. Simenstad. 2001. Overwater Structures: Marine Issues. Washington Departments of Fish and Wildlife, Ecology, and Transportation. Olympia, Washington. 177 P. Scheu, K.R., D.A. Fong, S. G. Monismith, and O.B. Fringer. 2012. Sediment transport dynamics near a river inflow of a large alpine lake. Environmental Fluids Mechanics Laboratory, Stanford University. Stanford, CA. Skokomish Indian Tribe & Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2010. Recovery Plan for Skokomish River Chinook Salmon. Internet Report. URL: http://hcec.wa.gov/Downloads/Downloads GetFile aspx?id=397519&fd=0 Sandoval Biological Evaluation 28 Tacoma Public Utilities. 2014. Cushman Hydro Project. Internet report. URL: hgps•//www m3lpu org/tacomapower/about-tacoma-power/dams-power-sources/hydro- power/cushman-hydro-project/ Tacoma Public Utilities. 2015. Cushman Fisheries Program. Internet report. URL: http•//www m3lpu or�i/tacomapower/fish-wildlife-environment/cushman-hydro- proi ect/cushman-fisheries-pro gram.htm U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1997. Recovery Plan for the Threatened Marbled Murrelet in Washington, Oregon, and California. Published by USFWS, Portland, OR. URL:http//ecos fws gov/docs/recovery i)lans/1997/970924.pdf U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2004. Draft Recovery Plan for the Coastal-Puget Sound Distinct Population Segment of Bull Trout(Salvelinus confluentus). Volume 11 (of II): Olympic Peninsula Management Unit. Portland, Oregon. 277 +xvi pp U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. Species Profile, Marbled Murrelet. Internet report. URL:http://www.fws.fzov/arcata/es/birds/mm/m murrelet.html U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2012. Guidance for Identifying Marbled Murrelet Nest Trees in Washington State. Internet report. URL: http•//www wsdot wa gov/NR/rdonlyres/2D97D3D8-D448-43A7-8249- E2319095C8C2/0/MAMUhabitatF WS.pdf U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2012. Marbled Murrelet Nesting Season and Analytical Framework for Section 7 Consultation in Washington. Internet report. URL: hLtp://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/F3847D4F-BFI C-476C-8E9D- A45 A715B624C/0/CoverLtrNestin p-Season.pdf U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2013. Conducting Masking Analysis for Marbled Murrelets and Pile Driving Projects. Internet report. URL: http://www.wsdot.wa.izov/NR/rdonlyres/3506DAAA-4BI 3-4EI B-85.5D- 36E047E07090/0/MAMU MaskAnalysis.pdf U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016. Official Species List#O1EWFW00-2416-SLI- 0984. Internet report. URL: http•//www.fws.gov/wafwo/ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2014. Species fact sheet, Streaked Horned Lark, Eremophila alpestris strigata. Internet report. URL: http•//www fws gov/wafwo/species/Fact%20sheets/streakedhornedlarkfinal.pdf Washington State Department of Ecology. 2012. 2012 Water Quality Assessment 303(d) List: Skokomish/Dosewallips Water Resource Inventory Area(WRIA 16). Internet report. URL: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/303d/currentassessmt.htmI Sandoval Biological Evaluation 29 Washington State Department of Ecology. 2012. 2012 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. Internet report. URL: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/SummaryPages/I 41005 5.htm l Washington State Department of Natural Resources. 2014. FPARS ARCIMS mapping application. Internet report: URL: http://fortress.wa.Rov/dnr/appl/fears/viewer htm Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List. Olympia, Washington. 177 pp. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2012. Annual Report: Marbled Murrelet. Internet report. URL: http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/endan e� red/species/marbled murrelet pdf Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2012. Annual Report: Northern Spotted Owl. Internet report. URL: http://wdfw.wa.jzov/conservation/endan ered/species/northern spotted owl pdf Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2012. Annual Report: Streaked Horned Lark. Internet report. URL: http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/endan e� red/species/streaked horned larkpdf Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2012. Annual Report: Yellow-billed Cuckoo. Internet report. URL: http://wdfw.wa.aov/conservation/endan ered/s eeies/yellow-billed cuckoo Ddf Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2014. SalmonScape. Internet report. URL: http://apps.wdfw.wa.gov/salmonscaDe/ Washington State Department of Transportation. 2014. BA Preparation for Transportation Projects—Advanced Training Manual—Version 4-02-2014. URL: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/Al F85352-90E0-457B-9A8C B5103E097FAE10/BA manualpart2 pdf Wikipedia. 2016. Basalt. URL: https:Hen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basalt Sandoval Biological Evaluation 30 Attachment 1 Vicinity map. 77 'Asa e y " -s u g Sandoval Biological Evaluation 31 Attachment 2 Site Plan with existing and proposed development. nR4 � M ip FQ � 3 �rz w z � � �, � .a°. a . 40 IMP _ 14 - " Z t 1 � . Sandoval Biological Evaluation 32 Attachment 3 Cross section with proposed pier and float development. u 1.4 - 3 fr it —Cg E k!-, H ji� 1 ' Am I 1 z_ HU,A 9H HA Rig PR - � g2 Sandoval Biological Evaluation 33 Attachment 4 Cross section with proposed bulkhead development. 41 3 ._ k I 41 31 ?F � ••3 � '•Y 1 >t, qua Sandoval Biological Evaluation 34 Attachment 5 The shoreline at the site. Sandoval Biological Evaluation 35 Attachment 6 The northern-most existing pier,float, and beach access stairs that will be removed. Sandoval Biological Evaluation 36 Attachment 7 The southern-most existing pier to be removed. Sandoval Biological Evaluation 37 Attachment 8 Part of the overhanging deck to be removed with the shoreline access stairs (that will also be removed) in the background. Sandoval Biological Evaluation 38 Attachment 9 Essential Fish Habit Assessment Essential Fish Habitat Assessment A. Background The Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act was signed into law on April 13, 1976. Under provisions of the Act, eight Regional Fishery Management Councils were established to prepare FMP's in conformance with national standards published in 50 CFR Part 600.305-340. The Magnuson Act was renamed the Magnuson-Stevens Act in a 1996 appropriations bill. On October 11, 1996,the Sustainable Fisheries Act,which amended the Magnuson-Stevens Act,was signed into law. Provisions included a mandate that the Councils amend each FMP to include a description of Essential Fish Habitat, including adverse impacts on EFH and conservation measures to protect EFH. Essential Fish Habitat is defined as those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity. The Pacific Fisheries Management Council has designated EFH for federally-managed species on the Pacific West Coast, including 82 species of groundfish, 5 coastal pelagic species, and 3 species of salmon. The following species may occur in Lake Cushman during some period of their life history: Chinook salmon(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and Coho salmon(Oncorhynchus kisutch). B. Essential Fish Habitat The designated EFH for Pacific salmon species is identified using U.S. Geological Survey(USGS)hydrologic units as well as habitat association tables and life history descriptions of each life stage (PFMC 1999). The EFH for the Pacific coast salmon fishery is defined as those waters and substrate necessary for salmon production needed to support a long-term sustainable salmon fishery and salmon contributions to a healthy ecosystem (WSDOT 2014). To achieve that level of production, EFH must include all those streams, lakes,ponds, wetlands, and other currently viable water bodies and most of the habitat historically accessible to salmon in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and California(WSDOT 2014). This does not include habitats above the impassible barriers identified by the Pacific Fishery Management Council Fishery Management Plan(PFMC 1999). Sandoval Biological Evaluation 39 C. Proposed Action The proposed project is the repair of an existing bulkhead and the installation of a replacement pier and float on the shoreline of Lake Cushman. Overwater coverage at the site will be reduced by approx. 290 square feet. D. Effects of the Proposed Action The effects of the proposed project on designated EFH are expected to be comparable to the effects described in the attached BE. E. Conservation Measures The conservation measures and BMPs discussed in the attached BE will be implemented to minimize any adverse effects to Essential Fish Habitat. F. Conclusion The proposed project is likely to have no significant impact on designated EFH for Pacific salmon. G. References NOAA, 2006. Final environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact for Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Essential Fish Habitat. Internet report. Website: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/habitat/efh/finalenvironmentalassessmentandfindingofno.htm PFMC (Pacific Fishery Management Council), 1999. Fisheries Management Plans for groundfish, coastal pelagic fish, and Pacific salmon. Internet reports. Website: www.pcouncil.org/ Washington State Department of Transportation. 2014. BA Preparation for Transportation Projects—Advanced Training Manual, Chapter 16—Version 4-02-2014. Internet report. http://www.wsdot.wa.Lyov/NR/rdoniyres/A I F85352-90E0 457B 9A8C B5103E097FAEI0/BA manualpart2 pdf Sandoval Biological Evaluation 40 x � mat A�gNT O Tjy F161MU SPB United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Washington Fish and Wildlife Office 510 Desmond Dr.SE,Suite 102 Washington 98503 Lacey, � AUG 2 5 2017 In Reply Refer To: Ol E W FW 00-2017-I-1338 Michelle Walker, Chief Regulatory Branch Seattle District,U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ATTN: Regulatory Branch (Sweeney) P.O. Box 3755 Seattle,Washington 98124-3755 Dear Ms. Walker: Subject: Barbara Sandoval Bulkhead Repair and Pier, Ramp and Float Replacement (NWS-2017-273) This letter is in response to your letter dated August 3,2017,requesting the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service)concurrence with your determination that the replacement/repair of existing structures and a bulkhead at a private residence along Lake Cushman,Mason County, Washington, "may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect"bull trout (Salvelinus con1luentus), marbled murrelet(Brachyramphus marmoratus),northern spotted owl(Strix occidentalis caurina), and designated bull trout critical habitat We received your letter and Memorandum for the Services on August 7, 2017. This informal consultation has been conducted in accordance with section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973,as amended(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (ESA). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has determined that the action will have"no effect"on critical habitat for marbled murrelet and northern spotted owl. The determination of"no effect" to listed resources rests with the action agency. The Service has no regulatory or statutory authority for concurring with a "no effect" determination,and no consultation with the Service is required. We recommend that the action agency document their analysis on effects to listed species,and maintain that documentation as part of the project file. c i Michelle Walker 2 We believe that sufficient information has been provided to determine the effects of the proposed action and to conclude whether it would adversely affect federally listed species and/or designated critical habitat. Our concurrence is based on information provided by the action agency, best available science, and complete and successful implementation of agreed-upon conservation measures. Brief Description of the Proposed Action This proposed project includes repairing a 62-foot long wooden bulkhead,removing two piers, a float,an overhanging deck,two sets of stairs and a shed, and constructing a new pier and float. Additionally, 16 posts will be removed and 10 cedar posts would be installed to support the new structure. Up to 4 cubic yards of concrete would be used to set the new posts. Up to 5 cubic yards of riprap would be used around the posts and along the toe of the repaired bulkhead. The new pier and float would be constructed with steel,aluminum,yellow cedar, and polyethylene encapsulated styrofoam floats. A float landing cradle would prevent the float from resting on the lakebed. The decking of the new pier would include grating to let 60 percent light through. The net result of removing overwater structures and building new overwater structures is 238 less square feet ft2 of overwater structure. Al( ) 1 demolition and construction would be done in the dry when the lake is drawn down(November 1 to March 31). Effects on Bull Trout Lake Cushman is used by bull trout year-round for rearing, foraging, and migration. However, ground disturbance associated with the proposed construction will occur when the shoreline is dry,during the time of year when the water levels are drawn down(fall and winter). Turbidity associated with ground disturbance,when the level of the reservoir is lifted, is not expected to measurably affect bull trout, and would not preclude bull trout from foraging and migrating in the action area or significantly disrupt normal bull trout behaviors(feeding,moving,and sheltering). The proposed construction activities are also not expected to have measurable short- or long-term effects to bull trout prey resources (i.e.,juvenile salmonids) because work would be completed in the dry and the net result of the action is a 238 ftZ reduction in overwater structures. Therefore all direct and indirect effects to bull trout would be insignificant. Effects on Designated Bull Trout Critical Habitat The final revised rule designating bull trout critical habitat(75 FR 63898 [October 18,2010]) identifies nine Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs)essential for the conservation of the species. The 2010 designation of critical habitat for bull trout uses the term PCE. The new critical habitat regulations(81 FR 7214)replace this term with physical or biological features (PBFs). This shift in terminology does not change the approach used in conducting our analysis, whether the original designation identified primary constituent elements,physical or biological features, or essential features. In this letter, the term PCE is synonymous with PBF or essential features of critical habitat. The proposed project has the potential to affect the following PCEs: Michelle Walker 3 PCE 2: Migration habitats with minimal physical,biological, or water quality impediments between spawning,rearing, overwintering, and foraging habitats including but not limited to permanent, partial, intermittent, or seasonal barriers. PCE 3: An abundant food base, including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic macroinvertebrates, and forage fish. PCE 4: Complex river, stream, lake,reservoir, and marine shoreline aquatic environments and processes with features such as large wood, side channels, pools, undercut banks and substrates,to provide a variety of depths, gradients,velocities, and structure. PCE 8 Sufficient water quality and quantity such that normal reproduction, growth, and survival are not inhibited. Lake Cushman water levels are maintained by the Cushman Dam. Water levels of the lake are kept high between the Memorial Day and Labor Day weekends and are drawn down during the winter months(November 1 to March 31). All work would occur in the dry when the water levels are drawn down, so minimal turbidity will be produced. Impacts to water quality (PCE 8) from the proposed construction activities would be minor and the replaced overwater structures would not impede bull trout movement through the area or degrade the function of the migratory corridor(PCE 2). The action may temporarily reduce the food base(PCE 3)via a small reduction of prey resources, degradation of aquatic habitat, and/or removal or alteration of riparian vegetation. However,the impacts will be temporary and/or components of the project design will avoid, reduce, or compensate for them. Repair of the bulkhead and the replacement pier and float would not further impair the complexity of the shoreline and nearshore environment(PCE 4)or impair ecological processes more than they already are in the project area. This project will result in a net reduction of over-water coverage by 238 ft2,which will benefit the aquatic environment. The proposed construction activities would have only insignificant effects to PCEs 2, 3,4 and 8, and we concur that they are not likely to adversely affect designated critical habitat for bull trout. Effects on Marbled Murrelets The project site is not in or adjacent to mature conifer-dominated forest with large trees that could have platforms and provide suitable nesting habitat for marbled murrelet. There are numerous residences around the project site and the forest in the project area is open and fragmented by roads, parking lots, driveways and homes. The proposed construction activities would not result in the loss of any trees. Because of lack of suitable habitat,the developed nature of the project area, and the proposed timing of construction outside of the marbled murrelet nesting season, it is extremely unlikely that the project would impact marbled murrelets. Therefore sound and visual disturbance to marbled murrelets from the proposed project is discountable. c : Michelle Walker 4 Effects on Northern Spotted Owls The project site is at least a mile from suitable northern spotted owl habitat and 2.5 miles from the nearest historic northern spotted owl activity center. The project site is also not in or adjacent to mature conifer-dominated forest with large trees that typically provide suitable nesting or foraging habitat for northern spotted owls. There are numerous residences around the project site and the forest in the project area is open and fragmented by roads, parking lots,driveways and homes. The proposed construction activities would not result in the loss of any trees. In previously completed analyses for the potential of construction activities to disturb northern spotted owls, we determined that significant effects are essentially limited to nesting owls during the early breeding season(USFWS 2013,pp.74-83). The proposed action may overlap with the early breeding season in March. However, the project area is not suitable nesting habitat for northern spotted owls, and is not adjacent to suitable nesting habitat. Northern spotted owls are extremely unlikely to be nesting anywhere they can hear the proposed construction. Therefore, effects to northern spotted owls from the proposed action are considered discountable. Conclusion This concludes informal consultation pursuant to the regulations implementing the ESA (50 CFR 402.13). This project should be re-analyzed and re-initiation may be necessary if 1)new information reveals effects of the action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner,or to an extent,not considered in this consultation,2) if the action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to a listed species or critical habitat that was not considered in this consultation, and/or 3)a new species is listed or critical habitat is designated that may be affected by this project. If you have any questions about this letter or our joint responsibilities under the ESA,please contact Zach Radmer at 360-753-4325 or Emily Teachout at 360-753-9583. Sincerely, 64J0' Eric V. Ri ers n, State S sor Washington Fish and Wildlife Office LITERATURE CITED USFWS(U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2013. Biological opinion for effects to northern spotted owls, critical habitat for northern spotted owls, marbled murrelets, critical habitat for marbled murrelets, bull trout,and critical habitat for bull trout from selected programmatic forest management activities March 25, 2013 to December 31, 2023 on the Olympic National Forest, Washington. USFWS Reference: 13410-2009-F-0388. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington Fish and Wildlife Office, Lacey, WA. 404 pp. ��R4go a US Army Corps +� of Engineers, Terms and Conditions Seattle District Effective Date:March 19,2017 A. Description of Authorized Activities B. U.S.Army Corps of Engineers(Corps)National General Conditions for all NWPs C. Corps Seattle District Regional General Conditions D. Corps Regional Specific Conditions for this NWP E. Washington Department of Ecology(Ecology)Section 401 Water Quality Certification(401 Certification):General Conditions F. Ecology 401 Certification: Specific Conditions for this NWP G. Coastal Zone Management Consistency Response for this NWP In addition to any special condition that may be required on a case-by-case basis by the District Engineer, the following terms and conditions must be met,as applicable,for a Nationwide Permit(NWP) authorization to be valid in Washington State. A. DESCRIPTION OF AUTHORIZED ACTIVITIES Minor Discharges. Minor discharges of dredged or fill material into all waters of the United States, provided the activity meets all of the following criteria: (a)The quantity of discharged material and the volume of area excavated do not exceed 25 cubic yards below the plane of the ordinary high water mark or the high tide line; (b)The discharge will not cause the loss of more than 1/10-acre of waters of the United States; and (c)The discharge is not placed for the purpose of a stream diversion. Notification: The permittee must submit a pre-construction notification to the district engineer prior to commencing the activity if: (1)the discharge or the volume of area excavated exceeds 10 cubic yards below the plane of the ordinary high water mark or the high tide line,or(2)the discharge is in a special aquatic site, including wetlands. (See general condition 32.)(Authorities: Sections 10 and 404) B. CORPS NATIONAL GENERAL CONDITIONS FOR ALL NWPs To qualify for NWP authorization,the prospective permittee must comply with the following general conditions,as applicable,in addition to any regional or case-specific conditions imposed by the division engineer or district engineer.Every person who may wish to obtain permit authorization under one or more NWPs,or who is currently relying on an existing or prior permit authorization under one or more NWPs,has been and is on notice that all of the provisions of 33 CFR 330.1 through 330.6 apply to every NWP authorization.Note especially 33 CFR 330.5 relating to the modification, suspension,or revocation of any NWP authorization. 1.Navigation. (a)No activity may cause more than a minimal adverse effect on navigation. (b)Any safety lights and signals prescribed by the U.S.Coast Guard,through regulations or otherwise,must be installed and maintained at the permittee's expense on authorized facilities in navigable waters of the United States. (c)The permittee understands and agrees that, if future operations by the United States require the removal,relocation,or other alteration,of the structure or work herein authorized,or if, in the � r opinion of the Secretary of the Army or his authorized representative, said structure or work shall cause unreasonable obstruction to the free navigation of the navigable waters,the permittee will be required, upon due notice from the Corps of Engineers,to remove,relocate,or alter the structural work or obstructions caused thereby,without expense to the United States.No claim shall be made against the United States on account of any such removal or alteration. 2.Aquatic Life Movements.No activity may substantially disrupt the necessary life cycle movements of those species of aquatic life indigenous to the waterbody, including those species that normally migrate through the area,unless the activity's primary purpose is to impound water. All permanent and temporary crossings of waterbodies shall be suitably culverted,bridged,or.otherwise designed and constructed to maintain low flows to sustain the movement of those aquatic species. If a bottomless culvert cannot be used,then the crossing should be designed and constructed to minimize adverse effects to aquatic life movements. 3. Spawning Areas.Activities in spawning areas during spawning seasons must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable.Activities that result in the physical destruction(e.g.,through excavation, fill, or downstream smothering by substantial turbidity)of an important spawning area are not authorized. 4.Migratory Bird Breeding Areas.Activities in waters of the United States that serve as breeding areas for migratory birds must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. 5. Shellfish Beds.No activity may occur in areas of concentrated shellfish populations,unless the activity is directly related to a shellfish harvesting activity authorized by NWPs 4 and 48,or is a shellfish seeding or habitat restoration activity authorized by NWP 27. 6. Suitable Material.No activity may use unsuitable material(e.g.,trash, debris, car bodies,asphalt,etc.). Material used for construction or discharged must be free from toxic pollutants in toxic amounts(see section 307 of the Clean Water Act). 7. Water Supply Intakes.No activity may occur in the proximity of a public water supply intake, except where the activity is for the repair or improvement of public water supply intake structures or adjacent bank stabilization. 8.Adverse Effects From Impoundments. If the activity creates an impoundment of water,adverse effects to the aquatic system due to accelerating the passage of water, and/or restricting its flow must be minimized to the maximum extent practicable. 9.Management of Water Flows. To the maximum extent practicable,the pre-construction course, condition, capacity, and location of open waters must be maintained for each activity, including stream channelization, storm water management activities,and temporary and permanent road crossings,except as provided below. The activity must be constructed to withstand expected high flows. The activity must not restrict or impede the passage of normal or high flows, unless the primary purpose of the activity is to impound water or manage high flows.The activity may alter the pre-construction course,condition, capacity,and location of open waters if it benefits the aquatic environment(e.g., stream restoration or relocation activities). 10.Fills Within 100-Year Flood plains. The activity must comply with applicable FEMA-approved state or local floodplain management requirements. 11. Equipment. Heavy equipment working in wetlands or mudflats must be placed on mats, or other measures must be taken to minimize soil disturbance. 2 12. Soil Erosion and Sediment Controls.Appropriate soil erosion and sediment controls must be used and maintained in effective operating condition during construction,and all exposed soil and other fills,as well as any work below the ordinary high water mark or high tide line,must be permanently stabilized at the earliest practicable date.Permittees are encouraged to perform work within waters of the United States during periods of low-flow or no-flow,or during low tides. 13.Removal of Temporary Fills.Temporary fills must be removed in their entirety and the affected areas returned to pre-construction elevations.The affected areas must be revegetated,as appropriate. 14. Proper Maintenance.Any authorized structure or fill shall be properly maintained, including maintenance to ensure public safety and compliance with applicable NWP general conditions, as well as any activity-specific conditions added by the district engineer to an NWP authorization. 15. Single and Complete Project.The activity must be a single and complete project. The same NWP cannot be used more than once for the same single and complete project. 16. Wild and Scenic Rivers. (a)No NWP activity may occur in a component of the National Wild and Scenic River System, or in a river officially designated by Congress as a"study river"for possible inclusion in the system while the river is in an official study status, unless the appropriate Federal agency with direct management responsibility for such river,has determined in writing that the proposed activity will not adversely affect the Wild and Scenic River designation or study status.(b)If a proposed NWP activity will occur in a component of the National Wild and Scenic River System,or in a river officially designated by Congress as a"study river"for possible inclusion in the system while the river is in an official study status,the permittee must submit a pre-construction notification(see general condition 32). The district engineer will coordinate the PCN with the Federal agency with direct management responsibility for that river. The permittee shall not begin the NWP activity until notified by the district engineer that the Federal agency with direct management responsibility for that river has determined in writing that the proposed NWP activity will not adversely affect the Wild and Scenic River designation or study status. (c)Information on Wild and Scenic Rivers may be obtained from the appropriate Federal land management agency responsible for the designated Wild and Scenic River or study river(e.g., National Park Service, U.S.Forest Service,Bureau of Land Management,U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service).Information on these rivers is also available at:http://www.rivers.gov/. 17. Tribal Rifhts.No NWP activity may cause more than minimal adverse effects on tribal rights (including treaty rights),protected tribal resources, or tribal lands. 18.Endangered Species. (a)No activity is authorized under any NWP which is likely to directly or indirectly jeopardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered species or a species proposed for such designation,as identified under the Federal Endangered Species Act(ESA), or which will directly or indirectly destroy or adversely modify the critical habitat of such species.No activity is authorized under any NWP which"may affect"a listed species or critical habitat,unless ESA section 7 consultation addressing the effects of the proposed activity has been completed. Direct effects are the immediate effects on listed species and critical habitat caused by the NWP activity. Indirect effects are those effects on listed species and critical habitat that are caused by the NWP activity and are later in time,but still are reasonably certain to occur.(b)Federal agencies should follow their own procedures for complying with the requirements of the ESA.If pre-construction notification is required for the proposed activity,the Federal permittee must provide the district engineer with the appropriate documentation to demonstrate compliance with those requirements.The district engineer will verify that the appropriate documentation has been submitted. If the appropriate documentation has not been submitted,additional ESA section 7 consultation may be necessary for the activity and the respective federal agency would be responsible for fulfilling its obligation under section 7 of the ESA. (c)Non-federal permittees must submit a pre-construction notification to the district engineer if any listed species or designated critical 3 habitat might be affected or is in the vicinity of the activity, or if the activity is located in designated critical habitat,and shall not begin work on the activity until notified by the district engineer that the requirements of the ESA have been satisfied and that the activity is authorized. For activities that might affect Federally-listed endangered or threatened species or designated critical habitat,the pre-construction notification must include the name(s)of the endangered or threatened species that might be affected by the proposed activity or that utilize the designated critical habitat that might be affected by the proposed activity. The district engineer will determine whether the proposed activity"may affect"or will have"no effect"to listed species and designated critical habitat and will notify the non-Federal applicant of the Corps' determination within 45 days of receipt of a complete pre-construction notification. In cases where the non-Federal applicant has identified listed species or critical habitat that might be affected or is in the vicinity of the activity,and has so notified the Corps,the applicant shall not begin work until the Corps has provided notification that the proposed activity will have"no effect"on listed species or critical habitat,or until ESA section 7 consultation has been completed. If the non-Federal applicant has not heard back from the Corps within 45 days,the applicant must still wait for notification from the Corps. (d)As a result of formal or informal consultation with the FWS or NMFS the district engineer may add species-specific permit conditions to the NWPs. (e)Authorization of an activity by an NWP does not authorize the"take"of a threatened or endangered species as defined under the ESA. In the absence of separate authorization(e.g., an ESA Section 10 Permit,a Biological Opinion with"incidental take" provisions, etc.) from the FWS or the NMFS,the Endangered Species Act prohibits any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to take a listed species,where"take" means to harass,harm,pursue, hunt,shoot,wound,kill,trap, capture, or collect,or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.The word "harm" in the definition of"take"means an act which actually kills or injures wildlife. Such an act may include significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns,including breeding, feeding or sheltering. (f)If the non-federal permittee has a valid ESA section 10(a)(1)(B)incidental take permit with an approved Habitat Conservation Plan for a project or a group of projects that includes the proposed NWP activity,the non-federal applicant should provide a copy of that ESA section 10(a)(1)(B)permit with the PCN required by paragraph(c)of this general condition. The district engineer will coordinate with the agency that issued the ESA section I0(a)(1)(B)permit to determine whether the proposed NWP activity and the associated incidental take were considered in the internal ESA section 7 consultation conducted for the ESA section 10(a)(1)(B)permit. If that coordination results in concurrence from the agency that the proposed NWP activity and the associated incidental take were considered in the internal ESA section 7 consultation for the ESA section 10(a)(1)(B)permit,the district engineer does not need to conduct a separate ESA section 7 consultation for the proposed NWP activity. The district engineer will notify the non-federal applicant within 45 days of receipt of a complete pre-construction notification whether the ESA section 10(a)(1)(B)permit covers the proposed NWP activity or whether additional ESA section 7 consultation is required. (g)Information on the location of threatened and endangered species and their critical habitat can be obtained directly from the offices of the FWS and NMFS or their world wide web pages at http://www.fws.gov/or http://www.fws.gov/ipac and http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/esa/ respectively. 19. Migratory Birds and Bald and Golden Eagles.The permittee is responsible for ensuring their action complies with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.The permittee is responsible for contacting appropriate local office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to determine applicable measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds or eagles, including whether "incidental take"permits are necessary and available under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act or Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act for a particular activity. 20.Historic Properties. (a)In cases where the district engineer determines that the activity may have the potential to cause effects to properties listed,or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places,the activity is not authorized, until the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act(NHPA)have been satisfied. (b)Federal permittees should follow their own procedures 4 for complying with the requirements of section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.If pre- construction notification is required for the proposed NWP activity,the Federal permittee must provide the district engineer with the appropriate documentation to demonstrate compliance with those requirements.The district engineer will verify that the appropriate documentation has been submitted. If the appropriate documentation is not submitted,then additional consultation under section 106 may be necessary. The respective federal agency is responsible for fulfilling its obligation to comply with section 106. (c)Non-federal permittees must submit a pre-construction notification to the district engineer if the NWP activity might have the potential to cause effects to any historic properties listed on, determined to be eligible for listing on,or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, including previously unidentified properties. For such activities,the pre-construction notification must state which historic properties might have the potential to be affected by the proposed NWP activity or include a vicinity map indicating the location of the historic properties or the potential for the presence of historic properties.Assistance regarding information on the location of,or potential for,the presence of historic properties can be sought from the State Historic Preservation Officer,Tribal Historic Preservation Officer,or designated tribal representative,as appropriate, and the National Register of Historic Places (see 33 CFR 330.4(g)). When reviewing pre-construction notifications,district engineers will comply with the current procedures for addressing the requirements of section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.The district engineer shall make a reasonable and good faith effort to carry out appropriate identification efforts, which may include background research,consultation,oral history interviews,sample field investigation,and field survey. Based on the information submitted in the PCN and these identification efforts,the district engineer shall determine whether the proposed NWP activity has the potential to cause effects on the historic properties. Section 106 consultation is not required when the district engineer determines that the activity does not have the potential to cause effects on historic properties(see 36 CFR 800.3(a)). Section 106 consultation is required when the district engineer determines that the activity has the potential to cause effects on historic properties. The district engineer will conduct consultation with consulting parties identified under 36 CFR 800.2(c)when he or she makes any of the following effect determinations for the purposes of section 106 of the NHPA: no historic properties affected,no adverse effect,or adverse effect. Where the non-Federal applicant has identified historic properties on which the activity might have the potential to cause effects and so notified the Corps,the non-Federal applicant shall not begin the activity until notified by the district engineer either that the activity has no potential to cause effects to historic properties or that NHPA section 106 consultation has been completed. (d) For non-federal permittees,the district engineer will notify the prospective permittee within 45 days of receipt of a complete pre-construction notification whether NHPA section 106 consultation is required. If NHPA section 106 consultation is required,the district engineer will notify the non-Federal applicant that he or she cannot begin the activity until section 106 consultation is completed. If the non-Federal applicant has not heard back from the Corps within 45 days, the applicant must still wait for notification from the Corps. (e) Prospective permittees should be aware that section 110k of the NHPA(54 U.S.C. 306113)prevents the Corps from granting a permit or other assistance to an applicant who,with intent to avoid the requirements of section 106 of the NHPA,has intentionally significantly adversely affected a historic property to which the permit would relate, or having legal power to prevent it, allowed such significant adverse effect to occur,unless the Corps,after consultation with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation(ACHP),determines that circumstances justify granting such assistance despite the adverse effect created or permitted by the applicant. If circumstances justify granting the assistance,the Corps is required to notify the ACHP and provide documentation specifying the circumstances,the degree of damage to the integrity of any historic properties affected,and proposed mitigation. This documentation must include any views obtained from the applicant, SHPO/THPO, appropriate Indian tribes if the undertaking occurs on or affects historic properties on tribal lands or affects properties of interest to those tribes,and other parties known to have a legitimate interest in the impacts to the permitted activity on historic properties. 21. Discovery of Previously Unknown Remains and Artifacts. If you discover any previously unknown historic,cultural or archeological remains and artifacts while accomplishing the activity authorized by this 5 permit,you must immediately notify the district engineer of what you have found,and to the maximum extent practicable,avoid construction activities that may affect the remains and artifacts until the required coordination has been completed. The district engineer will initiate the Federal, Tribal, and state coordination required to determine if the items or remains warrant a recovery effort or if the site is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. 22. Designated Critical Resource Waters. Critical resource waters include,NOAA-managed marine sanctuaries and marine monuments,and National Estuarine Research Reserves.The district engineer may designate,after notice and opportunity for public comment, additional waters officially designated by a state as having particular environmental or ecological significance, such as outstanding national resource waters or state natural heritage sites. The district engineer may also designate additional critical resource waters after notice and opportunity for public comment. (a)Discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States are not authorized by NWPs 7, 12, 14, 16, 17,21,29, 31, 35,39,40,42,43, 44, 49, 50, 51, and 52 for any activity within,or directly affecting, critical resource waters, including wetlands adjacent to such waters. (b)For NWPs 3, 8, 10, 13, 15, 18, 19,22,23,25,27,28,30,33, 34, 36, 37, 38, and 54,notification is required in accordance with general condition 32, for any activity proposed in the designated critical resource waters including wetlands adjacent to those waters. The district engineer may authorize activities under these NWPs only after it is determined that the impacts to the critical resource waters will be no more than minimal. 23.Mitigation. The district engineer will consider the following factors when determining appropriate and practicable mitigation necessary to ensure that the individual and cumulative adverse environmental effects are no more than minimal: (a)The activity must be designed and constructed to avoid and minimize adverse effects,both temporary and permanent,to waters of the United States to the maximum extent practicable at the project site(i.e.,on site). (b)Mitigation in all its forms(avoiding, minimizing, rectifying,reducing,or compensating for resource losses)will be required to the extent necessary to ensure that the individual and cumulative adverse environmental effects are no more than minimal. (c)Compensatory mitigation at a minimum one-for-one ratio will be required for all wetland losses that exceed 1/10-acre and require pre-construction notification, unless the district engineer determines in writing that either some other form of mitigation would be more environmentally appropriate or the adverse environmental effects of the proposed activity are no more than minimal, and provides an activity-specific waiver of this requirement. For wetland losses of 1/10-acre or less that require pre- construction notification,the district engineer may determine on a case-by-case basis that compensatory mitigation is required to ensure that the activity results in only minimal adverse environmental effects. (d)For losses of streams or other open waters that require pre-construction notification,the district engineer may require compensatory mitigation to ensure that the activity results in no more than minimal adverse environmental effects. Compensatory mitigation for losses of streams should be provided, if practicable,through stream rehabilitation,enhancement, or preservation, since streams are difficult-to- replace resources(see 33 CFR 332.3(e)(3)). (e)Compensatory mitigation plans for NWP activities in or near streams or other open waters will normally include a requirement for the restoration or enhancement, maintenance,and legal protection(e.g., conservation easements)of riparian areas next to open waters. In some cases,the restoration or maintenance/protection of riparian areas may be the only compensatory mitigation required. Restored riparian areas should consist of native species. The width of the required riparian area will address documented water quality or aquatic habitat loss concerns.Normally,the riparian area will be 25 to 50 feet wide on each side of the stream,but the district engineer may require slightly wider riparian areas to address documented water quality or habitat loss concerns. If it is not possible to restore or maintain/protect a riparian area on both sides of a stream, or if the waterbody is a lake or coastal waters,then restoring or maintaining/protecting a riparian area along a single bank or shoreline may be sufficient.Where both wetlands and open waters exist on the project site,the district engineer will determine the appropriate compensatory mitigation(e.g.,riparian areas and/or wetlands compensation)based on what is best for the aquatic environment on a watershed basis.In cases where riparian areas are determined to be the most appropriate form of minimization or compensatory 6 mitigation,the district engineer may waive or reduce the requirement to provide wetland compensatory mitigation for wetland losses. (f)Compensatory mitigation projects provided to offset losses of aquatic resources must comply with the applicable provisions of 33 CFR part 332. (1)The prospective permittee is responsible for proposing an appropriate compensatory mitigation option if compensatory mitigation is necessary to ensure that the activity results in no more than minimal adverse environmental effects.For the NWPs,the preferred mechanism for providing compensatory mitigation is mitigation bank credits or in-lieu fee program credits(see 33 CFR 332.3(b)(2)and(3)).However,if an appropriate number and type of mitigation bank or in-lieu credits are not available at the time the PCN is submitted to the district engineer,the district engineer may approve the use of permittee-responsible mitigation. (2)The amount of compensatory mitigation required by the district engineer must be sufficient to ensure that the authorized activity results in no more than minimal individual and cumulative adverse environmental effects(see 33 CFR 330.1(e)(3)). (See also 33 CFR 332.3(f)). (3)Since the likelihood of success is greater and the impacts to potentially valuable uplands are reduced,aquatic resource restoration should be the first compensatory mitigation option considered for permittee-responsible mitigation.(4)If permittee- responsible mitigation is the proposed option,the prospective permittee is responsible for submitting a mitigation plan.A conceptual or detailed mitigation plan may be used by the district engineer to make the decision on the NWP verification request,but a final mitigation plan that addresses the applicable requirements of 33 CFR 332.4(c)(2)through(14)must be approved by the district engineer before the permittee begins work in waters of the United States,unless the district engineer determines that prior approval of the final mitigation plan is not practicable or not necessary to ensure timely completion of the required compensatory mitigation(see 33 CFR 332.3(k)(3)). (5)If mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program credits are the proposed option,the mitigation plan only needs to address the baseline conditions at the impact site and the number of credits to be provided. (6) Compensatory mitigation requirements(e.g.,resource type and amount to be provided as compensatory mitigation, site protection,ecological performance standards,monitoring requirements) may be addressed through conditions added to the NWP authorization,instead of components of a compensatory mitigation plan(see 33 CFR 332.4(c)(1)(ii)). (g)Compensatory mitigation will not be used to increase the acreage losses allowed by the acreage limits of the NWPs.For example,if an NWP has an acreage limit of 1/2-acre,it cannot be used to authorize any NWP activity resulting in the loss of greater than 1/2-acre of waters of the United States,even if compensatory mitigation is provided that replaces or restores some of the lost waters.However, compensatory mitigation can and should be used,as necessary,to ensure that an NWP activity already meeting the established acreage limits also satisfies the no more than minimal impact requirement for the NWPs. (h)Permittees may propose the use of mitigation banks, in-lieu fee programs, or permittee- responsible mitigation. When developing a compensatory mitigation proposal,the permittee must consider appropriate and practicable options consistent with the framework at 33 CFR 332.3(b). For activities resulting in the loss of marine or estuarine resources,permittee-responsible mitigation may be environmentally preferable if there are no mitigation banks or in-lieu fee programs in the area that have marine or estuarine credits available for sale or transfer to the permittee.For permittee-responsible mitigation,the special conditions of the NWP verification must clearly indicate the party or parties responsible for the implementation and performance of the compensatory mitigation project, and, if required,its long-term management. (i)Where certain functions and services of waters of the United States are permanently adversely affected by a regulated activity, such as discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States that will convert a forested or scrub-shrub wetland to a herbaceous wetland in a permanently maintained utility line right-of-way,mitigation may be required to reduce the adverse environmental effects of the activity to the no more than minimal level. 24. Safety of Impoundment Structures.To ensure that all impoundment structures are safely designed, the district engineer may require non-Federal applicants to demonstrate that the structures comply with 7 established state dam safety criteria or have been designed by qualified persons. The district engineer may also require documentation that the design has been independently reviewed by similarly qualified persons, and appropriate modifications made to ensure safety. 25. Water Quality. Where States and authorized Tribes, or EPA where applicable,have not previously certified compliance of an NWP with CWA section 401, individual 401 Water Quality Certification must be obtained or waived(see 33 CFR 330.4(c)). The district engineer or State or Tribe may require additional water quality management measures to ensure that the authorized activity does not result in more than minimal degradation of water quality. 26. Coastal Zone Manaizement. In coastal states where an NWP has not previously received a state coastal zone management consistency concurrence,an individual state coastal zone management consistency concurrence must be obtained, or a presumption of concurrence must occur(see 33 CFR 330.4(d)).The district engineer or a State may require additional measures to ensure that the authorized activity is consistent with state coastal zone management requirements. 27.Reizional and Case-By-Case Conditions. The activity must comply with any regional conditions that may have been added by the Division Engineer(see 33 CFR 330.4(e))and with any case specific conditions added by the Corps or by the state, Indian Tribe, or U.S. EPA in its section 401 Water Quality Certification, or by the state in its Coastal Zone Management Act consistency determination. 28. Use of Multiple Nationwide Permits. The use of more than one NWP for a single and complete project is prohibited, except when the acreage loss of waters of the United States authorized by the NWPs does not exceed the acreage limit of the NWP with the highest specified acreage limit.For example,if a road crossing over tidal waters is constructed under NWP 14,with associated bank stabilization authorized by NWP 13,the maximum acreage loss of waters of the United States for the total project cannot exceed 1/3-acre. 29. Transfer of Nationwide Permit Verifications. If the permittee sells the property associated with a nationwide permit verification,the permittee may transfer the nationwide permit verification to the new owner by submitting a letter to the appropriate Corps district office to validate the transfer.A copy of the nationwide permit verification must be attached to the letter,and the letter must contain the following statement and signature: "When the structures or work authorized by this nationwide permit are still in existence at the time the property is transferred,the terms and conditions of this nationwide permit, including any special conditions,will continue to be binding on the new owner(s)of the property. To validate the transfer of this nationwide permit and the associated liabilities associated with compliance with its terms and conditions,have the transferee sign and date below." (Transferee) (Date) 30. Compliance Certification.Each permittee who receives an NWP verification letter from the Corps must provide a signed certification documenting completion of the authorized activity and implementation of any required compensatory mitigation. The success of any required permittee- responsible mitigation, including the achievement of ecological performance standards,will be addressed separately by the district engineer. The Corps will provide the permittee the certification document with the NWP verification letter. The certification document will include: (a)A statement that the authorized activity was done in accordance with the NWP authorization, including any general,regional,or activity- specific conditions; (b)A statement that the implementation of any required compensatory mitigation was completed in accordance with the permit conditions. If credits from a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program are used to satisfy the compensatory mitigation requirements,the certification must include the 8 documentation required by 33 CFR 332.3(1)(3)to confirm that the permittee secured the appropriate number and resource type of credits; and(c)The signature of the permittee certifying the completion of the activity and mitigation.The completed certification document must be submitted to the district engineer within 30 days of completion of the authorized activity or the implementation of any required compensatory mitigation,whichever occurs later. 31. Activities Affecting Structures or Works Built by the United States. If an NWP activity also requires permission from the Corps pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 408 because it will alter or temporarily or permanently occupy or use a U.S.Army Corps of Engineers(USACE)federally authorized Civil Works project(a "USACE project"),the prospective permittee must submit a pre-construction notification. See paragraph (b)(10)of general condition 32. An activity that requires section 408 permission is not authorized by NWP until the appropriate Corps office issues the section 408 permission to alter,occupy,or use the USACE project, and the district engineer issues a written NWP verification. 32.Pre-Construction Notification.(a)Timing. Where required by the terms of the NWP,the prospective permittee must notify the district engineer by submitting a pre-construction notification(PCN)as early as possible.The district engineer must determine if the PCN is complete within 30 calendar days of the date of receipt and,if the PCN is determined to be incomplete,notify the prospective permittee within that 30 day period to request the additional information necessary to make the PCN complete.The request must specify the information needed to make the PCN complete.As a general rule, district engineers will request additional information necessary to make the PCN complete only once.However, if the prospective pennittee does not provide all of the requested information,then the district engineer will notify the prospective permittee that the PCN is still incomplete and the PCN review process will not commence until all of the requested information has been received by the district engineer. The prospective permittee shall not begin the activity until either: (1)He or she is notified in writing by the district engineer that the activity may proceed under the NWP with any special conditions imposed by the district or division engineer; or (2)45 calendar days have passed from the district engineer's receipt of the complete PCN and the prospective permittee has not received written notice from the district or division engineer.However, if the permittee was required to notify the Corps pursuant to general condition 18 that listed species or critical habitat might be affected or are in the vicinity of the activity, or to notify the Corps pursuant to general condition 20 that the activity might have the potential to cause effects to historic properties,the permittee cannot begin the activity until receiving written notification from the Corps that there is"no effect"on listed species or"no potential to cause effects"on historic properties,or that any consultation required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act(see 33 CFR 330.4(f))and/or section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act(see 33 CFR 330.4(g))has been completed.Also,work cannot begin under NWPs 21,49, or 50 until the permittee has received written approval from the Corps. If the proposed activity requires a written waiver to exceed specified limits of an NWP,the permittee may not begin the activity until the district engineer issues the waiver.If the district or division engineer notifies the permittee in writing that an individual permit is required within 45 calendar days of receipt of a complete PCN,the permittee cannot begin the activity until an individual permit has been obtained. Subsequently,the permittee's right to proceed under the NWP may be modified, suspended, or revoked only in accordance with the procedure set forth in 33 CFR 330.5(d)(2). (b)Contents of Pre-Construction Notification: The PCN must be in writing and include the following information: (1)Name, address and telephone numbers of the prospective permittee; (2)Location of the proposed activity; (3)Identify the specific NWP or NWP(s)the prospective permittee wants to use to authorize the proposed activity; (4)A description of the proposed activity;the activity's purpose; direct and indirect adverse environmental effects the activity would cause,including the anticipated amount of loss of wetlands, other special aquatic sites,and other waters expected to result from the NWP activity, in acres,linear 9 feet, or other appropriate unit of measure;a description of any proposed mitigation measures intended to reduce the adverse environmental effects caused by the proposed activity; and any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s),or individual permit(s)used or intended to be used to authorize any part of the proposed project or any related activity, including other separate and distant crossings for linear projects that require Department of the Army authorization but do not require pre-construction notification. The description of the proposed activity and any proposed mitigation measures should be sufficiently detailed to allow the district engineer to determine that the adverse environmental effects of the activity will be no more than minimal and to determine the need for compensatory mitigation or other mitigation measures. For single and complete linear projects,the PCN must include the quantity of anticipated losses of wetlands, other special aquatic sites,and other waters for each single and complete crossing of those wetlands, other special aquatic sites, and other waters. Sketches should be provided when necessary to show that the activity complies with the terms of the NWP. (Sketches usually clarify the activity and when provided results in a quicker decision. Sketches should contain sufficient detail to provide an illustrative description of the proposed activity(e.g., a conceptual plan),but do not need to be detailed engineering plans); (5)The PCN must include a delineation of wetlands,other special aquatic sites, and other waters, such as lakes and ponds, and perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral streams, on the project site. Wetland delineations must be prepared in accordance with the current method required by the Corps. The permittee may ask the Corps to delineate the special aquatic sites and other waters on the project site,but there may be a delay if the Corps does the delineation,especially if the project site is large or contains many wetlands,other special aquatic sites, and other waters.Furthermore,the 45 day period will not start until the delineation has been submitted to or completed by the Corps,as appropriate; (6)If the proposed activity will result in the loss of greater than 1/10-acre of wetlands and a PCN is required,the prospective permittee must submit a statement describing how the mitigation requirement will be satisfied, or explaining why the adverse environmental effects are no more than minimal and why compensatory mitigation should not be required.As an alternative,the prospective permittee may submit a conceptual or detailed mitigation plan. (7)For non-Federal permittees, if any listed species or designated critical habitat might be affected or is in the vicinity of the activity, or if the activity is located in designated critical habitat, the PCN must include the name(s)of those endangered or threatened species that might be affected by the proposed activity or utilize the designated critical habitat that might be affected by the proposed activity. For NWP activities that require pre-construction notification,Federal permittees must provide documentation demonstrating compliance with the Endangered Species Act; (8)For non-Federal permittees,if the NWP activity might have the potential to cause effects to a historic property listed on, determined to be eligible for listing on, or potentially eligible for listing on,the National Register of Historic Places,the PCN must state which historic property might have the potential to be affected by the proposed activity or include a vicinity map indicating the location of the historic property. For NWP activities that require pre-construction notification,Federal permittees must provide documentation demonstrating compliance with section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act; (9)For an activity that will occur in a component of the National Wild and Scenic River System, or in a river officially designated by Congress as a"study river"for possible inclusion in the system while the river is in an official study status,the PCN must identify the Wild and Scenic River or the"study river"(see general condition 16); and (10)For an activity that requires permission from the Corps pursuant to 33 U.S.C.408 because it will alter or temporarily or permanently occupy or use a U.S.Army Corps of Engineers federally authorized civil works project,the pre-construction notification must include a statement confirming that the project proponent has submitted a written request for section 408 permission from the Corps office having jurisdiction over that USACE project. (c)Form of Pre-Construction Notification: The standard individual permit application form(Form ENG 4345)may be used,but the completed application form must clearly indicate that it is an NWP PCN and 10 must include all of the applicable information required in paragraphs(b)(1)through(10)of this general condition. A letter containing the required information may also be used. Applicants may provide electronic files of PCNs and supporting materials if the district engineer has established tools and procedures for electronic submittals.(d)Agency Coordination: (1)The district engineer will consider any comments from Federal and state agencies concerning the proposed activity's compliance with the terms and conditions of the NWPs and the need for mitigation to reduce the activity's adverse environmental effects so that they are no more than minimal. (2)Agency coordination is required for: (i)all NWP activities that require pre-construction notification and result in the loss of greater than 1/2-acre of waters of the United States; (ii)NWP 21,29,39,40,42,43,44, 50, 51,and 52 activities that require pre- construction notification and will result in the loss of greater than 300 linear feet of stream bed;(iii)NWP 13 activities in excess of 500 linear feet,fills greater than one cubic yard per running foot,or involve discharges of dredged or fill material into special aquatic sites; and(iv)NWP 54 activities in excess of 500 linear feet,or that extend into the waterbody more than 30 feet from the mean low water line in tidal waters or the ordinary high water mark in the Great Lakes. (3)When agency coordination is required,the district engineer will immediately provide(e.g.,via e-mail,facsimile transmission, overnight mail,or other expeditious manner)a copy of the complete PCN to the appropriate Federal or state offices(FWS, state natural resource or water quality agency,EPA,and, if appropriate,the NMFS). With the exception of NWP 37,these agencies will have 10 calendar days from the date the material is transmitted to notify the district engineer via telephone,facsimile transmission,or e-mail that they intend to provide substantive, site-specific comments. The comments must explain why the agency believes the adverse environmental effects will be more than minimal. If so contacted by an agency,the district engineer will wait an additional 15 calendar days before making a decision on the pre-construction notification.The district engineer will fully consider agency comments received within the specified time frame concerning the proposed activity's compliance with the terms and conditions of the NWPs,including the need for mitigation to ensure the net adverse environmental effects of the proposed activity are no more than minimal. The district engineer will provide no response to the resource agency, except as provided below.The district engineer will indicate in the administrative record associated with each pre- construction notification that the resource agencies' concerns were considered.For NWP 37,the emergency watershed protection and rehabilitation activity may proceed immediately in cases where there is an unacceptable hazard to life or a significant loss of property or economic hardship will occur.The district engineer will consider any comments received to decide whether the NWP 37 authorization should be modified,suspended,or revoked in accordance with the procedures at 33 CFR 330.5. (4)In cases of where the prospective permittee is not a Federal agency,the district engineer will provide a response to NMFS within 30 calendar days of receipt of any Essential Fish Habitat conservation recommendations,as required by section 305(b)(4)(B)of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.(5)Applicants are encouraged to provide the Corps with either electronic files or multiple copies of pre-construction notifications to expedite agency coordination. District Engineer's Decision: 1. In reviewing the PCN for the proposed activity,the district engineer will determine whether the activity authorized by the NWP will result in more than minimal individual or cumulative adverse environmental effects or may be contrary to the public interest. If a project proponent requests authorization by a specific NWP,the district engineer should issue the NWP verification for that activity if it meets the terms and conditions of that NWP,unless he or she determines, after considering mitigation,that the proposed activity will result in more than minimal individual and cumulative adverse effects on the aquatic environment and other aspects of the public interest and exercises discretionary authority to require an individual permit for the proposed activity. For a linear project,this determination will include an evaluation of the individual crossings of waters of the United States to determine whether they individually satisfy the terms and conditions of the NWP(s),as well as the cumulative effects caused by all of the crossings authorized by NWP. If an applicant requests a waiver of the 300 linear foot limit on impacts to streams or of an otherwise applicable limit,as provided for in NWPs 13,21,29, 36, 39, 40,42,43,44, 50, 51, 52,or 54,the district engineer will only grant the waiver upon a written determination that the NWP activity will result in only minimal individual and cumulative 11 adverse environmental effects. For those NWPs that have a waivable 300 linear foot limit for losses of intermittent and ephemeral stream bed and a 1/2-acre limit(i.e.,NWPs 21,29,39,40, 42,43,44, 50, 51, and 52),the loss of intermittent and ephemeral stream bed,plus any other losses of jurisdictional waters and wetlands,cannot exceed 1/2-acre.2. When making minimal adverse environmental effects determinations the district engineer will consider the direct and indirect effects caused by the NWP activity. He or she will also consider the cumulative adverse environmental effects caused by activities authorized by NWP and whether those cumulative adverse environmental effects are no more than minimal. The district engineer will also consider site specific factors, such as the environmental setting in the vicinity of the NWP activity,the type of resource that will be affected by the NWP activity,the functions provided by the aquatic resources that will be affected by the NWP activity,the degree or magnitude to which the aquatic resources perform those functions,the extent that aquatic resource functions will be lost as a result of the NWP activity(e.g.,partial or complete loss),the duration of the adverse effects(temporary or permanent),the importance of the aquatic resource functions to the region (e.g.,watershed or ecoregion),and mitigation required by the district engineer.If an appropriate functional or condition assessment method is available and practicable to use,that assessment method may be used by the district engineer to assist in the minimal adverse environmental effects determination. The district engineer may add case-specific special conditions to the NWP authorization to address site- specific environmental concerns.3. If the proposed activity requires a PCN and will result in a loss of greater than 1/1 0-acre of wetlands,the prospective permittee should submit a mitigation proposal with the PCN.Applicants may also propose compensatory mitigation for NWP activities with smaller impacts,or for impacts to other types of waters(e.g., streams). The district engineer will consider any proposed compensatory mitigation or other mitigation measures the applicant has included in the proposal in determining whether the net adverse environmental effects of the proposed activity are no more than minimal. The compensatory mitigation proposal may be either conceptual or detailed. If the district engineer determines that the activity complies with the terms and conditions of the NWP and that the adverse environmental effects are no more than minimal,after considering mitigation,the district engineer will notify the permittee and include any activity-specific conditions in the NWP verification the district engineer deems necessary. Conditions for compensatory mitigation requirements must comply with the appropriate provisions at 33 CFR 332.3(k). The district engineer must approve the final mitigation plan before the permittee commences work in waters of the United States, unless the district engineer determines that prior approval of the final mitigation plan is not practicable or not necessary to ensure timely completion of the required compensatory mitigation. If the prospective permittee elects to submit a compensatory mitigation plan with the PCN,the district engineer will expeditiously review the proposed compensatory mitigation plan.The district engineer must review the proposed compensatory mitigation plan within 45 calendar days of receiving a complete PCN and determine whether the proposed mitigation would ensure the NWP activity results in no more than minimal adverse environmental effects. If the net adverse environmental effects of the NWP activity(after consideration of the mitigation proposal)are determined by the district engineer to be no more than minimal,the district engineer will provide a timely written response to the applicant. The response will state that the NWP activity can proceed under the terms and conditions of the NWP, including any activity-specific conditions added to the NWP authorization by the district engineer. 4. If the district engineer determines that the adverse environmental effects of the proposed activity are more than minimal,then the district engineer will notify the applicant either: (a)that the activity does not qualify for authorization under the NWP and instruct the applicant on the procedures to seek authorization under an individual permit;(b)that the activity is authorized under the NWP subject to the applicant's submission of a mitigation plan that would reduce the adverse environmental effects so that they are no more than minimal;or(c)that the activity is authorized under the NWP with specific modifications or conditions. Where the district engineer determines that mitigation is required to ensure no more than minimal adverse environmental effects,the activity will be authorized within the 45-day PCN period(unless additional time is required to comply with general conditions 18,20,and/or 31,or to evaluate PCNs for activities authorized by NWPs 21,49, and 50), with activity-specific conditions that state the mitigation requirements. The authorization will include the necessary conceptual or detailed mitigation plan or a requirement that the applicant submit a 12 mitigation plan that would reduce the adverse environmental effects so that they are no more than minimal. When compensatory mitigation is required,no work in waters of the United States may occur until the district engineer has approved a specific mitigation plan or has determined that prior approval of a final mitigation plan is not practicable or not necessary to ensure timely completion of the required compensatory mitigation. Further Information: 1.District Engineers have authority to determine if an activity complies with the terms and conditions of an NWP. 2.NWPs do not obviate the need to obtain other federal, state,or local permits, approvals, or authorizations required by law. 3.NWPs do not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges.4.NWPs do not authorize any injury to the property or rights of others. 5.NWPs do not authorize interference with any existing or proposed Federal project(see general condition 31). C. CORPS SEATTLE DISTRICT REGIONAL GENERAL CONDITIONS: The following conditions apply to all NWPs for the Seattle District in Washington State,unless specified. 1. Proiect Drawings: Drawings must be submitted with pre-construction notification(PCN). Drawings must provide a clear understanding of the proposed project, and how waters of the U.S.will be affected. Drawings must be originals and not reduced copies of large-scale plans. Engineering drawings are not required. Existing and proposed site conditions(manmade and landscape features)must be drawn to scale. 2. Aquatic Resources Requiring Special Protection: Activities resulting in a loss of waters of the United States in mature forested wetlands,bogs and peatlands,aspen-dominated wetlands,alkali wetlands,vernal pools,camas prairie wetlands, estuarine wetlands,wetlands in coastal lagoons, and wetlands in dunal systems along the Washington coast cannot be authorized by a NWP,except by the following NWPs: NWP 3 — Maintenance NWP 20 — Response Operations for Oil and Hazardous Substances NWP 32 — Completed Enforcement Actions NWP 38 — Cleanup of Hazardous and Toxic Waste In order to use one of the above-referenced NWPs in any of the aquatic resources requiring special protection,prospective permittees must submit a PCN to the Corps of Engineers(see NWP general condition 32)and obtain written authorization before commencing work. 3 New Bank Stabilization in Tidal Waters of Puget Sound: Activities involving new bank stabilization in tidal waters in Water Resource Inventory Areas(WRIAs) 8,9, 10, 11 and 12(within the areas identified on Figures la through le on Corps website)cannot be authorized by NWP. 4. Commencement Bay: The following NWPs may not be used to authorize activities located in the Commencement Bay Study Area(see Figure 2 on Corps website): NWP 12—Utility Line Activities(substations) NWP 13—Bank Stabilization NWP 14—Linear Transportation Projects NWP 23—Approved Categorical Exclusions NWP 29—Residential Developments NWP 39—Commercial and Institutional Developments NWP 40—Agricultural Activities NWP 41 —Reshaping Existing Drainage Ditches NWP 42—Recreational Facilities NWP 43—Stormwater and Wastewater Management Facilities 13 5. Bank Stabilization: All projects including new or maintenance bank stabilization activities require PCN to the Corps of Engineers(see NWP general condition 32).For new bank stabilization projects only, the following must be submitted to the Corps of Engineers: a. The cause of the erosion and the distance of any existing structures from the area(s)being stabilized. b. The type and length of existing bank stabilization within 300 feet of the proposed project. c. A description of current conditions and expected post-project conditions in the waterbody. d. A statement describing how the project incorporates elements avoiding and minimizing adverse environmental effects to the aquatic environment and nearshore riparian area,including vegetation impacts in the waterbody. In addition to a.through d.,the results from any relevant geotechnical investigations can be submitted with the PCN if it describes current or expected conditions in the waterbody. 6. Crossings of Waters of the United States:Any project including installing,replacing,or modifying crossings of waters of the United States, such as culverts or bridges,requires submittal of a PCN to the Corps of Engineers(see NWP general condition 32). If a culvert is proposed to cross waters of the U.S. where salmonid species are present or could be present,the project must apply the stream simulation design method from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife located in the Water Crossing Design Guidelines(2013),or a design method which provides passage at all life stages at all flows where the salmonid species would naturally seek passage. If the stream simulation design method is not applied for a culvert where salmonid species are present or could be present,the project proponent must provide a rationale in the PCN sufficient to establish one of the following: a. The existence of extraordinary site conditions. b. How the proposed design will provide equivalent or better fish passage and fisheries habitat benefits than the stream simulation design method. If a culvert is proposed to cross waters of the U.S. where salmonid species are present or could be present, project proponents must provide a monitoring plan with the PCN that specifies how the proposed culvert will be assessed over a five-year period from the time of construction completion to ensure its effectiveness in providing passage at all life stages at all flows where the salmonid species would naturally seek passage. Culverts installed under emergency authorization that do not meet the above design criteria will be required to meet the above design criteria to receive an after-the-fact nationwide permit verification. 7. Stream Loss: A PCN is required for all activities that result in the loss of any linear feet of stream beds. No activity shall result in the loss of any linear feet of perennial stream beds or the loss of greater than 300 linear feet of intermittent and/or ephemeral stream beds. A stream may be rerouted if it is designed in a manner that maintains or restores hydrologic, ecologic,and geomorphic stream processes, provided there is not a reduction in the linear feet of stream bed. Streams include brooks, creeks,rivers, and historical waters of the U.S.that have been channelized into ditches. This condition does not apply to ditches constructed in uplands. Stream loss restrictions may be waived by the district engineer on a case- by-case basis provided the activities result in net increases of aquatic resource functions and services. 8. Mitigation: Pre-construction notification is required for any project that will result in permanent wetland losses that exceed 1,000 square feet. In addition to the requirements of General Condition 23 (Mitigation),compensatory mitigation at a minimum one-to-one ratio will be required for all permanent wetland losses that exceed 1,000 square feet. When a PCN is required for wetland losses less than 1,000 square feet,the Corps of Engineers may determine on a case-by-case basis that compensatory mitigation is required to ensure that the activity results in minimal adverse effects on the aquatic environment. Compensatory mitigation for impacts to marine waters, lakes, and streams will be determined on a case- by-case basis. If temporary impacts to waters of the U.S. exceed six months,the Corps of Engineers may require compensatory mitigation for temporal effects. 14 9. Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act—Essential Fish Habitat Essential Fish Habitat(EFH) is defined as those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding,feeding,or growth to maturity. If EFH may be adversely affected by a proposed activity,the prospective permittee must provide a written EFH assessment with an analysis of the effects of the proposed action on EFH. The assessment must identify the type(s)of essential fish habitat(i.e.,Pacific salmon, groundfish,and/or coastal-pelagic species)that may be affected. If the Corps of Engineers determines the project will adversely affect EFH,consultation with NOAA Fisheries will be required. Federal agencies should follow their own procedures for complying with the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. If PCN is required for the proposed activity,Federal permittees must provide the district engineer with the appropriate documentation to demonstrate compliance with those requirements. 10. Forage Fish: For projects in forage fish spawning habitat, in-water work must occur within designated forage fish work windows, or when forage fish are not spawning. If working outside of a designated work window,or if forage fish work windows are closed year round,work may occur if the work window restriction is released for a period of time after a forage fish spawning survey has been conducted by a biologist approved by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW). Forage fish species with designated in-water work windows include Pacific sand lance(Ammodytes hexapterus),Pacific herring(Clupea pallasi), and surf smelt(Hypomesus pretiosus). This RGC does not apply to NWP 48,Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Activities. Please see specific regional conditions for NWP 48. 11. Notification of Permit Requirements:The permittee must provide a copy of the nationwide permit authorization letter,conditions,and permit drawings to all contractors and any other parties performing the authorized work prior to the commencement of any work in waters of the U.S. The permittee must ensure all appropriate contractors and any other parties performing the authorized work at the project site have read and understand relevant NWP conditions as well as plans, approvals,and documents referenced in the NWP letter. A copy of these documents must be maintained onsite throughout the duration of construction. 12. Construction Boundaries: Permittees must clearly mark all construction area boundaries before beginning work on projects that involve grading or placement of fill. Boundary markers and/or construction fencing must be maintained and clearly visible for the duration of construction. Permittees should avoid and minimize removal of native vegetation(including submerged aquatic vegetation)to the maximum extent possible. 13. Temporary Impacts and Site Restoration a. Temporary impacts to waters of the U.S. must not exceed six months unless the prospective permittee requests and receives a waiver by the district engineer. Temporary impacts to waters of the U.S.must be identified in the PCN. b. No more than 1/2 acre of waters of the U.S.may be temporarily filled unless the prospective permittee requests and receives a waiver from the district engineer(temporary fills do not affect specified limits for loss of waters associated with specific nationwide permits). c. Native soils removed from waters of the U.S. for project construction should be stockpiled and used for site restoration. Restoration of temporarily disturbed areas must include returning the area to pre- project ground surface contours. If native soil is not available from the project site for restoration, suitable clean soil of the same textural class may be used. Other soils may be used only if identified in the PCN. d. The permittee must revegetate disturbed areas with native plant species sufficient in number, spacing, and diversity to restore affected functions. A maintenance and monitoring plan commensurate with the impacts,may be required. Revegetation must begin as soon as site conditions allow within the same growing season as the disturbance unless the schedule is approved by the Corps of Engineers. 15 r Native plants removed from waters of the U.S. for project construction should be stockpiled and used for revegetation when feasible. Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control measures must be removed as soon as the area has established vegetation sufficient to control erosion and sediment. e. If the Corps determines the project will result in temporary impacts of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV)that are more than minimal,a monitoring plan must be submitted. If recovery is not achieved by the end of the monitoring period,contingencies must be implemented, and additional monitoring will be required. This RGC does not apply to NWP 48, Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Activities. Please see specific regional conditions for NWP 48. D. CORPS REGIONAL SPECIFIC CONDITIONS FOR THIS NWP: none E. ECOLOGY 401 CERTIFICATION: GENERAL CONDITIONS In addition to all the Corps National and Seattle Districts' Regional permit conditions,the following State General Section 401 Water Quality Certification(Section 401)conditions apply to all Nationwide Permits whether certified or partially certified in the State of Washington. 1. For in-water construction activities. Ecology Section 401 review is required for projects or activities authorized under NWPs that will cause,or may be likely to cause or contribute to an exceedance of a State water quality standard(Chapter 173-201A WAC)or sediment management standard(Chapter 173-204 WAC). State water quality standards and sediment management standards are available on Ecology's website. Note: In-water activities include any activity within a wetland and/or activities below the ordinary high water mark(OHWM). 2. Projects or Activities Discharging to Impaired Waters. Ecology Section 401 review is required for projects or activities authorized under NWPs if the project or activity will occur in a 303(d)listed segment of a waterbody or upstream of a listed segment and may result in further exceedances of the specific listed parameter. To determine if your project or activity is in a 303(d)listed segment of a waterbody,visit Ecology's Water Quality Assessment webpage for maps and search tools. 3. Application. For projects or activities that will require Ecology Section 401 review,applicants must provide Ecology with a Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application(JARPA)along with the documentation provided to the Corps,as described in National General Condition 32,Pre-Construction Notification, including,when applicable: (a)A description of the project,including site plans,project purpose, direct and indirect adverse environmental effects the project would cause,best management practices(BMPs), and any other Department of the Army or federal agency permits used or intended to be used to authorize any part of the proposed project or any related activity. (b)Drawings indicating the Ordinary High Water Mark(OHWM), delineation of special aquatic sites and other waters of the state. Wetland delineations must be prepared in accordance with the current method required by the Corps and shall include Ecology's Wetland Rating form. Wetland rating forms are subject to review and verification by Ecology staff. Guidance for determining the OHWM is available on Ecology's website. (c)A statement describing how the mitigation requirement will be satisfied.A conceptual or detailed mitigation or restoration plan may be submitted. See State General Condition 5 for details on mitigation requirements. (d)Other applicable requirements of Corps Nationwide Permit General Condition 32, Corps Regional Conditions, or notification conditions of the applicable NWP.(e)Within 180 calendar days from receipt of applicable documents noted above and a copy of the final authorization letter from the Corps providing coverage for a proposed project or activity under the NWP Program Ecology will provide the applicant notice of whether an individual Section 401 will be required for the project.If Ecology fails to act within a year after receipt of both of these documents, Section 401 is presumed waived. 16 4. Aquatic resources requiring special protection. Certain aquatic resources are unique, difficult-to- replace components of the aquatic environment in Washington State. Activities that would affect these resources must be avoided to the greatest extent possible. Compensating for adverse impacts to high value aquatic resources is typically difficult,prohibitively expensive,and may not be possible in some landscape settings.Ecology Section 401 review is required for activities in or affecting the following aquatic resources(and not prohibited by Seattle District Regional General Condition): (a)Wetlands with special characteristics(as defined in the Washington State Wetland Rating Systems for western and eastern Washington,Ecology Publications#14-06-029 and 414-06-030): • Estuarine wetlands. • Wetlands of High Conservation Value. • Bogs. • Old-growth and mature forested wetlands. • Wetlands in coastal lagoons. • Interdunal wetlands. • Vernal pools. • Alkali wetlands. (b)Fens, aspen-dominated wetlands,camas prairie wetlands. (c)Marine water with eelgrass(Zostera marina)beds(except for NWP 48). (d)Category I wetlands. (e)Category II wetlands with a habitat score > 8 points.This State General Condition does not apply to the following Nationwide Permits: NWP 20—Response Operations for Oil and Hazardous Substances, NWP 32—Completed Enforcement Actions 5. Mitigation. Applicants are required to show that they have followed the mitigation sequence and have first avoided and minimized impacts to aquatic resources wherever practicable.For projects requiring Ecology Section 401 review with unavoidable impacts to aquatics resources,adequate compensatory mitigation must be provided. (a) Wetland mitigation plans submitted for Ecology review and approval shall be based on the most current guidance provided in Wetland Mitigation in Washington State,Parts 1 and 2(available on Ecology's website)and shall,at a minimum,include the following: i. A description of the measures taken to avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands and other waters of the U.S. ii. The nature of the proposed impacts(i.e.,acreage of wetlands and functions lost or degraded). iii. The rationale for the mitigation site that was selected. iv. The goals and objectives of the compensatory mitigation project. v. How the mitigation project will be accomplished,including construction sequencing,best management practices to protect water quality,proposed performance standards for measuring success and the proposed buffer widths. vi. How it will be maintained and monitored to assess progress towards goals and objectives. Monitoring will generally be required for a minimum of five years. For forested and scrub-shrub wetlands, 10 years of monitoring will often be necessary. vii. How the compensatory mitigation site will be legally protected for the long term. Refer to Wetland Mitigation in Washington State—Part 2: Developing Mitigation Plans(Ecology Publication#06-06-01 lb)and Selecting Wetland Mitigation Sites Using a Watershed Approach(Ecology Publications#09-06-032 (Western Washington)and#10-06-007(Eastern Washington))for guidance on selecting suitable mitigation sites and developing mitigation plans. Ecology encourages the use of alternative mitigation approaches, including credit/debit methodology,advance mitigation,and other programmatic approach such as mitigation banks and in-lieu fee programs. If you are interested in proposing use of an alternative mitigation approach,consult with the appropriate Ecology regional staff person. Information on alternative mitigation approaches is available on Ecology's website. (b) Mitigation for other aquatic resource impacts will be determined on a case-by-case basis. 17 6. Temporary Fills. Ecology Section 401 review is required for any project or activity with temporary fill in wetlands or other waters of the state for more than 90 days,unless the applicant has received written approval from Ecology.Note:This State General Condition does not apply to projects or activities authorized under NWP 33, Temporary Construction,Access, and Dewatering 7. Stormwater pollution prevention: All projects that involve land disturbance or impervious surfaces must implement stormwater pollution prevention or control measures to avoid discharge of pollutants in stormwater runoff to waters of the State. (a)For land disturbances during construction,the applicant must obtain and implement permits(e.g., Construction Stormwater General Permit)where required and follow Ecology's current stormwater manual. (b) Following construction,prevention or treatment of on-going stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces shall be provided. Ecology's Stormwater Management and Design Manuals and stormwater permit information are available on Ecology's website. 8. State Section 401 Review for PCNs not receiving 45-day response from the Seattle District.In the event the Seattle District Corps does not issue a NWP authorization letter within 45 calendar days of receipt of a complete pre-construction notification,the applicant must contact Ecology for Section 401 review prior to commencing work. F. ECOLOGY 401 CERTIFICATION: SPECIFIC CONDITIONS FOR THIS NWP: Certified, if all applicable State General Conditions are met. G. COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONSISTENCY RESPONSE FOR THIS NWP: (Note: This is only applies in the following counties: Clallam,Grays Harbor, Island,Jefferson,King, Kitsap, Mason,Pacific,Pierce, San Juan, Skagit, Snohomish, Thurston, Wahkiakum and Whatcom) Specific NWP Response: Ecology concurs that this NWP is consistent with the CZMP. 18 3628 South 35`t'Street I Tacoma,Washington 98409-3192 I rnconn PUnuic OWE TACOMA PUBLIC UTILITIES UTILITIEi 3 January 30, 2019 RECEIVED i j MAR 0 5 2019 Randy and Barbara Sandoval Via email 1 I 7302 278th Pi. NW 615 W. Alder St e-t Stanwood, WA 98292 Bulkhead Repair and Reconfiguration on Tacoma I SUBJECT: Sandoval Emergency p Power Property Adjacent to Lot 2 Division 11, Lake Cushman i Dear Mr. and Mrs. Sandoval: i The City of Tacoma, Department of Public Utilities, Light Division (Tacoma Power)was recently contacted to review emergency bulkhead repair and reconfiguration plans for your permitted bulkhead. Reviewed were engineering plans by Steven Morta stamped January 22, 2019 (enclosed)and your Tacoma Power application submitted on January 29, 2019. This emergency work is considered "major repair" under Section 11.c.iii of your Shoreline Use , Permit(SUP) No.335 as the proposal changes the structure's original permitted design and I dimensions. Tacoma Power will need copies of the required regulatory permits for this work before we can issue a short-term license for construction. Once the work is completed a new 5- year SUP will be issued. There is no-fee from Tacoma Power for the short-term license or new shoreline use permit. Tacoma Power has no abjection to the proposed repair and reconfiguration on Tacoma Power's property and authorizes you to move forward with your regulatory permit applications. E Feel free to contact me at 253-441-4180 or wwright(aici.tacoma.wa.us if you have any questions or wish to change your shoreline structure plans. i Sincerely, V � Wyntdght i Shoreline and Lands Coordinator i I Enclosure 1 k PLANNING ........... ............. � : . s b � � d..d IY W'.$x.Nl LtU A'VkUAfItW I YSTAL.ED s'a�L/�/�r'� 9�TEPi.AN� RE7AIt IN 1•li4.L r,tdOT.I t CWR rate I r vCN t'•MO WF v Ilex;,, ��:oN GLN7La.? W N'AS R icrER m NCva °4 rr�to >A^TAc a. av,+ut tawRDsTCa a•Pcxs' MEW DOCK DETAIL' WI fH nLJ U�tS A 0.ESS Si EgI¢'.4§G"HJOP `"'� , ,AGVDT5r^ND'ax5Y6RS trN.3PERd0MALER. fits Sl#F AC�6 (�'>F ❑ » vtsar v cl. runs "` -' 1 tkkw :.1� r DTmii Wasaoi E*aiiu'r.,r1 � �ZR 8 .. . 'Kr RG 5F.t,T:Gt R3 )G I .., �fi RC rrS75 R� ssl� EXIST"A"o LJATING , NA i LYr.AND a=ER TC1 LAYfC(::ISI-MAN flEuERVCIIti� ' k - �� BC I�iSOVEP i,i. iORFM g HOPELNI •N 1 1 PONY MALL FROM11,b TO Tl Yi �Ary�%Y.• osauzs To at � XTENDS IN'ANFACCD /3 IRA'rf7� RMM iUU3 bALL dE` D18 OC.ALL lrc tU1N uG , n•` k. , _ =� l:l hxT I , 7ti t ,C..X 1 t F'rvs t(IF.T`LJ LV,I V UWN «:a z z s :• x ',- �' i � � � I �usnrw atruc 13 itl 7kt + EXtSTW,-FU 6 \\ b F IVIMER0PER7YCIN67 ei III =:I 1 '1. DOOK TR 9E REkOVED ib -� OE"A to•s PP r^".,- `� .. & � r cr I s .�t ONU U S 1 •''^ t l t,; I f. \.1 Ur�wttrinki p C P011,s t t L _ " I PT psU. •� � h t i i �k t} \ �,\ t Y Ws1 vIN6c01 F't }.l' aM®daU1 t0 0 1NEV4a s Z l—axBAll .POSTS -A•O' \ with 5t8"lag twits tr ewsraa(r Bn,Ydw«d LCC�tOh is-O.0 ... n TME6C• - .. EXISTING ../ fJ �;--` l .- NOTE.RESIDENCE 4S LO;:ATED ON THE EAST T' M8 STAIRS A R�PA•�t0 "� 5iPC OF hLI:ARINE VIEW OR. 1 LANDVNGS ., � !..-��"~ �. ... _. ....%. - .x i;��._..._..> 1M"t F7 TO BE r REMOVCD �,,..F" SCALE 1'6'=I FEET n«,.exaA�WwadaAaO ' � O T 4' G g iG 1T ta' YG,. rtruw.n N tknd•cet 4W gtt:4d E SEO PRCIIECT REPLACE EXISTINiGSTAJRS,RETROFIT LOCATION _311 -p EX11SfiNG DULKI W?AO,RFPLACE.TFE TM EXISMNO APPLICANI 0-4b.4L•Q Al dig 25.7.1 t23 Gag 73'8'N4"st DOCKS W TH A SiNOLE Pgl2R iWD DCXX ADJACENT PROPERTY CMNER:' IM1:LX CLISLH�tAN,NE=+R HCK))DSPQF'r,,Yls1 1 ANt.A,LiTRUST'AIA_"jk71t,(3.A2732.5fJ-(NWk);I) (xhi F 2 C lNT@- T.J,2()t@ ( N"Y A4ASON•STAT WA 2.CY,"F[-Q,(MNjF,ta,¢j3f?Nift,{C,123325U-WWti 3628 South 35'"Street Tacoma,Washington 98409-3192 E V L..IV L✓ e� " -4 H A POWER TAC©MA PUBLIC UTILITIES KQ 0-5 20S TACOMA PufLIC UTILITIEf 616 W. Alder Street January 30, 2019 i NU Randy and Barbara Sandoval Via email 7302 2781h PI. NW Stanwood, WA 98292 SUBJECT: Sandoval Emergency Bulkhead Repair and Reconfiguration on Tacoma Power Property Adjacent to Lot 2 Division 11, Lake Cushman Dear Mr. and Mrs. Sandoval: The City of Tacoma, Department of Public Utilities, Light Division (Tacoma Power)was recently contacted to review emergency bulkhead repair and reconfiguration plans for your permitted bulkhead. Reviewed were engineering plans by Steven Morta stamped January 22, 2019 (enclosed)and your Tacoma Power application submitted on January 29, 2019. This emergency work is considered"major repair" under Section 11.c.iii of your Shoreline Use Permit(SUP)No.335 as the proposal changes the structure's original permitted design and dimensions. Tacoma Power will need copies of the required regulatory permits for this work before we can issue a short-term license for construction. Once the work is completed a new 5- year SUP will be issued. There is no-fee from Tacoma Power for the short-term license or new shoreline use permit. Tacoma Power has no objection to the proposed repair and reconfiguration on Tacoma Power's property and authorizes you to move forward with your regulatory permit applications. Feel free to contact me at 253-441-4180 or wwrightCa7ci.tacoma.wa.us if you have any questions or wish to change your shoreline structure plans. Sincerely, Wyn Wright Shoreline and Lands Coordinator Enclosure a-»nI.'AVWA yELLOWCEDARP JNSTAUW �NOOVAL-SITERAN O REraraNcwuL Z,2of INBfGGTORN Ci EXCAVAfIOK3 ATH r 2FOOTOIA CCNCR FftlfiO 6x6 POST DETAq, P. ®ATTACH a.sY•WNLER IWARD8708-AC'P�T REFER TO NEW "8'ON�CENTFI2 tfVG WAS OR lWTN GALVOR STANLE55 sTEF1rPBi b7'W70D IAEItIDOfACDETAWt IU 4 yl�oF NiNQy LAG BOLTS AMVAEHERS.MN.YPERW+ALER 0NSNEET4OF6 ®, E VEPoAY L+tiaMtrSTAIRELEv/1R'Ok5 ' ; FGELD URETkAT RI-5.TAGNTa .__ 'A N ANDTKkTTRVbLENGTH>W PFR ''I a s5tRC SECTION Rass T5 r — _ .-Ju 1 Off, �5 ` EJOSTWGIFLWING •'CJ-S�DntnL.FI,G LAKE CUSiNAN RESERVOIR EOCKANOPIERTO HE REMOVED CURRENT SNORELME _ rr STAIRSTO SI REMOVED BE `n PONY WN,LFRDF TO�TNAT i FJLTEND$IA%LLFr TO(j)T TED HAT 1g SrODS SWILL HE SPACED 10'D.C.,ALL IG• N11, AYC FRAMING.AOO 30(JtliWN(:V,AL,.18xRAYr el .t F f'OStSPtACrOAgSvOv.Tj APFrtu?(6 .4 tDNr"7 TOhWTCHEXISrII`K HB IK __ .._Lit AO PI.DS ntE4vF't't 1Y K'A1I REFER ro Fr�R lx:rml. �� _ AT Rtt eTT FOR RETR4F;T 74p F t C,I'.ExISIRJ<�GA 6T'(b'Ti EXISTING FLOATING .li _ Y.tOSTINGelAlOfAp LEANING6UtKHEAO DOCK 708E REMOVED Ir ELU AYFSTIAOPER7Y wg); HETa;�vrtnrTAK I wY ����0O • FtXtS NEN/4r11P.YC; ADD 30 DEG x 9 `•\ 3"'�1G �� - � POSTS It KING WALL w! 6* i 6 K 0A Y<IY:x rs '13 P �431 ALL iREE5 cu, r.w •��• - INt;REASE LONG. Ut-4 AYC.r— s TERM St OPE S1'ADILI TY •'` (NOTE ROOT SYSTEAs 75C s i 'Tx 6x T+f o vors REINrORCF FT POWMEBrT TO?QJLS) � (10)NEWlxB xr)4C80 to .. ST" POSTS a-60. nawax$AYC ,i fEW$tA1R w'M SW WW bob ewnv' I •' LOCATION 1r°D.C.. - � EXISTBK, tlE'�4TN� BE NOTE:RESIDENCE IS LOCATED ON THE EAST MS IAND/1GR SIDE OF MARWE VIEW DR. 7D BE FWADVED ! SCALE Vr=1 FEET rn fp"m 1 FT t X Nwl.lAYCpWh W IF ? 4' d 6 Ny 17 14- w hroloacate NEFEItEN�; APPLICANT` &ARHAR0kAWRMQXUMW6L LOCATION a11Mspm V*,DrN HooAcoafyyl88Ee ppPROUT REiKACE EMSTING$TN FR RS.RETRO ADJAWIT PROPERTY OYNJERS: LATILONG 47 deg Y5'r I In deg 13'Y•West DOCKS VATNAS010LE DOCKTHE TM EXISTING 1 M N vmm 'II j JMlj&(t42332-%00W3) N-12332-SDV 01) PACE 2 OF 6 DATE. Doe 29,2018 Integrated NW Construction, LLC CONSTRt N To: Marissa Watson, Mason County Community Services, Planner From: Integrated NW Construction, LLC TO BE KEPT IN THE Date: 02/06/2019 PARCEL FILE Re: Sandoval JARPA& SEPA Revision Letter Please consider this letter notice that Integrated NW Construction is under contract with Mr. and Mrs. Sandoval to perform the following work per engineered drawings dated 01/22/2019: 1.1. Installation of 10 8x8 AYC piles behind existing bulkhead I.I.I. 8x8 AYC piles shall be buried up to 4' in ground, encased in concrete 1.2. Installation of 2 additional 8x8 AYC piles to form wing walls behind existing bulkhead 1.2.1. 8x8 AYC piles shall be buried up to 4' in ground, encased in concrete 1.2.2. Wing walls shall be approx 5 - 6 feet in length 1.2.3. 3x12 AYC shall be used as face boards, attached with Timberlocks and lags to new 8x8 AYC posts 1.3. Installation of pony wall along length of existing bulkhead to raise it up approx 18" 1.3.1. 2x6 PT lumber shall be used for internal framing 1.3.2. Pony wall shall be secured to existing bulkhead and faced with 3x12 AYC to match existing bulkhead 1.4. All hardware shall be stainless steel or galvanized 1.5. All new posts attached to existing posts with 5/8" lags All work will be completed behind the existing bulkhead. All JARPA and SEPA answers remain the same except as follows: • JARPA 5o: The original piers and docks have been demolished and removed. The new pier is a 17'6"x 8' structure constructed out of Alaskan yellow cedar and Thru-Flow grating. The new floating dock is a 10' x 16' structure constructed out of Alaskan yellow cedar, Thru-Flow grating, and encased Styrofoam. All hardare is stainless steel or pressure-treated. The existing bulkhead is still in place but has been refaced using 3x12 Alaskan yellow cedar. • JARPA 6a: See above for the description of work to be performed. • JARPA 6b: The existing bulkhead is failing and needs to be repaired prior to the water rising again in the spring. If the repairs are not made before then, it is almost guaranteed that this structure will continue to fail. • JARPA 6d: Bulkhead only • JARPA 6e: See above for the description of how work will be performed. All work will be completed using hand tools. • JARPA 6f. Anticipated start date is Feb 2019 or as soon as we are permitted. We anticipate being complete within 2—4 weeks after commencement. BMF-011 Rev C Integrated NW Construction, LLC • JARPA 6g: Fair market value is $21,415. • JARPA 8e: Estimated 5.0 cubic yards of concrete will be installed around 12 piles behind existing bulkhead. • SEPA Al: Sandoval Bulkhead Repair and Wing Wall Construction • SEPA A4: Date is 2/6/2019 • SEPA A6: Anticipated start date is Feb 2019 or as soon as we are permitted. We anticipate being complete within 2—4 weeks after commencement. • SEPA A10: Mason County Building Permit, Tacoma Power Short-Term License, F&W HPA • SEPA A11: See previous page for description of work to be performed. • SEPA B 1(e) & B3(a)3: Estimated 5.0 cubic yards of concrete will be installed around 12 piles behind existing bulkhead. • SEPA 138(c): The original piers and docks have been demolished and removed. The new pier is a 17'6"x 8' structure constructed out of Alaskan yellow cedar and Thru-Flow grating. The new floating dock is a 10' x 16' structure constructed out of Alaskan yellow cedar, Thru-Flow grating, and encased Styrofoam. All hardare is stainless steel or pressure-treated. The existing bulkhead is still in place but has been refaced using 3x12 Alaskan yellow cedar. All other referenced structures (e.g., SFR) is still on the site. • SEPA 138(d): No Thank you, Z' Caralyn Valdeman Owner Integrated NW Construction, LLC General Contractor License #: INTEGNC84331 Electrical Contractor License #: INTEGNC843LT 60 N. Lake Cushman Road, Suite 109 PO Box 1008 Hoodsport, WA 98548 Cell: 206-310-4239 Email: Caralyn(a)integratedNWconstruction com Web: www.inteciratedNWconstruction.com BMF-011 Rev C Integrated NW Construction, LLC Request to Revise Approved Plans Permit Number:OL gkom 17 ( Name Parcel Number - -_� - Phone Number daytime ZS" Project Address gjl yi8 24 MailingAddress 73&0 ti4J 1 �s� r Y141 Please provide a complete, detailed description of the proposed revisions;tothe approved p s: L b5 /,N "X/ST av ' • Are two sets of the revis4plans or addendum indicating the changes in, ded? ;AYes ❑No • Are the approved construction plans included? Yes ❑ No The RED stauiRed "site" approved construction flans must be included. • Are the revisions clearly and accurately identified on the plans or, ddendum? OYes ❑No • Does the plan contain an engineer'�>,or architects lateral or vertical analysis? Z Yes ❑No If Yes, Has the engineer or architect approved this revision? 5 Yes El No Is a stamped and signed approval included with this,request? Yes ❑No No structural changes to a"desi ne& lan will be approved without the written consent of the engineer and/or architect of record. • Does the proposed revision modify the footprin`t,,,ot`location of the structure? ElYes No If Yes, Is a revised site plan, with all new se'tkack dimensions included with this request? ❑Yes ❑No Additional Information: 1 1nJAL /! T T D S S'r C6 3� v IV � c i2�° IR 711� ! Applicant's signature Date: 0/Z--yA Received by: Date: OFFICIAL USE ONLY Initials Department Date of Date Reviewers Original Valuation: $ for Review Received Assigned Approved Approval Additional Valuation: $ Reviewer Sq.Ft. x$ $ Building Sq.Ft. x$ $ Planning Total New Valuation $ Pubiic Additional Fees: Health Additional Planning Dept. $ Fire Marshal Additional Plan Review $ Additional Building Permit $ Public Additional Plumbing $ Works Additional Mechanical $ Additional Conditions/Comments: Additional E.H.Dept. $ Other $ Total Amount Due: $ m CO. 6 0, Z z M, tc,> m G) > m co > > > < :�; G)M�l X() Mon > M G) Mon 0 co C) omm > M r- M 00 z xo< 00T 0 :� q> 0 C G)0 M C)> r- W A(,) --j c m ;a Z Z Z OHO x ;u ,<x 0 r M Z > 0 0 -0 m 167' (SOUTH PROPEF�ff LINE) x 02 X M >0- Z - z ;a ZXN 0 z(n z --i M M U)0 po C: 5 Dry 0 r- c: > W z o --A z :i:-0, z 90 ;0 m 0 Gm ;0 1-11 , 2: X > --4 W MZ m > m r- A X > 0 m mmm 0< mdp z X r co 0 g: 03 > Fj)M --I X�D- ;U C/)co 0 X :E :E --i U)cf)0 -!n :*Z > 0 M U) 01, m IV ML> - w> z < Z (/) 2m IQ. O� cf) - ox on m Q 90 m 0 0 m XIM xm Emo qb C: x --I r- . r-U) > cf) Cf) 0 m < r"IA M W- -j -j,-> minim o 0 x MLOD x X --j-4 m(1) t\,) M 0 Cl) v)C) �0- = no c') M x 0 C/) z T co co Z 2 kiz N) C- -0 > > 0 o m m m V 0 0--4 r- CD 0 r- C:) ;a m > m m 00 0 Z < m 0 0 z Fn M -n TAIZ x C> CD MOX CD Lp Gh I M 0 1 C) 0 C)0 U) 'W Z 7- IS s > C) M z I- -TJ M r 0 o y 08 U) 0 -7-A cf) -N -s- --i z m 0 cn cnm m rl) 0 0 :E • :-A 0 -0 > I- r- co 0 z M, k n G) co. . /, 0 41. 0� Cf)� N 0) O CY) 7_ 0- CD 0Z (a N) -n Q'I (D IT ry m (D > - * Cj 0 m i - - m Ili m MOX w z ;a 0 u) 0 x Cf) m CL rn — m m 51 (D > (D 04 ;0 r, 0 0 z G) C-2 0 (r < Cl) < m M co CL 0 50 -v(> cn rpd- I'l) rL, r-- CD c 0 �8 60 m --q Z rn 0Z co m ---k r= G) �>- m > �D 0 0 00 Z 13 -t�- 0 m m Ul - 00 -n Q CP m > X Ul 0 r- M 0 m < FT, M 0MX >-i cn X :E 0 x M zn 0 c)�0 U) —Z 0 z0 Z po a, mD Z c W 00 — m Z U)Z C/) l co 0 m > m cn :E > > m OZ M > 0 > U) --A r- z o 4 M r- m195' (NOR�H PROPERTY LINE) > X m X ;a ID ID C m m M < ID . 0 --1 L<. =3 I\ CD CL ��-0 �a 0- -<cn m m -0 -- CD x 0 0 ;u r>- OD > 0 > =,< - = CD ��(0 3 -n 0 0 0 m 0 Z 0 O� a.in - Z . . M =; > z cn 0 (:) 0 U) C) m 0 D---i w § 0 c=3 CD > C, 0 0 T- X CD (3) X Om — 5, z CL 07 cn -0 a >c: c) CD a CD Zr--0 ::- cl) n WX �13 cn 0 0 co co r- CD z 0 x X m c M m = r OX > co 0 "a z 0 z > -n M U) rv) o z m Q (0 Z X X ;a 0 7 C) * >-4> C;) u C) M r- z x z --ij > �0 0 3: U) c 0� -r F- L', 0 F—I E=-1 x T7 x z - m Fn 3: < 5� 0 r u --A -P'-JU M v- <�l cr n G? > C) m > :-j 0:', 0 �`�O N 4a70 Z 0 C 0 0 cc X 0 4 ,q 4 > 0 > C, f'J >< NOD D �7 � � 0 cn DO � rn Y zJDD mri � z ZX � m m 0 Q n ; o Zcnx oZ> �� D mz � C7mz D m C) p G) -I •-io cnOmm G)=D n m pCl) z Z prm o7Z -n -iz0 w o > mX -� i C) 0r0 cOOrn C)=un< 0 <O, z z0 X m 167' (SOUTH PROPER T LINE) co g x c w � ��„Di i D w a D m � 0 co _ Cl) v' Tx � � m m-AmT Cn< x z r D �t1o> m 0 0X �� DON Z _ � cm X7Vo D -10 c Vim= z� _ (nzcn � � C7 CO ( (T1 h_ ` C70 � m� U) OD�Z �N o OG < D m � D -iX � �� SOD = :Utrrl�l0 D1-' D -� WZ0 � OZD �m -tr D � Z�Z WZm im �0 D pW (7zl —iW z -' �M- mmX x � -� p < mzU) zm 0 f OZ X 6Tm -i wwm NO X m m G) go N ,l m `�i v m D 0 In cnm © s O m 8ox �mX On � � .. z �` i pm ; v�-Irm-- Zma p0 N M p x G min m C.)— 0 A pz z -iz O_ ; Tx ow cn a � 0< W' co- >20 �cn � Z \ 0 m0cn cn mD oA D mD � 0 rrrr- w m0 OZ o0 G) No 1� \ m �m-A m o 0 1 y 0 v C) , �� TAg- LZ cn � m oW (5\ G) = p �1 O �. ® rn A C)0 U� \ �`1olao9 cJr1\L� 0 C) m 0). ., \ -n D13 � 0 r D O 0 Z� 1 _o i I G) �+ C) p' Z -'i z \ p Cn cnm - -I CD m o ', -A 00 �, o z y\l v C0 CD ��A AS V1`O o z ydM P-2 m m cD -I D-I - m n ZQz � —� m mpx o Z tP O X (D cQ \' -f 0 ''Cf) � � •� m � m --1 rN W Q z ° M ;o � D �D cNfl o0 i. 0 O ; Omer - <Om < 0 -n cD 0 m ~ ZU3 � rr \i r 0p o ° p N -n -< D0 �x w n > m ; J �m �, m -+ z D coC0 m to O -� 00 cv 00 m� "I 00 m a OZ f• - , p D� X r zp m OZ -� D o . . OXX mrn - u) Z � ��� * p C) 0 _ � (n - O Z �i x m << C ; gym � _ CD rnCl) Dm 2Cp rn -' 00z vat rm m f �+ £ - zC„ Z 0D D � �7 D w y,t _ zz cnmC- „L mph z Z D m _ 195' (NORTH PROPERTY LINE) C V D (m r� -j �� mDr D m .� �J r- m X ;o A \ W � m = mmm � < m Z o � k• � o Dp � n � °°� wx °' < 0 m ►a. CL - ' _ Dy << ��IX0 D (D cn rn r p ZMM 0 � _ cn 3 ;n0Op O0mp 0 p = X n�03 � S U)� Q 00 --1-1 � op0 Orn � az Q o rn rv =� 5 � sv' Zt o 00m -p � � �. r O Z G) r OO x a a � � xt cn z0 () K � � D cnC) �'�, OD cn O m _: _ r- = C tj '9J v � I III/ 1I. � i' �z A c� �� �, � zm � � o�`' �,� o�G a - - CO � =I c -0nto � ), p0 mm � m o a 11='1-1-1 I I- x pp r OJ: cn > C) -n rZ L x m r- z z m D z -� > [ 0 � a I✓ 1T�lf Co � m x -< '('0 pmQ m 10 o � 0 - Z Ids n � Z o - �,�� � N -b � < ADD X ydy -U x rn C) rP 3628 south 35P Street RECEIVED Tacoma;Washington 98409-3192 MAN — 9 2017 Mb� POWER tAcorin ruaLic urI4�t�es TACOMA PUBLIC UTILITIES 615 W. Alder Street - February 3, 2017 Randy and Barbara Sandoval Via email 7302 278th Pl. NW Stanwood, WA 98292 SUBJECT: Sandoval Shoreline Proposal on Tacoma Power Property Dear Mr. and Mrs. Sandoval: The City of Tacoma, Department of Public Utilities, Light Division (Tacoma Power)was recently contacted to review draft plans for bringing your shoreline structures into compliance. Reviewed were engineering plans by Steven Morta stamped January 13, 2017 and an undated scope of work labeled "CP-001 Rev C". Tacoma Power has will not allow existing decking waterward of the existing bulkhead to remain, but otherwise has no objection to the proposed activity on Tacoma Power's property and authorizes you to move forward with your regulatory permit applications. Please note that the proposed action will also require issuance of a shoreline use permit from Tacoma Power. Please provide Tacoma Power with a shoreline use permit application package in a timely manner. Feel free to contact me at 253-441-4180 or wwright(a)-ci.tacoma.wa.us if you have any questions. Sincerely, Wynne Wright i Shoreline and Lands Coordinator i 1 i i 1� _ 1 STA MASON COUNTY C F° Department of Community Services o A o N Planning Division i s N = 615 W Alder St, Shelton, WA 98584 NO Y ti (360)427-9670 OJ �O 1864 Exemption from Shoreline Management Act Case No.: SHX2017-00014 Substantial Development Permit Requirement The Proposal By: INTEGRATED NW CONSTRUCTION PO BOX 1008 HOODSPORT, WA 98548 Parcel Number: 423325000002 Site Address: 311 N MARINE VIEW DR HOODSPORT To undertake the following development: DEMO: remove & dispose of existing shoreline structures. CONSTRUCT NEW: staircase, bulkhead, retaining wall, floating dock, and pier per engineered drawings Within Lake Cushman and/or its associated wetlands is exempt from the requirement of substantial development because the development is categorized under WAC 173-27-040(2) as being category: B-normal maintenance Please contact Kell McAboy at ext 365 if you have any questions. Issued-3/21/2017 Authorized Loc"overnment Official SHX2017-00014 March 21, 201 P�ON.STgTFo� MASON COUNTY C 4-, Department of Community Services MO A° = Planning Division o T 615 W Alder St, Shelton, WA 98584 J Y y (360)427-9670 1864 DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (WAC 197-11-340) SEP2017-00017 Description of Proposal: DEMO: remove & dispose of existing shoreline structures. CONSTRUCT NEW: staircase, bulkhead, retaining wall, floating dock, and pier per engineered drawings Proponent: BARBARA & RANDOLPH SANDOVAL Location of Proposal: 311 N MARINE VIEW DR HOODSPORT Parcel Number: 423325000002 Legal Description: LAKE CUSHMAN #11 TR 2 Directions to Site: From Shelton, US HWY 101 N to N Lake Cushman Rd/SR119 and turn left; proceed up hill to Marine View Dr and turn left, left on Marine View Loop, house is on right, shoreline on left Lead Agency: Mason County The Lead Agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed Environmental Checklist and other information on file with the Lead Agency. This information is available to the public upon request. Please contact Kell McAboy at ext. 365 with any questions. This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2). The Lead Agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date shown below, when the determination is final. Comments must be submitted to Dept. of Community Development, 615 W Alder St, Shelton WA 98584 by 4/5/2017. Appeal of this determination must be filed within a 14-day period following this final determination date, per Mason County Code Chapter 15.11 Appeals. Authorized Local Goverment Official Date I LD201 - O B7Bk14'ALASKAN YELLOW CEDAR POST INSTALLED ; SANDOVAL-SITEPLAN O RETAINING WALL IN B-FOOT MIN.DEPTH x 2•FOCT DIA.CONCR PALLED -- 6 X 6 POST DETAIL EXCAVATIONS. `REFER NEV@-6'ON-CENTER RECEIVED > ATTACH 3 x 12"WI-IALER SDARDS TO 8`0'POST OC — - WITH GALV OR STAINLESS STEEL(S/S)&'8"WOOD PIERI DOCK DETAIL �-/� LAG BOLTS AND WASHERS. MIN.3 PER WHALER. {ON SHEET 4 OF 6t, .2 } xu j, A ' /i - 9 2017 FIELD VERIFY LANDING/STAIR ELEVATIONS _ i ___){ TO ENSURE THAT RISER HEIGHT<7.75" 615 W. Alder Street AND THAT TREAD LENGTH>10"PER / ! '•, 20151RC SECTION R311,7.5' 730 FT A / lWOW LAKE CUSHMAN RESERVOIR ', EXISTING,FLOATING CURRENT `�' DOCK AND PIER TO SHORELNIE L4 r�rn 56re 1.ne , _ BE REMOVED rA _ p v 0� STAIRS TO BE s' cwm On y` - REMOVED #A 0 M5 � -= J m� ptXr—Opt�� lei i EXISTING BULKHEAD EXISTING FLOATING i — 742'(WEST PROPERTY LINE) DOCKTO BE REMOVED v7 _ N �KH t` 7 Existing Deck to G1 i be remove VOCATION - ��x1Q i L_� INCREASE LONG' • TERM SLOPE STABILITY ° u_' CT3 P.AT()(NOTE. ROOT SYS.EM w �L PROVIDES REINFORCE C �'� OFSy�,''P)� P r OREjR1NA 50 61 6 x 6 POSTS 1WENT TO SOI S1 r 1 LU Z AO SNE -6 FT O.C. n_ rn G F / 3 w� 'THESE 1R5 ppj�((�'�\l�� Z Q.o�s?pL;�TV e O SSP 110*E Rf'S�1MIS LOCATED ON THE EAST S/0 EXISTING NEB NAV, STAIRS& II.OUNIl' ; Ip LANDINGS i ����N '2LAN REQUIRED TO BEpNs� -ITE 760F1 E O 11NGES SUBJET TO APPROVAL REMOVED SCALE: 118"=1 FEET l IDate 'q1-712or-7 Cy 2' 4' 6' 6' 10' 12' 14' i 6` 60, ?f�f� REFERENCE: LOCATION: 311 Marine View Dr.N.,Hoodsport.WA 96548 PROPOSED PROJECT.REPLACE EXISTING STAIRS,RETROFIT APPLICANT: BARBARA AND RANDY SANDOVAL EXISTING BULKHEAD,REPLACE THE TWO EXISITING ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: LAT J LONG: 47 deg 25'7"1123 deg 13'8"West DOCKS WITH A SINGLE PIER AND DOCK. 1. ANDERSON SURVIVING TRUSTEE JANET K.(#:42332-50-00003) IN:LK CUSHMAN,NEAR:HOODSPORT,WA 2, REED DANIGL&&ROBIN M. (#:42332-50-00001) PAGE 2 OF 6 DATE: JAN.13,2017 COUNTY:MASON,S TE:WA �j�nec+Q� : 2►e•S M