The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMiscWASHINGTON STATE Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) Form 1 •2 ~ ~ US Army Corps of Engineers • Seattle Dlstru::1 USE BLACK OR BLUE INK TO ENTER ANSWERS IN THE WHITE SPACES BELOW. Part 1-Project Identification r--------------------------------------, , AGENCY USE ONLY : Date received: Agency reference #: ________ _ Tax Parcel #(s): _________ _ 1. Project Name (A name for your project that you create. Examples: Smith's Dock or Seabrook Lane Development) It!liliiI Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project (USACE Project # NWS-2014-1025) Part 2-Applicant The person and/or organization responsible for the project. It!liliiI 2a. Name (Last, First, Middle) Tom Bean 2b. Organization (If applicable) King County Water and Land Resources Division 2e. Mailing Address (Street or PO Box) 201 S. Jackson Street, Room 600 2d. City, State, Zip Seattle, WA 98104-3855 2e. Phone (1) 2f. Phone (2) 2g. Fax 2h. E-mail (206) 477-4638 ( ) ( ) Tom.Bean@kingcounty.gov 1Additional fonns may be required for the following pennits: • If your project may qualify for Department of the Anny authorization through a Regional General Penn it (RGP), contact the U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers for application infonnation (206) 764-3495. • If your project might affect species listed under the Endangered Species Act, you will need to fill out a Specific Project Infonnation Fonn (SPIF) or prepare a Biological Evaluation. Fonns can be found at hUp:l/www.nws.usace.army.miI/Missions/CiviIWorks/Regulatory/PermitGuidebook/EndangeredSpecies.aspx. • Not all cities and counties accept the JARPA for their local Shoreline pennits. If you need a Shoreline perm¢,.JYAt~-t~ ~ppro~r1: .. e city or county government to make sure they accept the JARPA. )"<:~ ;.... \,' ',' , .' 2To access an online JARPA fonn with [help] screens, go to http://www.epermitting.wa .gov/site/alias resourcecenter/jaroa jaroa form/9984/jarpa form.aspx. JU!1010~ For other help, contact the Governor's Office for Regulatory Innovation and Assistance at (800) 917-0043 or help@'ora:vya.qoy, _ ... ,'-' .... , JARPA Revision 2012.2 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.) [bgjQ] 3a. Name (Last, First, Middle) Ritchotte, George L. 3b. Organization (If applicable) Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 3c. Mailing Address (Street or PO Box) 2200 6th Avenue, Suite 1100 3d. City. State, Zip Seattie, WA 98121 3e. Phone (1) 3f. Phone (2) 3g. Fax 3h. E-mail (206) 787-8288 ( ) ( ) gritchotte@herrerainc.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. [bgJQ] ~ Same as applicant. (Skip to Part 5.) o Repair or maintenance activities on existing rights-of-way or easements. (Skip to Part 5.) o There are multiple upland property owners. Complete the section below and fill out JARPA Attachment A for each additional property owner. o 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. 4a. Name (Last, First, Middle) 4b. Organization (If applicable) 4c. Mailing Address (Street or PO Box) 4d. City, State, Zip 4e. Phone (1) 4f. Phone (2) 4g. Fax 4h. E-mail ( ) ( ) ( ) JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 2 of 15 Part 5-Project Location(s) Identifying information about the property or properties where the project will occur, [ill;!Q] D There are multiple project locations (e,g. linear projects). Complete the section below and use JARPA Attachment B for each additional project location Sa. Indicate the type of ownership of the property. (Check all that apply,) ~ D Private D Federal IZI Publicly owned (state, county, city, special districts like schools, ports, etc.) o Tribal o Department of Natural Resources (DNR) -managed aquatic lands (Complete JARPA Attachment E) 5b. Street Address (Cannot be a PO Box. If there is no address, provide other location information in 5p.) [b§!QJ 550 Monster Rd 5c. City, State, Zip (If the project is not in a city or town, provide the name of the nearest city or town,) ~ Renton, WA 98055 5d. County [ill;!Q] King 5e. Provide the section, township, and range for the project location. [b§!QJ '!. Section Section Township Range SW 13 23 North 4 East Sf. Provide the latitude and longitude of the project location. [b§!QJ • Example: 47.03922 N lal./-122.89142 W long. (Use decimal degrees -NAD 83) 47.475327N/122.245100W 5g. List the tax parcel number(s) for the project location. ~ • The local county assessor's office can provide this information. 3779200090 and 7229500281 5h. Contact information for all adjoining property owners. (If you need more space, use JARPA Attachment C.) ~ Name Mailing Address Tax Parcel # (if known) City of Renton 1055 S Grady Way 3779200119; 3779200116;9188000150; 1323049078 Renton, WA 98055 BNSF P.O. Box 961089 1323049009 Fort Worth, TX 76161 Washington Department of P.O. Box 47016 7229500310 Natural Resources Olympia, WA 98504 5i. List all wetlands on or adjacent to the project location. ~ Four wetlands were mapped in the project vicinity, wetlands A, B, C, and D. Please refer to the Wetland and Stream Delineation Report (Appendix A) for additional details. JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page30f1S 5j. List all waterbodies (other than wetlands) on or adjacent to the project location. ~ Black River; LLiD 1222505474742 5k. Is any part of the project area within a 1 OO-year floodplain? ~ [8] Yes ONo o Don't know 51. Briefly describe the vegetation and habitat conditions on the property. ~ The project will take place in and adjacent to the Black River. Riparian and wetland vegetation includes black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera), big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), red alder (Alnus rubra), willows (Salix spp.), Pacific dogwood (Comus nutfallil), cattail (Typha latifolia), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), and reed canarygrass (Pha/aris arundinacea). Upland vegetation within the project footprint consists primarily of maintained lawn dominated by Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), with some scattered snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus) and a few shore pines (Pinus contolta). The Black River Pump Station impounds water behind the dam, creating a large, slow-moving pool. The river is listed as impaired on the state 303(d) list for fecal coliform and is listed as a water of concern for dissolved .. oxygen and temperature. There is little large woody debris and no undercut banks or off-channel habitat. Substrates consist of fine-grained sand and silt. Sediment samples collected by King County indicate that the sediment contains levels of arsenic, cadmium, and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPHs) that exceed the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) Method A or B cleanup levels for unrestricted land use. In addition, sediment exceeds freshwater sediment quality criteria for TPHs, bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), arsenic, cadmium, and nickel. Sm. Describe how the property is currently used. ~ The Black River Pump Station and parking lot are on the western portion of the property. The eastern part of the property is open space adjacent to the City of Renton's 92-acre Black River Riparian Forest and Wetland. 5n. Describe how the adjacent properties are currently used. I.tlli.!QI Surrounding properties are primarily undeveloped. Adjacent properties to the east are part of the Black River Riparian Forest and Wetland. A regional trail parallels the north side of the river, and BNSF railroad tracks are immediately north of the trail. Monster Road borders the property to the south. 50. Describe the structures (above and below ground) on the property, including their purpose(s) and current condition. I.tlli.!QI The Black River Pump Station and associated infrastructure are located on the property. The pump station consists of a concrete dam that spans the Black River channel, with eight pumps to convey flow from the forebay behind the dam to the downstream Black River channel. The pump station provides flood control for the lower Green River Valley. The dam is in good condition. 5p. Provide driving directions from the closest highway to the project location, and attach a map. I.tlli.!QI From 1-405 North take exit 1. • Turn left on SR181 at the end of the off ramp • Turn right on SW Grady Way after passing underneath 1-405 • Turn left onto Oakesdale Avenue SW From 1-405 South, take exit 2A. • Turn right onto SR167 • Take a left on SW Grady Way • Take a right on Oakesdale Avenue SW Follow Oakesdale Avenue (which becomes Monster Road SW) until just beyond SW 7th St. The parking lot is on the right, just before the pump station. JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 4 of 15 Part 6-Project Description 6a. Briefly summarize the overall project. You can provide more detail in 6b. rtlliIQl The King County Water and Land Resources Division operates the Black River Pump Station to provide flood control protection for the lower Green River Valley. King County plans to remove sediment that has accumulated in the pump station forebay. Project construction would entail: • Staging and site preparation, which will include constructing a sediment stockpiling, decant and treatment area and crane pad • Mobilizing equipment in the work area • Isolating the in-water work area with turbidity curtains, cofferdams, temporary flow diversion structures, or other best management practices (BMPs) • Excluding fish from the in-water work area • Pumping the Black River through a temporary bypass pipe on the north side of the river • Placing sediment removal equipment in the work area using the crane • Removing and stockpiling sediment adjacent to the river • Decanting stockpiled sediment and treating the wastewater • Removing in-water BMPs • Hauling sediment off site • Restoring and replanting any cleared areas. 6b. Describe the purpose of the project and why you want or need to perform it. rtlliIQl Sediment that has accumulated upstream of the pump station since its construction in the 1970s is now an operational concern for the facility. The project is necessary to maintain the pump station's flood control capacity. King County proposes to remove about 2,900 cubic yards of sediment from the river channel, extending from the pump station to approximately 100 feet upstream. 6c. Indicate the project category. (Check all that apply) rtlliIQl o Commercial o Residential o Institutional o Transportation o Recreational k8J Maintenance o Environmental Enhancement 6d. Indicate the major elements of your project. (Check all that apply) [help] o Aquaculture o Culvert o Float o Retaining Wall o Bank Stabilization o Dam /Weir o Floating Home (upland) o Boat House o Dike / Levee / Jetty o Geotechnical Survey o Road o Boat Launch o Ditch k8J Land Clearing o Scientific Measurement Device o Boat Lift o Dock/ Pier o Marina / Moorage o Stairs o Bridge k8J Dredging o Mining o Stormwater facility o Bulkhead o Fence o Outfall Structure o Swimming Pool o Buoy o Ferry Terminal o Piling/Dolphin o Utility Line o Channel Modification o Fishway DRaft k8J Other: Revegetation JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 5 of 15 6e. Describe how you plan to construct each project element checked in 6d. Include specific construction methods and equipment to be used. [bg!Q] • Identify where each element will occur in relation to the nearest waterbody. • Indicate which activities are within the 100-year floodplain. Land clearing: Prior to dredging, a staging and sediment stockpiling, decant, and water treatment area will be constructed on the south side of the river. That size of staging area is approximately 13,359 square feet and includes an access road to the Black River. The staging area overlaps with portions of the buffers of Wetlands Band C, and falls almost entirely within the 200-foot regulatory buffer of the Black River. Approximately 8,766 square feet of vegetation will be removed: 528 square feet of combined Wetland C and stream buffer; 1,171 square feet of stream buffer only; 3,825 square feet of combined Wetland B and stream buffer; 2,856 square feet of Wetland B buffer only; and 386 square feet of combined Wetland B, C, and stream buffer. The remaining portion of the staging area (4,593 square feet) will be located on the pump station parking lot. Wetland B is a Category III emergent and scrub-shrub wetland dominated by reed canarygrass and Himalayan blackberry. Wetland C is a Category IV emergent, scrub-shrub, and forested wetland. The buffer for both wetlands is primarily disturbed upland adjacent to the parking lot pump station consisting almost entirely of I . Kentucky bluegrass. One shore pine, which is 15 inches diameter at breast height (dbh), is in the middle of the grassy area and will be cleared. Vegetation within the proposed access road alignment consists of several small (2-to 4-inch dbh) alders and two small (2-inch dbh) Douglas-firs with an understory of reed canarygrass and Himalayan blackberry. The Black River will be pumped through a bypass pipe for the duration of in-water work. The pipe will run along the north bank of the river through portions of the buffer of Wetland D and the Black River. There may be some minor vegetation clearing in the bypass pipe alignment, resulting in approximately 10,019 square feet of combined Wetland D/stream buffer impact, and roughly 3,738 square feet of stream buffer impact. Upland vegetation within the alignment consists of weedy herbaceous species such as reed canarygrass, tansy (Tanacetum vulgare), and Himalayan blackberry. On the shoreline, yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus) dominates. No woody vegetation will be cleared to lay the pipe. Dredging: Sediment will be removed by dewatered mechanical excavation, which will involve isolating the sediment removal area from the river by constructing a temporary flow diversion structure (e.g., cofferdam) spanning the entire width of the river, installing temporary pumps and piping to divert the river, and dewatering the sediment removal area. Installation of a flow diversion structure will not require impact driving. Flows will be rerouted through pipes on the north bank of the river. Pipes will be placed on existing fill pads and gravel access roads. The work area will be partially dewatered using the pump station pumps until water levels are too low or turbidity levels are too high, at which point portable pumps will be used to remove the remaining water. Pumps will remain on site during excavation to remove water that may seep past the cofferdam. Water will be pumped downstream of the pump station, unless it is too turbid to meet Ecology Surface Water Quality Criteria, in which case it will be pumped directly to the onsite decant facility for treatment prior to being discharged back into the Black River. Fish capture and removal will be conducted by a qualified biologist. Fish will be removed from the in-water work zone prior to and during dewatering using a combination of seine and dip netting. Electrofishing may be used once adult and sub-adult fish have been removed from the work area. Any portable pumps used to dewater the area will be fitted with screens to prevent fish from being sucked into the pumps per RCW 77.57.070. Nets will be composed of non-abrasive nylon material. Fish handling will be kept to the minimum necessary to remove fish from the area. Sediment will be removed from the riverbed using conventional excavation equipment such as clamshell buckets or backhoes, and stockpiled in the dewatering area. A crane pad will be built in the staging area to support a crane that will lift and remove equipment into and from the riverbed. Water that drains from the sediment will be contained and treated prior to being discharged back into the Black River. Water will be tested prior to discharge; if it does not meet surface water quality criteria it will be JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 6 of 15 discharged to the sanitary sewer system or hauled off site for disposal. Drying agents may be used to dewater the sediment; the Black River will not be exposed to drying agents. Dewatered sediment will be hauled off site for disposal at a facility approved to accept such waste. Revegetation: Cleared areas will be revegetated with native species once construction is complete. Refer to the Wetland and Stream Buffer Mitigation Report (Appendix B) for details. Sf. What are the anticipated start and end dates for project construction? (MonthlYear) (bgJIlJ • If the project will be constructed in phases or stages, use JARPA Attachment 0 to list the start and end dates of each phase or stage. Start date: May 2016 End date: October 2017 D See JARPA Attachment D Staging area construction will begin as early as May 2016. Dredging will occur during the in-water work window of July 1 through August 31. The project will be conducted over two in-water work windows in 2016 and 2017. Site restoration and revegetation will occur in September and October of 2017. The project may be completed as early as October of 2016 if dredging can be accomplished in one season. Sg. Fair market value of the project, including materials, labor, machine rentals, etc. (bgJIlJ $1,596,200 Sh. Will any portion of the project receive federal funding? (bgJIlJ • If yes, list each agency providing funds . DYes [2J No D Don't know Part 7-Wetlands: Impacts and Mitigation [2J Check here if there are wetlands or wetland buffers on or adjacent to the project area. (If there are none, skip to Part 8.) (bgJIlJ 7a. Describe how the project has been designed to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to wetlands, D Not applicable (bgJIlJ Project staff met with the representatives from the US Army Corps of Engineers (Project # NWS-2014-1025), Washington State Department of Ecology, and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe on November 12, 2014, to discuss the project. Project staff also met with representatives from the City of Renton on December 8, 2014, and from Herons Forever on December 9, 2014, Based on feedback from those organizations, the project design was modified to avoid wetland and buffer impacts: • The staging area was moved from the north side of the river to the south side to avoid impacts on Wetland D. • The south side staging area was sized and located to avoid impacts on Wetlands Band C. • Buffer impacts have been minimized to the extent possible. 0 The access road to the Black River was designed to avoid impacts on trees great than 4 inches dbh. 0 The staging area was designed to minimize clearing of native vegetation. No native vegetation will be cleared for the stockpiling and dewatering area. 0 The staging area was sized and located outside the drip line of large trees to minimize impacts on root systems. 7b. Will the project impact wetlands? (bgJIlJ DYes [2J No D Don't know JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 7 of 15 7c. Will the project impact wetland buffers? [h§!Q] r2:J Yes DNo D Don't know 7 d. Has a wetland delineation report been prepared? [h§!Q] • If Yes, submil the report, including data sheets, with the JARPA package. r2:J Yes DNo 7e. Have the wetlands been rated using the Western or Eastern Washington Wetland Rating System? [h§!Q] • If Yes, submit the wetland rating forms and figures with the JARPA package. r2:J Yes DNo D Don't know Wetland rating forms are provided in the Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report (Appendix A). 7f. Have you prepared a mitigation plan to compensate for any adverse impacts to wetlands? [h§!Q] • If Yes, submit the plan with the JARPA package and answer 7g. • If No, or Not applicable, explain below why a mitigalion plan should not be required. r2:J Yes DNo D Not applicable There are no wetland impacts, but a buffer mitigation plan has been prepared per City of Renton municipal code and is provided in Appendix B. 7g. Summarize what the mitigation plan is meant to accomplish, and describe how a watershed approach was used to design the plan. [h§!Q] The mitigation plan was designed to restore temporary impacts on stream and wetland buffers. Non-native species in cleared areas will be replaced with native species to provide improved ecological functions and additional wildlife habitat. A watershed approach was implemented by providing onsite, in-kind mitigation. 7h. Use the table below to list the type and rating of each wetland impacted, the extent and duration of the impact, and the type and amount of mitigation proposed. Or if you are submitting a mitigation plan with a similar table, you can state (below) where we can find this information in the plan. [h§!Q] Activity (fill, Wetland Wetland Impact Duration Proposed Wetland drain, excavate, Name' type and area (sq. of impact3 mitigation mitigation area flood, etc,) rating ft, or type' (sq. ft. or categofy> Acres) acres) N/A t If no official name for the wetland exists, create a unique name (such as 'Wetland 1 "). The name should be consistent with other project documents, such as a wetland delineation report. 2 Ecology wetland category based on current Western Washington or Eastern Washington Wetland Rating System. Provide the wetland rating forms with the JARPA package. 31ndicate the days, months or years the wetland will be measurably impacted by the activity. Enter "permanent" if applicable. 4 Creation (C), Re-establishmentlRehabilitation (R), Enhancement (E). Preservation (P). Mitigation Bank/In-lieu fee (B) Page number(s) for similar information in the mitigation plan, if available: 7i. For all filling activities identified in 7h, describe the source and nature of the fill material, the amount in cubic yards that will be used, and how and where it will be placed into the wetland. [h§!Q] Not applicable. 7j. For all excavating activities identified in 7h, describe the excavation method, type and amount of material in cubic yards you will remove, and where the material will be dis!,osed. [h§!Q] Not applicable. JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 8 of 15 Part 8-Waterbodies (other than wetlands): Impacts and Mitigation In Part 8, "waterbodies" refers to non-wetland waterbodies. (See Part 7 for information related to wetlands.) lb!ili2l I:2J Check here if there are waterbodies on or adjacent to the project area. (If there are none, skip to Part 9.) 8a. Describe how the project is designed to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to the aquatic environment. lb!ili2l D Not applicable Dredging will take place within the Black River from behind the face of the dam to approximately 100 feet upstream. The project will incorporate the following minimization measures: • In-water work will occur during the approved in-water work window (July 1 to August 31). • The project has been designed to limit turbidity by dewatering the dredge area and bypassing Black River flows around the work zone. BMPs will be implemented to minimize the spread of sediment. The project has developed a water quality monitoring plan (Appendix C) to ensure compliance with Washington State water quality standards. Points of compliance have been established 100 feet upstream and downstream of the in-water work zone. Turbidity, temperature, dissolved oxygen, and pH will all be monitored to ensure project design and BMPs are functioning as proposed. • Turbidity curtains or other BMPs will be used to minimize turbidity and the spread of potentially contaminated sediments. • At the upstream extent of the dredged area, the face of the dredge prism will be angled to prevent remaining sediment from slumping into the work zone and increasing turbidity. • A sand cap of approximately 280 cubic yards will be placed over the dredged area to minimize the potential for post-project sediment mobilization. • All water removed from the river during dewatering and decant activities will be treated to meet Ecology Surface Water Quality Criteria for turbidity and toxics before being discharged into the Black River downstream of the pump station. Water that does not meet Surface Water Quality Criteria will be taken off site for treatment and disposal. • Drying agents used to dry sediment will not be allowed to contact Waters of the State. • A Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control plan will be implemented during construction to prevent and reduce the potential for erosion. The plan requires the placement and maintenance of erosion control measures on site throughout construction. Measures could include placement of straw wattles, silt fences, temporary seeding, and/or soil coverings as appropriate. • An engineer-approved Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures plan will be implemented to guard against the release of any harmful pollutants or products. • All cleared areas will be revegetated with native plant species following construction. • The project will comply with all terms and conditions of applicable state and local regulations and permits. • Fish will be removed from the in-water work zone by a qualified biologist prior to dredging. Fish handling will be minimized to the extent possible. Seining and dip netting is the preferred removal method. Nets will be composed of non-abrasive materials. Electrofishing may be used to remove any remaining fish once adults and sub-adult fish have been excluded from the in-water work area. Electrofishing will comply with the most recent US Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service guidelines. 8b. Will your project impact a waterbody or the area around a waterbody? lb!ili2l I:2J Yes DNo 8e. Have you prepared a mitigation plan to compensate for the project's adverse impacts to non-wetland waterbodies? lb!ili2l • If Yes, submit the plan with the JARPA package and answer 8d . 0 If No, or Not applicable, explain below why a mitigation plan should not be required. DYes DNo I:2J Not applicable JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 9 of 15 Impacts on the Black River will be temporary and limited to the duration of dredging (approximately six weeks each during July and August of 2016 and July and August of 2017). There will be no permanent alteration to hydrology or stream banks. Minor vegetation impacts are addressed in the buffer mitigation report. Sd. Summarize what the mitigation plan is meant to accomplish. Describe how a watershed approach was used to design the plan. • If you already completed 79 you do not need to restate your answer here. [bg!Q] N/A Se. Summarize impact(s) to each waterbody in the table below. [bg!Q] Activity Amount of material (cubic (clear, Waterbody Impact Duration of yards) to be Area (sq. ft. or linear dredge, fill, name' location2 impact' placed in or ft.) of waterbody pile drive, removed from directly affected etc.} waterbody Points of compliance for turbidity have been Black River 6 weeks 2,900 cubic established 100 feet Dredging Black River Pump Station each in 2016 yards of upstream of in-water work and 100 feet forebay and 2017 sediment downstream of the Black River Pump Station. Black River 100 feet upstream of Fill (sand cap) Black River Pump Station Permanent 280 cubic yards forebay the pump station 'It no official name for the waterbody exists, create a unique name (such as "Stream 1") The name should be consistent with other documents provided. "Indicate whether the impact will occur in or adjacent to the waterbody_ If adjacent, provide the distance between the impact and the waterbody and indicate whether the impact will occur within the 100-year flood plain. 3 Indicate the days, months or years the waterbodv will be measurably imoacted bv the work. Enter "permanent" if applicable. Sf. For all activities identified in 8e, describe the source and nature ofthe fill material, amount (in cubic yards) you will use, and how and where it will be placed into the waterbody. [bg!Q] Approximately 280 cubic yards of clean sand will be placed on the riverbed once dredging is complete to minimize mobilization of fine sediment. Traditional upland earthwork equipment will be used to place the sand cap while the work area is dewatered. Sg. For all excavating or dredging activities identified in 8e, describe the method for excavating or dredging. type and amount of material you will remove, and'where the material will be disposed. [bg!Q] Sediment will be removed by dewatered mechanical excavation, which will involve isolating the sediment removal area from the river by constructing a temporary flow diversion structure (e.g., cofferdam) spanning the entire width of the river, installing temporary pumps and piping to divert the river, and dewatering the sediment removal area. Sediment will be excavated with conventional excavation equipment such as clamshell buckets or backhoes, and stockpiled in the dewatering area. Water that drains from the sediment will be contained and treated prior to being discharged back into the Black River. Water will be tested prior to discharge; if it does not meet surface water quality criteria, it will be discharged to the sanitary sewer system or hauled off site for disposal. Dewatered sediment will be hauled off site for disposal at a facility approved to accept such waste. Hydraulic dredging (using suction pumps to remove sediment and entrained water) may also be used to remove sediments within the pump bay area behind the trash racks due to difficulty accessing that area. Once dredging is complete, a sand cap approximately 1 foot thick will be placed over the dredged area to minimize the potential for sediment mobilization when the area is rewatered. JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 10 of 15 Part 9-Additional Information Any additional information you can provide helps the reviewer(s) understand your project. Complete as much of this section as you can. It is ok if you cannot answer a question. 9a. If you have already worked with any government agencies on this project, list them below. ~ Agency Name Contact Name Phone Most Recent Date of Contact US Army Corps of Engineers Suzanne Anderson 206-764-3708 12/18/14 Washington State Department of Ecology Rebekah Padgett 425-649-7129 12/18/14 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Martin Fox 253-939-3311 11/12/14 City of Renton Department of Public Works Ron Straka 425-430-7248 10/30/14 City of Renton Department of Community Clark Close 425-430-7289 5/4/15 and Economic Development 9b. Are any of the wetlands or waterbodies identified in Part 7 or Part 8 of this JARPA on the Washington Department of Ecology's 303(d) List? ~ • If Yes, list the parameter(s) below. • If you don't know. use Washington Department of Ecology's Water Quality Assessment tools at httQ:llwww.ec~.wa.govIQrogramslwgI303dl. [8J Yes ONo The Black River is on the Washington State Department of Ecology's 303(d) list for the following parameters: • Fecal coliform • Dissolved oxygen • Temperature • bis(2ethylnexyl)phthalate 9c. What U.S. Geological Survey Hydrological Unit Code (HUC) is the project in? ~ • Go to httQ:llclQub.eQa.govlsurfllocatelindex.ctm to help identify the HUe. HUC 171100130305 9d. What Water Resource Inventory Area Number (WRIA #) is the project in? ~ • Go to httQ:llwww.ec~.wa.govlserviceslgislmaQslwrialwria.htm to find the WRIA #. WRIA9 ge. Will the in-water construction work comply with the State of Washington water quality standards for turbidity? ~ • Go to httQ:llwww.ecy.w8.gov/l2rograms/wg/swgs/criteria.html for the standards. [8J Yes ONo o Not applicable A water quality monitoring plan has been developed to ensure compliance with Washington State water quality standards for turbidity. 9f. If the project is within the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act, what is the local shoreline environment designation? ~ • If you don'l know. contact the local planning department. • For more infonnalion, go to: httQ:llwww.ecy.wa.govIQrogramslsealsmallaws rules1173-261211 designations.html. o Rural DUrban [8J Natural o Aquatic o Conservancy o Other JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 11 of 15 99. What is the Washington Department of Natural Resources Water Type? ~ • Go to httf.):LLwww.dnr.wa.goviBusinessPermitsiToQicsiForestPracticesAgQlicationsiPagesLf(2 watertYQing.as(2x for the Forest Practices Water Typing System. r8l Shoreline o Fish o Non·Fish Perennial o Non-Fish Seasonal 9h. Will this project be designed to meet the Washington Department of Ecology's most current stormwater manual? ~ • If No, provide the name of the manual your project is designed to meet. r8l Yes ONo Name of manual: 2012 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, as amended in December 2014. 9i. Does the project site have known contaminated sediment? ~ • If Yes, please describe below. r8l Yes ONo Sediment samples collected by King County indicate that the sediment contains levels of arsenic, cadmium, and TPHs that exceed the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) Method A or B cleanup levels for unrestricted land use. In addition, sediment exceeds freshwater sediment quality criteria for TPHs, bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, PCBs, arsenic, cadmium, and nickel. Road runoff over the years is the likely source of most contaminants. 9j. If you know what the property was used for in the past, describe below. ~ Prior to the construction of the Black River Pump Station in the 1970s, the property was riparian open space. 9k. Has a cultural resource (archaeological) survey been performed on the project area? ~ • If Yes, attach it to your JARPA package. r8l Yes o No The Cultural Resources Report is provided in Appendix D. 91. Name each species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act that occurs in the vicinity of the project area or might be affected by the proposed work. ~ Puget Sound Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Puget Sound steelhead (0. mykiss) Coastal-Puget Sound bull trout (Sa/ve/inus confluentus) See the Biological Evaluation in Appendix E for additional information on ESA-listed species in the project area. JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 120115 9m. Name each species or habitat on the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's Priority Habitats and Species List that might be affected by the proposed work. lilllli2l Common name Scientific name Status' Presence in study area River lamprey Lampelra ayresi FCo, Likely to occur SC Bald eagle Haliaeelus FCo, Documented leucocephalus SS Great blue heron Ardea herodias SM Documented Turkey vulture Calharles aura SM Likely to occur Osprey Pandeon haliaelus SM Documented Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus FCo, Possible SS Pileated woodpecker Oryocopus pi/ealus SC Documented Townsend's big-Corynorhinus lownsendii FCo, Possible eared bat SC Biodiversity area and Not applicable PH Urban deciduous riparian forest with great corridor blue heron nesting and waterfowl use. Waterfowl Not applicable PH Ponds provide urban wintering dabbling concentrations and diving duck habitat. See the Habitat Data Report in Appendix F for additional information on species and habitats in the project vicinity. 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 for Regulatory Innovation and Assistance at (800) 917-0043 or help@ora.wa.gov. • For a list of addresses to send your JARPA to, click on agency addresses for completed JARPA. 10a. Compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). (Check all that apply.) lilllli2l • For more information about SEPA, go to www.ec~.wa.gov/Rrograms/sea/seRa/e-review.html. [8J A copy of the SEPA determination or letter of exemption is included with this application in Appendix G. o A SEPA determination is pending with King County. The expected decision date is March 15,2015. o I am applying for a Fish Habitat Enhancement Exemption. (Check the box below in 10b.) lilllli2l o This project is exempt (choose type of exemption below). o Categorical Exemption. Under what section of the SEPA administrative code (WAC) is it exempt? o Other: o SEPA is pre·empted by federal law. 10b. Indicate the permits you are applying for. (Check all that apply.) lilllli2l LOCAL GOVERNMENT JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 13 of 15 Local Government Shoreline permits: D Substantial Development [8] Conditional Use D Variance [8] Shoreline Exemption Type (explain): Normal maintenance or repair Other City/County permits: D Floodplain Development Permit [8] Critical Areas Ordinance STATE GOVERNMENT Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife: [8] Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) D 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 a~~ro~riate boxes: D $150 check enclosed. Check # Attach check made payable to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. o My project is exempt from the application fee. (Check appropriate exemption) o HPA processing is conducted by applicant-funded WDFW staff. Agreement # 0 Mineral prospecting and mining. D 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.) 0 Project is a modification of an existing HPA originally applied for, prior to July 10, 2012. HPA# Washington Department of Natural Resources: o 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: [8] Section 401 Water Quality Certification FEDERAL GOVERNMENT United States Department of the Army permits (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers): [8] Section 404 (discharges into waters of the U.S.) o Section 10 (work in navigable waters) United States Coast Guard permits: o Private Aids to Navigation (for non-bridge projects) JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 14 of 15 Part 11-Authorizing Signatures Signatures are required before submitting the JARPA package. The JARPA package includes the JARPA form, project plans, photos, etc. [bg)Q] 11 a. Applicant Signature (required) lblill!l 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 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 [bg)Q] 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. Authorized Agent Printed Name Authorized Agent Signature Date 11 c. Property Owner Signature (if not applicant) [bg)Q] 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.C §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 for Regulatory Innovation and Assistance (ORIA) at (800) 917-0043. People with hearing loss can call 711 for Washington Relay Service. People with a speech disability can call (877) 833-6341. aRIA publication number: ENV-019-09 rev. 08/2013 JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 15 of 15 WASHINGTON STATE Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) ~ Attachment D: Construction sequence ~ If.iia ~ US Army Corps 01 Engineers " Seattle DistrICt Use this attachment only if your project will be constructed in phases or stages. Complete the outline showing the construction sequence and timing of activities, including the start and end dates of each phase or stage. Use black or blue ink to enter answers in white spaces below. Phase or Start Date End Date Stage r-------------------------------------~ AGENCY USE ONLY Date received: Agency reference #: _______ _ Tax Parcel #(s): ________ _ f=====================================~ I TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLlCANT [bgJj;l] , , : Project Name: __________ , , , 1 ______ --------------------------------- Activity Description Stage I May 2016 September Staging area construction, dredging, sediment 2016 dewatering and disposal, potential site restoration if project can be completed in one season. Stage 2 June 2017 October 2017 Dredging, sediment dewatering and disposal, site restoration. If you require this document in another format, contact the Governor's Office for Regulatory Innovation and Assistance (aRIA) at (800) 917-0043. People with hearing loss can call 711 for Washington Relay Service. People with a speech disability can call (877) 833-6341. aRIA publication number: ENV-023-09 rev. 08/2013 JARPA Attachment D Revision 2012.2 Page 1 of 1 S 132.,d5t " ~~~, __ ..J--~- < ISIJtil5t \-~r- \:111 SITE t; COCA "ON.-.:::::::==::=="'l Westfield SOuthLcIltw Mall Stra • .dor Blvd SHEET INDEX I~ ~ng Langacre:s I IndtrKrial roark ! I I , VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE SW 7t!-oSt ~w 16thSt SN !g'h:>1 • SHEET NO. DESCRIPTION 1 VICINITY MAP AND SHEET INDEX 2 ADJACENT OWNERS 3 FOREBAY SEDIMENT REMOVAL PLAN 4 STOCKPILE, DECANT, WATER TREATMENT, AND STAGING AREAS 5 SECTIONS 6 DETAILS HER R E RA PRtYJ\"~D BY H~RREAA ENVlRONMENT"'-CONSUL TANIS DAT[ or PRINT ,Jun '", 201~ a 5126;0." BY, "0 ..... ' .. ', ,"" LOCAItON 0 ''''''i',=I[)\IO-D470G-005'CAD\~uAAP''\JARPA 1 ,""0 VICINITY MAP AND SHEET INDEX APPLICATION FOR: 47.475327N I 122.245100W NAVD 88 BLACK RIVER PUMP STATION SEDIMENT REMOVAL ti King County Depertment of Naturill Resources and Parks Watet and Land Resources DIvision River and Floodplain Management Section Christie TTlJfJ, Director FIGURE STATE: COUNTY: KING CITY: RENTON LOCATION: 550 MONSTER ROAD SW PURPOSE: PUMP STATION SEDIMENT REMOVAL REFERENCE NO: SHEET: 1 OF: 6 DATE: JUNE 2015 1 LATiLONG VERTICAL DATUM APPLICATION FOR' - 72295003)0 DEP/l R TMENT OF -----r.:;:;>1~:::--:-r--,.....;~. NATURAL RESOURCES I) -) 'HI ~:. ;~,,_ 47 475327N: 122 245100'1'1 NAVD 88 " .. ;;' ;;: ," ,--. ,-: , ~ ~ ~ , - ("" ",,", hV """~t",,, II l I,· ' "~" ,_, ' no, "'~ . .-, APPL ICANT ~ King County Department 01 Natural Resources and Park~ Water <I'ld L,md Resources DIVision River and FloOdplain Management Se~tiDn Chnsne True, Direcfor BLACK RIVLR PUMP STATION SEDIMENT REMOVAL FIGURE 2 STATe INA COUNTY KING CllY RE:NTON LOCA nON: bbO MONSTI::'.R ROAD SW PURPOSE:: PUMP STATION SEDIMENT RF:MOVAL REFERE'NCF NO SHEET. 2 OF. 6 DAlE' JUNE 2015 NORTH STAGING AREA D D D D 1 : z 1 1 ,--"'''=>I 1 I .. !~ REMOVE SEDIMENT DOWN TO CONCRETE D --" BOQMANCHQR \ \ LEGEND LIMITS OF WORK --<>---<0"" CHAIN LINK FENCE WETLAND • CONTROL POINT 1/ TEMPORARY RIVER BYPASS SYSTEM BOTTOM OF FOREWAY tll--t~R,..I-l.ll~U I ~ " I \ \ -~r~ffi I J,. 1 1 /, I I, I ~ -~i+cll 1 1 7 1 ~ 1 RACK LOCATION FOREBAY FLOOR (AF'PROX) 1''Il II 1 .. , , TEMPORARY SILT CURTAIN DURING TEMP:iO;;RA~R~Y~~~tjt\'i COFFERDAM AND REMOVAL o 20 --' ' SCALE IN FEET 40 1 , I I TEMPORARY COFFERDAM I I SE'''MENT R'oM"V'AL ZONE ACCESS ROUTE EXTEND UP TO AT -LEAST ELEVATION 10 --- ----- BOOM ANCHOR --' -, SOUTH STAGING AREA I j HER R E RA PRIFARED BY H£RRERA EMilRONMFNTAl OONSllLTANTS DATE OF PRINT'Jon la, ~Q15 A'51 llO'" BY ~_I-FILE LC<'.ATION O'..,.",W;>!l10110_a.4700-005\CAll1tlwgUO,RPA.rARPAJ a..g FOREBAY SEDIMENT REMOVAL PLAN LATfLONG: 47.475327N { 122.245100W VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 88 APPLICATION FOR: BLACK RIVER PUMP STATION SEDIMENT REMOVAL tQ King County Department of Natural Resources and Parts water and land Resources DIVIsion River and Floodplain Management Section FIGURE COUNTY: KING CITY: RENTON LOCATION: 550 MONSTER ROAD SW PURPOSE: PUMP STATION SEDIMENT REMOVAL REFERENCE NO: SHEET: 3 OF: 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '" '" w ~ w w w w '" W '" l' / , ,p , 0 c ,;0 /0 0 I , , ' , , 0 LEGEND 20 b o 20 --. SCALE IN FEET 40 I STOCKPILE, DECANT, WATER TREATMENT, AND STAGING AREAS APPLICATION FOR: 47.475327N I 122245100W NAVD 88 BLACK RIVER PUMP STATION SEDIMENT REMOVAL o Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ x ~ '" w x y '" w '" y w w ~ w w W '" W BOOM ANCHOR ASPHALT o 1.~I_mc I [It : . ~ i!----=r' o I ~ I ~ ~ , I , I ·--1 LIMITS OF WORK I~ If' SEDIMENT STOCKPILE AREA, SEE 2 6 WETLAND W W w WIRE BACKED SILT FENCE \ \ \ \ POTENTIAL ACCESS ROUTE ---------- BOOM ANCHOR .- / ; . / '" w -'_ 'STOCKPILE, DECANT, AND STAGING AREA SOUTH OF PUMP STATION CHAIN LINK FENCE • CONTROL POINT ti King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Waler and Land Resources Division River and Floodplain Management Section Christie TnJ6, DirrK;tor FIGURE 4 STATE: WA COUNTY: KING CITY: RENTON LOCATION: 550 MONSTER ROAD SW PURPOSE: PUMP STATION SEDIMENT REMOVAL REFERENCE NO' SHEET: 4 OF: 6 DATE: JUNE 2015 CONCRETE WING WALL TO NORTH PLACE 12-INCH LAYER CLEAN SAND-GRAVEL OVER PROPOSED SEDIMENT SURFACE EL -11.5' ----:::.....--- EXISTING SEDIMENT SURFACE PROPOSED SEDIMENT SURFACE TYPICAL ANNUAL WATER ELEVATION IS BELOW ABOUT 10' TYPICAL SUMMER WATER ELEVATION IS BELOW ABOUT 8' TRASH RACK ----;--::...----J -----, El. -4.56 RAIL TRACKS STOP LOG SLOT PUMP PUMP STATION EL -9.5' CONCRETE SODOM OF FOREBAY EL -1 1.56 CONCRETE WING WALL TO SOUTH PLACE 12-INCH LAYER CLEAN SAND-GRAVEL OVER PROPOSED SEDIMENT SURFACE EL-11.S' -----:::- TYPICAL NORTH SEDIMENT REMOVAL SECTION SCALE: NTS TYPICAL ANNUAl WATER ELEVATION IS BELOW ABOUT 10' TYPICAL SUMMER WATER ELEVATION IS BELOW ABOUT 8' TRASH RACK SURFACE --..... , STOP LOG SLOT WESTERN EXTENT OF SURVEY EL -9.5' EXISTING SEDlME: Y J--=--:.:----=-:--=---__ PROPOSED SEDIMENT :~~~~~~~~~~~~~::~~;;~::~~::~~~~~~~~ SURFACE El. -4.56 CONCRETE eODOM OF FOREBAY El. -11.56 WESTERN EXTENT OF SURVEY TYPICAL SOUTH SEDIMENT REMOVAL SECTION SECTIONS LATILONG: VERTICAL DATUM: APPLICATION FOR: SCALE: NTS 47.475327N I 122.245100W NAVD 88 BLACK RIVER PUMP STATION SEDIMENT REMOVAL APPLICANT: ti King County Department of Natural Resources atld Parka Water and Land Rasources Division River and Floodplain Management SectIon Cht1sfj& True, DIr9cfor FIGURE COUNTY: KING CITY: RENTON LOCATION: 550 MONSTER ROAD SW PURPOSE: PUMP STATION SEDIMENT REMOVAL REFERENCE NO: SHEET: FLOTATION SEGMENT ;-WATER SURFACE ;-SKIRT (DEPTH VARIES) BALLAST CHAIN z TURBIDITY CURTAIN DETAIL SCALE: NTS ANCHOR WEIGHTS ANCHOR GEOMEMBRANE EXTEND PLASTIC SHEETING OVER BERMS TO CAPTURE RUN-OFF (TVP) ECOLOGY BLOCK OR SOIL BERM (TYP) , , , , , , , , ,--------------- SEDIMENT STOCKPILE DETAIL SCALE: NTS 3 2 4 STOCKPILED SEDIMENT l_ 6 MIL (MIN) PLASTIC SHEETING 40 MIL (MIN) HDPE OR 30 MIL (MIN) POLYETHYLENE GEOMEMBRANE HER R E RA P~EP"~ED BY HE~RoRA. ENIIIRON"ENIAL CON~1JlIAN1S DJ\I~ ()f-I'RI~T Joo 18 2015 652 O&m· BY.."...,..." FILE LO,ATION O"""",\Y201G"O·C>4""'(l'''',~A.LJ."",~WARPAVARPA 6.<Iwll FIGURE ti King County STATE: WA COUNTY: KING CITY-RENTON Department of Natural ~sources and ParKs Water and Land Resources DiVision River and Floodplain Management Section LOCATION: 550 MONSTER ROAD SW 47.47S327N! 122.245100W VERTICAL DATUM-NAVD BS PURPOSE: PUMP STATION SEDIMENT REMOVAL APPLICATION FOR: Christie Tru&, DIrector REFERENCE NO: BLACK RIVER PUMP STATION SEDIMENT REMOVAL SHEET: 6 OF: 6 DATE: JUNE 2015 6 ~ King County Water and Land Resources Division Department of Natural Resources and Parks King Street Center 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 600 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 206-477-4800 Fax 206·296-0192 nY Relay: 711 June 18,2015 George Ritchotte Senior Scientist Herrera 220 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1100 Seattle, WA 98121 RE: Applicant Agent Cor Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal (Project 1120590) Dear George: You are hereby authorized to submit permit applications for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project on behalf of the King County Water and Land Resources Division as the applicant agent for the project. The pump station is at 550 Monster Road SW in the City of Renton. The sediment removal is intended to occur during the low flow fish windows of 20 16 and 2017, in order to preserve function of the pump station. If there are any questions or concerns, my desk phone is 206-477-4638 and my email address is tom.bean@kingcounty.gov. Please feel free to share this contact information as may be appropriate. Sincerely, Tom Bean Engineering Special Projects Lead River and Floodplain Management Section (RFMS) cc: Lorin Reine/t, Managing Engineer, RFMS Kerry Bauman, Senior Ecologist, RFMS ",":"' •. _,_; '. " u " !. -':_-, .. ;, I' . " I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .-.': , . . -" ".' : ; >."; '. " . ... ' -~" : . . ,-' .,' Wetland and Stream lineation Report UI KingCoonty " DRAFT WETLAND AND STREAM DELINEATION REPORT BLACK RIVER PUMP STATION SEDIMENT REMOVAL PROJECT King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division Note: Some pages in this document have been purposely skipped or blank pages inserted so that this document will copy correctly when duplexed. WETLAND AND STREAM DELINEATION REPORT Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project Prepared for tQ King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division River and Floodplain Management Section 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 600 Seattle, Washington 98104 by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1100 Seattle, Washington 98121 Telephone: 206/441-9080 May 16, 2014 Draft Prepared by: Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1100 Seattle, Washington 98121 Telephone: 206/441-9080 For comments or questions contact: Amanda Azous, PWS 206-787-8251 Direct Line Alternate Formats Available 206-296-7380 TIY Relay: 711 tQ KingCoumy DISCLAIMER Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. has prepared this report for use by King County. The results and conclusions in this report represent the professional opinion of Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. They are based upon examination of public domain information concerning the study area, site reconnaissance, and data analysis. The work was performed according to accepted standards in the field of jurisdictional wetland determination and delineation using the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Environmental Laboratory 2010). In addition, work was conducted according to accepted standards of determining the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of streams using the definition set forth in Washington Administrative Code 173 22 030(11) and Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark on Streams in Washington State (Olson and Stockdale 2010). However, final determination of jurisdictional wetland and OHWM boundaries pertinent to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the responsibility of the Seattle District of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Various agencies of the State of Washington and local jurisdictions may require a review of final site development plans that could potentially affect zoning, buffer requirements, water quality, or habitat functions of lands in question. Therefore, the findings and conclusions in this report should be reviewed by appropriate regulatory agencies before any detailed site planning or construction activities. Jr 1()-U416~-OI8 v·~l!and Ii 5tr€dm &tlmeatlc[l i>la(~ ".'Er.doc> CONTENTS Disclaimer .................................................................................................... i Summary ................................................................................................... S-1 Introduction.. . . . . . .. . . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . .. .. 1 Study Objectives ...................................................................................... 1 Project Setting ........................................................................................ 3 Applicable Laws and Regulations ................................................................... 3 Methods and Materials ..................................................................................... 5 Review of Available Information .................................................................... 5 Wetland Delineation .................................................................................. 5 Wetland Classification, Rating, and Functional Assessment .................................... 6 Wetland Classification ......................................................................... 6 Wetland Rating ................................................................................. 6 Wetland Functional Assessment .............................................................. 6 Stream Delineation and Classification ............................................................. 7 Results ....................................................................................................... 9 Analysis of Available Information ................................................................... 9 Previously Mapped Wetlands and Streams .................................................. 9 Ma pped Soils .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9 Analysis of Wetland Conditions ..................................................................... 9 Evaluation of Wetland Functions ................................................................... 12 Wetland A ...................................................................................... 21 Wetland B ...................................................................................... 21 Wetland C ...................................................................................... 22 Wetland D ...................................................................................... 22 Analysis of Stream Conditions ...................................................................... 22 Regulatory Implications .................................................................................. 25 Clean Water Act Sections 404 and 401 ............................................................ 25 Washington State Laws .............................................................................. 25 Renton Municipal Code .............................................................................. 25 Wetlands ....................................................................................... 25 Streams ......................................................................................... 26 References ................................................................................................. 27 Appendix A Wetland Delineation Methods Appendix B Wetland Delineation Data Forms Appendix C Wetland Rating Forms iii Jr '~-fj476~·013 wetland & <t,,,,am delmeati()~ bLack rive, .dar, TABLES Table S·l. Wetlands Delineated in the Study Area for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project. ............................................................... S·2 Table S·2. Streams Delineated in the Study Area for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project ................................................................ S·2 Table 1. Wetlands Delineated in the Study Area for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project. ................................................................ 12 Table 2. Summary for Wetland A .................................................................... 14 Table 3. Summary for Wetland B .................................................................... 16 Table 4. Summary for Wetland C. ................................................................... 17 Table 5. Summary for Wetland D .................................................................... 19 Table 6. Individual Wetland Function Scores for Wetlands in the Study Area for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal ProjecL ................................ 21 Table 7. Summary of the Black River within the Study Area of the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project ....................................................... 23 FIGURES Figure 1. Vicinity Map for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project, Renton, Washington .......................................................................... 2 Figure 2. NWI Mapped Wetlands and Streams in the Vicinity of the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project, Renton, Washington ............................. 10 Figure 3. Mapped Soils in the Vicinity of the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project, Renton, Washington ................................................... 11 Figure 4. Wetlands Delineated in the Study Area for Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project, Renton, Washington ....................................... 13 iv Jr 10-04766 018 wetland & stream deli'-ICotion black river.doo This wetland delineation was performed for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project. King County proposes to remove accumulated sediment from the forebay of the Black River Pump Station. The sediment must be placed on site for dewatering. Previous testing indicates that the sediment is contaminated, which may impact water draining from stockpiles and the surrounding environment. Contaminated sediment will be transported and disposed of offsite. The project area includes the forebay directly upstream of the pump station as well as the potential construction staging areas where the sediment may be placed, which may be along the north or south bank of the Black River, just upstream of the Black River Pump Station. The study area includes these and adjacent areas. The purpose of this report is to identify the boundaries of wetlands and streams within the study area. This wetland and stream assessment was performed in accordance with: • The Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) • Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Environmental Laboratory 2010) • Washington Administrative Code 173·22·030(5) -Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) Definition • Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark on Streams in Washington State (Olson and Stockdale 2010) • Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington -Revised (Hruby 2004) • Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-3-050-M Herrera biologists delineated four wetlands and the Black River within the study area (Tables S-1 and S-2). Wetland A is a riverine wetland that is hydrologically influenced by the Black River. Wetland B is a depressional wetland that gets most of its hydrology from groundwater, as well as stormwater from Monster Road. Wetland B drains into Wetland C through a culvert. Wetland C is a slope wetland that drains into the Black River. Wetland D is a depressional wetland that is comprised of primarily reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), and sits upslope of Wetland A. The OHWM of the southern bank of the Black River up to 100 feet upstream of the pump station was delineated in the field, and the OHWM of both banks was confirmed through stream gauge data. U1 Klng_~~L __________ _ 5·1 Table 5-1. Wetlands Delineated in the Study Area for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project. Wetland Size of Wetland USFWS Hydrogeomorphic I Ecology Rating , City of Renton Name (square feet/acre) Classification B Classification b , Category' Buffer Width (feet) d A 1.3 acres / PEM, PSS, PFO Riverine II 225 56,703 sq. ft. ! B 0.03 acres / PEM, PSS Depressional III 75 1,220 sq. It. C 0.04 acres / PEM,PSS,PFO Slope IV 50 1,945 sq. ft. 0 0.93 acres / PEM, PSS Depressional III 125 40,300 sq. ft. , US Fish and WIldlife Service classification is based on Cowardin et al. (1979): palustrine forested (PFO), palustrine scrub-shrub (PSS), and palustrine emergent (PEM) b Hydrogeomorphic classification is based on Brinson (1993). , Wetland category is based on the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) wetland rating system (Hruby 2004), which is required for wetlands in Renton within Shoreline Jurisdiction (RMC 4-3-090-D-2-d-ii) d Wetland buffer widths are based on RMC 4-3-090·D.2.d. iv. Table 5-2. Streams Delineated in the Study Area for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project. WRIA 9 Stream Aquatic Area Type b Buffer Width (feet)' Catalog Number· Name City of Renton City of Renton 9-0004 Black River Class I 200 . . , Based on A Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon UtILIzatIon (WDF 1975) . b RMC 4-3-090-L defines the Black River as a Shoreline of the State, which designates it a Class I stream. , Aquatic area buffer widths are based on the City of Renton's aquatic areas typing system(4-3-090-L). S·2 jr 10·04766-018 we-;:!and & stream ddineatlon_bl~[k rfvN.docx ti King County INTRODUCTION This wetland and stream delineation report was prepared for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project (hereafter referred to as the project). King County is proposing to remove accumulated sediment from the forebay of the Black River Pump Station. The sediment must be placed on site for dewatering. Previous testing indicates that the sediment is contami nated , which may impact water draining from stockpiles and the surrounding environment. Contaminated sediment will be transported and disposed of offsite. Th e project area includes the forebay directly upstream of the pump station as well as the potential construction staging areas where the sediment will be placed. Th e study area includes these and adjacent areas (Figure 1). The purpose of this report is to identify the boundaries of wetlands and streams within the study area. During the wetla nd and stream assessment, the project st udy area and vicinity was inspected for wetlands and the OHWM along the Black River was delineated. This report describes the conditions of wetlands and streams in the study area; provides wetland and stream ratings and required buffer widths; and identifies applicable federal, state, and lo ca l laws and regulations. Study Objectives The objectives of the study were to: • • • • • • • May 2014 Delineate (flag) all wetlands in the study area. Classify all delineated wetlands using the US Fish and Wildlife Service classification system (Cowardin et al. 1979). Classify all delineated wetlands using the hydrogeomorphic classification system (Brinson 1993). Evaluate wetland functions and values using the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington -Revised (Hruby 2004), hereafter referred to as the Eco logy rating system. Determine the applicable wetland buffer widths required by RMC (4·3·0 50 -M and 4-3- 090-D )). Id entify regulations and guidance applicable to project impacts on wetla nds and the river set forth by city, state, and federal authorities. Delineate (flag) the OHWM of all streams in the stu dy area. ~ King County Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project Legend o Potential construction staging area o Study area --Stream or river --Road -Highway -+--Railroad C'::::-J City limit Figure 1 . Vicinity Map for the Black River Pump Station, Renton, Washington. N @ O~.c=1 ;,O.OO .. ~2 ;,O.OO ........ ~4,OOO _ Feet ~ HERRERA USDA. Aerial (201 3) • Classify all streams within the study area according to the Washington Department of Natural Resources Forest Practices Water Typing as described in the Washington Administrative Code (WAC 222-16-031)_ • Determine the applicable stream buffer widths required by RMC 4-3-090-D_ The project site is located along the north bank of the Black River, just upstream of the Black River Pump Station (Figure 1)_ The 10-acre area investigated for the presence of wetlands and streams is referred to as the study area and is located in Sections 13, Township 23 North, Range 4 East of the Willamette Meridian_ The study area is in the lower reaches of Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 9 Green-Duwamish Watershed_ The study area is primarily vegetated, but the Black River and the Black River Pump Station covers a large part of the southern end of the study area_ Mixed deciduous and coniferous forest and a riverine wetland comprise the eastern part of the study area, while emergent reed canarygrass wetland covers much of the northern portion of the study area_ A gravel pit and railroad border the study area to the north and west, while Monster Road borders the site to the south_ The Black River Riparian Forest, a large preserved wetland area, borders the study area along the eastern edge_ Applicable Laws and Regulations Wetlands and streams are subject to a variety of federal and state regulations_ Federal laws regulating wetlands include Sections 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act (United States Code, Title 33, Chapter 1344 [33 USC 1344]). Washington state laws and programs designed to control the loss of wetland acreage include the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (a federal law that is implemented in the State of Washington by the Washington State Department of Ecology [Ecology], as mandated by the Washington State Water Pollution Control Act)_ The majority of the study area is located within the City of Renton's shoreline jurisdiction and, therefore, subject to the City's Shoreline Management Program. RMC 4-3-090-D specifies wetland categories, required wetland buffer widths, development standards, and wetland mitigation requirements for critical areas within its shoreline jurisdiction. May 2014 ~ IGngCounty ----------- Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report -Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 3 Evaluating the presence, extent, and type of wetlands and streams requires a review of available information about the site (e.g., surveys, studies), followed by an onsite wetland and stream delineation. The following sections describe the research methods and field protocols for the wetland and stream evaluations. More information about the methodology used in the wetland delineation performed for this project is available in Appendix A. Review of Available Information A literature review was performed to determine the historical and current presence of wetlands and streams in and near the study area. Sources of information included: • Aerial photographs of the project vicinity (USDA 2013) • National Wetlands Inventory map of wetland areas in the project vicinity (USFWS 2010) • King County wetland inventory (King County 2013) • Pump operations for the Black River Pump Station • A Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization (WDF 1975) • SalmonScape computer mapping system (WDFW 2014a) • Washington State priority habitat and species (PHS) data (WDFW 2014b) • King County area soil survey maps for the project vicinity (NRCS 2012) • Hydric soils list and soil unit descriptions for Washington (NRCS 2014) • Lake to Sound Trail -Segment A: Wetland Discipline Report (Parametrix 2011) Wetland Delineation The wetland delineation was performed in accordance with the Regional Supplement to the US Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Environmental Laboratory 2010), which is consistent with the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). The methods in the guidance manuals listed above use a three-parameter approach for identifying and delineating wetlands, and rely on the presence of field indicators for hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and hydrology. The methods for evaluating these three parameters are described in Appendix A. The wetland delineation for the project was performed according to procedures specified under the routine wetland determination method (Environmental Laboratory 1987). ~ May 2014 -------- __________ --"""'''o''"'y Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report -Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 5 Wetland biologists evaluated field conditions by traversing the study area and noting visual indicators of wetlands, streams, and other aquatic features. A test plot was established for each area that appeared to have potential wetland characteristics. For each test plot, data on dominant plant species, soil conditions, and evidence of hydrologic conditions were recorded on wetland determination data forms (Appendix B). Plants, soils, and hydrologic conditions were also analyzed and documented in adjacent upland areas. Based on collected data, a determination of wetland or upland was made for each test plot and area examined. Following confirmation of wetland conditions in a given area, the wetland boundary was delineated by placing sequentially· numbered fluorescent orange flagging along the wetland perimeter. A hand-held Global Positioning System (GPS) unit (Trimble Geo XT) was used to record the locations of the wetland boundary flags and test plots, and these data were overlaid on aerial photographs. Wetland Classification, Rating, and Functional Assessment Wetland Classification Wetlands observed in the study area were classified according to the US Fish and Wildlife Service classification system (Cowardin et al. 1979). This system is based on an evaluation of attributes such as vegetation class, hydrologic regime, salinity, and substrate type. The wetlands were also classified according to the hydrogeomorphic system, which is based on an evaluation of attributes such as the position of the wetland within the surrounding landscape, the source and location of water just before it enters the wetland, and the pattern of water movement in the wetland (Brinson 1993). Wetland Rating Wetlands were rated using the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington-Revised (Hruby 2004), hereafter referred to as the Ecology rating system. The Ecology rating system categorizes wetlands according to specific attributes such as rarity; sensitivity to disturbance; hydrologic, water quality, and habitat functions; and special characteristics (e.g., mature forested wetland, bog). The total score for all functions determines the wetland rating. The rating system consists of four categories, with Category I wetlands exhibiting outstanding functions or special characteristics and Category IV wetlands exhibiting minimal attributes and functions. The rating categories are used to identify permitted uses in the wetland and its buffer, to determine the width of buffers needed to protect the wetland from adjacent development, and to identify the mitigation ratios required to compensate for potential impacts on wetlands. The City of Renton requires the use of the Ecology rating system for wetlands within its shoreline jurisdiction (RMC 4-3-090-D). Wetland Functional Assessment Wetland functions are those physical and chemical processes that occur within a wetland, such as the storage of water, cycling of nutrients, and maintenance of diverse plant U1 King County 6 ________ --"M::::.cay 2014 Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report -Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project communities and habitat that benefit wildlife. Wetland functions can be grouped into three broad categories: habitat, hydrologic, and water quality: • Habitat functions include providing food, water, and shelter for fish, shellfish, birds, amphibians, and mammals. Wetlands also serve as a breeding ground and nursery for numerous species. • Hydrologic functions include reducing the velocity of stormwater, recharging and discharging groundwater, and providing flood storage. • Water quality functions include the potential for removing sediment, nutrients, heavy metals, and toxic organic compounds in the water passing through the wetland. The Ecology rating system (Hruby 2004) generates a score for each function based on the wetland's potential and opportunity for providing the function. Using the scores on the wetland rating forms, a qualitative functional rating (high, moderate, or low) was derived for scoring each of the functions (water quality, hydrology, and habitat) provided by each delineated wetland based on supplemental guidance provided by Ecology (2008). Stream Delineation and Classification The Black River was the only stream found within the study area. On the south bank, the OHWM of Black River up to 100 feet upstream of the pump station was delineated in the field. Access to the riverbank was not possible on the north bank, therefore data from the Black River Pump Station operations was used to further define the OHWM. The pump station modulates water depth to control flooding and provide sufficient flow for fish. The pumps are controlled by an automated system that operates based on water levels that range between 2.5 feet and a maximum of 5.0 feet NGVD29 (King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Wastewater Treatment Division 2007). The lead pump begins pumping down water from the Black River at a 4.0-foot set point, with follow up pump starts at 4.5-and S.O-foot set points; all pumps stop when the water elevation reaches 2.5 feet. Field observations on the south bank indicate the OHWM is at 5.0 feet NGVD29, which is near the top of the pump system operating elevation range. The artificially induced flow pattern near the flood control structure makes exact definition of the OHWM difficult; however, because the shoreline of the Black River is very steep within the study area there is little lateral variability associated with the OHWM location. The field delineation used the definition of OHWM provided in RCW 90.S8.030(c), which has been adopted by the City of Renton. According to this definition, the OHWM is "that mark that will be found by examining the bed and banks and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual, and so long continued in all ordinary years, as to mark upon the soil a character distinct from that of the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation ... " In addition, methods in the publication Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark on Streams in Washington State (Olson and Stockdale 2010) were applied. To delineate the OHWM of the stream, the channel bed and adjacent banks were examined for indications of frequent high water events. Factors considered when assessing changes in vegetation include scour (removal of vegetation and exposure of gravel, sand, or other soil ti King County -------" --------------~ Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report -Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 7 substrate); drainage patterns; elevation of floodplain benches; changes in sediment texture across the floodplain; sediment layering; sediment or vegetation deposition; and changes in vegetation communities across the floodplain. Herrera biologists placed white and blue spotted flagging to indicate the horizontal location of the OHWM along the riverbank. A handheld GPS unit (Trimble Geo XT) was then used to record the flag locations. The GPS yields sub-meter accuracy under optimal conditions. The Black River was classified using the City of Renton water typing system, per the RMC 4-3-050-L. This system is based primarily on fish, wildlife, and human uses, and consists of four stream types (Classes 1 through 5): • Class 1: Class 1 waters are perennial salmonid-bearing waters, which are classified by the City and state as Shorelines of the State. • Class 2: Class 2 waters are perennial or intermittent salmonid-bearing waters that meet one or more of the following criteria: o Mapped on the Renton Water Class Map, as Class 2 o Historically and/or currently known to support salmonids, including resident trout, at any stage in the species lifecycle o Is a water body (e.g., pond, lake) between one half (0.5) acre and twenty (20) acres in size • Class 3: Class 3 waters are non-salmonid-bearing perennial waters during years of normal rainfall, and/or are mapped on the Renton Water Class Map as Class 3. • Class 4: Class 4 waters are non-salmonid-bearing intermittent waters during years of normal rainfall, and/or are mapped on the Renton Water Class Map as Class 4. • Class 5: Class 5 waters are non-regulated non-salmonid·bearing waters which meet one or more of the following criteria: U1 o Flow within an artificially constructed channel where no naturally defined channel had previously existed o Is a surficially isolated water body less than one-half (0.5) acre (e.g., pond) not meeting the criteria for a wetland as defined in subsection M of RMC 4-3-050-L) KI~~~ May 2014 8 Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report -Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project RESULTS This section discusses the results of the wetland delineations and stream OHWM delineations , including a review of information obtained from various references, and an analysis of wetland and stream conditions in the study area as observed during field investigations. Analysis of Available Information The available existing information compiled for the wetland and stream delineations are summarized in the following subsections. PrevIOusly Mapped Wetlands and Streams The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) indicates a riverine wetland at the Black Ri ver, just upstream of the pump station. No other NWI wetlands are mapped within the study area (USFWS 2010) (Figure 2). King County iMAP does not show any wetlands within the study area. A report prepared by Parametri x for the Lake to sound Trail was reviewed and it documented additional wetlands within the study area (Parametrix 2011). Mapped Soils Two types of soil are mapped within the study area (NRCS 2012) (Figure 3). These are Woodinville silt loam (predominantly hydric ) and Puyallup fine sandy loam (partially hydric ). Woodinville Silt Loalll Woodin ville silt loam is a poorly drained soil that occurs on floodplains . The parent material is alluvium. A typical soil profile includes a 7·inch surface layer composed of silt loam. From 7 to 15 inches, there is silty clay loam, and from 15 to 60 inches there is strati fied muck to silt loam . Woodinville silt loam i s considered a predominantly hydric soil, with 96 percent of the unit being rated as hydric (NRCS 2014). Puyallup Fine Sandy Loalll Puyallup fine sandy loam is a well·drained soil that occurs on floodplains and terraces . The parent material is alluvium. A typical soil profile includes ashy fine sandy loam from 0 to 8 inches ; very fine sandy loam from 8 to 34 inches; and sand from 34 to 60 inches. Puyallup fine sandy loam is considered a partially hydric soil, with 22 percent of the unit being rated as hydric (NRCS 2014). Analysis of Wetland Conditions Wetland delineation field activities were conducted by Herrera biologists Julia Munger and Alicia Ward. The wetland d e lineations were conducted on February 21 and 24, 2014. Weather conditions during the fieldwork consisted of daytime high temperatures of approximately 50 degrees Fahrenheit (' F), with cloudy conditions the first day and rainy conditions the second day (NOAA 2014). It was determined that the growing season (as W May 2014 King County Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report Black Ri ver Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 9 Legend D Project area D Study area National Wetland Inventory (NWIJ D Freshwater Emergent Wetland --Stream or river _ Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland --Road -+--Railroad -Highway Freshwater Pond D Riverine Figure 2 . NWI Mapped Wetlands and Streams in the Vicinity of the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project, Renton, Washington. N @ ~O .. c=~25.0 .. ==5300 ........... 1,OOO • Fee l 8HERRERA legend o Proj ec t a r ea D Study a rea -Strea m o r r iver --Road Soil Ty p e Bea u sl t e g r ave ll y sa nd y lo am , 6-1 5 % s lop es Bea u slte g rave ll y sa nd y lo am , 4-15 % s lop es Newb erg s ilt loa m Pits Puget s ilty cl ay loam Pu ya llup fin e sa nd y loa m Tu k w ila muck Urb a n la n d Woodinvill e s ilt l oa m W a t e r Figure 3 . Mapped Soils in the Vicinity of the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project, Renton , Washington . N @ O~~==2~5.0 .. ~=5iO.O ........... 1 •. 000 • Feet 8 H ERRERA US DA , Soil (2 0 13 ) ~ 'P't.,.., •• ¥:<'(J'(l ,'(l.(I07 __ a"'I'_'.()oO, ..... '''''_~_"_1 ", •• ,~"'20"J defined in Appendix A) had begun , because herbaceous annual plant species and leaf buds were observed. Herrera biologists delineated four wetlands in the project area: Wetlands A, B, C, and D (Table 1; Figure 4). Figure 4 also shows wetlands delineated in 2011 by Parametrix (2011) for the Lake to sound Trail. Detailed descriptions of the wetlands are provided in Tables 2 through 5. The biologists completed wetland delineation data forms (Appendix B) and an Ecology wetland rating form (Appendix C) for each of the wetlands delineated in the project area. Representative photographs of the wetlands in the project area are included in Tables 2 through 5. Table 1. Wetlands Delineated in the Study Area for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project, Wetland Size of Wetland USFWS Hydrogeomorphic Ecology Rating City of Renton Buffer Name (sQuare feet/acre) Classification II Classification b CateQorv' Width (feet) d A 1.3 acres / PEM , PSS , PFO Riverine II 225 56 ,703 sq. It. B 0.03 acres I PEM , PSS Depressi ona l III 75 1,220 sq. It. C 0.04 acres I PEM , PSS , PFO Slope IV 50 1,945 sq. ft. 0 0.93 acres I PEM , PSS Depressional III 125 40 ,300 sq. ft. . . , US FISh and WIldlIfe ServIce clasSlflCatlOn IS based on Coward," et al. (1979): palustrine fore sted (PFO), palustrine scrub· shrub (PSS), and palustrine emergent (PEM) b Hydrogeomorphic classification is based on Brinson (1993), , Wetland category is based on t he Ecology wetla nd rating system (Hruby 2004), which is required for wetlands in Renton within shoreline jurisdi ct ion (RMC4·3·090 ·D) d Wetland buffer widths are based on the Ecology wetland rating, per Renton Municipal Code 4·3·090 ·D. Note that a sign was posted at Wetland B that identified it as the" Black River Channel Native Plant Restoration, Phase 2: A Community Effort to Protect and Improve the Black River Ecosystem" and identified its sponsor as the Black River Watershed Alliance. The native planting project was funded by the King Conservation District. Evaluation of Wetland Functions Wetland functions for each wetland within the project area were evaluated according to data in the Ecology wetland rating forms (Hruby 2004) and supplemental qualitative ratings (high, medium, low) were determined based on Ecology guidance (2008). A summary of the function scores , the total wetland score, and the associated rating (category) for each wetland is provided in Table 6. Qualitative and quantitative scores for both potential and opportunity for each wetland to provide water quality, hydrologic, and habitat functions is shown. li King County May 2014 12 Draft Wetland and St ream Delineation Report -Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project MONSTER RD SW legend D Potentia l constru ction stagin g a rea o Stud y area / // Deline ate d wetl a nd Previou s ly m a pp e d wetland • Test p it •••.• Critic a l a rea buffer - -_. Delin ea t e d Ordin a ry High Water Mark (OHWM ) - --. OHWM a pproxim at e d based on pump station op e ra tions Note: Wetland A and C conn e ct to th e Bl a ck Rive r Esri, Black River Channel Plant Restoration , USGS ,AEX , ~ ~~ p", ~~ User Community Figure 4. Wetlands Delineated in the Study Area for the Black River Pum p Station , Renton , Washington. N ~ o 75 150 300 _-=::::J_-=::::i ______ Feet ~HERRERA ESRI. Ae r ial (201.1): King County. St r ea m s 1201 3 ) ~ Po ...... Y 1O'(MO-O<JN-01 8 P-",r~ ..... __ ~ ... ~_ .. ","_ ............. ~'1 ' ,0 14 ) Table 2. Su for Wetland A. Wetland Name Wetland A Location North of the Black R iver Size of entire wetland Dominant vegetation Soils Hydrology til King County 14 1.30 acres Local jurisdiction City of Renton WRIA WRIA 9: Green-Duwamish Wetland rating Category II City of Renton 225 feet buffer width Cowardin PEM , PSS, PFO classification Hydrogeomorphi Riverine c classification Wetland data form(s) Upland data form(s) TP-WL-A TP-UPL-A Wetland A is primarily a palustrine forested and scrub-shrub wetland . The dominant species include Pacifi c wi llow (Sa lix lucida ), Sitka willow (Salix sitchensis), and red alder (Alnus rubra). There are also small areas of Palustrine emergent wetland that are dominated by reed canarygrass (Phala ris arundinacea), soft rush (Juncus eflusus), slough sedge (Carex obnupta), and yellowflag iris (Iris pseudacorus). Soils in the wetland were primarily silt loams, which is consistent with the NRCS soil unit rating of Woodinville silt loam . At TP-WL-A, between 0 and 4 inches depth, the soil had a texture of silt loam. The matrix color was very dark grayish brown (1 OYR 3/2), comprising 100 percert of the soil layer. Between 4 and 9 inches , the soil had a texture of loam. The matrix color was very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) comprising 50 percent of the soil layer. The redox features resembled concentrations in the matrix with a color of strong brown (7 .5 YR 5/8), comprisin g 50 perc ent of the matrix. Between 9 and 18 inches , the soil had a texture of silt loam. The soil color was dark brown (1 OYR 3/3) comprising 100 percent of the soil layer. The soil met the hydric soil indicator F6 (redox Dark Surface). For the upland soils, at TP-UPL-A, soils displaved relic hydric soil features. Between 0 and 7 inches the soil had a texture of silt loam. The soil rlatrix had a color of dark grayish brown (1 OYR4 /2) comprising 100 percent of t he soil layer. Betwe,," 7 and 18 inches, the soil had a texture of silt loam. The soil matrix had a color of grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2), comprising 85 percent of the soil layer. The redox features resembled concentrati"ns in the matrix with colors of strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) comprising 15 percent of the soil layer. The soil met hydric soil indicator F3 (Depleted matrix). There are several hydrologic regimes present in Wetland A. Much of the area is permanently flooded, with surrounding areas being seasonally flooded, and a few areas being saturated only. Wetland hydrology is greatly influenced by the operation of the Black River Pump Station , which is located immediately downstream of Wetland A. Wetland A is directly connected to the Black 'liver at both ends of the wetland, causing the water level in Wetland A to rise and fall with the rive, level. In the wetland test pit , saturation was present at a depth of 2 inches, and the water tabl a was present at a depth of 9 inches. ______ M_'y 2014 Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report · Black River Pum p Station Sediment Removal Project Table 2 (continued). Summary for Wetland A. Wetland Name Wetland A Rationale for Wetland A was determined by the presence of hydric soils, wetland hydrology indicators, and a delineation dominance of hydrophytic vegetation. The rationale for delineation was based primarily on a change in topography combined with a change in dominant vegetation from hydrophytic to non- hydrophytic. Rationale for The Renton Municipal Code classifies wetlands within the shoreline jurisdiction according to the local raling Ecology rating system, which rates Wetland A as a Category II wetland. Functions of Wetland A has a high potential to improve water quality as well as the opportunity. It has a weIland moderate potenliallo improve hydrologic functions but no opportunity. It has a high potential and moderate opportunity to improve habitat functions. More information on Wetland A's functions can be found in Table 6. Buffer The buffer width for Wetland A is based on the City of Renton's requirements for a Category II condition wetland within the shoreline jurisdiction and an Ecology wetland rating of 29 for habitat functions. The buffers for Wetland A are primarily mixed deciduous and coniferous forest, with the Black River comprising a small portion of the buffer. May 2014 ti King County ----------- Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 15 Table 3. for Wetland B. Wetland Name Wetland B Location South of the Black River and north of Monster Road Size of entire wetland Dominant vegetation Soils Hydrology Rationale for delineation Rationale for local rating Functions of wetland Buffer condition ti KlngComty 16 ~~-.---------.r------------~ Local jurisdiction City of Renton WRIA WRIA 9: Green-Duwamish Wetland rating III City of Renton 75 feet buffer width Cowardin PEM, PSS classification Hydrogeomorphic Depressional classification Wetland data TP-WL-B form(s) Upland data TP-UPL-B 0.03 acres Wetland B is a palustrine emergent and palustrine scrub-shrub wetland. The dominant vegetation in Wetland B is reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) and Himalayan blackbeny (Rubus armeniacus), with occasional patches of soft rush (Juncus eftusus). At TP-WL-B, between 0 and 8 inches depth, the soil had a texture of sapric muck. The matrix color was very black (10YR 211), comprising 100 percent of the soil layer. Between 8 and 18 inches, the layer was cobble. The soil met the hydric soil indicator A3 (Black Histic). For the upland soils, at TP-UPL·B, between 0 and18 inches the soil had a texture of silt loam. The soil matrix had a color of dark brown (1 OYR3/3) comprising 100 percent of the soil layer. The soil did not meet any hydric indicators. The hydrologic regime of Wetland B is seasonally flooded over more than half its area. At TP·W l· B, the water table and saturation were present at a of 0 inches. Wetland B was determined by the presence of hydric soils, wetland hydrology indicators, and a dominance of hydrophytic vegetation. The rationale for delineation was based primarily on a change in topography as well as a change in dominant vegetation from hydrophytic to non· The Renton Municipal Code classifies wetlands within the shoreline jurisdiction according to the Ecology rating system, which rates Wetland B as a Category III wetland. Wetland B has a moderate potential to improve water quality as well as the opportunity. It has a moderate potential to improve hydrologic functions but no opportunity. It has a low potential and moderate opportunity to improve habitat functions. More information on Wetland B's functions can be found in Table 6. The buffer width for Wetland B is based on the City of Renton's requirements for a Category III wetland within the shoreline jurisdiction and an Ecology wetland rating of below 20 for habitat functions. The buffers for Wetland B are primarily disturbed upland, much of it Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) lawn. Part of the southern buffer includes Monster Road. May 2014 Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report -Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project Wetland Name Location Size of entire wetland Dominant vegetation Soils Hydrology May 2014 -------- Table 4. Wetland C Southern bank of the Black River 0.04 acres for Wetland C. Local jurisdiction City of Renton WRIA 9: Green-Duwamish Category IV 50 feet PEM, PSS, PFO classification Hydrogeomorphi Slope c classification Upland data form(s) TP-WL-C TP-UPL-C Wetland C is primarily a palustrine emergent and palustrine scrub-shrub wetland. The dominant species for the emergent strata are reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) and yellowflag iris (Iris pseudacorus). Willow species (Salix spp.) are dominant in the scrub-shrub strata. Soils in the wetland were primarily silt loams, which is consistent with the NRCS soil unit rating of Woodinville silt loam. At TP-WL-C, between 0 and 5 inches depth, the soil had a texture of silt loam. The matrix color was very dark grayish brown (1 OYR 3/2), comprising 99 percent of the soil layer. The redox features resembled concentrations in the matrix with a color of dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4), comprising 1 percent of the matrix. Between 5 and 9 inches, the soil had a texture of silt loam. The matrix color was very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) comprising 95 percent of the soil layer. The redox features resembled concentrations in the matrix with a color of yellowish brown (1 OYR 5/8), comprising 5 percent of the matrix. Between 9 and 18 inches, the soil had a texture of silty clay loam. The soil color was dark gray (10YR 4/1) comprising 70 percent of the soil layer. The redox features resembled concentrations in the matrix with a color of strong brown (7.5YR 5/8), comprising 30 percent of the matrix. The soil met the hydric soil indicator F6 (redox Dark Surface). For the upland soHs, at TP·UPL-A, soils displayed relic hydric soil features. Between 0 and 8 inches, the soil had a texture of sandy loam. The soil matrix had a color of very dark grayish brown (10YR3/2) comprising 100 percent of the soil layer. Between 8 and 18 inches, the soil had a texture of sandy loam. The soil matrix had a color of very dark grayish brown (10YR 312), comprising 98 percent of the soil layer. The redox features resembled concentrations in the matrix with colors of brown (10YR 4/3) comprising 2 percent of the soil layer. The soil did not meel any hydric soil indicators. Wetland C has several hydrologic regimes. Much of the area is saturated only, with smaller areas that are seasonally flooded. The northern edge of the wetland is bordered by the Black River. At TP-WL-C, saturation was present at a depth of 2 inches and the water table was present at a depth of 4 inches. ti King County -----... -- Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 17 Table 4 (continued). Summary for Wetland C. Wetland Name Wetland C Rationale for Wetland C was determined by the presence of hydric soils, wetland hydrology indicators, and a delineation dominance of hydrophytic vegetation. The rationale for delineation was based primarily on the extent of wetland hydrology as well as a change in dominant vegetation from hydrophytic to non-hydrophytic. Rationale for The Renton Municipal Code classifies wetlands within the shoreline jurisdiction according to local rating the Ecology rating system, which rates Wetland C as a Category IV wetland. Functions of Wetland C has a low potential to improve water quality as well as the opportunity. It has a low wetland potential to improve hydrologic functions but no opportunity. It has a moderate potential and moderate opportunity to improve habitat functions. More infonnation on Wetland C's functions can be found in Table 6. Buffer condition The buffer width for Wetland C is based on the City of Renton's requirements for a Category IV wetland within the shoreline jurisdiction and an Ecology habitat rating of 20. The buffers for Wetland C are disturbed forested and scrub-shrub upland on the southern side and the Black River on the northern side. tQ King County May 2014 --------- 18 Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report -Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project Table 5. for Wetland D. Wetland Name Wetland D Location North of the Black River Pump Station Size of entire wetland Dominant vegetation Soils Hydrology Rationale for delineation 0.93 acres Local jurisdiction WRIA Wetland rating City of Renton buffer width Cowardin classification City of Renton WRIA 9: Green-Duwamish Category III 125 feet PEM, PSS Hydrogeomorphic Depressional classification Wetland data formes) Upland data formes) TP-WL-D TP-UPL-D Wetland 0 is primarily a palustrine emergent wetland, with small areas of palustrine scrub-shrub. The wetland is dominated by reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus.). There are small patches of red-osier dogwood (Comus sericea). willow (Salixspp.), and alder (Alnus rubra). Soils in the wetland were primarily silt loams, which is consistent with the NRCS soil unit rating of Woodinville silt loam. At TP-WL-D, between 0 and 6 inches depth, the soil had a texture of silty clay loam. The matrix color was very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2), comprising 100 percent of the soil layer. Between 6 and 9 inches, the soil had a texture of silt loam. The matrix color was very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) comprising 85 percent of the soil layer. The redox features resembled concentrations in the matrix with colors of strong brown (7.5 YR 5/8), comprising 5 percent of the matrix, and grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2) comprising 10 percent. Between 9 and 18 inches, the soil had a texture of silt loam. The soil color was gray (1 OYR 5/1) comprising 60 percent of the soil layer. The redox features resembled concentrations in the matrix with a color of strong brown (7.5 YR 5/6), comprising 40 percent of the matrix. The soil met the hydric soil indicatorAll (Depleted Below Dark Surtace). For the upland soils, at TP-UPL- 0, soils displayed between 0 and 6 inches the soil had a texture of cobbly sandy loam. The soil matrix had a color of very dark gray (1 OYR31) comprising 100 percent of the soil layer. Between 6 and 18 inches, the soil layer was cobble (100 percent). The upland soil did not meet any hydric soil indicators. Most of Wetland D is saturated but there are large areas that are seasonally ponded. At TP-WL -0, the water table was present at a depth of 8 inches, and the soil was saturated at the soil surtace. There were areas of ponding up to 6 inches deep at the time of the site visit in the early growing season. Wetland 0 was determined by the presence of hydric soils, wetland hydrology indicators, and a dominance of hydrophytic vegetation. The rationale for delineation was based primarily on the presence of hydrology and topography, since the soil and vegetation are highly disturbed. til KingCoYnty --------- Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report -Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 19 Table 5 (continued). Summary for Wetland D. Wetland Name Wetland D Rationale for The Renton Municipal Code classifies wetlands within the shoreline jurisdiction according to the local rating current Ecology rating system, which rates Wetland D as a Category III wetland, Functions of Wetland D has a moderate potential to improve water quality but no opportunity to improve water wetland quality, It has a moderate potential to improve hydrologic functions but no opportunity. It has a moderate potential and moderate opportunity to improve habitat functions. More information on Wetland D's functions can be found in Table 6. Buffer The buffer width for Wetland D is based on the City of Renton's requirements for a Category III condition wetland within the shoreline jurisdiction, and an Ecology wetland rating above 20 points for habitat functions. The buffers for Wetland D are mostly disturbed. A bike path runs along the entire northwestern edge. The Black River Pump Station is directly to the south, causing much of the buffer to be comprised of fill material. Along the eastern edge of the wetland is mixed deciduous-coniferous forest. ~ King County May 2014 20 Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report -Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project Table 6. Individual Wetland Function Scores for Wetlands in the Study Area for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project. Water Quality Hydrologic Functions Functions Rating 8 Rating 8 Habitat Functions Rating II (numerical score in (numerical score in (numerical score in Ecology r--parentheses) parentheses) , parentheses) , Wetland Total Rating Name Potential 0pI'0rtunity Potential Opportunity Potential Opportunity Score C Category b -- A High (12) Yes Moderate No High (16) Moderate (13) 62 II (9) , 1-----, B l Moderate Yes Moderate No Low (5) Moderate (11) 42 III (9) (8) -- C Low (0) Yes Low (3) No Moderate Moderate (12) 23 IV (8) D Moderate No Moderate No Moderate Moderate (13) 40 III (10) (10) (7) , Qualitative ratings are based on the "Using the Wetland Rating System in Compensatory Mitigation" focus sheet (Ecology 2008) b Wetland category is based on the Department of Ecology rating system (Hruby 2004). C Total score is derived by multiplying the numerical rating by 2 when there is opportunity for improving water quality or hydrologic functions and by 1 when there is none. Then all scores are summed to derive the total. IVetlandA Wetland A, a riverine wetland, has a high potential to improve water quality primarily because the wetland is covered by tree and shrub vegetation for over two thirds of the area, and oyer half of the area is covered in depressions. These characteristics can help Wetland A capture sediment during high water events. The wetland has the opportunity to improve water quality because its main hydrology source is the Black River, which is on Ecology's 303(d) list due to high levels of bacteria. The wetland has a moderate potential to improve hydrologic functions, primarily because it is heavily vegetated. However, Wetland A does not have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion downstream because it is directly upstream of the Black River Pump Station, which controls the flows of the Black River downstream of the wetland. Wetland A exhibits high potential to improve habitat functions because it is well vegetated, contains several hydroperiods and habitat features, and has a high interspersion of habitat types. The opportunity for the wetland to improve habitat functions is moderate because of the wetland's proximity to priority habitats and relatively undisturbed buffers. Wetlalld B Wetland B, a depressional wetland, has a moderate potential to improve water quality because the area is seasonally ponded over more than half its area and because it has an intermittently flowing outlet. It has the opportunity to improve water quality because untreated stormwater discharges into the wetland from nearby Monster Road. Wetland B has a moderate potential to improve hydrology because it has an intermittently flowing outlet and a ponding depth of up to two feet. However, Wetland B does not have the opportunity to improve hydrology because it is upstream of the Black River Pump Station, which controls ti May 2014 ________ ~ ... _______ ________ _ _ _______ ._____ _ ______ ~_~_Count~ Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report -Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 21 downstream flow. Wetland B has a low potential to improve habitat functions, primarily because it does not have a very diverse plant structure or hydrologic regime, and no special habitat features. The opportunity for the wetland to improve habitat functions is moderate because of the wetland's proximity to priority habitats and other wetlands. WiHialld C Wetland C is a slope wetland with a low potential to provide water quality improvements. This is due to the wetland location, on a slope greater than 5 percent, and a lack of dense herbaceous vegetation. The wetland has the opportunity to improve water quality, since untreated stormwater discharges to the wetland from nearby Monster Road. Wetland C has a low potential to improve hydrology, because of its lack of dense vegetation. Wetland C does not have the opportunity to improve hydrology because it drains to the Black River upstream of the Pump Station. Wetland C has a moderate potential for improving habitat function, due to the presence of several vegetation strata and a moderately complex hydrologic regime. It has a moderate opportunity to improve habitat functions because of Wetland C's proximity to other wetlands and to priority habitats. Wet/and D Wetland D is a depressional wetland. It has moderate potential to improve water quality because it does not have an outlet, and persistent vegetation covers almost the entire wetland. However, wetland D does not have the opportunity to improve water quality because it is not close enough to development. Wetland D has a moderate potential to improve hydrologic functions, because it does not have an outlet, and ponds water to a depth of up to 2 feet. It does not have the opportunity to improve hydrology, though, because its contribution to flood storage is minor when compared to the flow control provided by the Black River Pump Station. The wetland has a moderate potential to improve habitat, primarily because it has a moderate interspersion of habitats and contains several special habitat features. Wetland 0 has a moderate opportunity to provide habitat due to its proximity to other wetlands and a relatively undisturbed buffer along much of the wetland. Analysis of Stream Conditions Herrera biologists delineated the OHWM of the Black River on February 21,2014. A detailed summary of Black River conditions within the study area, including a representative photograph, is provided in Table 7. The location of the OHWM of the Black River was primarily distinguished by drainage patterns and scour lines in the field. Pump station operations data from the Black River Pump Station were also reviewed and used to refine further the OHWM location on the north bank. Figure 4 shows the location of the OHWM. ~ ~<:ounty-----. 22 May 2014 Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project Table 7. Summary of the Black River within the Study Area of the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project. Stream Name Black River WRIA Stream Catalog # Local Jurisdiction WDNR Stream Type Local Stream Rating Local Jurisdiction Buffer Width Documented Fish Use Location of Stream Relative to Project Area Connectivity (where stneam flows fromlto) Riparian/Buffer Condition May 2014 9-0004 City of Renton Type S: Shoreline of the State ~~~~~~~~~~~----~~~- Class 1: Shoreline of the State -------------------------1 200 feet The presence of Fall Chinook and winter steel head has been documented in the Black River. and coho rearing has also been documented 0NDFW 2014a). The Black River is located within the project area, and dredging work will occur within the river. The Black River originates upstream of the project area within the lower reaches of WRIA 9. The confluence of the Black River and the Green River, just downstream of the Black River Pump Station, forms the Duwamish River. The Duwamish River travels 11 miles before its mouth at Elliott Bay in Puget Sound. The bufler for the portion of the Black River within the project area is relatively undisturbed. There is a small area of development near the Black River Pump Station. The rest of the buffer is primarily upland of mixed coniferous and deciduous forest of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesil), black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), and red alder (Alnus rubra), with willows (Salix spp.) and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) in the understory. t4 Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project _~~~_~ntl! 23 Wetland and stream regulations imposed by the federal government, Washington State, and the City of Renton will apply if wetlands or the Black River are affected by activities planned for the project. The filling or excavation of wetlands is regulated under the federal Clean Water Act, Washington State laws, and the RMC. The RMC also establishes required buffer widths for wetlands and streams. Federal, state, and city regulations also uniformly require mitigation for impacts on wetlands and streams. Clean Water Act Sections 404 and 401 Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act regulates the placement or removal of soil or other fill, grading, or alteration (hydrologic or vegetative) in waters of the United States, including wetlands (33 USC 1344). The USACE administers the permitting program under the act. The permits include nationwide (general) permits for projects involving small areas of fill, grading or alteration and individual permits for projects that require larger areas of wetland disturbance. USACE does not regulate wetland buffers. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that proposed dredge (removal) and fill activities permitted under Section 404 be reviewed and certified to ensure that such activities meet state water quality standards. In Washington State, this certification is administered by Ecology for all Section 404 permits except when the activities are covered by a Section 404 Nationwide Permit that does not require a Section 401 certification. Washington State Laws Washington State laws and programs designed to control the loss of wetland acreage include the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (a federal law that is implemented in the state by Ecology as noted above and as mandated by the Washington State Water Pollution Control Act). The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife requires a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) for any alteration of the bed or banks of the Black River below the OHWM. Receipt of this permit is contingent on several mandates, including coordinating restoration, maintaining fish stocks, and preserving bald eagle populations (WAC 77.04.020, 43.41.270, 77.04.170, 232.12.292). Renton Municipal Code Wetlands RMC 4-3-090-0 requires that wetlands adjacent to a Shoreline of the State (the Black River) be classified according to the Ecology rating system (Hruby 2004). Buffers are required around each wetland in order to protect the wetland functions and values. For each classification of wetland (Categories I through IV), the code specifies a buffer width (Table 1). As shown in May 2014 W King County ---------"-------------- Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report -Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 25 Table 1, Wetland A meets the criteria for a Category II wetland; Wetlands Band D meet the criteria for Category III wetlands; and Wetland C meets the criteria for a Category IV wetland. The buffers were adjusted according to their habitat function levels (RMC 4-3-090-D). The buffer widths will be 225 feet for Wetland A, 75 feet for Wetland B, 50 feet for Wetland C, and 125 feet for Wetland D. Stteams Streams are classified under section 4-3-050-L of the RMC. The Black River within the project area is rated as a Class I stream, and is considered a Shoreline of the State. Streams of this rating are required to have a 200-foot-wide buffer measured from each OHWM. Buffer widths are shown on Figure 4. The buffer boundary indicates that all vegetated land within the study area is within a critical area or a critical area buffer; predominantly the buffer required for the Black River. May 2014 26 Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project Brinson, M.M. 1993. A Hydrogeomorphic Classification for Wetlands. Technical Report WRP- DE -4. US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. August 1993. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.e. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Publication FWS/OBS-79131. US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services. Ecology. 2008. Using the Wetland Rating System in Compensatory Mitigation. Focus Sheet: Shorelands and Environmental Assistance. Washington State. Ecology Publication 08-06-009. Washington State Department of Ecology. March 2008. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1. US Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. January 1987. Environmental Laboratory. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region. Technical Report TR-08-13. US Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center, Wetlands Regulatory Assistance Program, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Hruby, T. 2004. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington -Revised. Ecology Publication 04-06-025. Washington State Department of Ecology. August 2004. King County. 2013. King County iMAP Interactive Mapping Tool. Obtained February 20,2014, from agency website: http://www.kingcounty.gov loperations/GIS/Maps/iMAP .aspx. King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Wastewater Treatment Division. 2007. Black River Pumping Station Operations Manual, 90% Draft, Publication #1375, December. NOAA. 2014. National Weather Service Forecast Office. Obtained February 20, 2014, from agency website: http://www. nws. noaa. gov I climate/index. php?wfo=sew. NRCS. 2012. Soil survey geographic database for King County area, Washington. July 2,2012. US Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Obtained February 20, 2014, from agency website: http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov. NRCS. 2014. National hydric soils list for the state of Washington. US Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Obtained February 20, 2014, from agency website: http://soils. usda. gov luse/hydric/ lists I state. html. Olson, P. and E. Stockdale. 2010. Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark on Streams in Washington State. Second Review Draft_ Washington State Department of Ecology, Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program, Lacey, Washington. Ecology Publication #08-06-001. tQ May 2014 KingCoYnty --------- Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report -Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 27 Parametrix. 2011. Lake to sound Trail-Segment A: Wetland Discipline Report. Prepared by Parametrix. Bellevue, Washington. October 2011. USDA. 2013. Aerial photograph of King County. Color digital ortho quarter quad tiles (DOQQs). Horizontal Resolution: 1 meter. US State Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency Aerial Photography Field Office, National Agriculture Imagery Program. Production date: October 10, 2013. Obtained February 20,2014, from agency through GIS server: http:// gis. apfo. usda. gov I arcgis/services. USFWS. 2010. National Wetlands Inventory maps. Digital data compiled in July 2012. Inventory conducted in 1973. US Fish and Wildlife Service. Obtained February 20,2014. http://www. fws.gov/wetlands/. WDF. 1975. A Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization. Volume I, Puget Sound Region. Prepared by R.W. Williams, R.M. Laramie, and J.J. Ames. Washington Department of Fisheries, Olympia. November 1975. WDFW. 2014a. SalmonScape mapping system. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Obtained February 20,2014, from agency website: http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/ salmonscape Ii ndex. html. WDFW. 2014b. Priority Species and Habitat Database. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Obtained February 20,2014, from agency website: http://wdfw.wa.gov/ mapping/phs/. ti King County Month Year 28 Draft/Final Report Title APPENDIX A Wetland Delineation Methods This wetland delineation was performed in accordance with the Regional Supplement to the US Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Environmental Laboratory 2010). which is consistent with the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). These methods use a three-parameter approach for identifying and delineating wetlands: the presence of field indicators for hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and hydrology. This wetland delineation was performed according to procedures specified for the routine wetland determination method (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Hydrophytic Vegetation Hydrophytic vegetation is characterized by the ability to grow, effectively compete, reproduce, and persist in anaerobic soil conditions resulting from periodic or long-term saturation (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Vegetation must meet at least one of the four indicators (described below) that are used to determine the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in wetlands. Problematic and atypical situations for hydrophytic vegetation are also described in the US Army Corps of Engineers delineation manual and supplement (Environmental Laboratory 1987,2010). Plant Species Identification Plant species were identified using Flora of the Pacific Northwest (Hitchcock and Cronquist 1987) and A Field Guide to the Common Wetland Plants of Western Washington and Northwestern Oregon (Cooke 1997). The indicator status of each plant species is based on the National Wetland Plant List (Lichvar 2012) for the Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region. Dominant Species Determination Dominant species are those that contribute more than other species to the character of a plant community. To determine dominance, a vegetation sampling area is determined by the field biologist to accurately characterize the plant community that occurs in the area to be evaluated. These are commonly circular sampling areas, centered on the location of the test plot (where soil and hydrologic data is also collected). The radius of the circle is determined in the field, based on site conditions. In large wetlands, a typical sampling radius would be 2 to 5 meters for tree and sapl ing/shrub species, and 1 meter for herbaceous species. In a small or narrow wetland (or upland). the radius might be reduced to accurately sample wetland (upland) areas, thereby avoiding an overlap into an ac1jacent community having different vegetation, soils, or hydrologic conditions (Environmental Laboratory 2010). Within the vegetation sampling area, a complete list of plant species that occur in the sampling area is compiled and the species divided into four strata: tree, shrub (including tQ Wetland and Stream Delineation Report -Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal PrQj€ct ___ King County A-1 saplings, see criteria below), herb, and woody vines. A plant is included in the tree stratum if it is a woody plant 3 inches diameter at breast height (dbh) or greater; in the shrub stratum if it is a woody plant less than 3 inches dbh (including tree saplings under 3 inches dbh); in the herb stratum if it is an herbaceous (non-woody) plant; and in the woody vine stratum if it is a woody vine of any height (Environmental Laboratory 2010), To be included in the sampling, 50 percent or more of the plant base must be within the radius of the sampling area. For trees specifically, more than 50 percent of the trunk (diameter) must be within the sampling radius to be included. A rapid test, dominance test (e,g., the 50120 rule), or prevalence index are commonly used to determine which species are considered dominant and to assess whether the criteria for hydrophytic vegetation are met at each test plot (Environmental Laboratory 2010). Additional hydrophytic vegetation indicators are discussed in the following section. To conduct a rapid test (Indicator 1 on the wetland determination data form), the dominant species are evaluated visually and if all are FACW or OBL, the vegetation data passes the rapid test. To conduct a dominance test (Indicator 2 on the wetland determination data form), the absolute areal coverage of the plant species within a stratum are totaled, starting with the most abundant species and including other species in descending order of coverage, until the cumulative coverage exceeds 50 percent of the total coverage for the stratum. The plant species that constitute this first 50 percent of areal coverage are considered the dominant species in the stratum. In addition, any other any single plant species that constitutes at least 20 percent of the total percent cover in the stratum is also considered a dominant species (Environmental Laboratory 2010). The indicator status category for each plant (shown in Table A-1) is also listed on the wetland determination form. If more than 50 percent of the dominant species across all strata are rated OBL, FACW, or FAC, the hydrophytic vegetation dominance test (Indicator 2) is met. Table A-l. Plant Indicator Status Cate!lories. Indicator Indicator Status Symbol Definition Obligate wetland OBl Plants that occur almost always (estimated probability >99%) in plants wetlands under natural conditions but also occur rarely (estimated probabilitv <1%) in upland areas Facultative FACW Plants that usually occur (estimated probability >67%) in wetlands wetland plants under natural conditions but also occur (estimated probability 1% to 33%) in upland areas Facultative FAC Plants with a similar likelihood (estimated probability 33% to 67%) of plants occurrinQ in both wetlands and upland areas Facultative FACU Plants that sometimes occur (estimated probability 1% to 33%) in upland plants wetlands but occur more often (estimated probability >67% to 99%) in upland areas Obligate upland UPl Plants that rarely occur (estimated probability <1%) in wetlands under plants natural conditions ~ - WET< )DRY OBL-FACW-FAC-FACU-UPL Source: Environmental Laboratory (1987), UI K.."County May 2014 A-2 Wetland and Stream Delineation Report -Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal PrQject The prevalence index (Indicator 3 on the wetland determination data form) is a weighted- average wetland indicator status of all plant species in the sampling plot, where weighting is by abundance (Environmental Laboratory 2010), This method is used where indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology are present, but the vegetation initially fails the rapid and dominance tests (Indicators 1 and 2). To determine the prevalence index, the absolute cover of each species in each stratum is determined, All species (across all strata) are organized into wetland indicator status groups (i.e" OBL, FACW, FAC, FACU, or UPL) and their cover values are summed within the groups, The formula for the prevalence index is applied, If the prevalence index (which ranges from 1,0 to 5,0) equals 3,0 or less, this hydrophytic vegetation indicator is met, Additional Hydropl7ytic Vegetation Indicators The presence of morphological adaptations to wetland conditions in plants that lack a published hydrophytic vegetation indicator status or with an indicator status of FACU or drier is also a hydrophytic vegetation indicator (Indicator 4), Evidence of physiological, morphological, or reproductive adaptations indicating growth in hydrophytic conditions can include, but are not limited to, buttressed roots, adventitious roots, multi-stemmed trunks, or tussocks, To determine whether Indicator 4 is met, the morphological features must be observed on more than 50 percent of the individuals of a FACU species (or species without a published indicator status) living in an area where hydric soil and wetland hydrology are present, On the wetland determination data form, the indicator status of the species with morphological adaptations would be changed to FAC (with supporting notes), and the dominance test (Indicator 2) and/or prevalence index (Indicator 3) would then be recalculated, Wetland non-vascular plants, referred to as bryophytes and consisting of mosses, liverworts, and hornworts, may also meet the hydric vegetation criteria, under Indicator 5 (Environmental Laboratory 2010), These plants must be present in areas containing hydric soils and wetland hydrology, The percent cover of wetland specialist bryophytes is determined in 10-inch by 10-inch square plots placed at the base of hummocks, if present, The summed cover of wetland special ist bryophytes must be more than 50 percent of the total bryophyte cover in the vegetation sampling area, The problematic hydrophytic vegetation indicator section in the Corps regional supplement further explains how to interpret situations in which hydric soils and wetland hydrology are present but hydrophytic vegetation Indicators 1 through 5 are lacking (Environmental Laboratory 2010), Procedures for looking at settings such as areas with active vegetation management (e.g, farms), areas dominated by aggressive invasive species, active floodplains, and low terraces are described, as well as explanations for specific situations, such as seasonal shifts in plant communities, extended drought conditions, and riparian areas, Hydric Soils A hydric soil is a soil that is saturated, flooded, or inundated long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions that favor the growth and regeneration of hydrophytic vegetation (Environmental Laboratory 1987,2010), The evaluation of existing soil maps May 2014 ____ _ Wetland and Stream Delineation Report -Alack River Pump Station Sediment Removal PrQject (developed by NRCS and other sources) is used to understand hydric soil distribution and to identify the likely locations of hydric soils (by verifying their inclusion on the hydric soils list). Comparison of these mapped soils to conditions found on site help verify the presence of hydric soils. For on-site soils characterization, hydric soils data were obtained generally by digging test pits at least 20 inches deep and 4 inches wide. Hydric soi I conditions were evaluated using indicators outlined in Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States (NRCS 2006), and adopted by the Regional Supplement to the US Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Environmental Laboratory 2010). Hydric soil indicators applicable to the Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast region include, but are not limited to, the presence of organic soils (i.e., histosols or histic epipedons): sulfidic material (i.e., hydrogen sulfide): depleted, gleyed, or reduced soil matrices: and/or the presence of iron or manganese concretions (Environmental Laboratory 2010). Soil color characterization (i.e., hue, value, and chroma) is a critical tool in determining depleted, gleyed, and reduced soil conditions. Soil color was evaluated by comparing soil colors at test plots to standardized color samples in Munsell Soil Color Charts (Munsell Color 2000). Wetland Hydrology Wetland hydrology is indicated by site conditions that demonstrate the periodic inundation or saturation to the soil surface for a sufficient duration during the total growing season. A sufficient duration during the growing season is defined as 14 or more consecutive days of flooding, ponding, or presence of a water table at 12 inches or less from the soil surface (Environmental Laboratory 2010). The growing season is the period of consecutive frost-free days, or the longest period during which the soil temperature stays above biological zero (41°F), when measured at 12 inches below the soil surface. Two indicators of biological activity can be used to determine whether the growing season has begun and is ongoing (Environmental Laboratory 2010): • Occurrence of aboveground growth and development of at least two non-evergreen vascular plant species growing within the wetland. Examples of this growth include the emergence or elongation of leaves on woody plants and the emergence or opening of flowers. • Soil temperature, which can be measured once during a single site visit, should be at least 4 PF or higher at a depth of 12 inches. For this assessment, onsite hydrologic indicators were examined at the test plots. Hydrologic indicators include the presence of surface water, standing water in the test pit at a depth of 12 inches or less, saturation in the root zone, watermarks, drift lines, sediment deposits, drainage patterns within wetlands, oxidized rhizospheres surrounding living roots, and water- stained leaves. U1 -I(~"!~nty A·4 May 2014 Wetland and Stream Delineation Report -Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project Cooke, S. 1997. A Field Guide to the Common Wetland Plants of Western Washington and Northwest Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society and Washington Native Plant Society, Seattle, Washington. June 1997. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1. US Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. January 1987. Environmental Laboratory. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region. Technical Report TR-08-13. US Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center, Wetlands Regulatory Assistance Program, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1987. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington. Lichvar, R.W. 2013. The National Wetland Plant List: 2013 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2013-49:1-241. US Army Corps of Engineers. Obtained February 27,2014, from agency website: http://rsgisias.crrel. usace.army. miI/NWPLI. Munsell Color. 2000. Munsell Soil Color Charts. New Windsor, New York. NRCS. 2006. Field Indicators of Hydric Soil in the United States, Version 6.0. Edited by G.w. Hurt and L.M. Vasilas. US Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, in association with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. May _2014 ~ __________ KingCOU"!!r. Wetland and Stream Delineation Reporl-Black River Pump Station Secliment Removal Project A-5 APPENDIX B Wetland Delineation Data Forms ti King~nty _____________ ,_. ______________ ._. __ . ________ _ EI ,WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region HERRERA ENV)RONMENTA! CONSLl.TANTS Project Site: Applicant/Owner: Investigator(s): Black River Pump Station King County J. Munger, A. Ward City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: State: WA Sampling Point: Section. Township, Range: 813, T23N, R4E 2-21-2014 TP-UPL-A Landform (hillslope. terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): 5 Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Soil Map Unit Name: Woodinville silt loam Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes Are Vegetation Are Vegetation D, Soil D, Soil D, Or Hydrology D, significantly disturbed? 181, Or Hydrology D, naturally problematic? Long: No Datum: NWI classification: o (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are "Normal Circumstances" present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) None Yes 0 No IZI SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects important features etc Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No t8l Yes 181 No 0 Yes 0 No 181 Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? YES 0 NO IZI Remarks: Only the parameter for hydric soils is met. Area strongly influenced by past Black River activities. Strong relic hydric soils due to past inundation. VEGETATION -Use scientific names of Dlants Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 2m) 1. none 2. 3. 4. Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 2m) 1. Rubus armeniacus 2. Salix lucida 3. 4. 5. Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1m) 1. Pha/aris arundinacea 2. Polystichum munitum 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1m) 1. none 2. % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum = 60 Absolute % Cover o 50 10 60 25 15 40 o Remarks: Hydrophytic vegetation is not dominant. us Army Corps of Engineers )r tp.upl·a.d()("x Dominant Species? = Total Cover y" No = Total Cover Yes Yes = Total Cover = Total Cover Indicator Status FACU FACW FAGW FACU Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are DBl, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Percent of Dominant Species That Are DBl, FACW, or FAC: Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: 3 33 Multiply by: xl = x2= x3= x4= x5= (A) (B) (NB) DBl species FAGW species FAG species FACU species UPl species Column Totals: (A) Prevalence Index = BfA = (B) Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ~3.01 Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain) 11ndicalors of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes o No Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast -Version 2.0 Project Site: Black River Pump Station SOIL Samplinq Point: TP-LJPL-A Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators_) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color % Color % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks (moist) (Moist) 0-7 10YR 4/2 100 Silt loam 7-18 2.5Y 5/2 85 7.5YR 5/6 15 C M Silt loam Bits of trash and charcoal in layer lType: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted_) Indicators for Problematic Hydric SoilsJ : 0 Histosol (A 1) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2 cm Muck (A10) 0 Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) 0 Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (F 1) (except MlRA 1) 0 Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Glayed Matrix (F2) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Depleted 8elow Dark Surface (A11) 181 Depleted Matrix (F3) 0 Thick Dark Surface (A 12) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) 0 Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Jlndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland 0 Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (FS) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes 181 No 0 Depth (inches): Remarks: Hydric soil indicator F3 (Depleted Matrix) is present HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all thai apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) 0 Surface Water (A1) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (B9) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 0 Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (B11) 0 Drainage Pattems (B10) 0 Water Marks (B 1) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) 0 Sediment Deposits (82) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) 0 Drift Deposits (83) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (02) 0 Algal Mat or Crust (B4) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (03) 0 Iron Deposits (85) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (05) 0 Surface Soil Cracks (86) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (01) (L.RR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A) 0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (07) 0 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (8S) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 181 Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 0 No 181 Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 181 Saturation Present? Yes 0 No 181 Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Wetland hydrology indicators are not present. US Army Corps of Engineers jr tp-up[-(J.doa Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast -Version 2.0 a WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region HERRERA eNVIAONMFNr A{ CONSLLTANTS Project Site: Applicant/Owner: Black River Pump Station King County Investigator(s): J. Munger. A. Ward City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: Slale: WA Sampling Point: Section, Township, Range: 813, T23N, R4E 2-21-2014 TP-UPL-B Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): < 1 Subregion (LRR): A Lat Soil Map Unit Name: Woodinville silt loam Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes Are Vegetation D. Soil D, Or Hydrology D, significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation D. Soil D. Or Hydrology D, naturally problematic? Long: No Datum: NWI classification: o (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are "Normal Circumstances" present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) None Yes No o SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes CE:I No 0 Yes 0 No CE:I Yes 0 No 181 Remarks: Only the parameter for hydrophytic vegetation is met. VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 1m) 1. Pinus contorta 2. 3. 4. Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Pial Size: 1m) 1 Sambucus racemosa 2. 3. 4. 5. Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1m) 1. Poa pratensis 2. Cardamine hirsuta 3. Taraxacum officina/s 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1m) 1. 2. % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum = 45 Remarks: Hydrophytic vegetation is dominant. us Anny Corps of Engineers )f tp-~pl-h,d(Jn Absolute % Cover 85 85 40 40 50 5 3 Dominant Species? Yes ::: T alai Cover Yes ::: Total Cover Yes No No ::: Total Cover = Total Cover Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? YES 0 NO 181 Indicator Status FAG FACU FAC FACU FACU Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW. or FAG: Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Sirata: Percenl of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: 2 3 67 Multiply by: x1 = x2 = x3= x4 ::: x5 ::: (A) (B) (AlB) OBL species FACW species FAC species FACU species UPL species Column Totals: (A) Prevalence Index::: BfA::: (B) Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: x Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is .:::,3.01 Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants' Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present. unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No o Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast -Version 2.0 Project Site: Black River Pump Station SOIL S ampling Point: TP-UPL-B Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color % Color % Type1 loc2 Texture RemarKs (moist) (Moist) 0-18 lOYR 3/3 100 Silt loam lType: C= Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted,) Indicators for Problematic HydriC Soils3 : 0 Hislosol (A 1) 0 Sandy Redox (85) 0 2 cm Muck (A10) 0 Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) 0 81ack Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) 0 Very Shallow DarK Suliace (TFt2) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Depleted 8elow Dark Suliace (At1) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) 0 Thick Dark Surface (A12) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) 0 Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland 0 Sandy Gleyed Matrix (84) 0 Redox Depressions (FS) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrietive Layer (if present): Type: HydriC Soil Present? Ye. 0 No 181 Depth (inches): Remarks: Hydric soil indicators are not present. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) 0 Surface Water (A 1) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 Water-Stained leaves (89) 0 High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 48) 0 Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (811) 0 Drainage Pattems (810) 0 Water Marks (81) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (813) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) 0 Sediment Deposits (82) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) 0 Drift Deposits (83) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (02) 0 Algal Mat or 'Crust (84) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (03) 0 Iron Deposits (85) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (05) 0 Surface Soil Cracks (86) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (01) (LRR Al 0 Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A) 0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (07) 0 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 181 Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 0 No 181 Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 181 Saturation Present? Yes 0 No 181 Depth (inches): (inctudes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring weU, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Wetland hydrology indicators are not present. us Army Corps of Engineers jr tp-up/-h.d()l·X Western Mountains, Valfey, and Coast -Version 2.0 eI WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region HERRERA ENVJRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS Project Site: ApplicanVOwner: Investigator(s): Black River Pump Station King County J. Munger. A. Ward City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: Slale: WA Sampling Point: Section. Township, Range: 813, T23N. R4E 2~24-2014 TP-UPL-C landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex. none): Slope (%): 5 Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Soil Map Unit Name: Woodinville silt loam Are climatic { hydrologic conditions on the site typical fOf this time of year? Yes Are Vegetation D. Soil D, Or Hydrology D, significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation D. Soil ~, Or Hydrology D, naturally problematic? Long: No Datum: NWI classification: o (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are "Normal Circumstances" present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) None Yes No o SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -Attach site map showing sampling point locations transects important features etc Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? HydriC Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0 Yes 0 Yes 0 No 0 No 0 Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? YES 0 NO 0 Remarks: None of the wetland parameters are met. Area strongly influenced by past Black River activities_ Strong relic hydric SQils due to past inundation. VEGETATION -Use scientific names of Dlants Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 2m) 1. Betula papyrifera 2. 3. 4. Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 2m) 1. Rubus armeniacus 2. 3. 4. 5. Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1m) 1. Polystichum munitum 2. Hedera helix 3. Geranium robertianum 4. 5. 6. 7. B. 9. 10. 11. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1m) 1. none 2. % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum = 60 Absolute ~ 90 90 5 5 40 1 1 o Remarks: Hydrophytic vegetation is not dominant. US Army Corps of Engineers ir Ip-upi-(:,d,,('x Dominant ~ Yes = Total Cover = Total Cover Yes No No = Total Cover = Total Cover Indicator ~ FAC FACU FACU NL-UPL NL-UPL Dominance Test Worksheet; Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Prevalence Index worksheet: Tolal % Cover of: 3 33 Multiply by: xl = x2 = x3= x4= x5= (A) (B) (A/B) OBL species FACW species FAC species FACU species UPL species Column Totals: (A) Prevalence Index = BfA = (B) Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ~3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Planls1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydriC soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes o No Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast -Version 2.0 Project Site: Black River Pump Station SOIL Sampling Point: TP-UPL-C Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color % Color % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks (moist) (Moist) 0-8 10YR 3/2 100 Sandy loam 8-18 10YR 3/2 98 10YR 4/3 2 C M Sandy loam 'Type: C= Concentration, o=oepletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric SOils 3 : 0 Histosol (A1) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2 cm Muck (A10) 0 Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) 0 Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Depleted Below Dark Surface (A 11) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) 0 Thick Dark Surface (A12) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) 0 Sandy Mucky Mineral (51) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland 0 Sandy Gleyed Matrix (54) 0 Redox Depressions (FB) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Ve. 0 No 181 Depth (inches): Remarks: Hydric soil indicators are not present. HVDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) 0 Surface Water (A 1) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 0 Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (811) 0 Drainage Patterns (810) 0 Water Marks (81) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (813) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) 0 Sediment Deposits (82) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) 0 Drift Deposits (83) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (D2) 0 Algal Mat or Crust (84) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (03) 0 I ron Deposits (BS) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (05) 0 Surface Soil Cracks (86) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (01) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A) 0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (07) 0 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 181 Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 0 No 181 Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Ves 0 No 181 Saturation Present? Ves 0 No 181 Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Wetland hydrology Indicators are not present. us Army Corps of Engineers Jr tp-IJpl.(.d()(x Western Mountains, VaJley, and Coast -Version 2.0 B WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region HERRERA ENVIRONMEf'.oT AL CONSULTANTS Project Site: ApplicanUOwner: Investigator(s): Black River Pump Station King County J. Munger, J. Wozniak City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: Stale: WA Sampling Point Section, Township, Range: 813, T23N, R4E 2-24-2014 TP-UPL-O Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Soil Map Unit Name: Woodinville silt loam Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes Are Vegetation (81, Soil 18), Or Hydrology D. significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation D, Soil D, Or Hydrology 0, naturally problematic? Long: No Datum' NWI classification: o (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are "Normal Circumstances" present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Attach site map showing sampling point locations transects important features etc -, Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes L8I No 0 Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No L8I Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? YES Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No L8I None Yes o No 0 NO L8I Remarks: Only the parameter for wetland vegetation is met. Soils are disturbed-compacted and likely disturbed from construction of pump station. Much of the area is fill supporting the Black River Pump Station. Vegetation nearly all invasive. VEGETATION -Use scientific names of Dlants Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 2m) Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet: % Cover Species? Status 1. none Number of Dominant Species That Are 2 (A) 2. OSl, FACW, or FAG: 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across 3 (B) 4. All Strata: 0 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are 67 (AlB) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 2m) OSl, FACW, or FAC: 1. Rubus armeniacus 75 Yes FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Crataegus doug/asii 15 No FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply: by:: 3. OSl species xl = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAG species x3 = = Total Gover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1m) UPl species x5 = ,. Paa pratensis 30 Yes FAG Column Tolals: (A) (B) 2. Agrostis capillaris 30 Yes FAG Prevalence Index = BfA = 3. Phalaris arundinacea 5 No FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. Holcus lanafus 5 No FAG Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. X Dominance Test is >50% 6. Prevalence Index is ,:::3.0 1 7. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in 8. Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants 1 10. Problematic Hydrophylic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 11ndicalors of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, = Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic. Woody: Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1m) 1. 2. Hydrophytic Vegetation Yes L8I No 0 Present? = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum = 30 Remarks: Hydrophytic vegetation is dominant. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, VaHey, and Coast -Version 2. a i,. Ip-lIpl-d.doo Project Site: Black River Pump Station SOIL Sampling Point: TP-UPL-D Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confinn the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color % Color % Type 1 Loc 2 Texture Remarks (moist) (Moist) 0-6 10YR3/1 100 Cobbly sandy loam 6-18 Cobble lType: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to alllRRs, unless othelWise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3 : 0 Histosol (A 1) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2 cm Muck (A10) 0 Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) 0 Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MlRA 1) 0 Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) 0 Thick Dark. Surface (A 12) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) 0 Sandy Mucky Mineral (S 1) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland 0 Sandy Gleyed Matrix (84) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or oroblematic. Restrictive layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soli Present? Ves 0 No till Depth (inches): Remarks: Hydric soil indicators are not present. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) 0 Surface Water (A 1) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (B9) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (B9) 0 High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1. 2. 4A, and 48) (MlRA 1,2, 4A, and 48) 0 Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (811) 0 Drainage Patterns (810) 0 Water Marks (81) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) 0 Dry-8eason Water Table (C2) 0 Sediment Deposits (82) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) 0 Drift Deposits (83) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (02) 0 Algal Mat or Crust (B4) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (03) 0 Iron Deposits (B5) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (D5) 0 Surface Soil Cracks (86) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (01) (lRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (06) (lRR A) 0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) 0 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No till Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 0 No till Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Ve. 0 No till Saturation Present? Yes 0 No till Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Wetland hydrology indicators are not present. US Anny Corps of Engineers jr tp-upl·d.docx Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast-Version 2.0 EI WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region HERRERA ENVIRONMENTA~ CONSI.A.TANTS Project Site: Applicant/Owner: Investigator(s): Black River Pump Station King County J. Munger, A. Ward City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: Siale: WA Sampling Point: Section, Township, Range: 813, T23N, R4E 2/21/14 TP-WL-A Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Soil Map Unit Name: Woodinville silt loam Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes Are Vegetation Are Vegetation D, Soil D, Soil D, Or Hydrology D, significantly disturbed? D, Or Hydrology 181, naturally problematic? Long: No Datum: NWI classification: o (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are "Normal Circumstances" present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks,) None Yes 0 No 181 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. HydfOphytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes I8J No D Yes 1:81 No D Yes 181 No 0 Is the Sampled Area within a WeOand? YES 181 NO 0 Remarks: All three wetland parameters are present. Wetland's hydrology heavily influenced by dam just downstream. VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 2m) 1. Salix lucida 2. 3. 4. Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 2m) 1. Salix /ucida 2. Salix sitchensis 3. Rubus armeniacus 4. 5. Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1 m) 1. Poa pratensis 2. Phalaris arundinace8 3. Polystichum munitum 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1 m) 1. none 2. % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum = 60 Remarks: Hydrophytic vegetation is dominant. US Army Corps of Engineers ir rp-" I-a.dm:x Absolute % Cover 35 40 40 5 85 25 20 1 46 o Dominant Species? y" = Total Cover Yes Yes No = Total Cover Yes Yes No = Total Cover = Total Cover Indicator Status FACW FACW FACW FACU FAC FACW FACU Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OeL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Percent of Dominant Species That Are oel, FACW, or FAC: Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: oel species FACW species FAC species FACU species UPl species 5 5 100 Multiply by: x1 = x2 = x3 = x4 = x5 = (A) (B) (AlB) Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = BfA = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: x Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ~3.0' Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants' Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No o Western Mountains, Valley. and Coast-Version 2.0 Project Site: Black River Pump Station SOil Sampling Point: TP-Wl-A Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color % Color % Type 1 Loc 2 Texture Remarks (moist) (Moist) 0-4 10YR 3/2 100 Silt loam 4-9 10YR 312 50 7.5YR 518 50 C M Loam 9-18+ 10YR 313 100 Silt loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless othelWise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3 : 0 Histosol (A1) 0 Sandy Redox (85) 0 2 em Muck (A10) 0 Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (86) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) 0 Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) 0 Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Depleted Below Dark Surface (A 11) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) 0 Thick Dark Surface (AI2) t!!l Redox Dark Surface (FB) 0 Sandy Mucky Mineral (51) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland 0 Sandy Gleyed Matrix (54) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes t!!l No 0 Depth (inches): Remarks: Hydric soil indicator F6 (Redox dark surface) present. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) 0 Surface Water (AI) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) t!!l High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 48) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 48) t!!l Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (B 11) 0 Drainage Patterns (810) 0 WaterMarks (81) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (813) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) 0 Sediment Deposits (B2) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) 0 Drift Deposits (B3) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (02) 0 Algal Mat or Crust (B4) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (03) 0 Iron Deposits (B5) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (05) 0 Surface Soil Cracks (B6) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (01) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) 0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost·Heave Hummocks (07) 0 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Ves 0 No t!!l Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Ves t!!l No 0 Depth (inches): 9 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes t!!l No 0 Saturation Present? Yes t!!l No 0 Depth (inches): 2 (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Wetland hydrology indicators A2 and A3 are present. US Army Corps of Engineers jr tp-wl-a.docx Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast -Version 2.0 B WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region HERRERA ENVIAQNMEWAL CONSi.LTANTS Project Site: Applicant/Owner: Investigator(s): Black River Pump Station King County J. Munger, A. Ward City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: State: WA Sampling Point: Section. Township, Range: 813, T23N, R4E 2/21114 TP-Wl-B Landform (hilislope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Soil Map Unit Name: Woodinville silt loam Are climatic f hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes Are Vegetation D, Soil D, Or Hydrology D, significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation D, Soil D, Or Hydrology D, naturally problematic? Long: No Datum: NWI classification: o (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are "Normal Circumstances" present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) None Ves No o SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -Attach site map showing sampling point locations transects, important features, etc Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Remarks: All three wetland parameters are present. VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 1m) 1. none 2. 3. 4 Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 1m) 1. Rubus anneniacus 2. 3. 4. 5. Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1 m) 1. Phalaris arundinacea 2, Juncus effusus 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1m) 1. none 2. % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum = 5 Remarks: Hydrophytic vegetation is dominant. us Anny Corps of Engineers p-tp-,"-h,do('1 Ves Il!I Ves Il!I Ves Il!I Absolute % Cover o 5 5 85 10 95 o No 0 No 0 No 0 Dominant Species? = Total Cover Ves = Total Cover Ves No = T alai Cover = Total Cover Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? VES Il!I NO 0 Indicator Status FACU FACW FACW Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OSl, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: OBl species FACW species 95 FAC species FACU species 5 UPL species 1 (A) 2 (B) 50 (AlB) Multiply by: xl = x2 = 190 x3 = x4 = 20 x5 = Column Totals: 100 (A) 210 (B) Prevalence Index = BfA = 2.1 Hydrophy1ic Vegetation Indicators: x Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ~3.01 Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants' Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No o Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast -Version 2.0 Project Site: Black River Pump Station SOIL s p' amplinq omt: TP-WL-B Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color % Color % Type' Loc2 Tex1ure Remarks (moist) (Moist) 0-8 10YR2/1 100 Sapric muck 8-18+ Cobble Cannot dig 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3 : 0 Histosol (A1) 0 Sandy Redox (S5) 0 2 cm Muck (A10) 0 Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) 181 Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) 0 Very Shallow Dark Surlace (TF12) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Depleted Below Dark Surlace (A 11) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) 0 Thick Dart. Surface (A 12) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) 0 Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ~Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland 0 Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Ves 181 No 0 Depth (inches): Remarks: Hydric soil indicator A3 (Black histic) present. HVDROLOGV Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) 0 Surface Water (A 1) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 181 High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 48) 181 Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (B11) 0 Drainage Patterns (810) 0 Water Marks (81) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (913) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) 0 Sediment Deposits (92) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) 0 Drift Deposits (83) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (02) 0 Algal Mat or Crust (B4) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (D3) 0 Iron Deposits (BS) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilted Soils (CS) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (D5) 0 Surface Soil Cracks (BS) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (01) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) 0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) 0 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 181 Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Ves 181 No 0 Depth (inches): 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Ves 181 No 0 Saturation Present? Ves 181 No 0 Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Wetland hydrology indicators A2 and A3 are present. US Army Corps of Engineers jr tp-wl-h dm;;,; Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast -Version 2.0 eI WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region HERRERA ENVIRONMENTAL GONSU-TANTS Project Site: Applicant/Owner: Black River Pump Station King County Investigator(s): J. Munger, A. Ward City/County: Rentonl King Sampling Dale: State: WA Sampl'lng Point Section, Township, Range: 813, T23N, R4E 2/24/14 TP-WL-C Landform (hills lope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 5 Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Soil Map Unit Name" Woodinville silt loam Are climatic i hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes Are Vegetation D, Soil D, Or Hydrology 1'81, significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation D, Soil D, Or Hydrology D. naturally problematic? Long: o No Datum: NWI classification: o (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are 'Normal Circumstances" present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) None Yes o No SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -Attach site map showing sampling point locations transects, important features etc Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 181 No 0 Yes 181 No 0 Yes I8J No 0 Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? YES 181 NO 0 Remarks: All three wetland parameters are present. Wetland's hydrology heavily influenced by dam just downstream. VEGETATION -Use SCIentific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 2m) 1. None 2. 3. 4. Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 2m) 1. Oem/eria ceresiformis 2. Rubus armeniacus 3. Crataegus doug/asii 4. 5. Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1m) 1. Ranuncufus rep ens 2. Pha/aris arundinacea 3. Geum macrophy/fum 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. ". Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1m) 1. None 2. % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum = 30 Remarks: Hydrophytic vegetation is dominant. us Army Corps of Engineers if {/H\ k.docx Absolute % Cover o 15 15 10 40 50 15 5 o Dominant ~ = Total Cover Yes Yes Yes = Total Gover Yes Yes No = Total Gover = Total Gover Indicator Status FACU FACU FAC FAC FACW FAC Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OSL, FACW, or FAG: Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OSL, FACW, or FAG: Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: GBl species F AGW species FAG species FACU species UPl species 3 3 60 Multiply by: xl = x2 = x3 = x4 = x5 = (A) (B) (AlB) Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = BfA = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: x Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ~3.0' Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants' Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No o Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast -Version 2.0 Project Site: Black River Pump Station SOIL Sampling Point: TP-WL-C Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches} Color % Color % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks (moist) (Moist) 0-5 10YR 312 99 10YR 4/4 1 C M Silt loam 5-9 10YR 312 95 1DYR 5/8 5 C M Silt loam 9-18 10YR4/1 70 7.5YR 518 30 C M Silty clay loam 'Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soilsl : 0 Histosol (A 1) 0 Sandy Redox (55) 0 2 em Muck (A1D) 0 Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (S6) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) 0 Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) 0 Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) 0 Thick Dark Surface (A 12) 181 Redox Dark Surface (F6) 0 Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland 0 Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes 181 No 0 Depth (inches): Remarks: Soil meets hydric soil indicator F6 (Redox dark surface). HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) 0 Surface Water (A 1) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 181 High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A. and 4B) (MLRA 1,2, 4A, and 4B) 181 Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (B 11) 0 Drainage Patterns (810) 0 Water Marks (B1) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) 0 Ory-Season Water Table (C2) 0 Sediment Deposits (B2) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C 1) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) 0 Drift Deposits (83) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (02) 0 Algal Mat or Crust (B4) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (03) 0 Iron Deposits (85) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (05) 0 Surface Soil Cracks (BS) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (01) (lRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (OS) (LRR A) 0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (07) 0 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 181 Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 181 No 0 Depth (inches): 4 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 181 No 0 Saturation Present? Yes 181 No 0 Depth (inches): 2 (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections). if available: Remarks: Wetland hydrology indicators A2. and A3 are present. US Army Corps of Engineers jr tp-wl-cdocx Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast -Version 2.0 EI WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region HERRERA ENV)RONMENTAL CONSULTANTS Project Site: Applicant/Owner: Investigator(s): Black River Pump Station King County J. Munger. J. Wozniak City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: State: WA Sampling Point: Section, Township, Range: 813, T23N, R4E 2/24/14 TP-Wl-D Landform (hillslope. terrace, etc.): Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): A Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Woodinville silt loam NWI classification: None Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No D (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 181, Soil 181, Or Hydrology D. significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes Are Vegetation D. Soil D, Or Hydrology D, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -Attach site map showing sampling point locations transects, important features, etc HydrophytiC Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 181 No 0 Yes 181 No 0 Yes 181 No 0 Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? YES 181 No NO 0 o Remarks: All three wetland parameters are met. Soils are disturbed-compacted and likely disturbed from construction of pump station. Vegetation nearly all invasive. VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 2m) 1. none 2. 3. 4. Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 2m) 1. Rubus armeniacus 2 3. 4. 5. Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1m) 1. Pha/aris arundinacea Absolute ~ o 20 20 100 Dominant Species? = T alai Cover Yes = Total Cover Yes Indicator Status FACU FAGW Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OSl, FACW, Dr FAG: Total Number of Dominant Species Across AU Strata: Percent of Dominant Species That Are DBl, FACW, or FAC: Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: DBl species FACW species 100 FAG species FACU species 20 UPL species Column Totals: 120 (A) 1 (A) 2 (B) 50 (AlB) Multil2ly by: x1 ::: x2 = 200 x3 = x4 = 80 x5 = 280 (B) 2. Prevalence Index = BfA = 2,3 3. Hydrophytic: Vegetation Indicators: 4. Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. Dominance Test is >50% 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1m) 1. none 2. % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum = D 100 = Total Cover o = Total Cover Remarks: Hydrophytic vegetation passes the prevalence index worksheet US Army Corps of Engineers jr Ip-wl-d.do{'X x Prevalence Index is ,::,3.0 1 Morphological.Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants 1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation i (Explain) llndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present. unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No o Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast -Version 2.0 Project Site: Black River Pump Station SOIL SamplinQ Point: TP-WL-O Profile Description: (Oescribe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color % Color % Type' Lac' Texture Remarks (moist) (Moist) 0-<3 10YR 312 100 Silty clay loam 6-9 10YR 3/2 85 2.5Y 512 10 0 M 5iltloam 6-9 7.5YR 5/8 5 C M 9-18 10YR5/1 60 7.5YR 5/6 40 C M Silt loam Layer contains charcoal 'Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless othelWise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils~: 0 Histosol (A 1) 0 Sandy Redox (55) 0 2 cm Muck (A10) 0 Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (56) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2) 0 Black Histic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) 0 Very Shallow Dar1< Surface (TF12) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 181 Depleted Below Dark Surface (A 11) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3) 0 Thick Dark Sunace (A 12) 0 Redox Dark Sunace (F6) 0 Sandy Mucky Mineral (S 1) 0 Depleted Dark Sunace (F7) Jlndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland 0 Sandy Gleyed Matrix (54) 0 Redox Depressions (F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes 181 No 0 Depth (inches): Remarks: Soil meets hydriC soil indicator A11 (Depleted below dark surface). HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) 0 Sunace Water (A 1) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 181 High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 48) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 48) 181 Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (Bl1) 0 Drainage Pattems (Bl0) 0 Water Marks (B1) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (813) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) 0 Sediment Deposits (82) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) 0 Drift Deposits (B3) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (02) 0 Algal Mat or Crust (B4) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (03) 0 Iron Deposits (B5) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC~Neutral Test (05) 0 Surface Soil Cracks (B6) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A) 0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost·Heave Hummocks (07) 0 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) . Field Observations: Sunace Water Present? y" 0 No 181 Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes 181 No 0 Depth (inches): 8 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 181 No 0 Saturation Present? Y,s 181 No 0 Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Hydrology indicators A2 and A3 are present. US Army Corps of Engineers jr tp-wl-d.doo: Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast -Version 2.0 APPENDIX C Wetland Rating Forms Wetland name or number: A .;.;....-- WETLAND RA TlNG FORM -WESTERN WASHINGTON Version 2 -Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct. 2008 with the new \VDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (if known): -'W.:..:.et::.la:::n.:;d:..A:..:... ____________ _ Date of site visit: 2/21/14 Rated by J. Munger Trained by Ecology" Yes 0 :-10 0 Dote: ___ _ SEC: ..:.1,,-3 __ TWNSHP:.::.2"'3N"---__ RNGE:...:4.:::E ___ Is SiTiR in AppendlX D'! Yes DNo 0 Map of wetland unit: Figure ____ _ Estimated size: --- SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland 10 Category I ~ Score >=70 Category I I = Score 51-69 Category III ~ Score 30-50 Category IV = Score <30 II 0 mD IV 0 Score for Water Quality FunctionS~4 Score for Hydrologic Functions 9 Score for Habitat Functions 29 TOTAL score for functions 62 Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland o II D Does not Apply D Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above) II Check the appropriate type and class of wetland being rated. Wetland Type Wetland Class Estuarine 0 Depressional D Natural Heritage Wetland L.J Riverine l.:j Bog L.J La ke-fringe L.J Mature Forest L.J Slope L.J Old Growth Forest L.J Flats L.J Coastal Lagoon L.J Freshwater Tidal L.J Interdunal L.J None of the above l.:j Check if multiple HGM D classes are present Comments: Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. Does the wetland unit being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below, you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteri~tics found in the wetland. Cheek LI,t for Wetlands That May Need Speci~ Protection (io addition to Ibe protection reoommended for Its category) SPI. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat Jor any federally listed Threatened or Endangered (TIE) plant or animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. SP2. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat jor any state listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are categorized as Category I Natural Heritage Wetlands. SP3. Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFW for the state? SP4. Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to itsJimctions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having special significance. YES NO D [J D [J D [J D [J To complete the next part of the data sheet. YOU will need to determine the Hvdrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be detennined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 2 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. Classification or Vegetated Wetlands in Western Washington If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, indcntify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply and go to Question R. I. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e., except during floods)? o NO -go to 2 0 YES -the wetland class is Tidal Fringe If YES, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? DYES -Freshwater Tidal Fringe o NO -Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) If your wetland can be cfassijied as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe, use thejormsfor Riverine wetlands. Ifit is Salfl1.'aler Tidal Fringe, it is rated as an Estuarine }t.'etland. Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first and second editions ofthe rating system are called Saltwater Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the tenn "Estuarine" wetland is being kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. xx). 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface (2)NO -go to 3 DYES -the wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a "Flats" wetland, use the fonn for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet both of the following criteria? DThe vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of open water (without any vegetation on the surface) where at least 20 acres (8 hal are permanently inundated'(ponded or flooded); OAt least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 feet (2 m)? ~ NO -go to 4 0 YES -the wetland class is Lake-fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? DThe wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual). OThe water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks. DThe water leaves the wetland without being impounded. NOTE: Surface water does no! pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usualfv <3 feet in diameter and less than I foot deep). 0NO -go to 5 0 YES -the wetland class is Slope Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 3 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? [J The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it get::; inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or nver. o The overbank flooding occurs once every two years. D NO -go to 6 0 YES -the wetland class is Riverine 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the ifllerior of the wetland. D NO -go to 7 0 YES -the wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no stream or river running through it and providing water? The wetland seems to be maintained by higher ground water in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. o NO -go to 8 0 YES -the wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide.) Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HOM classes present within your wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the second class. is less than 10% of the unit, classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM CIiI8ns WiIIlIII. ~ Wetliuul8tnl"tImy a-fl1 Use Irt ~ Slope + Riverine Riverine D Slope + Depressional Depressional D Slope + Lake-fringe Lake-fringe D Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary Depressional LJ Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional L.J Saltwater Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with D special characteristics If you are unable still to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetla,nd boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 4 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. R Riverine and Freshwater Tidal Fringe Wetlands WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality. Rl. Does the wetland unit have the potential to improve water quality'? (see p. 52) Points R 1.1 Area of surface depressions within the riverine wetland that can trap sediments during a flooding event: 0 Depressions cover> 1/4 area of wetland Points = 8 0 Depresssions cover> 1/2 area of wetland Points = 4 4 If depressions> 112 of area oftmit, draw polygons on aerial photo or map 0 DepressIOns present but cover <1/2 area of wetland Points = 2 0 No depressions arc present Points = 0 Provide photo or drawing Figure RI.2 Characteristics of the vegetation in the unit (areas with >1)0%., cover at person helght): 0 Trees or shrubs> 2/3 area of the unit Points = 8 0 Trees or shrubs> I 13 area of the unit Points = 6 R 0 Ungrazed, herbaceous plants >2/3 area of the unit Points = 6 0 Ungrazcd, herbaceous plants> 1/3 area of the unit Points = 3 0 Trees, shrubs, and ungrazcd herbaceous < 1/3 area of unit Points = 0 Aerial photo or map showing polygons of different vegetation types I Fitrore Total for R 1 Add th~_points in the boxes above 12 R2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p. 53) Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in ground water or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes. or groWld water downgradiem from the wetland. Note which aIlhe/allowing conditions provide the sources o/pollutants. A unit ma.v ha~'e pollutants coming/rom several sources but any single source would qualify as an opportunity. 0 Grazing in the wetland or within 150 feet 0 Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland 0 Tilled fields or orchards within 150 feet of wetland 0 A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, fanned fields, roads, or clear-cut logging 0 Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 feet of wetland Multiplier 0 The river or stream linked to the wetland has a contributing basin where hwnan activities have raised levels of sediments, toxic compoWlds, or nutrients in the river water above standards for 2 0 water quality Other: YES -multiplier is 2 NO -multiplier is I TOTAL -Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from R I. by R 2. 24 Add score to table on p. J Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 5 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. R Riverine and Freshwater Tidal Fringe Wethlnds HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to reduce flooding/stream erosion. R3. Does the wetland unit have the potential to reduce flooding/erosion? (.f;ee p. 54) Puints R 3.1 Characteristics of the overbank storage the unit provides: E,timate the average width of the wetland unit perpendicular /0 the direction oj thef/ow anti the width (!/,the stream or river channel (distance henH!en hanh) ('aleulate the ralw (averaRe width o(unil)/(average width of" ,\'{n'um between bunh). 0 If the ratio is more than 20 Points = 9 0 If the ratio is between 10 -20 Points = 6 2 0 If the ratio is 5 -<10 Points = 4 G If the ratio is 1 -<5 Points = 2 0 If the ratio is <1 Points = 1 I AerIal phoID or map showing average widths Figare R3.2 Characteristics of vegetation that slow down water velocities during floods: Treat large woody debris as "jorest or shrub ". Choose points appropriate for the best description (polygons need to have >90% cover at person heighl NOT Cowardin clasM:.I). El Forest or shrub for> 1/3 area OR herbaceous plants >2/3 area Points = 7 7 0 Forest or shrub for> 1110 area OR herbaceous plants> 113 area Points = 4 0 Vegetation does not meet above criteria Points = 0 Aerial phoID po-map siloing polygons of different vegeladon typeS I FI&ure Total ror R3 Add the points in the boxes above 9 R4. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to reduce flooding/erosion? (seep.57) Answer YES if the unit is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. INote which of the following indicators oj opportunity apply: U There are human structures and activities downstream (roads, buildings, bridges, fanns) that can be damaged by flooding D There are natural resources downstream (e.g. salmon redds) that can be damaged by flooding 0 Other: Multiplier Answer NO iJthe major source of water to the wetland is controlled by a reservoir or the wetland is I tidal fringe along the sides of a dike. YES -multiplier is 2 NO -multiplier is 1 TOTAL -Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from R 3. byR4. 9 Add score to table on p. I Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 6 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. These questions apply to wetlands 0/ all HGM classes HABIT AT FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat. HI. Does the wethmd unit have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (see p. 72) Check the rypes afvegetation classes present (us defined by Cowardinj. Size thresholdfor class is ]14 acre or more than ]0% of the area lfunit is smaller than 2.5 acres. D Aquatic bed o Emergent plants o Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have >30% cover) GJ Forested (areas where trees have >30% cover) rf the unit has a forested class, check iI o The forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) that each cover 20% within the forested polygon. Add the number of vegetation types that qualify. If you have: 4 structures or more 3 structures 2 structures Points = 4 Points = 2 Points = 1 I structure Points = 0 PoInts 4 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes Figure. H 1.2 Hydroperiods (see p. 73) Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% a/the wetland ifless than 2.5 acres in size or 114 acre to count (.~ee text/or descriptions of hydro periods). [2] Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or morc types present Points = 3 [2] Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types prescnt Points = 2 D Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present Points = 1 3 o Saturated only 1 type present Points = 0 12] Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland D Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland o Lake-fringe wetland = 2 points D Freshwater tidal wetland = 2 points Mao of bydtoperiods Figure H 1.3 Richness of Plant Species (see p. 75) COUIlf the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least ]() sq. fl. (different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold). You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Milfoil, reed canar)'grass, purple loosestrife, Canadian Thistle. If you counted: List species below {(you want to: Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 7 > 19 species Points = 2 5-19 species Points = 1 <5 species Points = 0 Total for pagel 8 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. H1.4 Inters~ersion ofHabitat::i (see p. 76) Points Decide/rom the diagrams below whether interspersion betl1'een Cowardin vegetation classes (described in!f 1.1) or Ihe classes and un vegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, [ow, or none. 0 1 CQ)CfI!) @ None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points 3 ~(f) @S) [riparian braided channels} ~ ../ High ~ 3 points NOTE: If you have four or more vegetation types or three vegetation types and open water, the rating is always "high". Use map of Cowardin classes H1.5 Special Habitat Features (see p. 77) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points you put into the next column. G Large~ downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4 inches in diameter and 6 feet long). G Standing snags (diameter at the bottom >4 inches) in the wetland. Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 feet (2 m) and/or overhanging vegetation G extends at least 3.3 feet (l m) over a stream (or ditch) in or contiguous with the 5 wetland, for at least 33 fcet (10 m). Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver/muskrat for denning G (>30" slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned brown/gray). G At least 1/4 acre of thin-stemmed presistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians) . 0 Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants. Note: The 20% stated in early printings oJthe manual on page 78 is an error. . B 1. ;:r.~,AL Score • potential for providing h8bitai Add t scores/rom HU, H1.2, H1.3, HI.4, HI.S 16 Comments: Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 8 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. H 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? Points H 2.1 Buffers (see p. 80) Choose the description Ihal best represents condition a/bufler afwetland unit. The highest scoring criterion fhu! applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See textfor definition of "undisturhed. " 0 100 rn (330 fcet) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, Points = 5 or open water >95% of circumference. No structures are within undisturbed part of buffer (relative(v undisturbed also means no grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use ). 0 100 ill (330 feet) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, Points = 4 or open water >50% of circumference. [2J 50 m (170 feet) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or Points = 4 open water >95% circumference. 0 100 m (330 feet) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, Points = 3 or open water for >25% circumference. 4 0 50 m (170 feet) ofrelatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or Points = 3 open water for >50% circumference. If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above: No paved areas (except pi:lVcd trails) or buildings within 25 m (80 feet) Points = 2 0 of wetland >95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. 0 No paved areas or buildings within 50 m of wetland for >50% Points = 2 circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. 0 Heavy grazing in buffer. Points = 1 Vegetated buffers are <2 m wide (6.6 feet) for more than 95% of the Points = 0 0 circumference (e.g., tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland). 0 Buffer docs not meet any of the criteria above. Points = J Aerial photo showing buffers Figure H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (see p. 81) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed/unbroken vegetated corridor (riparian or upland) at least 150 feet wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest, or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands, or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (Dams in riparian corridors, heavi(v used gravel roads, and paved roads are considered breaks in the corridor. ) YES ~ 4 points (go to H 2.3) NO ~ go to H 2.2.2 H2.2.2 Is the wetland part ofa relatively undisturbed/unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) at least 50 feet wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to 2 estuaries, other wetlands, or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size OR a Lake- fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES ~ 2 points (go to H 2.3) NO ~ go to H 2.2.3 H 2.2.3 Is the wetland: D within 5 miles (8 km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR 0 within 3 miles of a large field or pasture> 40 acres in size OR 0 within 1 mile of a lake greater than 20 acres in size? YES ~ 1 point NO ~ 0 points Total for pagel 6 Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 9 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. H2.3 Near or Adjacent to Other Priority Habitats Listed by WDFW (see p. 82) Points Which of the following priority habitats are within 330 feet (100 m) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. These are DFW definitions. Check wilh your local DFW biologist {I there are any questions 0 Aspen stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen >0.4 ha (1 acre). 0 Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 152). 0 Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and Forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. 0 Old-growth/Mature forests: (Old growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre) > 81 em (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 em (21 in) dbh; crown cover 0 may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, number of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80 -200 years old west of the Cascade crest. 0 Oregon white Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is 25% (full descrptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158). El Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains clements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each 0 Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the fonn of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161 ). 4 El Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. 0 Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coa<;tal Nearshore, Open Coastal Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions a/habitats and the definition a/relatively undisturbed are in WDFWreport pp. 167- 169 and glossary in Appendix A). 0 Caves: Naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human. 0 Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 m (25 ft) high and oecuring below 5,000 ft. 0 Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0_15 -2.0 m (0.5- 6.5 ft), composed ofbasaH, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings_ May be associated with cliffs. El Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags ifthey are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of> 51 em (20 in) in western Washington and are> 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are> 30 em (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and> 6 m (20 ft) long. If wetland has: 3+ priority habitats =: 4 points 1 priority habitat = 1 point 2 priority habitats = 3 points No habitats = 0 points Note: all vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in question H 2.4 Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 10 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. Choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fi.ts. D There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, and the connecti.ons Points = 5 between them arc relatively undisturbed (li.ght grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake 5horc with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development). D The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there Points = 5 are 3 other Lake-fringe wetlands within \/2 mile. 3 0 There are at least 3 other wetlands within 112 mile, BUT the connections Points = 3 between them are disturbed. D The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with disturbance, and there are 3 Points = 3 other Lake-fringe wetlands within 1/2 mile. D There is at least I wetland within 112 mile. Points = 2 D There are no wetlands within 112 mile. Points = 0 H 2. TOTAL Score -opportunity for providing habitat 13 Add lhe scuresfrom H2.1. H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 Total Score for Habitat Functions -add the points for HI and H2, and record the result 00 p. I 29 Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington II Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Please determine iflhe wetland meets the attributes described below and choose the appropriate answers and Category. WedandType ! Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Chfck the appropriate Category when the appropriate criteria are met. Category SC 1.0 Estuarine Wetlands (see p. 86) Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? D The dominant water regime is tidal, D Vegetated, and D With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. D YES -Go 10 SC 1.1 0 NO -not an estuarine wetland SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park, or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? D YES ~ Category I D NO~GotoSC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland unit at least 1 acre in size and meeting at least two of the following three conditions? D The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has <10% cover ofnon~natjve plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover> I 0% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual rating (IIII). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category l. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. D At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 foot buffer of shrub, forest, or ungrazed or unmowed grassland. D The wetland has at least two of the following features: tidal channels, depressions v-rith open water, or continguous freshwater wetlands. D YES ~ Category I D NO ~ Category II Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 12 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. SC 2.0 Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage ProgramlDKR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered. or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 Is the wetland unit being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? (This question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHPfDNR.) S/T/R infonnation from Appendix DOor accessed from WNHP/DNR web site 0 DYES -contactWNHPfDNR(seep. 79) andgotoSC3.2 D NO SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as a site with state Threatened or Endangered plant species? DYES ~ Category I El NO -not a Heritage wetland SC 3.0 Bogs (see p. 87) Docs the wetland unit (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetations in bogs? Use the key below to identifY tIthe wetland is a hog. If you answer Yes, you will still need to rate the wetland based on itsfunction. t. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e., layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic oils.) DYES -go 10 Q. 3 El NO -go 10 Q. 2 2. Does the unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks, that are <16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impenneable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? DYES -go 10 Q. 3 0 NO -not a bog for purpose of rating 3. Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (>30% of total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? DYES -is a bog for purpose of rating D NO -go to Q. 4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. 4. Is the unit forested (>30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western redcedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine, WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on bog species plant list in Table 3 a<;j a significant component of the ground cover (> 30% coverage of total shrub/herbaceous cover)7 D YES ~ Category I D NO -not a bog for purpose of rating Cat~gory Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 13 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. SC 4.0 Forested Wetlands (see p. 90) Does the wetland unit have at least 1 acre of forest that meets one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitat? If you answer Yes, you will still need fa rale the weiland based on its Junctions. o Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade Crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, fanning a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/acre (20Ihectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of32 inches (81 em) or more. NOTE: The criterion for dbh is ba.;;ed on measurements for upland forests. 200-year-old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often smaller. The DFW criterion is an "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. o Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80· 200 years old OR have average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53 cm); crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old·growth. o YES = Category I o NO -not a forested wetland wI special characteristics SC 5.0 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (see p. 91) Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wtland in a coastal lagoon? The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially o separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks. o The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or brackish (>.5 ppt) during most of the year in at leat a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom ). DYES = go to SC 5.1 [2] NO -not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meet all of the following 3 conditions? The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, o grazing), and has less than 20% cover of invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). o At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 foot buffer of shrub, forest, or ungrazcd or unmowed grassland. o The wetland is larger than 1110 acre (4.350 square feet). o YES = Category 1 0 NO = Category II Category Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 14 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. SC6.0 Interdunal Wetlands (see p. 93) Category Is the wetland unit west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? DYES -go 10 SC 6. J o NO -not an intcrdunal wetland for rating Ilyon answer Yes, you will still need (0 rate the wetland based on its functions. In practical tcnns, that means the following geographic areas: • Long Beach Peninsula -lands west of SR 103 • Grayland-Westport -lands west of SR 105 • Ocean Shores-Copalis -lands west ofSR 1115 and SR 109. SC 6.1 Is wetland I acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 acre or larger? D YES ~ Category II 0 NO -go to SC 6.2 SC 6.2 Is the unit between 0.1 and I acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and I acre? o YES ~ Category III Category of wetland bas.d on SpeciIIJ Ch ........ rlotic. NA Choose the "highest" rating if wetland falls into several categories, and record on p. 1. If you answered NO for all types, enter "Not Applicable" 00 p. I. Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 15 Herrera Environmental Consultants. Inc. Wetland name or number: B -"---- WETLAND RATING FORM -WESTERN WASHINGTON Version 2 -Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct. 20118 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (ifknoYl-'f1): Wetland B ~==~------------------Date of site visit: 2/21/14 Rated by J. Munger Trained by Ecology? Yes 0 No G Date: ___ _ SEC: ..:.1::..3 __ TWNSHP:-=2",3N,,-__ RNGE:...:4",E ___ Is S/T/R in Appendix D? Yes DNo 0 Map of wetland unit: Figure ____ _ Estimated size: ------ SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland: 10 Category I = Score >=70 Category II = Score 51-69 Category III ~ Score 30-50 Category IV = Score <30 11 0 lIIG IV 0 Score for Water Quality FunctionS~8 Score for Hydrologic Functions 8 Score for Habitat Functions 16 TOTAL score for functions 42 Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland o II 0 Does not Apply 0 Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above) III Check the appropriate type and class of wetland being rated. Wetland Type Wet1andCl ... Estuarine 0 Depressional 0 Natural Heritage Wetland U Riverine U Bog U Lake-fringe U Mature Forest L..J Slope U Old Growth Forest U Flats U Coastal Lagoon L..J Freshwater Tidal U Interdunal U Check if unit has None of the above ~ multiple HOM classes 0 I present Comments: Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. Does the wetland unit being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below, you \vill need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. Cheek List for Wetlands That May Need sr~~ Protection (in addition to tbe protection recommended r its category) SPI. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitatfor any federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (TIE species)? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. SP2. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any state listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? for the ptrrposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are categorized as Category I Nahrral Heritage Wetlands (see p. 19 of data form). SP3. Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFW for the state? SP4. Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to itsfunctions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having special significance. YES NO 0 G 0 B 0 G 0 G To complete the next part of the data sheet. YOU will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how wen the wetland fimctions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be detennined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 2 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. Classification of Vegetated Wetlands in Western Washington If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, indentify which hydrologic critcri(l in questions 1-7 apply and go to Question 8. 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usuaJJy controlled by tides (i.e., except during floods)? 0NO -go to 2 DYES -the wetland class is Tidal Fringe If YES, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? DYES -Freshwater Tidal Fringe D NO -Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe, use the forms/or Riverine wetlands. {f it is .)'altwater Tidal Fringe, it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Saltwater Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphie Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision, To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is being kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and IJ estuarine wetland::; have changed (see p, xx), 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sourees of water to the unit. 0NO -go to 3 0 YES -the wetland class is Flats If your wetland ean be classified as a "Flats" wetland, use the fonn for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet both of the following criteria? DThe vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of penn anent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) at least 20 acres (8 ha) in size~ OAt least 30% of the open watcr area is deeper than 6.6 feet (2 m)? [2]NO -go to 4 0 YES -the wetland class is Lake-fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Docs the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? DThe wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual). DThe water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comcs from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheettlow, or in a swale without distinct banks. D The water leaves the wetland without being impounded. NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 feet in diameter and less than f foot deep). [JNO -go to 5 DYES -the wetland cia" is Slope Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 3 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? D The unit is. in a valley, or stream channel, whcre it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that s.tream or nver. D The overbank flooding occurs once every two years. o NO -go to 6 0 YES -the wetland class is Riverine 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of the year? This mean.s that any outlet, If present. is higher than the interior of the wetland. DNa -go to 7 El YES -the wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high ground water in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. DNO -go to 8 DYES -the wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes within your wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland being rated. If the area of the second class is less than 10% of the unit, classify the wetland using the class that represent more than 90% of the total area. HGM ~ WitIdII"DdbI 71 1 Wotltuul JI,oIllHltuy Cltm to Use In RAtbltl Slope + Riverine Riverine D Slope + Depressional Depressional D Slope + Lake-fringe Lake-fringe IU Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary Depressional ILJ Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional IU Saltwater Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with D special characteristics If you are unable still to detennine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating Form ~ Western Washington 4 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. D Depressional and Flats Wetlands WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality. D1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to improye water quality? (see p. 38) Points Dl.l Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland: D lJnil is a depression with no surrace water leaving it (no outlet) Points = 3 G Unit has an intennittently flowmg, OT highly constricted pennanently t10wing Points = 2 outlet. D Unit has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet (permanently Points = 1 2 flowing ). Unit is a flat depression (Q. 7 on key) or in the Flats class, with penneneot Points = 1 D surface outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch. (If ditch is not pemmnentiy flowing, treat Wlit as "intermittently flowing. ") Provide photo or drawing I FIgure DI.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface (or dufflayer) is clay or organic (use NRCS definitions): 0 D YES Points = 4 El NO Points = 0 D1.3 Characteristics of persistent vegetation (emergent, shrub, andlor forest Cowardin class): D Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation >=95% of area. Points = 5 G Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation >= 112 of area. Points = 3 3 D Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation >=1/10 of area. Points = ] D Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation < I! I 0 of area Points = 0 Mnp of Cownrdin vegetation classes Figure D 1.4 Characteristics of seasonal pan ding or inundation. This is the area afthe wetland that is ponded Jor at least 2 months, but dries out sometime during the year. Do not count the area that is permanently ponded. Estimate area as the average condition 5 out of 10 years. 4 El Area seasonally ponded is> 1/2 total area of wetland. Points = 4 D Area seasonally ponded is > 1/4 total area of wetland. Points = 2 D Area seasonally ponded is <114 total area of wetland. Points = 0 Map ofhydroperiods Fi ...... Total for D 1 Add the [Joints in the boxes above 9 D 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p. 44) Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in ground water or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes, or ground water downgradient from thc wetland. Note which ~rtheJollowillg conditions provide the sources o.{pollutallts: D Grazing in the wetland or within 150 feet. El Untreated stonnwater discharges to wetland. D Tilled fields or orchards within 150 feet of wetland. D A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, fanned fields, mads, or clear-cut logging. D Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 feet of wetland. Multiplier D Wetland is fed by ground water high in phosphorus or nitrogen. 2 D Other: YES -multiplier is 2 NO -multiplier is 1 TOTAL -Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from D I. byD2. 18 Add score to table on p. 1 Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 5 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. D Depressional and Flats Wetlands HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to reduce flooding/stream degradation. D3. Does wetland unit have the potential to reduce flooding/erosion? (see p. 46) Points D 3.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland: 0 Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet). Points = 4 B Unit has an intennittently flowing, OR highly constricted pennanently Points = 2 flowing outlet. 0 Unit is a "flat" depression (Q. 7 on key), or in the Flats class, with Points = 1 2 pennancnt surface outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch. (If ditch is not permanently flowing, treat unit at "inlermitfentlyflowing. '~ 0 Unit has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet Points = 0 (permanently flowing). D3.2 Depth of storage during wet periods. Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. For units with no outlet measure from the surface of permanent water or deepest part (if dry). 0 Marks of ponding are 3 feet or more above the surface or bottom of outlet. Points = 7 0 The wetland is a "headwater" wetland. Points = 5 3 D Marks of ponding ben.vcen 2 feet to <3 feet from surface or bottom of outlet. Points = 5 0 Marks are at least 0.5 feet to <2 feet from surface or bottom of outlet. Points = 3 0 Wetland is flat (yes to Q. 2 or Q. 7 on key) but has small depressions on the Points = 1 surface that trap water. 0 Marks ofponding are less than 0.5 feet. Points = 0 D3J Contribution of wetland to storage in the watershed. Estimate the ratio a/the area of upstream basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland itself 0 The area of the basin is <10 times the area of the unit. Points = 5 3 0 The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit. Points"" 3 0 The area of the basin is > I 00 times the area of the unit.· Points = 0 0 Entire unit is in the Flats class (basin=wetland) Points = 5 Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above 8 D4. Does wetland unit have the opportunity to reduce flooding/erosion? (see p. 49) Answer YES if the unit is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or 1 excessive and/or erosive flows. Answer NO if the 'Water corning into the wetland is controlled by a structure such as flood gate, tide gate, flap valve, reservoir, etc. OR you estimate that more than 90% of the water in the wetland is from groundwater in areas where damaging groundwater flooding does not occur. Note which 0/ the following indicators of opportunity apply: 0 Wetland is in a headwater ofa river or stream that has flooding problems. D Wetland drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems. 0 Wetland has no outlet and impounds surface runoff water that might otherwise flow into a river or stream that has flooding problems. Multiplier 0 Other: 1 YES -multiplier is 2 NO -multiplier is 1 TOTAL -Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from D 3. by D 4. 8 Add score to table on p. 1 Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 6 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. These questiJJns apply /0 wetilJnds of all HGM cllJsses HABITAT FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat. HI. Does the wetland unit have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (see p. 72) Check the types o/vegetaliun classes present (as defined b:v Cm,mrdin). Size thresllOldfor class is J/4 acre or more than JO% a/the area ilullit is smaller than 2.5 acres. D Aquatic bed D Emergent plants D Scrub/shrub (area'i where shrubs have >30% cover) D Forested (areas where trees have >30% cover) If the unit has a forested class, check (f: o The forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, .sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) that each cover 20% within the forested polygon Add the number a/vegetation types that qualify. If you have: 4 structures or more 3 structures Points = 4 Points = 2 2 structures Points = 1 1 structure Points = 0 Points Map of Cowardin classes Figure H 1.2 Hydroperiods (.<ee p. 73) Check the types oj water regimes (hydroperiod5) presenl within the wetland. The water regime has 10 cover more than 10% oj the wetland if less than 2.5 acres in size or 114 acre to count (see text/or descriptions of hydro periods). D Pennanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present Points = 3 o Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present Points = 2 o Occasionally flooded or inundatcd 2 types present Points = t 1 D Saturated only 1 type present Points = 0 D Pennanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland o Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland o Lalie-fringe wetland = 2 points o Freshwater tidal wetland = 2 points Map ofhydroperiods FIgure H 1.3 Richness of Plant Species (see p. 75) Count the number 0/ plant species in the wetland that cover at least l() sq. fl. (different patches of the same species can be combined to meet lhe size threshold). You do not have 10 name the species. Do not include Eurasian Mil/oil, reed canarygrass. purple loosestrife, Canadian Thistle. If you counted: List species below if you want 10: Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 7 > 19 species Points = 2 5-19 species Points = 1 <5 species Points = 0 Total for pagel 3 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. HIA Interspersion of Habitats (see p. 76) PoInts Decide from the diagrams belolv whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation classes (described in H 1./) or the classes and un vegetated arms (can include open wafer or mudflats) is high, medium, low. or none. 0 CQ)C~ (0) None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points 2 6!i>",()) /@ [riparian braided channels] High = 3 points NOTE: If you have four or more vegetation types or three vegetation types and open water, the rating is always Ilhigh". Use map of Cowardin vegetation classes. H 1.5 Special Habitat Features (see p. 77) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points you put into the next column. 0 Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4 inches in diameter and 6 feet long). 0 Standing snags (diameter at the bottom >4 inches) in the wetland. 0 Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 feet (2 m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 feet (1 m) over a stream (or ditch) in or contiguous with the wetland, for at least 33 feet(1 0 m). 0 0 Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver/muskrat for denning (>30" slope) OR signs ofrecent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned brown/gray). 0 At least 1/4 acre of thin-stemmed presistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians ). 0 Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants. Note: The 20% stated in early printings o/the manual on page 78 is an error. H I. T0!k,Se«e -potential for providing habitat Add the s resfromH1.1, H1.2, H1.3, H1.4. H1.5 5 Comments; Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 8 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. H 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? Points H 2.1 Buffers (see p. 80) Choose the description that best represents condition a/buffer of wetland unit. The highesl scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to he used in the rating. See textfor definition of "undisturbed. /I D 100 m (330 feet) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, Points = 5 or open water >95% of circumference. No structures aTC within undisturbed part of buffer (relatively undisturbed also means no grazing, no landscaping, no dai(v human use ). D 100 m (330 feet) ofrclatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, Points = 4 or open water >50% of circumference. D 50 m (170 feet) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or Points = 4 open water >95% circumference. D 100 m (330 feet) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, Points = 3 or open water for >25% cireumfercncc. [J 50 m (170 feet) ofrelatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas. or Points = 3 open water for >50% circumference. 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above: D No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 m (80 feet) Points = 2 of wetland >95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. 0 No paved areas or buildings within 50 m of wetland for >50% Points = 2 circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. D Heavy grazing in buffer. Points = 1 D Vegetated buffers are <2 m wide (6.6 feet) for more than 95% ofthc Points = 0 circumference (e.g., tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland). D Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. Points = 1 Aerial pboto showing buffers F1 ...... H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (tiee p. 81) H 2.2.1 Is thc wetland part of a relatively undisturbed/unbroken vegetated corridor (riparian or upland) at least ISO feet wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest, or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands, or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (Dams in riparian corridors. heavily used gravel roads, and paved roads are considered breaks in the corridor. ) YES ~ 4 points (go 10 H 2.3) NO ~ go to H 2.2.2 H2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed/unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) at least 50 feet wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands, or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size OR a Lake- 2 fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES ~ 2 points (go to H 2.3) NO ~ go 10 H 2.2.3 H 2.2.3 Is the wetland: 0 within 5 miles (8 km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR D within 3 miles of a large field or pasture> 40 acres in size OR D within I mile of a lake greater than 20 acres in size: YES ~ I point NO"" 0 points T DIal for pagel 5 Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 9 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. H 2.3 ;\lear or Adjacent to Other Priority Habitats Listed by WDFW (see p. 82) Points 'Which of the following priority habitats are within 330 feet (100 m) of the wetland unit? /'I/'OT£: the connections do not have to be relatively undi8turbed. These are DFW definitions. Check 'Il'ith your local DFW biologist fl there Grt' any questions 0 Aspen stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen >0.4 ha (1 acre). 0 Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PlIS report p. 152). 0 Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. 0 Old-growthlMature forests: (Old growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 treesiha (8/aore) >81 em (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crovm cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadance, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80 -200 years old west of the Cascade crest. 0 Oregon white Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is 25% (full descrplions in WDFW PHS report p. 158). [2] Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. 0 Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 3 161). 0 Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life hsitory requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. 0 Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Opcn Coastal Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions a/habitats and the definition 0/ relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report pp. 167- 169 and glossary in Appendix A). 0 Caves: Naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human. 0 Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occuring below 5,000 ft. 0 Talus: Homogenous area..;; of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 -2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. [2] Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at brcast height of> 51 crn (20 in) in western Washington and are> 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are> 30 em (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and> 6 m (20 ft) long. If wetland has: 3+ priority habitats =: 4 points ] priority habitat =: ] point 2 priority habitats =: 3 points No habitats = 0 points Note: all vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in question H 2.4 Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 10 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 2.4 Wetland Landscape (see p. 84) Choose the one description n.f the landscape around the }1iet{and that best iits. There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, and the connections Points = 5 between them are relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands o OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fIelds, or other development). D The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other Lake-fringe wetlands within 1/2 mile. Points = 5 G There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, BUT the connections Points = 3 between them are disturbed. D The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with disturbance, and there are 3 other Lake-fringe wetlands within 1/2 mile. D There is at least 1 wetland within 112 mile. D within 1i2 mile. H 2. TOTAL Score - Points = 3 Points = 2 ~O 3 \I Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington II Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Please determine illhe wetland meets the attributes described below and choose the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type Check off any criteria that apply /I} the wetland. Cht< the appropriate Category when the appropriate criteria are met. Cate20ry SC 1.0 Estuarine Wetlands (see p. 86) Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? 0 The dominant water regime is tidal, 0 Vegetated, and 0 With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. 0 YES ~ Go to SC 1.1 [] NO -not an estuarine wetland SC l.l Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park, or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? D YES ~ Category I D NO~GotoSC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland unit at least 1 acre in size and meeting at least two of the following three conditions? The wct1and is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has <10% cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover >10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be 0 given a dual rating (1111). The area of ~partina would be rated a Category II while the relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in detennining the size threshold of 1 acre. D At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 foot buffer of shrub, forest. or ungrazed or unmowed grassland. 0 The wetland has at least two of the following features; tidal channels, depressions with open water, or continguous freshwater wetlands. D YES ~ Category I 0 NO ~ Category II Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 12 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. SC 2.0 Natural Heritage \\'etlands ('iee p. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage ProgramlDNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 Is the wetland unit being rated in a Scetion/To\Vl1ship/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? (This question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHPiDNR.) S/TiR infoJIDation from Appendix DOor accessed from WNHPJDNR web site D DYES -contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 3.2 0 NO SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as a site with state Threatened or Endangered plant species? DYES = Category I G NO -not a Heritage wetland SC 3.0 Bogs (see p. 87) Does the wetland unit (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. If you answer Yes, you will still need to rate the wetland based on its function. I. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e., layers of organic soil), cither peats or mucks, that compose 16 inchcs or more of the first 32 inches of the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic oil~.) DYES -go to Q. 3 G NO· go to Q. 2 2. Does the unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks, that arc <16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? DYES -go to Q. 3 G NO· not a bog for purpose of rating 3. Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (>30% of total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? DYES -is a bog for purpose of rating o NO • go to Q. 4 NOTE: If you arc uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at lcast 16" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Tablc 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. 4. Is the unit forested (>30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western redcedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine, WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on bog specie~ plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover (> 30% coverage of total shrub/herbaceous cover)? DYES. Category I 0 NO -not a bog for purpose of rating Category Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 13 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. SC 4.0 Forested Wetlands (see p. 90) Does. the wetland unit have at least 1 acre of forest that meets one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitat? flyou answer Yes, you will slill need to rate the wetland based on its functions. Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade Crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, o fonning a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/acre (20Ihectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of32 inches (81 em) or more. NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. 200-year-old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates arc often smaller. The DFW criterion is an "ORIt so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. o Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80- 200 years old OR have average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53 em); crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large dO'Wlled material is generally less than that found in old-growth. 1-____ -'O=_Y.:...::Ec:S'-~......::C:.:a:.:t"'eg"'o:.;r"y_I'__=El NO -not a forested wetland wi special characteristics SC 5.0 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (see p. 91) Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wtland in a coastal lagoon? The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially o separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks. The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or o brackish (>.5 ppt) during most of the year in at leat a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom). DYES = go to SC 5.1 [2] NO -not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meet all of the following 3 conditions? The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, D grazing), and has less than 20% cover of invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). o At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 foot buffer of shrub. forest. or ungrazed or unmowed grassland. D The wetland is larger than 1110 acre (4,350 square feet). o YES ~ Category I 0 NO ~ Category II Category Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 14 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. SC6.0 Interdunal Wetlands (see p. 93) Category Is the wetland unit \Ilcst of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary oflJpland Ownership or WBtJO)? DYES -gu /0 SC 6.1 o NO -not an intcrdunal wetland for rating If you answer YES. you will still need to rate the wetland ba!,ed on its functions. In practical tenns, that means the following geographic areas.: • Long Beach Peninsula -lands west of SR 103 • Grayland-Westport -lands west of SR 105 • Ocean Shores-Copalis -lands west of SR 1115 and SR 109. SC6.1 Is wetland I acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 acre or larger? o YES ~ Category II 0 NO -go 10 SC6.2 SC 6.2 Is the wetland unit between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre? o YES ~ Category III Category of wetland based on Special Characteristic. NA Choose the ''highest'' rating if wetland falls into several categories, and record on p. 1. If you answered NO for all types, enter "Not Applicable" on p. I. Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 15 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. Wetland name or numher: ~C:..... __ _ WETLAND RATING FORM -WESTERN WASHINGTON Version 2 -Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct. 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (ifknoY.-n): -.:W::.::et~la~n~dc.:C::.. ___________ _ Date of site visit: 2/24/14 Rated by J. Munger Trained by Ecology? Yes D No 0 Datc: ___ _ SEC: -,1.=.3 __ TWNSHP:..::2:::.3N'"--__ RNGE:.:4..::E'-___ ls S/T/R in Appendix D? Yes DNo 0 Map of wetland unit: Figure ____ _ Estimated size: ____ _ SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland: 10 Category I = Score >=70 Category II = Seore 51-69 Category III ~ Score 30-50 Category I V = Score <3 a II 0 1110 IV [2] Score for Water Quali~y Funet~ons~ Score for Hydrologic FunctIOns 3 Score for Habitat Functions 20 TOTAL score for functions 23 Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland o II D Does not Apply 0 Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above) IV Check the appropriate type and class of wetland being rated. Wetland Tvoe Wetland Class Estuarine 0 Depressional 0 Natural Heritage Wetland L.J Riverine L.J Bog 0 Lake-fringe D Mature Forest TI Slope W Old Growth Forest 0 Flats 0 Coastal Lagoon 0 Freshwater Tidal LJ Interdunal L.J None of the above [2] Check if multiple HGM D classes are present Comments: Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. Does the wetland unit being rated meet any orthe criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below. you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. Check List for Wetlands That May Need Sp;iial Protection (in addition to the nrotectioD recommended I its cat ..... ry) SPI. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any federally listed Threatened or Endangered (TIE) plant or animal species? For the purposes of thi::; rating system, "documentedtl means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. SP2. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat Jor any slate listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are categorized as Category I Natural Heritage Wetlands. SP3. Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFWfor the state' SP4. Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to irs functions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having special significance. YES NO D D D D D B D B To complete the next part ofthe data sheet you will need to determine the Hvdrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways, This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 2 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. Classification of Vegetated \Vetlands in ""estern Washington If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, indentify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply and go to Question 8. 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e., except during floods)? 0NO -go to 2 DYES -the wetland class is Tidal Fringe If YES, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? DYES -Freshwater Tidal Fringe D NO -Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) If.vour wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe, use the/arms/or Riverine wetlands. /fit is Saltvv'ater Tidal fringe, it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Saltwater Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kcpt in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the tcnn "Estuarine" wetland is being kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. xx). 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface o NO -go to 3 DYES -the wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a "Flats" wetland, use the fonn for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet both of the following criteria? D The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of open water (without any vegetation on the surface) where at least 20 acres (8 hal are pennanently inundated (ponded or flooded); D At lea.;;t 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 feet (2 m)? EiNO -go to 4 0 YES -the wctland class is Lake~fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does thc entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? 0The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual). []The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow ~ubsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks. [] The water leaves the wetland without being impounded. NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of ~vetlal1ds except occasionally in vet}' small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usuanv <3 feet in diameter and less than J foot deep), D NO -go to 5 IZI YES -the wetland class is Slope Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 3 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all ofthc following criteria? DThe unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river. OThe overbank flooding occurs once every two years. D NO ~ go to 6 D YES ~ the wetland class is Riverine 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior of the wetland. DNO -go to 7 DYES -the wetland class j, Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no stream or river running through it and providing water? Thc unit seems to be maintained by higher ground water in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. DNO -go to 8 DYES -the wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide.) Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more ofthe total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the second class is less than 10% of the unit, classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM Clase:r IJIithbJ IIIh1iMtda1 Wdltuul /foImury a-'" Use lit RtlIIItg Slope + Riverine Riverine D Slope + Depressional Depressional D Slope + Lake-fringe Lake~ fringe .J Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary Depressional U Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional U Saltwater Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with D special characteristics (fyou are unable still to detennine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary~ classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 4 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Jnc. S Slope Wetland, WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality. SI. Does the wetland unit have the potential to improve water quality? (see p. 64) Points S 1.1 Characteristics of average slope of the unit: D Slope is 1 % or less (a 1°" .v/ope has a 1 ~(r)()t vertical drop for everv 100ft Points = 3 horizontal distance) 0 D Slope i~ 1% -2% Points = 2 D Slope is 2% -5~'n Points = 1 0 Slope is greater than 5% Points = 0 S1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface (or duff layer) is clay or organic (use NRCS definitions) 0 YES = 3 points NO = 0 points S1.3 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland that trap sediments and pollutants: choose the points appropriate for the description that bestfits vegetation in the weiland. Dense vegetation mean.l" YOII have trouble seeing the soil surface (> 75% cover), and uncut means not grazed or mOli/ed and plants are higher than 6 inches. Dense, uncut, herbaceous vegetation >90% of wetland area Points = 6 0 Dense, uncut, herbaceous vegetation> I /2 of wetland area Points = 3 Dense, woody vegetation> \12 of wetland area Points = 2 Dense, uncut, herbaceous vegetation> I 14 of wetland area Points = 1 Does not meet any of the criteria above for vegetation Points = 0 Aerial photo or map with vegetation polygons Fil!1ll"e Total for S 1 Add the points in the boxes above 0 S 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p. 67) Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groWldwater or swface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes, or groundwater downgradient from the wetland. Note which of the following conditions provide the sourceS oj pollutants. A unit may have pollutants coming from several sources but any single source would qualifY as an opportunity. D Grazing in the wetland or within 150 feet of the wetland D Untreated stOITnwater discharges to the wetland D Tilled fields, logging, or orchards within 150 feet of the wetland D Residential, urban areas, or golf courses are within [50 feet upslope of wetland Multiplier D Other: 2 YES· multiplier is 2 NO -multiplier is 1 TOTAL -Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from S I. by S 2. 0 Add score to table on p. 1 Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 5 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. S Slope WedaDds HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS -lodicator1! that wetland functions to reduce flooding and stream erosion. S 3. Does wetland unit have the potential to reduce flooding/erosion? (see p. 68) POID!. S 3.1 Characteristics of vegetation that reduce the velocity of surface f1ow~ during storms. Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fits the vegelation in the wetland. Dense vegetation memB" J'OII have truohle seeing the snil surface (> 75% cover), and uncut means not grazed or mowed and plants are higher than 6 inches. 0 Dense, uncut, rigid vegetation covers >90% of wetland area Points = 6 1 0 Dense, uncut, rigid vegetation covers> 112 of wetland area Points = 3 [2J Dense, uncut, rigid vegetation covers> 1/4 of wetland area Points = I D More than 3/4 of area is grazed, mowed, tilled, or vegetation is not rigid Points = 0 S 3.2 Characteristics of the slope wetland that holds back small amounts of flood flows: the slope wetland has small sur/ace depressions that can retain water over at least 10% of its area 2 YES ~ 2 points NO = 0 points Record the points from the boxes above 3 S 4. Does wetland unit have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p. 70) Is the wetland in a landscape position where the reduction in water velocity it provides help to protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows? Note which of the following conditions apply. D Wetland has surface runoff that drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems 0 Other: Multiplier 1 YES -multiplier is 2 NO -multiplier is 1 TOTAL -Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from S 3. by S 4. 3 Add score to table on p. 1 Wetland Rating Form -Western WaShington 6 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. These questions apply to Wedllntls of aU HGM classes HABIT A T FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat. HI. Does the wetland unit have the putential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (see p. 72) Check the types a/vegetation classes present (as defined by Cmmrdin). Size threshold/or class is 1!4 acre or more than 10% a/the area{ful1it is smaller than 2.5 acres. D Aquatic bed D Emergent plants [] Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have >30% cover) [] Forested (arcas where trees have >30% cover) If the unit has a forested class, check if o The forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub~canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) that each covcr 20% within the forested polygon. Add tire numbero/vegetation types that qualify. If you have: 4 structures or morc 3 structures 2 structures Points = 4 Points = 2 Points = 1 1 structure Points = 0 Points 2 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes Figure H 1.2 Hydroperiods (fiee p. 73) Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiod~) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland ifless than 2.5 acres in size or 1/4 acre to count (see text/or descriptions ofhydroperiod~). o Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present Points = 3 o Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present Points = 2 o Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present Points = 1 2 o Saturated only I type present Points = 0 [2] Pennanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland o Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland o Lake-fringe wetland = 1 points D Freshwater tidal wetland = 2 points Map ofhydroperiods FIgure H 1.3 Richness of Plant Spccies (see p. 75) Counl the number v/plant species in the wetland that cover alleast 10 sq. ft. (d~fferent patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold). You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian Thistle. If you counted: List species below ifJ'OU want 10: > 19 species 5~ 19 species <5 species Points = 2 Points = 1 Points = 0 o Total for pagel 4 Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 7 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. HIA Interspersion of Habitats (see p. 76) Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion bern'een Cowardin vegetation classes (described in H l. 1) or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, [ow, or none. None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points ~",(j) /@ High = 3 points [riparian braided channels1 NOTE: If you have four or more vegetation types or three vegetation types and open water, the rating is always "high I'. Use map of Cowardin vegetation classes. H 1.5 Special Habitat Features (see p. 77) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points you put into the next column. o Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4 inches in diameter and 6 feet long). EJ Standing snags (diameter at the bottom >4 inches) in the wetland. Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 feet (2 m) and/or overhanging vegetation o extends at least 3.3 feet (1 m) over a stream (or ditch) in or contiguous with the Points 2 wetland, for at least 33 feet( 10m). 2 Comments: [2] Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver/muskrat for denning (>30° slope) OR signs ofrecent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned brown/gray). At least 1/4 acre of thin-stemmed presistent vegetation or woody branches are present D in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians ). o Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants, Note: The 20% stated in early printing.'; of the manual on page 78 is an error. Score -potential for prOviding'babitaI .from HI. 1. H1.2. Hl.3. H1.~ Hl.5 8 Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 8 Herrera Environmental Consultants. Inc. II 2. Does the wetland unH have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? Points II 2.1 Butlers (see p. 80) Choose the description that best represents condition of bl{IJer of lvetland ullit. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to he used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed. " D 100 m (330 feet) ofrelatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, Points = 5 or open water >95% of circumference. No structures are within undisturbed part of buffer (relatively undisturbed also means no grazing, flO landscaping, no daily human use ). D 100 m (330 feet) ofrclativcly undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, Points = 4 or open water >50% of circumference. D 50 m (170 feet) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or Points = 4 open water >95% circumference. D 100 m (330 feet) ofrelatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, Points = 3 or open water for >25% circumference. D 50 m (170 feet) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or Points = 3 open water for >50% circumference. 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above: No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 m (80 fect) Points = 2 D of wetland >95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lav.l1s are OK. D No paved areas or buildings within 50 m of wetland for >50% Points = 2 circumference. Light to moderate grazing. or Ja\VIls are OK. D Heavy grazing in buffer. Points = 1 Vegetated buffers are <2 m wide (6.6 feet) for more than 95% of the Points = 0 D circumference (e.g., tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland). D Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. Points = 1 Aerial photo showing buffers Fi ...... 112.2 Corridors and Connections (see p. 81) II 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed/unbroken vegetated corridor (riparian or upland) at least 150 feet wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest, or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands, or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (Dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, and paved roads are considered breaks in the corridor. ) YES ~ 4 points (go to H 2.3) NO ~ go to H 2.2.2 H 2.2.2 Js the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed/unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) at least 50 feet wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands, or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size OR a Lake- 2 fringe wetland, ifit does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES ~ 2 points (go to H 2.3) NO ~ go to H 2.2.3 II 2.2.3 Is the wetland: D within 5 miles (8 km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR D within 3 miles of a large field or pasture> 40 acres in size OR D within I mile of a lake greater than 20 acres in size? YES ~ 1 point NO = 0 points Total for pagel 5 Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 9 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. H 2.3 Near or Adjacent to Other Priority Habitats Listed by WDFW (seep. 82) \\'hich of the following priority habitats are within 330 feet (l00 m) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. These are DFW definitions. Check with :vour local DFW biologist if there are any questions o Aspen stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen >0.4 ha (1 acre). o Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to o Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over o Old-growth/Mature forests: (Old growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 treeslha (8/acre) >81 ern (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) S o Oregon white Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oakJconifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is 25% (full descrptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158). B Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutual1y influence each o Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non~forested plant communities that can either take the fonn of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161). G Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and PoInts conditions that interact to provide functional life hsitory requirements for instream 4 o Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coastal Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore.lfull descriptions o Caves: Naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological fonnations and is large enough to contain a human. o Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occuring below 5,000 ft. o Talus: Homogenous areas ofrock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 -2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. B Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of> 51 em (20 in) in western Washington and are> 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are> 30 em (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and > 6 m (20 ft) long. Ifwetland has: 3+ priority habitats = 4 points 1 priority habitat = 1 point 2 priority habitats = 3 points No habitats = 0 points Note: all vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list. Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 10 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. Nearby wctlands are addressed in Question H 2.4 Choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits. Therc arc at least 3 other wetlands within 112 mile, and the connections Points = 5 bemreen them are relatively undisturbed (light grazing bem:een wetlands D OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should -:-.JOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development). D The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there Points = 5 are 3 other Lake-fringe wetlands within III mile. 3 [2J There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, BUT the connections Points = 3 bctwecn them are disturbed. D The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lakc with disturbance, and there are 3 Points = 3 other Lake-fringe wetlands within 1/2 mile. D There is at least 1 wetland within 1/2 mile. Points = 2 D There are no wetlands within 112 mile. Points = 0 H 1. TOTAL Score· opportunity for providing habitat 12 Add the sIXJresfrom H2.I, H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 Total Score for Habitat Functions· add the points for H I and H2, and record the result 00 p. I 20 Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington II Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and choose the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type ,~, Check off any crlleria IMI apply to the weiland. Check : e appropriate Category when the appropriate Cat.~orv criteria are met. SC 1.0 Estuarine Wetlands (see p. 86) Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? 0 The dominant water regime is tidal, 0 Vegetated. and 0 With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. 0 YES ~ Go 10 SC 1.1 D NO -not an estuarine wetland SC I.l Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park, or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? D YES ~ Category I D NO ~ Go 10 SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland unit at least I acre in size and meeting at least two of the following three conditions? 0 The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has <10% cover ofnon~native plant species. (fthe non~native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover >10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual rating (1/11). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would bc a Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in detennining the size threshold of I acre. D At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 foot buffer of shrub, forest, or ungrazed or unmowed grassland. 0 The wetland has at least two of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or continguous freshwater wetlands. D YES ~ Category I 0 NO ~ not an estuarine wetland Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 12 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. SC 2.0 Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage ProgramiDNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered. or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 Is the wetland unit being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? (This question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHPiDNR.) S/TJR infonnation from Appendix DOor accessed from WNHP/DNR web site DYES -contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 3.2 D G NO SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as a site with state Threatened or Endangered plant species? D YES ~ Category I D NO -not a Heritage wetland SC 3.0 Bogs (see p. 87) Docs the wetland unit (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetations in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a hog. I/you answer Yes, you will still need to rate the wetland based on its function. 1. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e., layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic oils.) DYES -go to Q. 3 El NO -go to Q. 2 2. Does the unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks, that are <16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impenneable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond'! DYES -go to Q. 3 El NO -not a bog for purpose of rating 3. Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listcd in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (>30% of total shrub and herbaceous covcr consists of species in Table 3)? DYES -is a bog for purpose of rating D NO -go to Q. 4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent ofmosscs in the understory you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16" deep. Ifthc pH is lcss than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. 4. Is the unit forested (>30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western rcdcedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine, WITH any ofthe species (or combination of species) on bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover (> 30% coverage of total shrub/herbaceous cover)? DYES = Category I 0 NO -not a bog for purpose of rating Category Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 13 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. SC4.0 Forested Wetlands (see p. 90) CateeDrv Docs the wetland unit have at least 1 acre of forest that meets one of these criteria for the Department ofFish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitat? if you answer Yes, you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. 0 Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade Crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/acre (20/hectare) that arc at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 em) or more. NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. 200-year-old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often smaller. The DFW criterion is an "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. 0 Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80- 200 years old OR have average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53 em); crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. 0 YES ~ Category I EI NO -not a forested wetland wi special characteristics SC5.0 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (see p. 91) Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wtland in a coastal lagoon? The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially 0 separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks. 0 The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or brackish (>.5 ppt) during most of the year in at leat a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the boltom ). o YES ~ go to SC 5. J 8. NO -not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SCS.I Does the wetland meet all of the following 3 conditions? The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, 0 grazing), and has less than 20% cover of invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). 0 At lea.'tt 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 foot buffer of shrub, forest, or ungrazed or unmowed grassland. 0 The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4,350 square feet). o YES ~ Category I o NO -not a wetland in a coastal lagoon Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 14 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. SC 6.0 Interdunal Wetlands (see p. 93) Category Is the wetland unit west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? DYES -go In SC 6.1 G ~O -not an interdunal wetland for rating If you answer Yes. you will still need to rate the wetland based on its/unctions. In practical terms, that means the following geographic area,,: • Long Beach Peninsula -lands west of SR 103 • Grayland-Westport -lands west of SR 105 • Ocean Shores-Copalis -lands west ofSR 1115 and SR 109. SC6.1 Is wetland 1 acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is I acre or larger? o YES ~ Category II 0 NO -go to 8C6.2 SC 6.2 Is the unit betv-leen 0.1 and I acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is betvveen 0.1 and 1 acre? DYES ~ Category III Category of wetland based on Special Characteristl •• NA Choose the "highest" rating if wetland falls into several categories, and record on p. I. Ifyou answered NO for all types, enter "Not Applicable" on p. I. Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 15 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. We1land name or number: D -=----- WETLAND RATING FORM -WESTERN WASHINGTON Version 2 -Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct. 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats l\ame of wetland (ifknown): -'W.:.e:;t:::1a::;n:::d..:D'-_________ -==-_ Date of site visit: 2124/14 Rated by 1. Munger Trained by Ecology? Yes 0 No El Date: --- SEC: -'.',--3 __ TWNSHP:co2",3N-,-__ RNGE:_4",E ___ Is S/T/R in Appendix O? Yes DNa D Map of wetland unit: Figure ____ _ Estimated size: ____ _ SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland: 10 Category I = Score >=70 Category II ~ Score 51-69 Category III ~ Score 30-50 Category I V == Score <3 a II D 1110 IV 0 Score for Water Quality Functions~o Score for Hydrologic Functions 10 Seore for Habitat Functions 20 TOTAL score for functions 40 Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland o II D Does not Apply 0 Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above) III Check the appropriate type and class of wetland being rated. Wet .... dType WetlaDd Class Estuarine 0 Depressional 0 Natural Heritage Wetland L.J Riverine L.J Bog 0 Lake-fringe D Mature Forest L.J Slope L.J Old Growth Forest L.J Flats L.J Coastal Lagoon L.J Freshwater Tidal U Interdunal L.J Check if unit has N one of the above W multiple HGM classes 0 prcsent Conunents: Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. Does the wetland unit being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below, you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. Check List for Wetlands TIIat May Need sr:tol Protection (in addition to the protection recommended ~ r its category) SPI. Has the Vliet/and unit been documented as a habitat for any federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (TIE species)? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. SP2. Has the ",ref/and unit been documented as habitat for any state listed Threatened . or Endangered animal :o.pecies? For the purposes of Ihis rating system., "docwnented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are categorized as Category I Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 19 of data fonn). SP3. Does the wet/and unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFW for the state? SP4. Does the wetland unit have a local signfficance in addition to its Junctions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having special significance. YES NO 0 D 0 D 0 D 0 D To complete the next part ofthe data sheet. YOU will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogcomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 2 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. Classification of Vegetated Wetlands in Western Washington If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM clas.'Ies. In this case, inoentify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply and go to Question 8. 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e., except during floods)? 0:--.JO -go to 2 DYES -the wetland class is Tidal Fringe lfYES, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? DYES -Freshwater Tidal Fringe D NO -Saltwater Tidal Fringe (E.stuarine) Jfyour J.1ietland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe, use the farms/or Riverine wetlands. ffit is Salnrater Tidal Fringe, it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were called estuarine in thc first and second editions of the rating system arc called Saltwater Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earher editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency bernleen editions, the tenn "Estuarine" wetland is being kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. xx). 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) ofw~ter to it. Groundwater and surface watcr runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit. 0NO -go to 3 DYES -the wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a "Flats" wetland, use the fonn for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet both of the following criteria? DThe vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of penn anent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) at least 20 acres (8 hal in size; OAt least 30% of the opcn water area is deeper than 6.6 feet (2 m)? 0NO -go to 4 0 YES -the wetland class is Lake-fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? o The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual). OThe water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks. o The water leaves the wetland without being impounded. NOTE: Surji:~ce water does not pond in these type of l-\!etlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 feet in diameter and less than I foot deep) 0NO -go to 5 DYES -the wetland class is Slope Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington ] Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? o The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river. D The overbank flooding occur.; once every two years. o NO -go to 6 0 YES -the wetland class is Riverine 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water pond.s, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of the year? This means that any outlet, ~fpresent, is higher than the interior a/the "»'etland. DNO -go to 7 G YES -the wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high ground water in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. DNO -go to 8 0 YES -the wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes within your wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland being rated. Tfthe area of the second class is less than 10% of the unit, classify the wetland using the class that represent more than 90%) of the total area. HGM CltlssI!8 IJIIthIn /llhIbte/lW Wet/mJd .,,1IIIIltuy C1Irss tD USIl'" ltJIIbrg . Slope + Riverine Riverine 0 Slope + Depressional Depressional 0 Slope + Lake-fringe Lake-fringe iLJ Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary' Depressional ILJ Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional IU Saltwater Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with 0 special characteristics If you are unable stil1 to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 4 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. D Depressional and Flats Wetlands WATER QUALITY fUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality. Dl. Does the wetland unit have the potential to improve water quality? (see p. 38) Points D 1.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland: B Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) Points = 3 0 UOit has an intennittently flowmg, or highly constricted pennanently tlowmg Points = 2 outlet. 0 Unit has an lmconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet (permafleflt~v Points = 1 3 flOWing ). Unit is a flat depreSSIOn (Q. 7 on key) or m the Flats class, with pennenent Points = 1 0 surface outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch. (If ditch is not pennanently flowing. treat unit as "intennittently flowing.") Provide Dhota or drawina y ....... D1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface (or dufflayer) is clay or organic (use NRCS definitions); 0 0 YES Points = 4 B NO Points = 0 D1.3 Characteristics of persistent vegetation (emergent, shrub, and/or forest Cowardin class): [2] Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation >=95 Iyo of area. Points = 5 0 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation >= t/2 of area. Points = 3 5 0 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation >=1110 of area. Points = 1 0 Wetland has persistent, ungrazcd vegetation < 1/ 1 0 of area Points = 0 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes Figure D 1.4 Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation. This is the urea of the wetland that is ponded/or at least 2 months, but dries out sometime during the year. Do not count the area that is permanently ponded. Estimate area as the average condition 5 out of 10 years. 2 0 Area seasonally ponded is > 1/2 total area of wetland. Points = 4 B Area seasonally ponded is > I /4 total area of wetland. Points = 2 0 Area seasonally ponded is < I /4 total area of wetland. Points = 0 Map ofhydroperiods Figure Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above 10 D 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to improve water quality? (.fiee p. 44) Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in ground water or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes, or ground water downgradient from thc wetland. Note which afthe following conditions provide the sources afpollutams: 0 Grazing in the wetland or within 150 feet. 0 1 Jntreated stormwatcr discharges to wetland. 0 Tilled fields or orchards within 150 feet of wetland. 0 A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, fanned fields, roads. or clear -cut logging. 0 Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 feet of wetland. Multiplier 0 Wetland is fed by ground water high in phosphorus or nitrogen. I 0 Other: YES -multiplier is 2 NO -multiplier is 1 TOTAL -Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from D 1. byD2. 10 Add score to table on p. J Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 5 Herrera Environmental ConSUltants, Inc. D DepressioDal and Flats Wetlands HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS" Indicators that wetland functions to r_doc_ flooding/stream degradation. D3. Does wetland unit have the potential to reduce flooding/erosion? (see p. 46) Polnu D3.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland: G Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet). Points = 4 D Unit has an intcnnittently flowing, OR highly constricted pennanently Points = 2 flowing outlet. D Unit is a "flat" depression (Q. 7 on key), or in the Flats class, with pennanent surface outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet Points = 1 4 is a man-made ditch. (If ditch is not permanently !lowing, treat unit at "intermittently flowing. ") D Unit has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet Points = 0 (permanently flowing). D3.2 Depth of storage during wet periods. Estimate the height of pan ding above the bottom o/the outlet. For units with no outlet measure from the surface of permanent water or deepest part (if dry). D Marks of ponding are 3 feet or more above the surface or bottum of outlet. Points = 7 D The wetland is a "headwater" wetland. Points = 5 3 D Marks of ponding between 2 feet to <3 feet from surface or bottom of outlet. Points = 5 G Marks are at least 0.5 feet to <2 feet from surface or bottom of outlet. Points =3 D Wetland is flat (yes to Q. 2 or Q. 7 on key) but has small depressions on the Points = 1 surface that trap water. D Marks of ponding are less than 0.5 feet. Points = 0 D 3.3 Contribution of wetland to storage in the watershed. Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream basin contributing surface waler to the wetland to the area of the wetland itself. D The area of the basin is <10 times the area of the unit. Points = 5 3 G The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit. Points = 3 D The area of the basin is > I 00 times the area of the unit. Points = 0 D Entire unit is in the Flats class (basin=wetland) Points = 5 Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above 10 D4. Does wetland unit have the opportunity to reduce flooding/erosion? (see p. 49) Answer YES if the unit is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. Answer NO if the water coming into the wetland is controlled by a structure such as flood gate, tide gate, flap valve, reservoir~ etc. OR you estimate that more than 90% of the water in the wetland is from groundwater in areas where damaging groundwater flooding does not occur. Note which of the following indicators of opportunity apply: D Wetland is in a headwater of a river or stream that has flooding problems. D Wetland drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems. D Wetland has no outlet and impounds surface runoff water that might otherv.'ise flow into a river or stream that has flooding problems. Multiplier D Other: I YES -multiplier is 2 NO -multiplier is 1 TOTAL -Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from D 3. by D 4. 10 Add score to table on p. I Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 6 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. These questions apply to wetl#nds of all HGM classes HABITAT FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat. HI. Does the wetland unit have the potential to provide habitat for many species'! H 1.1 Vegetation structure (see p. 72) Check the (vpes ofl'egelatiofl classes present (as delined by Cowurdin). Size thres/wldfor class is /14 acre or more than 10% oflhe area ifunil is smalier Ihal12.5 acres. D Aquatic bcd o Emergent plants G Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have >30% cover) o Forested (areas where trees have >30% cover) If the unit has a forested class, check if: D The forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) that each cover 20% within the forested polygon Add the number of vegetation types that qualify Jfyou have: 4 structures or more 3 structures Points = 4 Points = 2 2 structures 1 structure Points = 1 Points = 0 M3Il of Cowardin classes H 1.2 Hydroperiods (see p. 73) Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than JO% of the wetland if less than 2.5 acres in size or 1/4 acre to count ('lee text for descriptions of hydroperiods). D Pennanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present Points = 3 [2] Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present Points = 2 Point. Figure D Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present Points = 1 I [2] Saturated only 1 type present Points = 0 D Pennanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland D Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland D Lake-fringe wetland ~ 2 points D Freshwater tidal wetland = 2 points Map ofhydroperlods Figure H 1.3 Richness of Plant Species (see p. 75) Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 sq.ji. (different patches a/the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold). You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian Thistle. If you counted: List species below ~lyou want to: Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 7 > 19 species Points = 2 5-19 species Points = I <5 species Points = 0 Total for pagel 3 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. HIA interspersion of Habitats (see p. 76) Points Decide/rom 'he diagrams below whether interspersion befl1..'een Cowardin vegetation classes (described in H 1./) or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. 0 (2)( .. ) (0) None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points 2 ~",(j) /,9 [riparian braided channelsl High = 3 pOints NOTE: If you have four or more vegetation types or three vegetation types and open water, the rating is always "high". Use map of Coward in vegetation classes. H 1.5 Special Habitat Features (see p. 77). Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The numher of checks is the number of points you put into the next column. D Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4 inches in diameter and 6 feet long). [2] Standing snags (diameter at the bottom >4 inches) in the wetland. 0 Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 feet (2 m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 feet (1 m) over a stream (or ditch) in or contiguous with the wetland, for at least 33 feet (10m). 2 D Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver/muskrat for denning (>30 0 slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned hrownlgray). 121 At least 1/4 acre of thin-stemmed presistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are pennanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians ). D Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants. Note: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. H 1. T~l~ Score -potential for providing habitat Add the s res from HU. Hl.2, Hl.3, Hl.-I, Hl.5 7 Comments: Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 8 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. H 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? Points H 2.1 Buffers (see p. 80) ChoosE' fhe description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to he used ill the rating. See text/or definition of "undisturbed. " 0 100 m (330 feet) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, Points = 5 or open water >95% of circumference. No structures are within undisturbed part of buffer (relatively undisturbed also means no grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use). [J 100 m (330 feet) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, Points = 4 or open water >50% of circumference. 0 50 m (170 feet) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or Points = 4 open water >95% circumference. 0 100 m (330 feet) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, Points = 3 or open water for >25% circumference. 0 50 m (170 feet) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or Points = 3 open water for >50% circumference. 4 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above: 0 No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 m (80 feet) Points = 2 of wetland >95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. 0 No paved areas or buildings within 50 m of wetland for >50% Points = 2 circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns arc OK. 0 Heavy grazing in buffer. Points = 1 0 Vegetated buffers are <2 m wide (6.6 feet) for more than 95% of the Points = 0 circumference (e.g., tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to cdge of wetland). 0 Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. Points = 1 Aerial photo showing buffers FI ...... H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (see p. 81) U 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed/unbroken vegetated corridor (riparian or upland) at least 150 feet wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest, or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands, or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (Dams ill riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, and paved roads are considered breaks ill the corridor. ) YES ~ 4 points (go to H 2.3) NO ~ go to H 2.2.2 U 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed/unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) at least 50 feet wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands, or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size OR a Lake- 2 fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES ~ 2 points l~o to H 2.3) NO ~ go to H 2.2.3 H 2.2.3 Is the wetland: 0 within 5 miles (8 km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR 0 within 3 miles of a large field or pasture> 40 acres in size OR 0 within 1 mile of a lake greater than 20 acres in size? YES ~ 1 point NO= 0 points Total for pagel 6 Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 9 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. H 2.3 Near or Adjacent to Other PrioritJ: Habitats Listed bJ: WDFW (see p. 82) Points Which of the following priority habitats are within 330 feet (100 rn) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. These are DFW definitions. Check with your local DFW biologist tf there are any questions 0 Aspen stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen >0.4 ha (I acre). 0 Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 152). 0 Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. 0 Old-growth/Mature forests: (Old growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 treeslha (8/acre) >81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadance, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80 -200 years old west of the Cascade crest. 0 Oregon white Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is 25% (full descrptions in WDFW PHS repar/p.158). [2] Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. 0 Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non·forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 4 16/). [2] Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life hsitory requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. 0 Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coastal Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report pp. 167- 169 and glossary in Appendix A). 0 Caves: Naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological fonnations and is large enough to contain a human. 0 Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occuring below 5,000 ft. 0 Talus: Homogenous area'i of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 -2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, andlor sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. 0 Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags jfthey are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of> 51 em (20 in) in western Washington and are> 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are> 30 em (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and> 6 m (20 ft) long. If wetland has: 3+ priority habitats = 4 points 1 priority habitat = 1 point 2 priority habitats = 3 points No habitats = 0 points Note: all vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in question H 2.4 Wetland Rating Form· Western Washington 10 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. H 2.4 Vletland Landscape (.'1ee p. 84) Choose the one description oIlhe landscape around the \1"ellund that hestfits. There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, and the connections Points = 5 between them are relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands o OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development). o The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other Lake-fringe wetlands within 1/2 mile. Points = 5 G. There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, BUT the connections Points = 3 between them are disturbed. o The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with disturbance, and there are 3 Points = 3 other Lake-fringe wetlands within 1/2 mile. D There is at least I wetland within 1/2 mile. Points = 2 o There are no wetlands within 112 mile. Points = 0 H 1. TOTAL Score -opportunity for providing habitat Add the H2.4 3 13 Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington II Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and choose the appropriate answer.fI and Category. W.d .... dTyp. Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Check: the appropriate Category when the appropriate criteria are met. Cat020ry SC 1.0 Estuarine Wetlands (see p. 86) Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? 0 The dominant water regime is tidal, 0 Vegetated, and 0 With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. D YES ~ Go to SC 1.1 [] NO -not an estuarine wetland SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park, or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? D YES ~ Category I D NO~GotoSC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland unit at least 1 acre in size and meeting at least two of the following three conditions? The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has <10% cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover >10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be 0 given a dual rating (1111). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category 11 while the relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in detennining the size threshold of I acre. D At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 foot buffer of shrub, forest, or ungrazed or unmowed grassland. 0 The wetland has at least two of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or continguous freshwater wetlands. D YES ~ Category I 0 NO ~ Category " Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 12 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. SC 2.0 Natural Heritage Wetlands (.fjl!l! p. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Vlashington Natural Heritage ProgramiDNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 Is the wetland unit being rated in a Seetion/To\Vt1ship/Range that contains. a Natural Heritage wetland? (This question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHP/DNR.) SiT/R information from Appendix DOor accessed from WNHP/DNR web site D DYES -contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and gn tn SC 3.2 D NO SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as a site with state Threatened or Endangered plant species? D YES ~ Category I D NO -not a Heritage wetland SC 3.0 Bogs (see p. 87) Does the wetland unit (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identifY iJfhe lA'etland is a bog. [fyou answer Yes, you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functwn. 1. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e., layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic oils.) DYES -go 10 Q. 3 D NO -go to Q. 2 2. Does the unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks, that are <16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? DYES -go to Q. 3 [] NO -not a bog for purpose of rating 3. Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (>30% of total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? DYES -is a bog for purpose of rating D NO -go to (l. 4 NOTE: If you arc uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. 4. Is the unit forested (>30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western redcedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine, WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on bog species plant list in Table 3 a'i a significant component of the ground cover (> 30% coverage of (olal shrub/herbaceous cover)'! DYES -Category I D NO -not a bog for purpose of rating Category Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington I3 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. SC 4.0 Forested Wetlands (see p. 90) Does the wetland unit have at least 1 acre of forcst that meets one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitat? Jj~vou answer Yes, yuu will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade Crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, o fonning a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/acre (20Ihectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast hcight(dbh) of32 inches (81 cm) or more. NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. 200-year-old trces in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often smaller. The DFW criterion is an "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. D Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80- 200 years old OR have average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53 cm); crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. DYES = Category I 0 NO R not a forested wetland wI special characteristics ~----~=-~~~~~--= SC 5.0 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (see p. 91) SC 5.1 Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wtland in a coastal lagoon? The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially o separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks. The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or o brackish (>.5 ppt) during most of the year in at leat a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom). DYES = go to SC 5.1 0 NO R not a wetland in a coastal lagoon Does the wetland meet all of the following 3 conditions? The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, o grazing), and has less than 20% cover of invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a I 00 foot buffer of shrub. forest. D or ungrazed or unmowed grassland. D The wetland is larger than 1110 acre (4,350 squarcfcet). D YES ~ Category I D NO ~ Category II Category Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington \4 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. SC 6.0 Interdunal Wetlands (see p. 93) Category Is the wetland unit west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUD)? o YES-goloSC6.! GJ ~o -not an interdunal wetland for rating IIYou answer YES, you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. In practical terms, that means the following geographic areas: • Long Beach Peninsula -lands west of SR 103 • Grayland-Westport -lands west of SR 105 • Ocean Shorcs-Copalis -lands west of SR 1115 and SR 109. SC 6.1 Is wetland I acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 acre or larger? o YES ~ Category II 0 NO -go 10 SC 6.2 SC 6.2 Is the wetland unit between 0.1 and I acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre? o YES ~ Category III Category of wetland based 08 Special Characteristks NA Choose the ''highest' rating if wetland falls into several categories, and record on p. I. Ifyou aoswered NO fOT all types, enter ''Not Applicable" on p. I. Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington 15 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. -I' I·" I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ " . ." .~. ./ ... "; , '; '.' , c • '.' ~. .. , • • I', .. ," '. .' . :' .. ,: ···APPEN·OIXS •• •······· ..... ! " Wetland and Stream Buffer· Mitigation Report tQ KingCounty DRAFT WETLAND AND STREAM BUFFER MITIGATION REPORT BLACK RIVER PUMP STATION SEDIMENT REMOVAL PROJECT King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division WETLAND AND STREAM BUFFER MITIGATION REPORT Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project Prepared for tQ King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division King Street Center -DNRP 201 South Jackson Street, Room 700 Seattle, Washington 98104-3855 by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1100 Seattle, Washington 98121 Telephone : 206-441-9080 June 23, 2015 DRAFT Prepared by: George Ritchotte, Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. For comments or questions contact: George Ritchotte, 206-787-8288 Alternate Formats Available 206-296-7380 TTY Relay: 711 ~ KmgCounty -----------.. ------- CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................ 1 Regulatory Implications ................................................................................... 3 City of Renton Regulations .......................................................................... 3 Mitigation Sequencing .............................................................................. 3 Impacts and Mitigation .................................................................................... 5 Existing Conditions .................................................................................... 5 Impacts ................................................................................................. 5 Buffer Mitigation and Vegetation Management Plan ............................................. 7 Goals, Obj ectives, and Performance Standards ........................................... 8 Buffer Revegetation Plan ..................................................................... 8 Monitoring, Site Maintenance, and Contingency Plan ................................... 10 References ................................................................................................. 13 APPENDICES Appendix A Photos Appendix B Planting Plan TABLES Table 1. Stream and Wetland Buffer Impact Areas ................................................. 7 Table 2. Plant Species Planned for Buffer Restoration .............................................. 9 FIGURES Figure 1. Vicinity Map for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Prqject, Renton, Washington .......................................................................... 2 Figure 2. Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Prqject Stream and Wetland Buffer Impacts. ............................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6 ti King County The King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division (King County) operates the Black River Pump Station (pump station) to provide flood control in the lower Green River Valley. The pump station is located on the Black River in the City of Renton, Washington, about 1,700 feet upstream from the confluence of the Black River and Green River (Figure 1). King County proposes to temporarily divert Black River flow through a bypass pipe on the north side of the river and dredge approximately 2,900 cubic yards of sediment that has accumulated behind the pump station. Sediment will be stockpiled and dewatered on the south side of the Black River before disposal at an offsite facility. Project construction would entail: • Staging and site preparation, which will include constructing a sediment stockpiling, decant and treatment area and crane pad • Isolating the in-water work area with turbidity curtains, cofferdams, temporary flow diversion structures, or other best management practices (BMPs) • Excluding fish from the in-water work area • Placing sediment removal equipment in the work area using the crane • Removing and stockpiling sediment adjacent to the river • Decanting stockpiled sediment and treating the wastewater • Removing in-water BMPs • Hauling sediment off site • Restoring and replanting any cleared areas A detailed project description can be found in the Biological Evaluation and Habitat Data Reports prepared for the project (Herrera 2014a, 2014b). Despite revisions to project design to reduce environmental impacts, and implementation of minimization and avoidance measures, the project will result in unavoidable impacts to the Black River, the regulatory buffer of the Black River, and wetland buffers. The staging and stockpiling area, and an access road extending from the staging area to the streambank, will be located within the regulatory buffers of both the Black River and wetlands located on the south side of the river, resulting in combined stream and wetland buffer impacts on the south side. The bypass pipe will need to cross the buffers of the Black River and a wetland on the north side of the river. Minor clearing to set the pipe may cause combined wetland and stream buffer impacts on the north side. All impacts will be temporary, and cleared areas will be revegetated with native vegetation once construction is complete. This report documents City of Renton regulatory requirements, avoidance and minimization measures that were incorporated into project design and construction methods, unavoidable buffer impacts, and compensatory mitigation for those impacts. June 2015 DRAFT Wetland and Stream Buffer Mitigation Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal PrQject legend D Project area --Stream or river --Road --Highway -+--Railroad _I City limit FA r:. F If". OCfAN Ocean .Shams ,., ___ J Mount .v .... no " II!.me'io'! .50&111 .. • Figure 1. Vicinity Map for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project, Renton, Washington. N @ o 1,000 2,000 4,000 ..=::-.I.C::::l •••••• _ Feet ~HERRERA USDA, Aerial (2013) '1 , \ I Wetlands in the study area are within the Black River shoreline and fall under thejurisdiction of the City of Renton's Shoreline Master Program (SMP) (Redmond Municipal Code [RMC] 4-3-090), The SMP requires that wetlands within shorelinejurisdiction be classified according to the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) rating system (Hruby 2004), Buffers are required around each wetland in order to protect the wetland functions and values. Wetland B is a Category III wetland with a minimum buffer width of 75 feet. Wetland C is a Category IV wetland, and has a buffer of 50 feet. Wetland D, also a Category III wetland, has a buffer of 125 feet. According to RMC 4-3-090 B.3.a, thejurisdictional area associated with shorelines include lands within 200 feet from the ordinary high water mark or lands within 200 feet from floodways, whichever is greater. Per RMC 4-3-090 D.2, shoreline use and development shall be carried out in a manner that prevents or mitigates adverse impacts to ensure no net loss of ecological functions and processes of wetlands, including buffers. According to RMC 4-3-090 D.2.d.x, activities that adversely affect wetlands or buffers shall follow mitigation sequencing, as described below, to ensure that impacts on wetlands and buffers are minimized to the extent feasible. In addition, RMC 4-3-090 F.3,d.viii(c) states that no dredged material shall be stockpiled in a shore land area that would result in the clearing of native vegetation. Mitigation Sequencing This project has made all reasonable efforts to provide sufficient mitigation such that the prQject will not result in net loss of buffer functions. The following describes the mitigation sequencing approach as required by RMC 4-3-090 D. 2' and the corresponding measures taken by the prQject to comply with these requirements: • Avoiding the adverse impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action, or moving the action. o The prQject completely avoided wetland impacts by moving the proposed staging area from the north side to the south side of the Black River. Completely avoiding stream and wetland buffer impacts was not feasible due to the amount of space eneded for the staging and sediment treatment area. Because accumulated sediments are within the stream channel, completely avoiding stream impacts was also unavoidable. 1 This mitigation sequence is also outlined injoint Ecology, US Army Corps of Engineers, and US Environmental Protection Agency guidance (Ecology et al. 2006); and State Environmental Policy Act (Washington Administrative Code Chapter 197-11-768). W June 2015 King County DRAFT Wetland and Stream Buffer Mitigation Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 3 • Minimizing adverse impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation by using appropriate technology and engineering, or by taking affirmative steps to avoid or reduce adverse impacts. o The staging area was sized and located to minimize buffer impacts to the extent possible. The staging area was sited to avoid the drip line of any large trees. o Tree clearing has been avoided to the extent possible. o No native vegetation will be cleared for staging and stockpiling. Staging and stockpiling will take place on the parking lot and maintained lawn immediately east of the lot. o Bypassing and dewatering the excavation area will minimize turbidity. • Rectifying the adverse impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected envi ronment. o All areas disturbed by prqject activities will be revegetated with native plant species as part of the Buffer Mitigation and Vegetation Management Plan (see section below). • Reducing or eliminating the adverse impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action. o The prqject will minimize adverse impacts on buffer areas over time by revegetating disturbed areas immediately following construction. Lawn that is currently dominated by nonnative grass will be revegetated with native shrub and emergent vegetation. o The Monitoring, Site Maintenance, and Contingency Plan (see section below) will ensure that performance standards for buffer planting areas are achieved and buffer functions are restored. • Compensating for the adverse impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing similar substitute resources or environments, and monitoring the adverse impact and taking appropriate corrective measures. o Cleared areas will be revegetated at a 1:1 ratio. Nonnative vegetation such as Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea,) and Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) will be replaced with appropriate native species. Because the prqject will cause unavoidable temporary buffer impacts, a buffer mitigation and vegetation management plan is provided in this report. tQ King County June 2015 ------... ~-. _ •... 4 DRAFT Wetland and Stream Buffer Mitigation Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project IMPACTS AND MITIGATION -isti g (' (It 0 S Project activ ities will occur on the north and so uth sides of th e Black Riv er, as wel l as with in the Black River channel. On the south sid e of the river in the proj ect area a narrow strip of riparian veget ation approximate ly 60 feet wid e ext end s a long th e bank , w hich ri ses st ee ply from th e river to a flat gra ss y area immediate ly eas t of th e pump station parking lot . Tw o wetland s (wetlands B and C) were del in ea t ed on t he south sid e of the river for this prQj ect (H e rrer a 2014c). Wetlands and streams in the prQj ec t vi ci nity ar e described i n th e Wetl and and Str eam Del in ea tion Report (H errera 2014c). Th e propos ed acc ess road wi II exte nd from the pump sta tion parking lot to the riverbank through th e veg etated strip (Figur e 2). Plant spec ie s in this lo cation are primarily willows (Salix spp .), r ed osier dogwood (Comus sericea), r ed alde r (A lnus rubra), Dougla s-fir (Pse udotsug a m enziesii), sho re pine (Pi nus contorta), an d black cotto nwood (Populus balsamifera). Him a layan blackb erry (R ubus armeniacus) and reed ca narygrass (P halaris arundinacea) dominate th e under story (Appendix A, Photo 1). Th e stag ing and d ewa tering area will be constructed in the gra ssy ar ea so uth of the riparian strip . Veg et ati on in thi s ar ea is alm ost ent ire ly nonn ative Kentucky blu eg ra ss (Poa prate nsis). On e larg e shore pine , whic h is 15 in ches diam et er at br eas t he ight (dbh) grows in th e middl e of th e lawn (Appen di x A, Photo 2). The north bank rises steep ly from the riverbank to a flat ar ea leve l with the top of the pump station wh e r e th e access road and some pump station infrastructur e ar e located. Two wetland s (w et l ands A and D) w e r e de lin eated on th e north si de of the rive r , north and eas t of the propos ed bypass pip e al ignm e nt. Soils consi st largely of imported cobbles and gravel f ill. Re ed canaryg r ass , Himal aya n bla ckberry , tan sy (Ta nacetum vulgare), and oth er nonnative herbac eo us vegetation are th e dominant plant species in this area . There i s very littl e native v egetation (Append i x A, Photo 3). Down str eam of th e pump sta tion the stream b ank is heav ily riprapped . Him a layan bl ack berry has spr ead ove r the rocks (App endix A, Photo 4). On the upstream side of the stat ion a concr ete wingwa ll ex tend s a long the bank for ap pro ximately 30 f ee t . Ye ll ow flag i ris grows thickly a long the shoreline (Appendix A, Photos 5 and 6). Impacts The total ar ea nee ded for th e so uth staging and access road is approximate ly 13 ,359 square f ee t . Ho wever, of that total area, 4,593 squar e f eet of that area is gr ave l parking lot ; thu s there wi ll b e 8 ,766 square f ee t of vegetation clear ing . Most of th e cleared ar ea is w ith i n th e 200-f oot r egul atory buffer of th e Bla ck River , and ov e rl aps with portion s of th e buffer s of Wetland s Band C (Figur e 2; Tabl e 1). June 2015 King County DI~AFT Wetland and Strci1rn Buffer Mltlgallon Report -Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 5 Legend CJ Staging area ~ Wetland and stream buffer im pact ~ Stream buffer impact I2ZI Wetland buffer impact . --L _ .! Wetland buffer Delineated wetland Figure 2. Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project Stream and Wetland Buffer Impacts. N @ o 30 60 120 .£:::::J_£:::::J_ •••• _Fee t ~ HERRERA Table 1. Stream and Wetland Buffer Impact Areas. Impact Type 1___ _____ Impact Area (sq. ft.) Access Road -------. . ---"--1 --- Wetland C and stream buffer 528 -, South Staging Area " 1--Stream buffer only - 1.171 ----- Wetland B and stream buffer 3,825 Wetl"ncl B buffer only 2,856 - Combined wetland B, C, and stream buffer 386 - Bypass Pipe Alignment Stream buffer only 3,738 Wetland D and stream buffer 10,019 The south side staging and stockpiling area covers 8,104 square feet, and covers buffers of the Black River, Wetland B, and Wetland C. Vegetation is almost entirely maintained lawn dominated by nonnative Kentucky bluegrass. One 15-inch dbh shore pine in the middle of the lawn will need to be removed. Except for removal of that tree, no native vegetation will be cleared for stockpiling. The access road area is approximately 528 square feet. Several small (2-to 4-inch db h) red alders and two small (2-inch dbh) Douglas-firs will be removed to construct the road (Appendix A, Photos 7 and 8). As much as 13,757 square feet of stream and Wetland D buffer vegetation will be cleared within the bypass pipe alignment (Table 2). Almost all the vegetation within this area consists of nonnative weedy species (Appendix A, Photos 9 and 10). No trees, shrubs, or native woody vegetation will be removed. All buffer impacts will be temporary and will be restored post project per the buffer mitigation plan described below. Buffer Mitigation and Vegetation Management Plan According to RMC 4-3-090 D,2.d,xii, a vegetation management plan is required in order to maintain effective buffer conditions and function. Supplemental planting may be necessary to provide adequate cover of native vegetation, In addition, the plan needs to include measures for controlling invasive weeds and removal of existing invasive species. The plan also needs to include a monitoring and maintenance plan for a period of at least 5 years. This plan will ensure that buffer areas are restored to their pre-existing condition or better (such as reduction of invasive species coverage), resulting in no net loss of ecological functions in buffer areas. Per RMC, 4-3-090 D.2.d.x(e), the minimum mitigation ratio for buffer impacts is 1:1 (i.e., the area of buffer revegetation must equal the area of buffer impact). The project will enhance existing buffer by replaCing the existing maintained lawn with native buffer vegetation. June 2015 W King County ------- ------ DRAFT Wetland and Stream Buffer Mitigation Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Prqject 7 The goal of the mitigation plan is to rectify temporary buffer impacts by restoring buffer function through restoration of buffer vegetation, resulting in no net loss of buffer area or ecological function. The objective is to establish a diversity of native emergent and shrub species in buffer restoration areas that will develop into a mature vegetation community with adequate cover and comprised of native plant species. The prQject will accomplish the goal and objective of the mitigation plan by implementing the following performance standards. • Year 0: 100 percent of planted species will survive by the end of the first year after planting. Plants that die will be replaced. All plants will be installed as specified in the mitigation plan to achieve intended plant community composition and structural diversity. • Year 1: By the end of the second year growing season, native vegetation cover will be at least 20 percent. • Year 2: By the end of the third year growing season, native vegetation cover will be at least 40 percent. • Year 3: By the end of the fourth year growing season, native vegetation cover will be at least 60 percent. • Year 4: By the end of the fifth year growing season, native vegetation cover will be at least 80 percent. • All years: The percentage of the buffer mitigation areas covered by invasive and nonnative species wi II not exceed 15 percent throughout the monitoring period. Buffer Revegetation Plan The general construction sequence for construction activities in buffer mitigation area~; is as follows: • Installation of temporary erosion and sediment control measures per plans and specifications • Site clearing and grubbing per plans and specifications (selective removal of invasive plant species and retention of native species where possible) • Site excavation per plans and specifications • Replacement of topsoi I • Installation of weed-free wood chip mulch in the planting areas • Installation of native plant material per project plans and specifications W King Count)' June 2015 8 DRAFT Wetland and Stream Buffer Mitigation Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment RemO\lal Prqject Planting is scheduled to occur during the dormant, or non-growing, season (October 2015). Because stream access may be needed for future dredging projects, only shrubs and herbaceous species are proposed for planting, to minimize removal of woody vegetation in the future. Shrubs will be planted 4 feet on center, and herbaceous species will be planted 18 inches on center. Plants will be, at minimum, in l-gallon containers. Plant material will be inspected by the project biologist, botanist, or horticulturist before acceptance, and that person will be on site during replacement of topsoil and plant installation to ensure that topsoil and plants are installed properly. A variety of native emergent and shrub species will be planted in the buffers (Table 2). Species adapted to wetter conditions will be planted in the access road area aqjacent to the river. Species more tolerant of drier, sunnier conditions will be planted in the staging area. Many of these plant species currently occur on site, providing a reference for planting prescriptions. The selected species are common in western Washington riparian forest habitat, provide good forage and cover resources for fish and wildlife, and perform well in restoration sites (Stevens and Vanbianchi 1993). Plants with narrow ecological tolerance ranges or that are difficult to obtain from local native plant nurseries were not selected. The mitigation planting plan is included in Appendix B. Table 2. Plant Species Planned for Buffer Restoration. Common Name Scientific Name Stratum Wetland Indicator Status Access Road ~ed !',sier dogwood Comus sericea Shrub FACW Pacific ninebark Physocarpus capitatus Shrub FACW .-, .. - Nootka rose Rosa nutkana Shrub FAC -- Sitka willow Salix sitchensis Shrub FACW _ .. ,. ---- Woodland strawberry Fragaria vesca Herbaceous FACU _._----------- Sword fern ! Po/ystichum munitum Herbaceous FACU _ ....... - Fringecup T ellima grandiflora Herbaceous FAC Piggyback plant Tolmiea menziesii Herbaceous FACU South Staging Area --- Serviceberry Amelianchier alnifolia FACU Beaked hazelnut Cory/us com uta Shrub FACU Tall Oregon grape Mahonia aquifo/ium Shrub FACU Nootka rose Rosa nutkana Shrub FAC Thimbleberry Rubus parvifforus Shrub FACU --~- Elderberry Sambucus racemosa Shrub FACU -- Snowberry Symphoricarpos a/bus Shrub FACU Sword fern Po/ystichum munitum Herbaceous FACU "._ .•. _----- South Staging Area and Bypass Pipe Alignment California brome Bromus carinatus Herbaceous Not listed Blue wild rye E/ymus g/aucus Herbaceous FACU Red fescue Festuca rubra Herbaceous FAC .. _-,----------- Regreen sterile wheatgrass T riUcum aestivum Herbaceous Not listed June 2015 UI KlngCounty ----------------- DRArT Wetland and Stream Buffer Mitigation J-;:eport-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Projf~ct 9 There will be no grubbing on the north side of the river, but there may be some minor clearing to lay the bypass pipe. No trees, shrubs, or woody vegetation will be cleared. Any cleared areas will be hydroseeded with a mix of native grasses. I~JOf7ltotill.g",Si/e ,i/,iillit-lldllce. ami COflllllgeliCr Plall Per RMC 4-3-090 D.2.d.xii, maintenance and monitoring will be conducted to ensure that buffer mitigation goals, o~ectives, and performance standards are achieved. The maintenance and monitoring program will be conducted for a minimum of 5 years to ensure plants become established and develop adequate native vegetation cover. If monitoring activities determine that performance standards are not being met, contingency measures will be implemented to remedy onsite problems. Monitoting Plan King County will arrange for a qualified biologist to perform monitoring of the buffer enhancement areas to ensure compl iance with the performance standards I isted above. The site will be monitored annually for a minimum of 5 years following construction. If monitoring results determine performance standards are not being achieved, corrective actions will be taken (see Monitoring, Site Maintenance, and Contingency Plan below). Year 0 Monitoring The monitoring visit at the end of the first growing season following construction will be conducted to establish permanent sampling plots and photograph points (as needed). inspect the plantings, identify mortality, and specify quantities and locations of plants needing replacement (see Year 0 performance standard above). In addition, the site will be inspected for the presence of invasive or exotic plant species (see performance standard for all years, above). Years 1, 2, 3, and 4 Monitoring During the second, third, fourth, and fifth years of monitoring (Year 1 through Year 4). mitigation areas will be evaluated and photographs will be taken from each of the permanent photograph points. At the end of the fifth year growing season (Year 4), if performance standards are not achieved, the monitoring period shall be extended for as many years as necessary until they are achieved. All Years Every year mitigation areas will be monitored for invasive species cover to ensure percentage of the buffer mitigation areas covered by invasive and nonnative species does not exceed 15 percent. Site Maintenallce and Contillgellcy Plan Following initial planting, the planting contractor will be responsible for maintaining 100 percent plant survival within the wetland and buffer enhancement areas for a minimum of 1 year as per the planting contract plans. In accordance with the 1-year plant survival guarantee, the contractor will replace plants that have died during the first year. Before plants are replaced, the contractor will consult with the project biologist arranged by King U1 King County June 2015 10 DRAFT Wetland and Stream Buffer Mitigation Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project County to determine why certain species are not surviving and, if necessary, which native plant substitutions are appropriate. In addition, throughout the summer of the first year, the contractor will be responsible for irrigating as frequently as necessary to ensure healthy plant conditions. King County will be responsible for managing the establishment of plants from the second through the fifth year, with the goal of meeting all applicable performance standards listed above. If percent cover requirements are not met, maintenance activities may include, but are not limited to, plant replacement, plant supplement, plant substitution, adjustment of planting layout to reflect specific or changing site conditions, weed control, and installation and adjustment of plant protection devices. An integrated pest management (IPM) approach will be adhered to for invasive species management within buffer mitigation areas (all years performance standard), including limited use of herbicides per RMC 4-3-090 D.2.d.xi. Invasive plant species will be pulled by hand to the extent practical. If herbicides are deemed appropriate for use to control invasive species, only those herbicides approved for use in aquatic ecosystems by Ecology (e.g., Rodeo, Aquamaster) will be selected. Herbicides will be applied by a licensed applicator. UI June 2015 KingCourrty DRAFT Wetland and Stream Buffer Mitigation Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 11 Herrera. 2014a. Biological Evaluation for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project. Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. for King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division. February 5,2015. Herrera. 2014b. Habitat Data Report for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project. Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. for King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division. March 2, 2015. Herrera. 2014c. Wetland and Stream Delineation Report. Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal PrQject. Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. for King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division. May 16, 2014. Hruby, T. 2004. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington -Revised. Ecology Publication 04-06-025. Washington State Department of Ecology. August 2004. Stevens, M.L. and R. Vanbianchi. 1993. Restoring Wetlands In Washington: a Guidebook for Wetland Restoration Planning and Implementation. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, Washington. <https://fortress.wa.gov /ecy/publ ications/summarypages/93017. htm I >. Ecology, US Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District, and US Environmental Protection Agency Region 10. 2006. Wetland Mitigation in Washington State -Part 1: Agency Policies and Guidance (Version 1). Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #06-06-011a. Olympia, Washington. March 2006. June 2015 W King County DRAFT Wetland and Stream Buffer Mitigation Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 13 APPENDIX A Photos W King County Photo 1 . Riparian vegetation on the south bank of the Black River. Photo 2 . Top of bank along the north edge of lawn where staging and stockpiling will take place. The large shore pine to be removed is in the background, far right. June 2015 Wetland and Stream Buffer Mitigntlon Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Rcmov!11 Project l ~ King Count)' A·' Photo 3. Road on north side of Black River and typical Wetland D buffer in fnr·pnlrol.lnri Photo 4. Nonnative vegetation on the north bank of the Black River downstream from the pump station. tJJ King County June 2015 A·2 Wetland and Stream Buffer Mitigation Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project Photo 5 . Wingwall and stream bank on the north side of the Black River upstream of the pump station. Photo 6 . Yellow flag iris on the north bank of the Black River upstream of the pump station. June 2015 Wetland and Stream Buffer Mitigation Rcp0rl-BIC1Ck River Pump StatlOll Sedlm()f1ll~emoval Project til King County A-3 Photos 7 and 8. Buffer vegetation in the proposed south side access road alignment. li King County June 2015 A·4 Wet land and Stream Buffe r Miti gat ion I~eport-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project Photo 9 . Buffer vegetation in the proposed bypass pipe alignment -east of the station. Photo 10 . Buffer vegetation in the proposed bypass pipe alignment - west of the pump station. June 2015 Wctlcilld and Stream t:luffer Mitigation Report -S lack River Pump Stillion Secillnent Remuval Project King County APPENDIX B Planting Plan / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ + " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w '" '" *, '" '" '" + '4·;&a&h;!\&Sm4.:z:a~.t 2 ·i@(~ ..... + ~ ~ ~ + ~ ~ + ~ ..i-\ ..... , '" , ~ ~ ,~ '-.",' ..... '", + + ~ ~' ~ ~, ~' ..!LA~r~" I l \, ' ~~lt· \ I , _~_-'ii--I r --MH + ~ + + + + + + ~ + ACCESS ROAD AREA Figure 1 Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project Buffer Revegetation Plan LEGEND ~ SEEDING AREA ~ PLANTING AREA N 4» o 25 50 Scale in Feet 100 • .HERRERA o 'P!0JW20101W-il4766.Q65\CADlDwgIMitigaII0fl Rapart\Figure 1 -Plantiog Areas dwg I PLANT SCHEDULE WETLAND PLANT ON CENTER TOTAL PLANT STRATUM SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME INDICATOR MATERIAL SIZE (O.C.) SPACING QUANTITIES PLANT ZONE QUANTITIES STATUS ACCESS ROAD SOUTH STAGING AREA AREA SHRUB AMELANCHIER ALNIFOLIA SERVICEBERRY FACU 1 GALLON 4'O.C 82 82 SHRUB CORNU5 SERICEA RED OSIER DOGWOOD FACW 1 GALLON 4'O,C. 9 9 SHRUB CORYLUS CORNUTA BEAKED HAZELNUT FACU 1 GALLON 4' D.C. 82 82 SHRUB MAHONIA AQUJFOLIUM TALL OREGON GRAPE FACU 1 GALLON 4' D.C 82 82 SHRUB PHYSOCARPUS CAPITATUS PACIFIC NINEBARK FACW 1 GALLON 4' D.C 9 9 SHRUB ROSA NUTKANA NOOTKA ROSE FAG 1 GALLON 4'O.C. 91 9 82 SHRUB RUBUS PARVIFLORUS THIMBLEBERRY FACU 1 GALLON 4'O.C. 82 82 SHRUB SALIX SITCHENSIS SITKA WILLOW FACW 1 GALLON 4'O.C. 9 9 SHRUB SAMBUCUS RACEMO$A RED ELDERBERRY FACU 1 GALLON 4'0,C. 82 82 SHRUB SYMPHORICARPOS ALBUS SNOWBERRY FACU 1 GALLON 4'0.C. 82 82 GRQUNDCOVER FRAGERfA VESCA WOODLAND STRAWBERRY FACU 1 GALLON 2'0.C. 55 55 GROUNDCOVER POL YSTfCHUM MUNITUM SWORD FERN FACU 1 GALLON 2'0.C 1789 55 1734 GROUNDCOVER TELLIMA GRANDfFLORA FRINGECUP FACU 1 GALLON 2' O.C. 55 55 GROUNDCOVER TOLMfEA MENZIESfI PIGGYBACK PLANT FAe 1 GALLON 2' O.C 55 55 BYPASS PIPE AREA AND SOUTH STAGING AREA SEED MIX STRATUM HERBACEOUS HERBACEOUS HERBACEOUS HERBACEOUS SCIENTIFIC NAME BROMUS CARINATUS EL YMUS GLAUCUS FESTUCA RUBRA TRITICUM AESTIVUM 24" DIAMETER BARK OR WOOD CHIP MULCH RING. KEEP 2" AWAY FROM TRUNK OF PLANT ~ FINISH GRADE, REMOVE CONTAINER PRIOR TO PLANTING. DURING PLANTING OPERATIONS GENTLY LOOSEN WETLAND COMMON NAME INDICATOR STATUS CALIFORNIA BROME NOT LISTED BLUE WILDRYE FACU RED FESCUE FAG REGREEN STERILE WHEATGRASS NOT LISTED PLANT AT SAME LEVEL AS GROWN IN POT (5.( / A , 6" GREATER AND SPREAD ROOTS < 9.>; '73' THAN ROOTBALL OR CONTAINER DEPTH EXCAVATE SOIL FOR PLANTING TO DIMENSIONS SHOWN. FIRM SOIL AROUND ROOTBALL AND WATER SETTLE DO NOT LEAVE AIR POCKETS, DO NOT DAMAGE ROOTS DURING PLANTING OPERATIONS ~ COMPRESS SOIL INTO SMALL, FLAT TOPPED MOUND BENEATH ROOTBALL FOR SUPPORT ONE GALLON CONTAINER PLANTING DETAIL PERCENT OF MIX PERCENT OF MIX POUNDS PURE BY SEED COUNT BY SEED WEIGHT LIVE SEED (PLS) 30 30 30 10 21.18 15.75 4.24 58.84 -~ 24" DIAMETER BARK OR WOOD CHIP MULCH RING, 4" THICK LAYER, KEEP 2" AWAY FROM TRUNK OF PLANT FINISH GRADE---./ REMOVE CONTAINER PRIOR TO PLANTING. DURING PLANTING OPERATIONS GENTLY L .................. " '0 "'? AND SPREAD ROOTS AT BOTTOM OF ROOTBALL --: EXCAVATE SOIL FOR PLANTING TO DIMENSIONS SHOWN FIRM SOIL AROUND ROOTBALL AND WATER PER ACRE 15.68 11.66 3,14 43.56 SETTLE. DO NOT LEAVE AIR POCKETS. DO NOT l~)e DAMAGE ROOTS DURING PLANTING OPERATIONS 1X..' ~----I EXCAVATION COMPRESS SOIL INTO SMALL. FLAT TOPPED -----./" 3X GREATER .. MOUND BENEATH ROOTBALL FOR SUPPORT Tl.I.UJ DnnTDAl1 PLANT AT SAME LEVEL AS GROWN IN POT ONE GALLON CONTAINER PLANTING ON SLOPE DETAIL 6" GREATER THAN ROOTBALL OR CONTAINER DEPTH NOTES: Figure 2 Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project Planting Schedule and Details REMOVE ANY NOXIOUS AND/OR NONNATIVE WEEDS FROM PLANTING ZONES PRIOR TO PLANTING 2. THE PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE SHALL APPROVE GRADES PRIOR TO MULCH APPLICATION AND PLANT INSTALLATION. 3. PLANT SUBSTITUTIONS ARE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE. 4. PLANTS SHALL BE TAGGED FOR IDENTIFICATION AND APPROVED BY THE PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION 5. KEEP PLANTS SHADED UNTIL TIME OF PLANTING DO NOT LET PLANT MATERIAL SIT IN SUN OR DRY OUT BEFORE PLANTING 6. PLANT GROUNDCOVER AND SHRUBS IN CLUSTERS OF THREE, FIVE, AND SEVEN. EACH CLUSTER SHALL BE ONE SPECIES. EVENLY SPACE CLUSTERS THROUGHOUT PLANT ZONES. INTENT OF PLANTING IS TO APPEAR NATURAL AND INFORMAL 7. THE PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE SHALL APPROVE PLANT LAYOUT BEFORE lNST ALLATION 8. APPLY SEED MIX BETINEEN SEPTEMBER 1 THROUGH OCTOBER 1 ANDIOR BETWEEN MARCH 1 AND MAY 15. 9. INSTALL SHRUBS, AND GROUNDCOVER BETWEEN OCTOBER 1 AND MARCH 1 OF THE FIRST DORMANT SEASON FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION. .HERRERA o ~aJ\Y2010\1O.(l4761l-065ICAD\Dwg\Mitigation Rero>rt\Figur" 2· Planting Schedule ilfld De1~il, ",",g .' -~, ,-. ". ,- I ," ,-' -.-. • . _i ", ; '. :. I . . . ~ .... .' ...•. ,: ... ,,"p .. p .. : <E" ··N····· "D'-'I'X' .. C' .' '., .•.. , " 1\., " J ''',',,' '. , ,: . . . . " , ," ,l' , __ , 1 : ·1 . Water Quality Monitoring Plan' 1 I I I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I I tQ I KlngCounty WATER QUALITY MONITORING PLAN BLACK RIVER PUMP STATION SEDIMENT REMOVAL PROJECT King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division Note: Some pages in this document have been purposely skipped or blank pages inserted so that this document will copy correctly when duplexed. WATER QUALITY MONITORING PLAN BLACK RIVER PUMP STATION SEDIMENT REMOVAL PROJECT Prepared for ~ King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division King Street Center -DNRP 201 South Jackson Street, Room 700 Seattle, Washington 98104-3855 by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1100 Seattle, Washington 98121 Telephone: 206.441.9080 February 2, 2015 Prepared by: Peter Jowise, Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. For comments or questions contact: Peter Jowise, 206.441.9080, ext. 8220 Alternate Formats Available 206.296.7380 TTY Relay: 711 CONTENTS 1. Introduction ........................................................................................... 1 1 .1. Purpose. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4 1.2. Prqject Description .............................................................................. 5 2. Monitoring Plan ........................................................................................ 7 2.1. Monitoring Strategy .............................................................................. 7 2.2. Applicable and Relevant Water Quality Standards .......................................... 8 2.2.1. Points of Compliance................................... .. ........................ 8 2.2.2. Specific Criteria ...................................... .. ............................ 8 2.3. Water Quality Monitoring Locations ............................. .. .. ....................... 9 3. Water Quality Monitoring Procedures ............................................................. 11 3.1. Sampling Methods ............................................................................... 11 3.2. Water Quality Monitoring Feedback and Response ......................................... 11 3.3. Documentation .................................................................................. 12 ApPENDICES Appendix A Field Form: Daily Water Quality Monitoring Data .HERRERA TABLES Daily Water Quality Monitoring Data Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Proj ect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ...... A-1 FIGURES Figure 1. Prqject Vicinity Map for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Prqject, Renton, Washington ................................................................. 2 Figure 2. Black River Pump Station Site Map, Renton, Washington ................................ 3 Figure 3. Compliance Areas at the Black River Pump Station Site Map, Renton, Washington ..................................................................................... 10 @tHERRERA P.I 1O-0~766-065 wqmp brp' ,edltl1enr "-m:w~1 ~r(lJecl due. I I I I I I I I I I I I This Water Quality Monitoring Plan (WQMP) was prepared to describe monitoring requirements during removal of sediment from the Black River, located in Renton, Washington. The King County Water and Land Resources Division (KCWLRD) operates the Black River Pump Station (BRPS) to provide flood control protection for the lower Green River Valley. The BRPS is situated on the Black River about 1,700 feet upstream from its confluence with the Green River (Figure 1). The Black River historically was part of the Cedar River drainage system, but currently is considered the downstream reach of Springbrook Creek, which has an estimated mainstem length of 12 miles, draining approximately 15,763 acres (24.7 square miles). The pump station consists of a concrete dam that spans the Black River channel, with eight pumps to convey flow from the fore bay behind the dam to the downstream Black River channel. Plant pumps can handle Black River flow up to an estimated 2,945 cubic feet per second (cfs) capacity, which exceeds a 1 percent flood condition. In order to protect properties downstream, the station is not run at full capacity when the Green River is near levee capacity; excess inflow is held in r:hannel storage behind the dam. Flood control is accomplished by starting the large pumps at an early stage of a storm. During normal, non- storm flow conditions, only pump P-l is used to regulate discharge past the dam, typically cycling on and off for a few hours a day (using an automated stage control system). Fish migration facilities are also included for upstream and downstream fish passage around the pump station. Construction will be conducted during the July and August fish window when fish passage facilities are not run. The dam is designed to prevent Green River backflow into the Black River and its tributaries; it has freeboard over best available estimates of 1 percent annual exceedance flood conditions on the Green. All flow past the dam is pumped toward the Green. Water levels downstream of the dam range from -4.0 to +21.5 feet mean sea level (MSL). depending on tidal conditions and water level of the Green River. Water surface elevations upstream of the dam are normally held in the range of 0.0 to +2.0 feet MSL. Flow rates below the dam are not measured, but vary at any particular time based on a combination of BRPS pumping, Green River flow, and tidal fluctuation. As such, it is difficult to predict the flow rate of water moving from the dam toward the Green River at any pOint in time. The monthly average flow rates measured at a stream gauge located on Springbrook Creek approximately 1 mile upstream of the BRPS for July and August over 4 years of available records are 13.1 and 7.8 cfs, respectively. Sediment that has accumulated upstream of the pump station since its construction in the 1970s is now an operational concern for the facility. The KCWLRD proposes to remove about 2,900 cubic yards of sediment from the river channel, extending about 100 feet upstream of the pump station (Figure 2). The sediment removal area includes a concrete forebay apron (an approximately l-foot-thick concrete slab covering the 165-foot width between the pump station retaining walls and extending 75 feet upstream of the pumping bays). the narrow area between the dam trash grates and pump bays, and east (upstream) of the apron up to existing grade. The thickness of sediment to be removed varies from 7.0 to 15.5 feet. Sediment will be removed by dewatering the work area behind a cofferdam and excavating directly from the riverbed. February 2015 Water Quality Monitoring Plan-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal PrQJect '-3· ~~i';; _ .. t, ., ~ ~ " ~; ;., "',''''', , ,~. '1 ,~ ~- 1. i\: ':.. -~ . z lh'. ,~ 1 t, Jf' 1. '*' "'-:" ,,' "'\', : .. ~ ',-' ,.", \ ~ , ;}?, ~, , , '1iJ ') ~ .. --.. "I~"I--"'- ~ ,Pump Station 'Jlili1i8~ MONSTER RD SW --, "J, '·~i- ,( ~ ~ ffi Iii z o ~ I Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe. GeoEye, i-cubed, Earthstar Geographies, :ISNES/Airbus OS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, the GIS User Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project, Renton, Washington. Legend -+-Railroad BR!T!SH COLUMBIA .B~lIlngh~m • M~un' Vernon .PortAngel~s ,Da'rlne;l,<>n • ForK. .E,eren _ .In~e~. Bremerlon • Sealile Lea.en\Oort~. • Shelton .T3OJm~ Cle Eltfm OC~3n Sn<>le~ • Ol~mpl" • . * WASHIN,GTON • Chehallo; N @ o 200 400 800 _ _ Feet ~ HERRERA ESRI. A~rial 12011) Legend Area of sediment removal Pump Station discharge point Figure 2. Black River Pump Station Site Map, Renton, Washington. N @ 50 100 200 _-==_-=:::J ______ Feet o lclI HERRERA Bing. l\eri<ll i20141 Analytical test results on sediment samples indicate arsenic, cadmium, and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) concentrations that exceed the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) Method A or B cleanup levels for unrestricted land use (WAC 173-340). In addition, sediment exceeds freshwater sediment quality criteria (WAC 173-204) for TPH, bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, total polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), arsenic, cadmium, and nickel. As a result, the removal method will include provisions to control the release of contaminated sediment. 1.1. Pu rpose The purpose of this WQMP is to: • Provide a methodology for assessment of impacts to surface water that may result from in-water activities. • Define the protocol for providing real-time feedback to the contractor so that all construction activities remain in compliance with water quality criteria. The WQMP describes protocols for routine monitoring, with both specific and general procedures identified for corrective actions. It is important that the user conduct additional monitoring to demonstrate that corrective actions have been successful, as necessary. Any non-routine, additional monitoring shall be documented in field notebooks and/or field data sheets. The oQjectives of this plan are to: • Define the process for monitoring water quality during in-water construction activities including: o Installation and removal of temporary flow diversion structures and equipment. o Isolation of the dredge area within the Black River channel. • Provide a methodology to: o Verify that water quality conditions are within the limits specified in all applicable state and federal laws and permits. o Identify whether water quality problems are occurring as a result of in-water prqject activities. • Assist field monitors in the determination of when to modify in-water act ivies to ensure protection of the environment if exceedances of water quality criteria occur. • Define communication and response protocol in the event of an exceedance of water quality criteria. This WQMP is specific to in-water activities; control of upland water discharges will be addressed by separate plans. The contractor will be required to conduct all operations in compl iance with these performance standards . • HERRERA 4 February 2015 Water Quality Monitoring Plan-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal PrQject There are three construction elements that have the potential to affect Black River water quality: • Isolating the in-water work area with turbidity curtains, temporary flow diversion structures, or other best management practices (BMPs). • Dredging sediment and stockpiling it acjjacent to the river. • Removing in-water BMPs. Excavation will involve isolating the sediment removal area from the river by constructing a temporary flow diversion structure (e.g., cofferdam) spanning the entire width of the river, installing temporary pumps and piping to divert the river, and dewatering the sediment removal area. The work area will be partially dewatered using the pump station pumps until water levels are too low or turbidity levels are too high, at which point portable pumps will be used to remove the remaining water. Sediment will then be dredged using conventional excavation equipment placed into the dewatered area between the cofferdam and existing pump station structure by a crane. During excavation, portable pumps will remain on-site to remove water that may seep past the cofferdam. Water will be pumped downstream of the pump station, unless it is too turbid to meet State water quality standards. If the pumped water is too turbid, it will be pumped directly to the on-site facility used to treat decant water. River flow past the dam will be controlled by regulating pump rates, as well as relying on the ability of the cofferdam to hold water in the upstream storage basin. Hydraulic dredging (using suction pumps to remove sediment and entrained water) may also be used to remove sediments within the pump bay area behind the trash racks due to difficulty accessing that area. February 2015 .HERRERA Water Quality Monitoring Plan-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 5 The dredging design aims to limit the potential for release of contaminated water into the environment. PrQject components and associated BMPs are designed to ensure that the m'!.i0rity of the in-water activities will not disturb submerged sediment or the water column. The primary activities expected to disturb sediment, in work order, include: • Installation of turbidity curtains upstream of the contractor-installed river bypass structure and downstream of the BRPS dam • Installation and operation of the upstream river bypass system (vault, channel modification, pumps, and pipe) • Installation of the cofferdam • Dewatering of the work area between the BRPS dam and the cofferdam • Ongoing dewatering of seepage in the work area • Allowing water to re-enter the work area following sediment removal • Remova I of the cofferdam • Removal of the river flow bypass system • Removal of turbidity curtains Once the river bypass system is operating, most of the river flow will not reach the work area. With the bypass intake positioned far enough upstream of the work, any highly turbid water associated with seepage into the dredging area can either bejudiciously mixed with bypass river water or diverted to the upland treatment system associated with sediment dewatering. The bypass system will be operated to minimize entrainment of sediment. Black River water upstream of the work area has a potential to be impacted by the work only when the river is backed up behind the dam. The monitoring plan outlined below will be tailored to the operating conditions in play at any particular time. River flow conditions, regulated either by the BRPS pumps or the bypass system operations, will be documented for each monitoring event such that the proper upstream or downstream point of compliance is addressed. Water quality monitoring of temperature, dissolved oxygen (DO), turbidity, and pH will take place during in-water activities, as described below. Field monitoring will occur at least twice daily during in-water activities. If the work day is longer than 8 hours, monitoring will occur at least once every 4 hours. F~b~u~y}O_15_ Water Quality MonitOring Plan-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Prqject ~HERRERA 7 ? ') c.L. Applicable anlj HC!evilllt Water Quality StandEmis During construction, water quality criteria as defined within WAC 173-201A needs to be attained at specified points of compliance. ~'2' j' L ... p()/!1t,~ uf (omp/ld/lce Based on typical summer flows of around 10 cfs, the points of compliance will be conservatively set at a distance of 100 feet, per WAC 173-201A-200. The specific upstream or downstream point of compliance location will depend on the control of flow during performance of the specific activity: • When pumping water past the dam, the pOint of compliance will be 100 feet downstream of the discharge point. • When no pumping takes place, the point of compliance will be 100 feet upstream of the work being conducted (e.g., river bypass system, cofferdam). which defines the work boundary. The only exception to this will apply to installation and removal of BMP features (e.g., turbidity curtains) either downstream of the pump station or upstream of the bypass system, when the point of compliance will be extended 100 feet from these activities. 2.2.2. Specific Criteria Specific criteria are based on the Aquatic Life Use designation of Salmonid Spawning, Rearing, and Migration for the Black River (WAC 173-201A-602). Criteria associated with this designation are specified in WAC 173-201A-200 and summarized in the following sections. 2.2.2.1. Temperature At the pOint of compliance, the highest 7-day average of the daily maximum temperatures (7-DADMax) shall be 17.5 degrees Celsius (OC). If the background temperature exceeds the criterion (or is within 0.3 °C of the criterion) due to natural conditions, then human actions may not cause the 7-DADMax temperature to increase more than 0.3 °C (0.54 OF). If the background temperature is cooler than the criterion, the allowable rate of warming up to, but not exceeding, the numeric criterion from the project is restricted to: • Incremental temperature increases resulting from construction activities must not, at any time, exceed 28/(T+7) as measured at the edge of a mixing zone boundary (where ''1'' represents the background temperature in 0c) • Incremental temperature increases resulting from the combined effect of all nonpoint source activities in the water body must not, at any time, exceed 2.8 °C. The incremental temperature increase is measured as the difference between background and downstream point of compliance conditions. Background temperature measurements should be taken from well-mixed portions of rivers and streams to represent the dominant aquatic habitat of the area. Samples should not be taken from shallow stagnant backwater areas, within isolated thermal refuses, at the surface, or at the water's edge. ~HERRERA ---- 8 Water Quality Monitoring Plan-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal PrQject ?? D, scli Oil At the p oint of co mplianc e, DO shall excee d the sta nd ard of 8.0 milligrams per liter (mg /L). If ba ckground DO is lower than t his criterion (or with in 0.2 mg /L of th e criterion) due to natura l conditions , th en th e background condition minu s 0 .2 mg /L w ill r eplace the criterion. Turbidity sha ll not e xc ee d 5 neph e lometric turbidity units (NTU) above backg ro und when b ac kground turbidity is 50 NTU or l ess. If background turbidity is gr eater th an 50 NTU , turbidity shall not be increase d more than 10 per ce nt above background . ? 224. pH At the point of co mplianc e, pH mu st be w ithin the range of 6.5 to 8 .5 with a human-ca use d variation within the above rang e of l ess than 0.5 units (b etwee n background and down strea m point of compliance cond itions). 2,3, Water Quality Monitoring Locations Monitoring location s includ e complian ce point sites and a background site that ar e mon itored on a daily ba sis during const ru ction activiti es. Appro x imate monitoring locations ar e shown on Figur e 3 and wi II in c lud e th e following sites: • Background (BG) -along a tran sec t located approximate 200 feet up strea m from the river bypass st ructure and down stream of th e last tributary to th e Bl ac k River , Springbrook Creek (shown in Figur e 3 as r e lative to th e BRPS dam ). Samp les w ill be collected for monitoring from a de pth of 0.5 met er from th e surfa ce during in-water constru c ti on activ it ies. If total depth of water is less than 1 .5 meter s, sa mpl es w ill be coll ec t ed f rom mid -depth . • Downstream Dam (DO) -along a tran se ct lo ca t ed 100 feet downstream of the pump discharg e location (shown in Figur e 3 as r e l ative to th e BRPS dam). Samp les wil l be co ll ec t ed fo r monitoring from a depth of 0.5 met e r from th e surface and from 1 meter above th e riv er bottom when water is b e ing discharged be low th e dam . If total depth of water is less than 1 .5 meters, sa mpl es w ill be co ll ec t e d from mid-d epth . • Upstream Dam (UD) -along a tran sect located 100 f eet upstream of th e in-water work at any part i cular tim e , which will vary betwee n the turbidity curtain, riv er bypass structure, and cofferd am (shown in Figur e 3 as r e lative to an es timat ed co fferd am lo cation). Samp les wi ll be coll ec ted for monitoring from a dep th of 0 .5 meter from th e surface during insta ll ation and removal of t he structure. If total depth of w at er is less than 1 .5 meters, sa mpl es will be coll ec ted from mid-d epth. • Continuous Turbidity Monitoring -both dewater ing dis charg e and river bypass discharg e water will b e cont inu ously monitored , with data reco rded at 10-minute interva ls (if both flow s are combined , only one meter is neces sary). These data wi ll be used to d et e rmine effec tiven ess of th e trea tm ent syst em and wheth er t he bypass syst e m i s entraining se diment , indicating th e nee d to alter op eration s. Al so, du e to the complicat ed flow r egim e below th e BRPS dam , turbidity may be naturally elevate d down str ea m of th e DO location . Di sc harg e turbidity m eas ur ements ca n be used to demonstrate th at up stream work ac tiviti es ar e ei ther not r es pon sibl e for th e ex cee dance or that work activiti es n ee d to b e changed to ac hieve compliance . February 2015 ~ HERRERA Wat e r Quality Monitoring Plan-Blflck Riv er Pump Station Sediment RemOVal Project 9 Legend [Z2] Are a of sediment removal • Pump Station discharge point Point of compliance -downstrea m (a pproxi m a te ) Point of compliance -upstream (a pproximate) Ba ckground Note: Actual points of co mpliance to be determined by specific activity Figure 3. Compliance Areas at the Black River Pump Station Site Map , Renton , Washington. N @ 50 10 0 200 _-== __ =:itit _____ ilFeet o 8 HERRERA Bing. Aeria l (20141 ~ "" __ •• v 20 'O"(I.O<'_ ..... o<r' ..... ' .. _Q"" ..... _ ... """""II _ .... "'""".Io<>ooo_.'.n ..," I! '2:1':101') Water quality monitoring involves field measurement of the conventional parameters turbidity, DO, pH, and temperature. Field monitoring at compliance and background locations will occur at regular intervals (i.e., a minimum of every 4 hours) throughout the in-water work period. Readings at each sample location will be taken at two depths: 0.5 meter below the surface and from 1 meter above the river bottom. For comparison of background to compliance sites, the deeper readings will be compared between sites, and the shallower readings will be compared between sites. 3.1. Sampling Methods Field monitoring will be conducted with handheld water quality instruments, such as a multimeter, that measure all parameters or a combination of meters that measure individual parameters. Readings may be made in situ by lowering the meter probe to the desired depth, or may be taken from samples collected using a water sampler, such as a Van Dorn bottle. The readings will be recorded on field data sheets or in the field log book. The handheld water quality probe will be calibrated daily pursuant to the manufacturer's guidelines, and calibration data will be recorded in a field data sheet or in the field log book. The monitoring locations will be accessed using a vessel at the deepest part of the river channel, determined by sounding or using a depth finder (locations indicated in Figure 3 are representative transects along which the deepest point should be found, depending on the specific location of in-water work being performed). The meter probe will be allowed to stabilize prior to recording the readings. Monitoring will be conducted at upstream (BG) to downstream (UD or DD) locations sequentially, within as short a time as possible. 3.2. Water Quality Monitoring Feedback and Response If field measurements exceed applicable criteria, in-water work will be halted or slowed, and the Resident Engineer (RE) will be notified. At the discretion of the RE, work practices will be adjusted, and the source will be investigated. Once a suspected cause has been identified, alterations to the work methods have been made, and any turbidity plumes associated with the in-water work have dissipated, in-water activities may resume and return to a normal working pace. Field monitoring will be repeated within 1 hour from the time the modified activities begin. If the results of this monitoring show compliance, monitoring will continue at the 4-hour minimum frequency. If the results again show non-compliance, in-water activities will be halted and the RE will determine the appropriate actions. Reporting requirements to Ecology will be established in the 401 Water Quality Certification. Fe,brua,~Y_ 2015 Water Quality Monitoring Plan-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Prqject ~HERRERA 11 Appendix A provides a field form to be used each day to document monitoring results. Entries shall be made for both shallow and deep measurements at each location. If water depth is less than 1 meter, only one sample will be collected. Daily reports shall be submitted to the RE each day for both point of compliance monitoring and continuous turbidity monitoring . • HERRERA 12 ... --------February ~~_~~ Water Quality Monitoring Plan-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Prqject .HERRERA APPENDIX A Field Form: Daily Water Quality Monitoring Data ------ Daily Water Quality Monitoring Data Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Prqject Date: ---r----------------- Dissolved I I I Station-Turbidity Temperature Oxygen Time depth (NTU) ('e) (mg/L) pH I Notes BG-S BG-O ----- OO-S 00-0 - UO-S UD-O BG -DO or UO' i , BG-S _. -- BG-O OO-S 00-0 UO-S Uo-o - BG -DO or UO' BG-S BG-O OO-S --; 00-0 UO-S UO-O BG -DO or UO' BG-S BG-O .--" I OO-S -- 00-0 UO-S UO-O BG -DO or UO' Use shallow (S) deSignation and not the deep (0) deSignatIOn for Single mOnitoring depth, If necessary. *Compare to criteria in Section 2.2. ., ~ 'c ---- -, .. - --- Fcbr~~~12015_ .HERRERA Water Quality Monitoring Plan-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project A-l ·1· .. ;,' ':', t, . .-, I Cultural Resources Report· , . , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I King County Historic Preservation Program Cultural Resources Review Project Name: Black River Pump Station Forebay Sediment Removal Project No.: 1120590 Task No.: g Award No.: 114194 Date Requested: 2/7/14 Reviewer(s): Philippe LeTourneau, Charlie Sundberg Review Date: 4/3/14 (revised 8/5/14) Federal Undertaking? Yes -USACE permit Department/Division/Section: DNRPIWLRD/RFMS Contact: Erik Peters Project Location Street Address: 1110 Monster Road SW, Renton, WA 98055. Parcels: 3779200119, 3779200090. Summary Project Description King County WLRD plans to dredge in the concrete-lined fore bay of the Black River Pump Station and adjacent concrete-lined river channel (dredging area) to remove accumulated sediment since the channel was constructed in the early 1970s. Dredged sediments will be dewatered and processed in a just-over-l-acre area north and adjacent to the pump station (dewatering area). The dewatering area will be disturbed for site preparation (including grading and tree removal and grubbing) and restoration to a depth of less than 2 feet. King County HPP reviewed the Black River Pump Station Fuel Upgrades Project in parcel 3779200090 in March 2013. Ground disturbance for the project was 18 m southwest of the current project's dredging area. Because all ground disturbance for that project was within artificial fill, we recommended that no archaeological work was necessary prior to construction. Known Cultural Resources Within or Adjacent to Area of Potential Effects (APE) I8:l Historic Res. Inventory: South Water Treatment Plant (3056), 230 m to S, will not be affected. None in APE. I8:l Other Above-Ground Historic Resources: The Black River Pump Station was constructed in the early 1970s, but does not appear to be individually eligible for National Register listing. I8:l Archaeological Sites: One historic site (45KI538) 15 m, two prehistoric sites (45K1267, 45K1438) 480 m; none in APE. o Burke Museum Reported Sites: None. I8:l Ethnographic Places: Village site (7047) 120 m, three geographic features with ethnographic names (7048, 7160, 7161) 65-250 m, mythological place (7049) 355 m; none in APE. I8:l GLO Map (1862, 1863) Features: The APE is in the C. E. Brownell Donation Land Claim. o Other DAHP Sites (cemeteries, etc.): None. Information from Historic Maps, Aerial Photographs, Other Sources: The APE has been logged at least once: the 1897 Tacoma Land Classification Map shows the APE as "Cut. .. not restocking". According to WLRD, the pump station, its concrete-lined forebay and channel, and excavation of a new river channel was completed in the early 1970s. Comparison of 1969 engineering drawings for construction of the pump station and 2012 drawings for the current project shows that 8.5-16.5 It of artificial fill was placed in the current dewatering area as part of pump station construction. The 1969 drawings show existing elevations of 12-14 It and planned 1 King County Historic Preservation Program Cultural Resources Review elevations of 20-25 It; planned fill thickness was 4-13 ft. The 2012 drawings show existing elevations of 24.5-28.5 ft in the dewatering area (alter subtracting 3.5 It to reflect a post-1969 vertical datum shift so that the measurements are comparable). Comments: No known above-ground properties listed in or eligible for local, state or national registers are in or adjacent to the APE. Cultural Resources Surveys Within or Adjacent to Project Area; Fernandez 2011 (1681527) excavated one shovel probe adjacent to north side of dewatering area: fill to at least 52 cm (1.7 It), historic materials of unknown age. Gilpin & Dellert (2010) (no NADB) excavated one shovel probe in southeastern corner of dewatering area: 40 cm (1.3 It) of fill above 90 cm (3 It) of intact alluvial sediments with clam and mussel shell and burned wood, no definite cultural materials. Given that 8.5-16.5 feet of fill was placed in the dewatering area as part of pump station construction, Gilpin & Dellert's identification of intact sediments must be incorrect. According to WLRD, the sediments that Gilpin and Dellert identified as intact were probably dredged from the Black River channel and placed in the dewatering area, DAHP GIS Predictive Model Classification: Very High Risk. Environmental Conditions Landform: Holocene alluvium on floodplain Distance to Water: 0-70 m Water Source: Black River Slope: < 1 % Information from historic maps, aerial photos, other sources: Historic maps (1862, 1863, 1907) and aerial photographs (1936, 1940) show the Black R. channel farther south than it is today. Comments: None. King County CRPP GIS Model Classification: High Probability of archaeological resources in dewatering area, Low Probability of intact archaeological resources, Low Probability of archaeological resources in dredging area. Comments: The dewatering area has a High Probability of containing archaeological sites based on environmental and other factors. but it has a Low Probability of containing intact archaeological resources because project-related ground disturbance will be entirely within artificial fill. The dredging area has a Low Probability of containing archaeological sites because all dredging will be within concrete-lined areas. Recommendations o No action 0 Arch, Survey 0 Arch. Monitoring 0 DAHP Excavation Permit I:8l Other Comments: Work crews should be familiar with the KCHPP's Archaeological Resources in King County so that they can recognize archaeological materials and will understand and follow proper procedures should archaeological materials or human remains be found during the project. WLRD should contact interested Indian Tribes as early as possible in project planning to inquire about concerns and information they may have about cultural resources in the APE and should keep them updated as to upcoming project activities, NOTE: This information is confidential and must not be released to the public. Site locations must be summarized without specific details in ECls and other public documents_ Confidentiality of archaeological site information is protected under RCW 42.56.300. 2 'I: ., y' I iologicalEvaluatlon I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ I King County If.iiif.iI ~ US Army Corps of Engineers 1\ Seattle District BIOLOGICAL EV ALUA TION FOR INFORMAL ESA CONSULTATION For: Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project (Corps Reference Number) Version: May 2012 e,,': ~. I / ** This form is for projects that have insignijiL"ant or discountable impacts on listed species. It contains all the information required for a biological evaluation, but in abbreviated form and with minimal instructions on how to fill it out. For more detailed instructions, a format for development of a biological assessment or biological evaluation can befound on the Seattle District Corps website (www.nws.usace.army.mil-dick on regulatory and then on endangered species, BA Template). You may also contact the Corps at 106-764-3495 for further information. Drawings and Photographs -Drawings and photographs must be submitted. Photographs must be submitted showing local area, shoreline conditions, existing overwater structures, and location of the proposed project. Drawings must include a vicinity map; plan, profile, and cross-section drawings ofthe proposed structures; and over-and in-water structures on adjacent properties. (For assistance with the preparation of the drawings, please refer to our Drawing Checklist located on our website at www.nws,usace.army.mil Select Regulatory -Regulatory/Permits -Forms.) Submit the information to: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch, P.O. Box 3755, Seattle, Washington 98124-3755. Date' Februarv 5 2015 , SECTION A -General Information J. Applicant name: Tom Bean, King County Water and Land Resources Division Mailing address: 201 S Jackson St., Rm 600, Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Work phone: Cell phone: Email: Fax: 206-477-4638 206-979-8270 tom. bean@kingcounty.gov 206-205-5134 2. Joint-use applicant name (if applicable): Mailing address: Work phone: Home phone: Email: Fax: 3. Authorized agent name: George Ritchotte, Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. Mailing address: 2200 6th Avenue, Suite 1100, Seattle W A 98121 Work phone: Cell phone: Email: Fax: (206) 787-8288 206-356-0511 gri tc h otte(j"iJ hcrrcrainc. com (206) 441-9108 4. Location where proposed work will occur: Address (street address, city, county): 550 Monster Rd, Renton, King County, W A Parcel # 377920-0090 Location of joint-use property (street address, city, county): same as above Waterbody: Black River, tributary to the Green River (WRIA 9; HUC 171100130001) 1. Section: SW Section: 13 Township: 23N Range: 4E Latitude: 47"28'3J.34"N Longitude: I22°14'41.39"W 2 5. Description of Work Project Overview and Background The King County Water and Land Resources Division (KCWLRD) operates the Black River Pump Station (BRPS) to provide flood control protection for the lower Green River Valley. The BRPS is located about 2 miles west-southwest of Renton, Washington, on the Black River about 1,700 feet upstream from its confluence with the Green River (Figure I). The pump station consists of a concrete dam that spans the Black River channel, with eight pumps to convey flow from the forebay behind the dam to the downstream Black River channel. Plant pumps can handle Black River flow up to an estimated 2,945 cubic feet per second (cfs) capacity, which exceeds a I percent flood condition. In order to protect properties downstream, the station is not run at full capacity when the river is near levee capacity; excess inflow is held in channel storage behind the dam. Flood control is accomplished by starting the large pumps at an early stage of a storm. During normal, non-storm flow conditions, only pump P-I is used to regulate discharge past the dam, typically cycling on and off for a few hours a day (using an automated stage control system). Fish migration facilities are also included for upstream and downstream fish passage. Sediment that has accumulated upstream of the pump station since its construction in the 1970s is now an operational concern for the facility. The KCWLRD proposes to remove about 2,900 cubic yards of sediment from the river channel, extending about 100 feet upstream of the pump station. The sediment removal area includes a concrete forebay apron (an approximately l-foot- thick concrete slab covering the 165-foot width between the pump station retaining walls and extending 75 feet upstream of the pumping bays), the narrow area between the dam trash grates and pump bays, and east (upstream) of the apron up to existing grade (Figure 2). The depth of sediment to be removed varies from 7.0 to 15.5 feet. Sediment will be removed by dewatering the work area and excavating directly from the riverbed. Analytical test results on sediment samples indicate arsenic, cadmium, and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) concentrations that exceed the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) Method A or B cleanup levels for unrestricted land use. In addition, sediment exceeds freshwater sediment quality criteria for TPH, bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), arsenic, cadmium, and nickel. As a result, the removal method will include provisions to control the release of contaminated sediment. Project Description Project construction would entail: • Staging and site preparation, which will include constructing a sediment stockpiling, decant and treatment area and crane pad • Mobilizing equipment in the work area • Isolating the in-water work area with turbidity curtains, a cofferdam, temporary flow diversion structures, or other best management practices (BMPs) • Placing sediment removal equipment in the work area using the crane • Removing and stockpiling sediment adjacent to the river • Decanting stockpiled sediment and treating the wastewater • Removing in-water BMPs • Hauling sediment off-site • Restoring and replanting the staging area Prior to drcdging , a stag in g and sed im ent stockpiling , decant, a nd water trea tm ent arca will be constructed on t he so uth si d e of th e river. Th e stag in g area will includ e a crane pad to su pport a crane that williiti a nd remove equipment into and from th e rivcrbed. Sedimcnt will be re mo ved by d ewatercd m ec hanic al excavat ion , which wil l in vo lve isola ting the se dim ent remova l area fro m the river by construct ing a temporary flow dive rs ion s tru ct ur e (e.g., cofferdam) spanning th e cntire width of the river, in sta lling tcmporary pumps and piping to divert the ri ve r, and dewaterin g th e se diment re mo va l a rea (F igurc 3). In stallation of a flow divers ion structure will not require imp act dri ving. The work area wil l be part ia ll y dewate red u si ng the pump st ati on pumps un til water level s are too low or turbidit y leve ls a re too hi gh, at w h ich point portable pumps wi ll be use d to re mo ve the remaining water. Pum ps w ill remai n on sit e during excava tion to remo ve water thut may seep past the cofferdam. Water will be pumped down s t ream of th e pump s tation , unl ess it is too turbid to m ee t Water Qua lity Standa rds for S urface Wate rs of th e State of Washington, in whic h case it wi ll be pumped directly to th e on-s it e decant facility for treatment prior to being di scharged back into th e Black River. Fi s h w ill be removed f rom the in-wat er work zone prior to and du ring dewatering using a co mbination of seine and dip nett in g. Electrofishing may also be used aftc r other fish remova l m etho d s have removed mo st of the adult and sub-a dult fish in the work area. Any portab le pumps used to d ewater th e area wi ll be fitted with scree n s to prevent ti sh from being s ucked into t he pumps per RCW 77.57.070. Nets w ill b c composed of non-abrasive nylon material. Fis h handling will be kept to the m ini mum necessa ry to remo ve fish from the area . Electrofishing wi ll be con ducted. Fis h ca pture a nd remova l will be conducted by a qua lifi ed biologist. Sediment will be removed from the riverbed using co nve ntional exca va tion eq uipme nt such as clamshell buckets or backhoes, and stockpiled in the dewatering area. Wat e r that drain s from th e sedim cnt will be conta in ed an d treated prior to b e ing di scharged back into the Black Ri ver. Water wi ll b e te st e d p rior to di sc harge; if it d oes not meet s urface water qu a li ty crit e ria , it w ill be di scharged to the sa nitary sewer system or hauled ot1~site for di sposa l. Dewatered se diment w ill be hau led ofT-s it e for disposal a t a faci l ity approved to accept suc h wastc. Hydra ul ic dredging (us ing s uction pumps to remove sedi ment and e ntrained water) may a lso be used to remove se dime nt s within the pump bay area behind t he tra s h racks d ue to difficulty accessing t hat area. Once drcdging is co mp lete a san d cap approximately I ft t hi ck wil l be placed over the dredged area to minimize the po ten tial for sedi ment mobilization when the area is rewatered. Project Impacts Staging area constructio n wi ll te mporaril y fill about R,632 square feet of s t ream and/or wetland buffer o n the sou th si de of th e river. The buffer is primaril y di st urb ed up land adjacent to the parking lot pump s tation . Kentucky bluegra ss (Pu" prate llsis) is the domi nant species in th e buffer, con taining one s ho re pi ne (Pill us camano), which is 15 inches diameter a t breast heig ht (dbh); two s mall (2 -inch dbh) Doug las -tirs (Pseudatsuga menziesii); and seve ral sma ll (2-to 4- inch dbh) red a ld ers (A hill s rubra).The bypass pipe alignment cou ld c lcar as much as 13 ,7 57 square feet of non-native herbaceous vege tat ion in st ream and wetland buffer on the north side of th e ri ver. .1 Legend Y-";~~~==:;;--I Figure 1. D Approximate staging .""""IM'" area • Mo unt .... "'oll o In-water extent of action area (downstream) ,F0"" o In·water extent of ---~--' action area (upstream) ,---. '-__ I Terrestrial extent of action area ,Oc •• nSho -+--Railroad PACIFIC---r-L_ ~-'';''''~-\ OCEAN IY"" Project Vicinity Map and Action Area for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project, Renton , Washington. N @ 200 400 800 .-== __ ==-••••• 11 Feet o ~HERRERA ESRI . Ae ri al (20U) K ,py","",.,V~lD1I[)'OllM-Ola""'Io<rll'~L ."_"""~""''''''' __ '''' _e" ... M., 1'(1 '20'51 / / / I 1 1 1 xx~ o o Temporary Cofferdam Location (Offset ~20' from Dredge I I I Relocated Floating Boom \ r 2,878.42 CY OF SEDIMENT (MUCK) REMOVAL (IN PlA.CE VOLUME) _~_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (I SiitC \urtain ::: 0; "--0'- 0, r "--c..:: --------------~~~----) , ' ' TURS ' \, "N I 'I 0: ' ... / ( " \' Co \1 TYPE It IL ~ I . _-\ 0: __ .. .( 4 '- ~\ ' >-~--,() . 2 ---, ( 'w 3~ ~ Oz ~~ .~~ / / « <t;. -I o ~U)~~ fd \~ / o o o ~/~(1) (I) ~~g~::E i: ~I----- '<::X 'J (/) (2) :cw~~~-----·T--"_+.---- \ '-, ------. ) <-a.. 0 0 ;-,O------J---~~(.3)-(.3 ~«t-()iii .. - P-8 514 cIs P-7 : 514 cfs I ~j P-6 cIs rp~1 : ,75cfsj '--- , . / / / / / / / / / / / / / ( 0 .0 ,/ ,/ ,/ La Red values indicate depth of sediment in feet Figure 2. Forebay sediment removal components / / / / / I 0/ I ,...-Decant, Stockpile. I / and Staging Area // , / '" . I ! , Ii I! , I 0 II I I II 15 0 15 30 45 SCALE IN FEEl SURVEY NOTES: 1. DATUM: HORIZONTAL DATUM: WASHINGTON STATE COORDINATE SYSTEM. NAD 8.3/91, NORTH ZONE PER GPS TIES TO WSRN. VERTICAL DATUM: NAVDB8 PER GPS TIES TO WSRN. 2. GPS CONTROL: (LOCATIONS NOT SHOWN ON MAP) PMX #9001 FOUND 1 3/4~ BRASS DISK WITH PUNCH MARK IN CASE. CENTERLINE PC MONUMENT IN MONSTER RD. EAST OF THE BlA.CK RIVER BRIDGE. N 176345.687 E 1290905.012 ELEV. 25.59 PMX #9002 FOUND LEAD AND TACK IN NW. CORNER BLACK RIVER BRIDGE FOR MONSTER RD. N 176477.487 E 1290501.985 ELEV. 34.95 3. PROJECT CONTROL; (SHOWN ON MAP) PMX #9100 SET 5/8 H REBAR WITH RED PlA.STIC CAP STAMPED PMX CONTROL IN GRAVEL AT WEST SIDE OF EASTERLY ASPHALT DRIVEWAY TO BLACK RIVER PUMP STATION. CONTROL POINT IS LOCATED 15.7' SOUTHWEST OF THE NW. CORNER OF THE DRIVEWAY AND 9.4' NORTH OF THE BACK FLOW PREVENTOR HOTBOX. N 176426.400 E 1291289.910 ELEV. 28.48 PMX #9103 SET 5/8H REBAR WITH RED PLASTIC CAP STAMPED PMX CONTROL IN STRAWED GRASSY AREA 12.8' NORTHEASTERLY OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE 6' CHAIN LINK FENCE CORNER AT THE LOG STOP STORAGE AREA. N 176780.122 E 1291317.724 ELEV. 28.14 4. METHOD: GPS CONTROL OBSERVATIONS USING TOPCON GPS. CONVENTIONAL TRAVERSE METHODS WITH LEICA TCRP1203 FOR SITE CONTROL AND TOPOGRAPHC SURVEY. BATHYMETRIC SURVEY BY TERRASOND. INC. PERFORMED ON MARCH 10, 201l. 5. THIS SURVEY IS A COMPIlA.TION OF SURVEY DATA BY PARAMETRIX, INC. AND TERRASOND. INC. B. ELEVATIONS SHOWN AT WATER LEVEL GAUGES DO NOT REPRESENT THE WATER LEVEL AT THE TIME OF THIS SURVEY. THE ELEVATIONS SHOW THE COMPARISON BETWEEN DATUMS. THIS SURVEY IS ON NAVD88 AND THE ELEVATION DIFFERENCE AVERAGES +3.55'. WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GAUGES BEING REFERENCED TO NGVD29 DATUM. CONSTRUCTION NOTES: 1. PROTECT PUMP STAn ON AND ASSOCIATED FEATURES DURING DREDGING OPERATIONS. 2. DEWATER SEDIMENT AS NECESSARY NORTH OF PUMP STATION. 3. MAINTAIN ACCESS TO PUMP STATION AT ALL TIMES . 7 Figure 3. Example Dewalered Mechanical Excavation . Avoidance and Minimizalion Measures o The project was red es igned 10 minimi ze impacts on w etlands , wetland a nd st ream buffe r s, and se n si ti ve wi ldli fe habitat. The s taging area was mo ve d fro m t he n o rth si d e of th e river to th e south s id e to a void impact s on Wetland D an d oth e r sens itiv e habitats . o In-wate r work will occur durin g th e app roved in-wa t er wo rk w indow (probab ly Jul y I to Aug ust 31). o BMPs, suc h as t urbidity c u rta in s a nd a flow di vers io n s tru cture, wi ll be imp le m e nt ed during constru c t io n to iso la te th e in -water wo rk area a nd control the s pread of turb idi ty a nd contaminate d s ediment s. o T he Cont rac tor wi ll d eve lop a nd imp le ment a Dredging an d Di sposa l Plan t hat will addre ss requ ireme nt s to meet wate r quality cri ter i a. o Once dre d g in g is complete a sa nd cap approx im ate ly I ft th ic k w ill be p laced ove r th e dredged area t o minimi ze the potential for sediment m ob il iza t ion w h e n t he a rea is rewatered. o All water removed from th e river durin g dre d ging or excavation a nd d eca nt ac ti v iti es will b e treated for turbidity and toxics before being di scharged into th e Bl ac k Ri ve r down s tream of th e pump s tati o n. Wate r w ill be tested prior to di sc ha rge: ifit d oes not m eet surfac e water quality cri teria , it w ill be di s po sed of ofT-s it e . o Sediments will b e di s posed of a t a n off-s it e facility permitted to accept the wa s te . o Imp ac ts on buffe r s w ill be minimized to the ex tent po ss ibl e . Temporary buffer impacts wi ll be res tored and re p lan ted pos t project. o A te mpora ry e ro s io n an d se diment control (TESC) plan w ill be imp lemented d uring c onstru c ti on to reduce th e pot e nt ia l for e rosion . o A n eng in eer-approved spill preve n t ion , contro l, an d countermeasure s (SpeC) plan w ill be impl e m ented to g uard aga in st the re le a se of any harmful pollutants o r product s. o Fi s h will be re mo ved from the in -wate r work zo ne prior to dredging . F is h handl in g will be minimi ze d to the ex te nt poss ibl e. Nets w ill be composed of non-abrasive m ate ri a ls. 8 6. Construction Techniques A. Construction sequencing and timing of each stage (duration and date s): C onstruction is schedu led to begin in s prin g of20 16 and will la st about 10 w eek s. Mobi li zat ion of e quipm e nt and sta g in g area construction will start in late May . If a ll the sediment cannot be re mo ve d one season. in·water work may resume in 20 17. In-wa te r wor k w ill take p lace during th e app ro ved in-w ater wo rk window of Jul y I to Augu st 3 1. B. Site Preparation: Site preparation wi ll cons ist of: • Flagging the construction limits • Placing hi gh-v is ihility fencin g aro und se ns itiv e areas that w ill not be cleared • In s tallin g TESC mea sures, as re quir ed by the appro ve d TESC plan • Flagging tr ees to be protected • Removing tree s as necessary to mobili ze equ ipment , as permitted by the construction plans a nd spec ifi cat ion s • G radin g and leveling th e stag in g area • In sta llin g the turbidity c urt ai n and temporary flow divers ion s tru ctu re C. Equipment to be Used: Eq ui pme nt will co ns ist of: • A flow di ve rs io n st ructure (e.g., cofferdam) • Turbidity c urtain s to control turbidity • P umps a nd piping • C ra ne a nd necessary s horin g • Excavator • Sediment tran sfer skid or container • Hy draulic dre dge • Sedime nt dewatering equipment • Water tr eatme nt system • Dump trucks H y draulic dred ges wo uld only be us e d within th e pump ba y where d e bri s screen and fi s h scree ns make acc ess w ith other tool s problematic. D. Construction Materials to be Used: Some of the major construction materials include: • Imp e rm eab le lin er and berm (s uch as E cology blocks) for the sed im ent s tockpi li ng and decant a re a • Co bble or grave l fo r the stag in g area and crane pad • Topso il a nd plant s for revegetating cleared areas 9 E. Work Corridor: The work corridor will be limited to the project footprint, which includes the staging area and in-water work area. Transportation of materials to and from the site will use existing state and local roads. F. Staging Areas and Equipment Wash Outs: A staging area will be constructed on the south bank of the Black River to accommodate materials prior to and during construction. The staging area will include a temporary crane pad to support the crane used to lift the excavator and barges into the water and sediment dewatering area (see Section G, below). The staging area will be revegetated post construction with appropriate native plants. G. Stockpiling Areas: The excavated sediment may contain up to 70 percent water by volume, requiring dewatering prior to disposal. A sediment stockpiling, decant, and water treatment area will be constructed south of the river, adjacent to the pump station parking lot. Construction will require ground leveling, laying down an impervious liner, and constructing a berm around the perimeter to contain the sediment and decant water. An additional area will likely be required for treatment of free water that drains by gravity from the sediment. Free water from the sediment stockpile will have relatively high turbidity and may have elevated levels of TPH and metals. Water will most likely be treated on site and discharged back to the Black River. Water will likely be treated through a combination of pumping and settling in tanks (with or without the use offlocculants), sand filtration to remove suspended solids, and possibly carbon filtration to remove the toxics, if needed. Drying agents may be used to speed the dewatering process. Drying agents will not be allowed to come into contact with Waters ofthe State. Any water discharged to the river will meet Ecology surface water quality criteria for turbidity and toxics. Water will be tested prior to discharge; ifit does not meet surface water quality criteria, the contractor will implement additional treatment techniques or dispose of the water off-site. Water may be directed to the nearby King County South Treatment Plant for treatment or hauled to an off-site disposal facility. H. Running of Equipment During Construction: Work will occur during daylight hours; generally from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. Construction equipment for in-water work will run during the in-water work window of July I to August 31. I. Soil Stabilization Needsrrechniques: Soil stabilization will be needed for any areas of exposed soils that will not be disturbed for 7 days in the dry season. Stabilization techniques will likely include seeding, mulching, or plastic covering. 10 J. Clean-Up and Re-Vegetation: Temporarily impacted areas will be re-vegetated after construction is complete. Cleared will be re-vegetated with appropriate vegetation per the project planting plan. K. Storm Water Controls&1anagement: The project will develop a TESC Plan and stormwater pollution prevention plan to describe stormwater controls and management that will be implemented for the project. Minimum measures to manage stormwater will include: • Marking clearing limits • Establishing construction access • Controlling flow rates • Installing sediment controls • Stabilizing soils • Protecting slopes • Protecting drainage inlets • Controlling pollutants • Controlling dewatering • Maintaining stormwater BMPs • . Managing the project and stormwater BMPs L. Source Locatiou of Any Fill Used: Temporary fill material will be placed in the staging and dewatering area. Fill material for the staging area will be clean gravel or cobble. The sediment dewatering area will be lined with an impermeable liner to prevent water from the sediment from contacting the soil or adjacent wetlands. Once dredging is complete a layer of clean sand approximately I ft thick will be placed over the dredged area to minimize the potential for sediment mobilization when the area is rewatered. M. Location of Auy Spoil Disposal: Sediment dredged from the forebay will be disposed of at an upland facility approved to handle such waste. 7. Action Area The project action area is defined as all areas to be affected directly or indirectly by the action and not only the immediate area involved in the action (50 CFR §402.02). The action area includes the project footprint and all surrounding areas where project activities could potentially affect the environment. The extent of the action area encompasses direct and indirect effects, as well as any effects of interrelated or interdependent actions. No interdependent or interrelated actions were identified for this project. The action area for this project consists of terrestrial and aquatic components. The terrestrial extent of the action area was defined by temporary increases in noise that may result from construction. The boundaries of the aquatic portion of the action area were defined by how far II suspended sediments are expected to extend downstream from work activities. The terrestrial portion of the action area for this project extends for a radius of 1,250 feet from the project footprint. The aquatic portion includes the area 270 feet upstream and 200 feet downstream of the pump station (Figure I). Terrestrial Extent of the Action Area Background noise levels at the pump station were measured at 56 dBA when the pump station pumps were off, and at over 79 dBA when pumps P I and P2 were operational. Ambient noise levels 640 feet upstream from the project were closer to 49 dBA regardless of whether pumps were operating or not. Construction-related noise will exceed background noise levels near the pump station. The three loudest pieces of construction equipment are clamshell buckets (87 dBA), excavators (81 dBA), and dump trucks (76 dBA), which will produce a combined maximum construction noise level of about 88 dBA measured 50 feet from the source (WSDOT 2014). Construction noise at a vegetated site decreases approximately 7.5 dB per doubling of distance from the source. Construction noise will therefore attenuate to the estimated background noise level of 49 dBA approximately 1,250 feet from the project footprint (Figure I). Aquatic Extent of the Action Area In-water work will mobilize fine sediments that have settled in the forebay of the BRPS. Turbidity curtains or a flow diversion structure will be installed approximately 120 feet upstream of the pump station prior to starting in-water work to minimize turbidity. Some turbidity will be generated during installation of turbidity curtains or flow diversion structure. Due to the extremely low water velocity typical in the Black River at that time of year, turbidity will likely settle out of the water column within about 25 feet of the curtain or flow diversion structure (both upstream and downstream). The contractor will ensure the project meets the mixing zone per WAC 173-20IA-200. Based on summer flows of? to 8 cubic feet per second (cfs), the points of compliance will be at a distance of 100 feet per WAC 173-20IA-200. During installation and removal of the temporary flow diversion structure, the point of compliance will be located 100 feet upstream from the diversion structure. During dredging activities, the point of compliance will be located 100 feet downstream of the BRPS. The specific point of compliance is based on work activities occurring during the day. The upstream limit of the aquatic portion of the action area is therefore 220 feet (turbidity curtain or flow diversion structure installed 120 feet upstream ofBRPS, plus the 100-foot regulatory mixing zone), and the downstream limit of the action area is 100 feet. 8_ Species Information: Aquatic Species Puget Sound Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus Ishawytscha) and Puget Sound steel head (0. mykiss), both listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (NMFS 2012), have been documented in the Black River (WDFW 2014). Coho (0. kisulch) and cutthroat (0. clark;;) have also been trapped at several locations in the basin (Kerwin and Nelson 2000). The Black River and Springbrook Creek are documented coho rearing habitat (WDFW 2014) and coho and cutthroat have been observed spawning in Springbrook Creek and its tributaries (Kerwin and Nelson 2000). 12 Chinook salmon enter the Green River system to spawn from September to December. Fourteen Chinook were trapped in a net pen at the BRPS during fish counts in 1994; the first Chinook arrived on September 17, and the last on October 22 (Harza 1995). Adult Chinook salmon were observed entering the BRPS and attempting to spawn at the 27th Street culvert, approximately 1.5 miles upstream of the pump station, in the fall of 1997 (Kerwin and Nelson 2000). Chinook were last observed in Springbrook Creek in 2011 and likely only use the creek intermittently for spawning (USACE 2014). There is no spawning habitat in the action area; substrates in the action area consist of fine-grained sand and silt. Juveniles outmigrate from January to August, with the peak between March and May. Most juveniles have migrated downstream by July (WDFW 2012). Steelhead adults have been observed spawning in Springbrook Creek and its tributaries, upstream of the BRPS (Kerwin and Nelson 2000). A hatchery steelhead was captured on January 5,1995, in Mill Creek upstream of the Black River Pump Station (Harza 1995), and three steelhead smolts were captured in the BRPS net pen in 1994 (Harza 1995). Winter steelhead begin river entry and spawning in December. Juvenile outmigration peaks in April and May and is generally complete by June (WDFW 2012). Rainbow trout have been documented in Springbrook Creek near the Springbrook Creek Trout Farm in Renton, which rears rainbow trout that sometimes escape into Springbrook Creek. Rainbow trout juveniles and smolts have been captured at the BRPS net pen, but the origin of these fish is uncertain (Harza 1995). Bull trout (Salvelinus conjluentus) typically migrate upstream immediately prior to spawning in September and October, and as late as November in lower elevation drainages (KCDNR 2000). Bull trout (Salvelinus conjluentus) have never been observed in the Black River, but small numbers have been documented in the Green River (KCDNR 2000; WDFW 2014), which is located approximately 1,700 feet downstream of the BRPS. Dolly Varden (S malma), a very similar species, have been observed in the Springbrook Creek system (Harza 1995), indicating that bull trout could be present in the Black River. The pump station has upstream and downstream fish migration systems. The upstream system operates between September and February and the downstream system operates between April and June. Between June 1 and September 1, when the in-water work will take place, neither migration system is in operation, preventing any fish below the pump station from accessing the work zone. Listed salmonids are unlikely to be found in the action area during in-water work, due to project timing, high water temperatures, and low dissolved oxygen (DO). Work will be conducted during the approved in-water work window (July 1 to August 31), when listed fish are least likely to be present in the river. Most juvenile Chinook salmon or steelhead present in the system would likely have migrated downstream by that time of year, and any upstream migration would be prevented by the pump station. September 17 is the earliest documented arrival of Chinook at the BRPS (Harza 1995). Despite timing of in-water work for when listed salmonids are least likely to be present, not all Chinook or steelhead migrate downstream during their first year; and juveniles ofthese species could be present in the Black River system year-round. However, salmonids would likely avoid the action area during summer months, due to high water temperatures and low DO. Average water temperature in July and August between 1990 and 2014 at King County's Springbrook Creek water quality monitoring site, about half a mile upstream from the pump station, was 16.9'C, sometimes exceeding 20°C (King County 2014a). Summer water temperatures at the 13 BRPS have a lso b e en m easure d at o ve r 20"C (Ke rw in a nd Ne lso n 2000 ). C hinook sa lm o n a nd stee l hea d gr ow mo re slow ly in wat er te m pera tu res above 18°C and avo id wa ter te m peratu res above 20"C (Carter 200 5). B u ll tr o ut abund a nce d ecl in es su bstan t ially in s t rea m s w it h wa te r te m pe rature s bet ween 15 a nd 20 "C (75 FR 6JR97). Juveni le salmonids usually mi g rate t o coole r ups trea m reac hes t o avo id hi g h seasonal wate r te m per atures (Sauter e t al. 200 I ). Between 1990 a nd 201 4 , DO co ncentrati o n s at t he S prin gb rook C r eek wa ter quality m o n it o rin g s it e averaged 3 .5 m g /L in Jul y and Aug u st. In s ix of t ho se yea rs , D O concentration s fe ll b e lo w 3 mg /L a nd onl y three m eas ure m e nts ex ceed ed 5 mg /L (Kin g Count y 201 4). S teelh ead p refe r D O con centrati o ns g reater th a n 7 m g /L (N MF S 201 4a), an d juveni le s tee l head a nd C hinoo k ac t ive ly avoi d a reas w it h D O levels lower th a n 4.5 mg /L (Ca rt e r 2 005). Long-te rm ex p os u re to concentrat io ns less t han 3.3 m g/L i s fa ta l to juve nil e sa hnonids (Ecology 200 2). Terrestrial Species Th e US Fi s h a nd Wildlife Se r v ice (U SFWS) li sts O rego n sp o tt ed fr og (Ra na pretiosa) a nd ye ll ow-b ill e d cuckoo (Co ccyzus allle rical/us) as threate ned ; bot h sp ec ies have t h e po te n t ia l to occur in the projec t v ic inity . C ri t ica l h ab it a t has been p roposed fo r O regon spott e d fr o g , bu t d oes not occ ur in t h e actio n a rea (78 FR 53538). A lthou gh s p o rt e d fr ogs hi s tori ca ll y li ve d in t he lower Gree n Ri ver, they a re n ow o nl y k nown to l ive in Whatcom, Skag it , Th u rs ton , a nd Kli ck it at counti es (H a ll ock 2 01 3). W es t e rn ye llow-bill e d c uc k o o s r equire lar ge (50 acres o r more) t r ac ts o f will o w Ie ott on woo d fo r est for n estin g (79 FR 4 855 1). S uit a bl e ri pa r ia n h ab ita t d oes occ u r in t h e act ion a rea, bu t t he re are no reco rd s o f th is s p ec ies in t h e proj ec t v ic init y. T he USFWS a lso li s ts t he fo ll o win g s pecies as hav in g t he pote ntia l to occur in th e p roj cet vicinity: • Wh it e b a rk p in e (Pinus alb ieaulis) • Go ld e n paintbrus h (Ca s lilleja levisecra) • G ri zzly b ear (Ursus arctos h orrihilis) The re is no h abi t a t fo r th ese sp ec ies in th e ac ti on arca. B ecause t h ese species a re h ig hl y unl ik e ly to be foun d in [h e act ion area, th ey are n o t di sc u ssed furt h er in t h is d ocu m e nt. 9. Existing Environmental C onditions A. Shoreline Riparian Vegetation and Habitat Fea tures T h c B RP S is on the weste rn e d ge of th e B lack R ive r Ri pa ria n Fo re s t a nd W e t lan d , a 92 -ac re r ipa r ia n wet la nd reservc , o wne d by t h e City o f Re nton. Ripa ri an vegeta t io n w ith in th e rc serve cons is t s p r im ari l y o f bl a ck cO ll o n wood (Poplli ll s ba lsamife ra), b ig -lea f m a pl e (Acer ma crophyllulII ), r ed a ld er (Al nll s ruhra), w ill ows (Salix s p p .), Pac ifIc dogwo o d (Co m us n ll ll allii ), ca ttail (Typhus la li /o lia), Him a laya n bl ackb e rry, a nd reed ca na ry g rass (Ph o to I). Th e B RP S impo und s wa te r, c reati ng a la r ge, s low-m ov in g turb id pool. Th ere is litt le large wood y d eb ri s, a nd no u n d e rc ut bank s o r off-channe l h ab it at. Subst ra tes cons ist o f fin c- g r ai ned sa nd a nd si lt. A fl oa tin g b oom was in sta ll ed ac ross the r iver in 20 10 to c aptu re large tras h an d d ebri s tha t coul d rack u p against t he pu m p st a ti o n d uring fl ood even ts. 14 B. Aquatic Substrate and Vegetation S ub strate in the ac tion a rea genera ll y consists of severa l feet of line-grained sand and silt. Aquatic vegetat io n is limite d to catta il s an d yellow fl ag iri s (Iris pseudacorus) a t the water 's ed ge and a few iso la te d pat c hes of pond weed (Pota mog etoll spp .). Algae was observed floatin g on th e water s urfa ce durin g a s ite visit in Jul y 2014 (Photo I). Photo 1. Black River Riparian Forest immediately upstream of the pump statioll. The photo was taken from the south side of the ri.'e r. C. Surrounding Land/Water Uses Land imme di ate ly adjac e nt to th e BRPS cons ists of th e Black Riv er Ripari a n Forest and W etla nd. This reserve is bordered to th e so uth by Monster Road and to th e north by railroad tracks a nd a concrete recycling facility. The Black River watershed is highly urbani ze d . Land u se consists primarily of c omme rcial a nd indu stri a l properti es, with a de nse network of roads. Remaining areas of natural vegetat ion are fragmented, du e to s urrounding d eve lopment within the cities of Renton a nd Tukwila. Riparian s trip s along the Black Riv e r, Springbrook Creek, an d th e Green River are the primary wildlife mi g ration an d mo ve m ent corridors connecting th ese vege tation patches. A narrow vegetated corridor along Springbrook Creek provides so m e connectivity of rip ar ian habitat to other wetland systems to the so uth within the Green Ri ve r va lley, but thi s co rridor is di sru pted by several road and highway crossings. The Black River follow s a thin vegetated 15 strip that connects to the Green River corridor, linking upstream and downstream riparian habitats along the Green River; however, most riparian areas have been replaced by commercial and industrial development. D. Level of Development The Black River watershed is highly urbanized. Land use consists primarily of commercial and industrial properties, with a dense network of roads. E. Water Quality The Black River is listed as impaired on the state 303(d) list for fecal coliform and is listed as a water of concern for DO, temperature, and bis(2ethylhexyl)phthalate (Ecology 2012). Sediment samples collected by King County indicate that the sediment contains levels of arsenic, cadmium, and TPH that exceed the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) Method A or B cleanup levels for unrestricted land use (King County 2008). In addition, sediment exceeds freshwater sediment quality criteria for TPH, bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, PCBs, arsenic, cadmium, and nickel. Road runoff over the years is the likely source of most contaminants. Background turbidity levels are approximately 10 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU), based on measurements taken by King County upstream of the pump station (King County 201Oa, b). The upstream water level is controlled by eight pumps. Three of the pumps (pumps 1. 2, and 4) operate automatically and are activated by fluctuations in water level. The remaining pumps are manually operated and are only activated when storm events cause high flows. Summer flows can usually be managed by pump P-l. Water level in the forebay is normally held between 2.5 and 4.0 feet elevation (NA VD 29). Summer flows are around 7 to 8 cfs. F. Describe use ofthe action area by listed salmonid fish species. Puget Sound Chinook salmon and Puget Sound steelhead, both listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (NMFS 2012), have been documented in the Black River (WDFW 2014). Adult Chinook salmon have been observed entering the BRPS and attempting to spawn at the 27th Street culvert, approximately 1.5 miles upstream of the pump station (Kerwin and Nelson 2000). There is no spawning habitat in the action area. Substrates in the action area consist of fine-grained sand and silt. Fall Chinook salmon enter the Green River system to spawn from September to December. Juveniles out -migrate from January to August, with the peak between March and May. Most juveniles have migrated downstream by July (WDFW 2012). Steelhead adults have been observed spawning in Springbrook Creek and its tributaries, upstream of the BRPS (Kerwin and Nelson 2000). Winter steelhead begin river entry and spawning in December; juvenile outmigration peaks in April and May and is generally complete by June (WDFW 2012). Bull trout have never been observed in the Black River, but have been documented in the Green River (WDFW 2014), approximately 1,700 feet downstream of the BRPS. There are no physical barriers to prevent bull trout from accessing the system, except from June 1 to September 1 when the BRPS fish ladder is not operational. 16 G. Is the project located within designated/proposed bull trout or Pacific salmon critical habitat? lfso, please address the proposed project's potential direct and indirect effect to primary constituent elements (critical habitat templates can be found on the Corps website at: http://v~r\V\\/.l1ws.Llsace.armv.mil/~1 i ssiotls/Ci vi IVY' orks/Regulatory/Perm itGuidebook/Endange redSpecies.aspx, select Forms, Tools and References; Forms and Templates; Critical Habitat Assessment Forms) The project is located within designated Puget Sound Chinook salmon critical habitat (NMFS 20 14b); see Attachment A, Assessment of Impacts to Critical Habitat. There is no designated bull trout critical habitat or proposed steelhead critical habitat in the action area. H. Describe use of the action area by other listed fish species (green sturgeon, eulachon, bocaccio, canary rockfish and yelloweye rockfish). None present. I. Is the project located within designated/proposed critical habitat for any of the species listed below? If so please address the proposed projects' potential direct and indirect effect to primary constituent elements. Please see the NOAA·Fisheries and US Fish and Wildlife websites (www.nwr.noaa.gov and www.fws.gov/pacific respectively) for further information. Southern resident killer whale Marbled murrelet Northern spotted owl Green sturgeon Western snowy plover Eulachon The project is not located within designated or proposed critical habitat for any of these speCIes. J. Describe use of action area by marbled murrelets. How far to the nearest marbled murrelet nest site or critical habitat? Some information is available on the Fish and Wildlife Service website: http://ecos.fws. gOY / speciesProfile/pro file/spec iesPro file. action ?spcode-B08 C. The action area does not contain any suitable habitat for marbled murrelets and murre lets are extremely unlikely to use the action area. Marbled murre lets forage in marine waters, and their terrestrial habitat generally consists of large core areas of mature and old growth forests with low amounts of edge habitat and fragmentation (76 FR 61599). This type of habitat does not occur in the action area. The nearest designated critical habitat for marbled murrelets is on the west slopes ofthe Cascades approximately 30 miles east of the action area (USFWS 2014). K. Describe use of action area by the spotted owl. How far to the nearest spotted owl nest site or critical habitat? Some information is available on the Fish and Wildlife Service website: http:// ecos. fws. gOY / speciesPro fi le/profi lei speciesPro fi le.act ion'?spcode~ B08 B. The project action area does not contain suitable habitat for spotted owls, which typically use mature coniferous forest (77 FR 71876). The project action area is dominated by deciduous tree species, specifically black cottonwood and red alder. The nearest designated critical habitat for spotted owls is on the west slopes of the Cascades, approximately 30 miles east of the action area (USFWS 2014). 17 L. For marine areas only: Describe use of action area by Southern Resident killer whales, How often have they been seen in the area and during what months of the year'l For information on noise impacts on killer whales and other marine mammals, please see the National Marine Fisheries website: http://WWW,!1W,.,noaa.gov!Matinc-MalllIllai,/\1 M -consults,cfm, N/A M. For marine areas and Colnmbia River: How far is the nearest Steller sea lion haul-out site from the action area? Describe their use of the action area. See the National Marine Fisheries website: http://\vww.nwr,noaa,gov/Marine-Mammals/MM-consults.cfm for infonnation on the Steller sea lion and location of their haul-out sites, N/A N. For marine areas only: Forage Fish Habitat -only complete this section if the project is in tidal waters, Check box if Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) documented habitat is present. Go to the WDFW website for this information: http://wdfw.wa.gov/iish/forage/forage.htm. then search for each species under the link to Biology, then the link to Documented Spawning Grounds (if available, please attach a copy of the Hydraulic Project Approval from WDFW): Surf Smelt: D Pacific Herring: D Sand Lance: D Check box if the proposed action will occur in potentially suitable forage fish spawning habitat: Surf Smelt: D Pacific Herring: D Sand Lance: D N/A If no boxes are checked, please explain why site is not suitable as forage fish spawning habitat. Please describe the type of substrate and elevation and presence of aquatic vegetation at the project area, For example: At + I 0 to +5 feet above MLLW, there is no aquatic vegetation, the substrate consists of large cobbles. At +5 to + I foot above MLL W, there is eelgrass and the substrate consists of fine sand, 10, Effects Analysis Direct Effects: The primary impacts from this project are turbidity that will be generated during in-water work, and any contaminants associated with sediments becoming suspended in the water column, Any listed species in the forebay could also be disturbed or possibly injured during fish removal. 18 Turbidity In-water work could generate turbidity levels high enough to affect listed fish species in the action area. High turbidity can cause physiological effects such as gill trauma, elevated stress levels, and reduced growth rates, or behavioral changes such as avoidance of turbid areas, reduced foraging efficiency, and reduced reactive distance to predators, thus increasing the risk of predation (Bash et a1. 2001). The in-water work area will be isolated by a turbidity curtain extending to the mud line prior to beginning in-water work, and a cofferdam will be installed to reduce the potential for turbidity during dredging. Turbidity curtains have been used successfully to achieve water quality criteria for dredging projects with similar site conditions (fine-grained sediment, relatively shallow areas with low-velocity flows). Installing and removing the turbidity curtain and cofferdam would disturb fine sediments in the forebay, and some turbidity may escape the turbidity curtains, causing a turbidity plume that could extend upstream and downstream of the pump station. There is also a risk for increased turbidity when the area is re-watered after dredging is complete. To prevent water quality exceedances, turbidity curtains and the cofferdam will be installed when the pump station pumps are turned off; water will be reintroduced slowly to the dredged area after dredging is completed. Portable pumps will be used to pump the Black River around the in-water work area and from within the work zone. If turbidity levels are too high, water from the portable pumps will be pumped to the sediment dewatering area to prevent water quality violations. Although listed salmonids are unlikely to be present either in the pump station forebay or downstream of the BRPS during construction (because of project timing and degraded water quality), it is still possible that juvenile Chinook salmon or steelhead could be present and exposed to elevated turbidity levels. Contamination Sediments in the BRPS forebay contain elevated levels of arsenic, cadmium, nickel, TPH, PCBs, and phthalates above known toxicity levels. Exposure of salmonids to these substances can result in a variety of chronic and acute behavioral and health effects, such as decreased prey capture efficiency, reduced overall condition, or direct mortality (WSDOT 2007). Contaminants generally adhere to suspended sediment particles. Sediment will be controlled by installing a turbidity curtain, temporary diversion structure, or other BMPs to meet water quality requirements. Despite implementation of BMPs, sediments will be disturbed during project construction, potentially exposing any listed salmonids in the action area to contamination. Because work will be conducted in July and August, when listed salmonids are least likely to occur in the Black River system, and the high water temperatures and low DO likely would preclude salmonid presence, the chance of exposure is extremely low. Fish Removal Fish will be removed from the work area using a combination of seine and dip nets. Electrofishing may be used once other methods have removed most of the adult and sub-adult fish. Netting has the potential to harass, injure, or even kill any fish removed from the work zone. Nets will be composed of a non-abrasive material such as nylon, and fish will be handled as littk as possible to minimize the potential for injury. Fish will be handled with care and kept in water 19 at all times during transfer to limit stress. Fish will be released as near as possible to the isolation zone. Portable pumps used to dewater the work area will be fitted with screens to prevent fish from being sucked into the pumps. Electrofishing will be the removal method of last resort. Electrofishing will be performed by qualified biologists and will conform to the latest protocols and standards. Because listed fish are not likely to be present in the work zone during construction, the potential for injury is low. Indirect Effects: Indirect effects are those caused by, or resulting from, the proposed action and are later in time, but are still reasonably certain to occur (50 CFR §402.02). Indirect effects could be caused by changes to ecological systems resulting in altered habitat or predator/prey relationships or anticipated changes in human activities, including changes in land use. The project will not result in any land use changes, but turbidity and the spread of potentially contaminated sediments could result in minor ecological changes by reducing the availability of macroinvertebrates that make up part of the juvenile salmonid diet. Turbidity and siltation can clog mouthparts and fill in habitat (Bash et al. 200 I). However, the duration of work is short, and the area of in-water work is small, resulting in minor expected effects to prey species, which reproduce quickly so would probably recover quickly (within months) from any adverse effects. Some contaminants can become absorbed in the tissues of prey species and become increasingly concentrated as they move up the food chain, eventually reaching levels high enough to become toxic. While bioaccumulation of metals is rare (McGeer et al. 2004), some hydrocarbon compounds and PCBs readily bioaccumulate (Meador et al 1995; Kuzyk 2000). Macroinvertebrates exposed to elevated levels of contaminants could be eaten by juvenile salmonids post project, potentially causing an impact after the project has been completed and fish return to the system and consume those prey items. Again, the extent and duration of exposure of aquatic organisms to contaminants are likely too small and short to result in any measureable effect to listed fish species. Beneficial Effects: The project will remove approximately 2,900 cubic yards of potentially contaminated sediment from a stream documented to contain Chinook salmon and steelhead, and designated Chinook salmon critical habitat. Removing the sediment will reduce the potential for exposure of Chinook salmon and steelhead or their prey to contaminants. 11. Conservation Measures The following conservation measures will be implemented to avoid and minimize impacts associated with construction: • In-water work will occur during the approved in-water work window (probably July 1 to August 31). • Turbidity curtains or other BMPs will be used to minimize turbidity and the spread of potentially contaminated sediments. • All water removed from the river during dewatering and decant activities will be treated to meet Ecology surface water quality criteria for turbidity and toxics before being discharged into the Black River downstream of the pump station. • Drying agents will not be allowed to come into contact with Waters of the State. 20 • A TESC plan will be implemented during construction to prevent and reduce the potential for erosion (Appendix A). The plan requires the placement and maintenance of erosion control measures on site throughout construction. Measures could include placement of straw wattles, silt fences, temporary seeding, and/or soil coverings as appropriate. • Once dredging is complete a sand cap approximately I ft thick will be placed over the dredged area to minimize the potential for sediment mobilization when the area is rewatered. • An engineer-approved SPCC plan will be implemented to guard against the release of any harmful pollutants or products. • All disturbed areas will be re-vegetated with native plant species following construction. • The project will comply with all terms and conditions of any applicable state and local regulations and permits. • Fish will be removed from the in-water work zone prior to dredging. Fish handling will be minimized to the extent possible. Fish nets will be composed of non-abrasive materials. 12. Determination of Effect On the basis of the analyses described in this Biological Evaluation, the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, Puget Sound Chinook salmon, Puget Sound steelhead, and Coastal-Puget Sound bull trout. The project may affect Puget Sound Chinook, Puget Sound steelhead, and Coastal-Puget Sound bull trout because: • These species have been documented in or near the action area and could be present during in-water work. • The project will cause temporary increases in suspended sediment and turbidity. • Sediment samples collected in 2008 contained elevated levels of TPHs, metals, and other contaminants. • Dewatering the in-water work zone will require capture and relocation of any listed fish species within the dewatered area. The project is not likely to adversely affect Puget Sound Chinook, Puget Sound steelhead, and Coastal-Puget Sound bull trout for the following reasons: • Work will take place during the approved in-water work window when listed salmonids are least likely to be present in the action area. • Probable elevated summer water temperatures and low DO will likely discourage salmonid presence and preclude bull trout presence. • Implementation of appropriate BMPs will minimize turbidity and the spread of potentially contaminated sediments. • Fish removal and handling will be conducted in such a way as to minimize impacts on any listed species that might be captured. Oregon spotted frog and yellow-billed cuckoo have not been documented in the action area and are extremely unlikely to occur there during project construction. The project will therefore have no effect on Oregon spotted frog or yellow-billed cuckoo. 21 13. EFH Analysis A. Description of the Proposed Action Sediment that has accumulated upstream of the BRPS since its construction in the 1970s is now an operational concern for the lacility. The KCWLRD proposes to remove about 2,900 cubic yards of sediment from the river channel, extending about 100 reet upstream of the pump station. The sediment removal area includes a concrete forebay apron (an approximately I-foot-thick concrete slab covering the I 65-foot width between the pump station retaining walls and extending 75 feet upstream ofthe pumping bays), the narrow area between the dam trash grates and pump bays, and east (upstream) of the apron up to existing grade (Figure 2). The depth of sediment to be removed varies from 7 to IS feet. Sediment will be removed by dewatering the work area and excavating directly from the riverbed. Please see Section I, above, for a detailed description of the proposed action. B. Addresses EFH for Appropriate Fisheries Management Plans (FMP) The Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) has designated EFH for the Pacific salmon fishery, federally managed ground fishes, and coastal pelagic fisheries. Freshwater EFH for Pacific salmon includes all those streams, lakes, ponds, wetlands, and other water bodies in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and California currently or historically accessible to salmon species managed under any federal fisheries management plan. Exceptions include areas upstream of certain impassable man-made barriers, as well as longstanding, naturally impassable barriers (PFMC 2012). The project action area includes areas designated as EFH for Pacific salmon, including Chinook salmon, pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha), and coho salmon (0. kisutch). The project does not involve any marine work and will have no effect on marine habitat; therefore, it will have no effect on EFH for groundfish or coastal pelagic species. C. Effects of the Proposed Action i. Effects on EFH The project will have no effect on marine habitat; therefore, it will have no effect on EFH for groundfish or coastal pelagic species. As described in detail in the Effects Analysis section, the project may result in direct, short-term, construction-related ellects to salmon EFH, such as temporary sedimentation and turbidity and mobilization of contaminated sediments. Impacts will be minimized through project design and implementation of BMPs to minimize turbidity and the spread of contaminated sediments. ii. Effects on Managed Species. The project will not adversely affect associated species because impacts will be minimized through project design and implementation ofBMPs to minimize turbidity and the spread of contaminated sediments. Moreover, it is unlikely that listed species will be present in the action area during project construction. 22 iii. Effects on Associated Species, Including Prey Species Chinook and coho salmon prey in part on benthic macroinvertebrates. Dredging and sediment removal may temporarily reduce the number and availability of these species. However, benthic macroinvertebrates are short-lived and reproduce rapidly so they will likely re-colonize the dredged area within a few months of project completion. D. Proposed Conservation Measures The habitat requirements for the Magnuson-Stevens Act-managed species within the action area (i.e., EFH) are similar or identical to those of the ESA-listed species. Conservation measures are listed in Sections 5 and 11, above. E. Conclusious by EFH The proposed project will adversely affect EFH for Pacific salmonids by generating turbidity during in-water work and disturbing potentially contaminated sediments that could become re-suspended in the water column. Impacts will be short-term and limited to the duration of in-water work (approximately 8 weeks in each construction season). 23 14. References Bash, J., C. Berman, and S. Bolton. 2001. Effects of turbidity and suspended solids on salmonids. White paper prepared for the Washington State Department of Transportation. Available online at http://wW\V . \\!sdot. \va. gov/rcsearch/rcports/fu llrcports/5 26. I .pJf. Carter, K. 2005. The Effects of Dissolved Oxygen on Steelhead Trout, Coho Salmon, and Chinook Salmon Biology and Function by Life Stage. California Regional Water Quality Control Board. Available online at h no ://v./\vw. s \vre b. ca. gO\!:' nort hcoast/watcr i S5 ues/p [0 grams/tmJ 1 s/ shasta river/0607 0 7 /2 9appe nd i x bel hcctlcclso f d isso I "edoxy genonstee I headtroutco hosa I 1110 nandchinooksal mon b i 0 logy andfllncti on.pdf. Ecology. 2002. Evaluating criteria for the protection of aquatic life in Washington's surface water quality standards: dissolved oxygen. Draft discussion paper and literature summary. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, Washington. Ecology. 2012. Washington State Water Quality Assessment 305(b) report and 303(d) list. Washington State Department of Ecology. Accessed online July 8, 2014 at hllps:!/fortress.wa.gov;ecy/wgamapviewer/ddalllt.aspx"res~ 1920x I 080, Hallock, L. 2013. Draft State of Washington Oregon spotted frog recovery plan. Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington, 93+v pp, Harza. 1995. Comprehensive Fisheries Assessment of the Springbrook, Mill and Garrison Creek Watershed for the City of Kent. Prepared for City of Kent, Environmental Engineering. June 1995, Kerwin, J, and T.S. Nelson. 2000. Habitat Limiting Factors and Reconnaissance Assessment Report. GreenlDuwamish and Central Puget Sound Watersheds. Available online at http://www . go\' 1 i ok. orgiwatershcdsi9 Ireport s/Recon, aspx. King County Department of Natural Resources (KCDNR). 2000. Literature Review and Recommended Sampling Protocol for Bull Trout in King County, Seattle, Washington. May 2000. King County. 2008. King County Environmental Lab Matrix Report #12983, Project 421195. King County, 20 lOa. WLRD/Environmental Lab. Black River Pump Station Sediment Dewatering Water & Sediment, collected on April 30 and May 6, 2010, June 4,2010. King County. 201Ob. WLRD/RFPMS. Black River Pump Station Sediment Collection & Hanging Bag Test on April 29, 2010 (Memorandum by Erik Peters), May 4, 2010. King County. 2014. King County Stream Monitoring Data for Springbrook Creek (Site #0317). Downloaded trom the King County website on September 29, 2014 at hi I p:; I green 2 .ki ngcoll n Iy. g ov IStrcamsDa lalDa la Download. asp x 'I Locator-OJ I 7. Kuzyk, Z.Z. 2000. Bioaccumulation of PCBs from contaminated sediments in a coastal marine system of northern Labrador. Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada. Available online at hllp:; Iwww.collectionscanada.gc.calobj/s41f2/dskl/tape4/PQDD 003 5/MQ5291 7.pdf 24 Meador, 1., 1.E. Stein, W.L. Reichert, and U. Varanasi. Bioaccumulation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons by marine organisms. 1995. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 143: 79-165. McGeer, 1., G. Henningsen, R. Lanno, N. Fisher, K. Sappington, and J. Drexler. 2004. Issue paper on the bioavailability and bioaccumulation of metals. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Available online at http://www.epa.govirafipublicalions/pdfs/BIOFlNAL8 1904.PDF. NMFS. 2012. Status ofESA listings and critical habitat designations for West Coast salmon and steelhead. Accessed online July 8, 2014 at http://www . westcoast. fi sheries. noaa. gov Ipu b licalions/protected speciesl salmon steelheadl sta 1 us of esa salmon listings and ch designations map. pdf. NMFS. 2014a. Office of Protected Resources species profile: steelhead trout. Available online at http:// www.nmfs.noaa.gov/prlspecies/fish/steelheadlroul.hlm. NMFS. 2014b. Critical habitat mapper. Accessed online July 1,2014 at http://map.streamnet.org/website/CriticaIHabilat/v iewer.htm. PFMC. 2012. Pacific Coast Salmon Plan for Commercial and Recreational Salmon Fisheries Off the Coasts of Washington, Oregon and California as Revised Through Amendment 17. Pacific Fishery Management Council, Portland, Oregon. October 2012. Available online at http://www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/fMP through A-17 Final.pdf. Sauter, S.T., 1. McMillan, and J. Dunham. 2001. Issue Paper I: Salmonid Behavior and Water Temperature. Prepared as Part of EPA Region 10 Temperature Water Quality Criteria Guidance Development Project. EPA-9 I O-D-O 1-001. Available online at http://yosemite.epa.gov/rI0/water.nsf/6cbla I df2c4ge4968825688200712cb7/5ebge54 7eege III III 8256a03005bd665/$file/paper%20 l-behavioral-5-9.pdf. USACE. 2014. Upper Springbrook Creek: Year Two Biological Monitoring. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District. Seattle, Washington. USFWS. 2014. Critical habitat mapper. Accessed online July 1,2014 at http://ecos.fws.gov/crithab/. WDFW. 2012. Green River Juvenile Salmonid Production Evaluation: 2011 Annual Report. Available online at http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/0141 7/wdfwO 141 7.pdf. WDFW. 2014. SalmonScape. Accessed online July 1,2014 at http://apps.wdfw.wa.goy/salmonscape/map.html. WSDOT. 2007. Potential effects of highway runoff on priority fish species in western Washington. White paper prepared by Pacific EcoRisk. Available online at http://www.wsdot. wa.govlNRIrdonlyres/BA4454DF -7FD3-4EEO-A071- F357C559f A5A/0/BA EfTectsOnFish.pdf. WSDOT. 2014. Biological Assessment Preparation Advanced Training Manual Version 04-02-2014. Accessed online July 2, 2014 at http://www.wsdot.wa.govINRIrdonlyres/448B609A-A84E-4670- 811B-9BC68AAD30001OIBA ManuaIChapter7.pdf. Attachment A ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS TO CRITICAL HABITAT FOR ESUs of Pacific Salmon and Steelhead in Washington Designated December 28, 1993, and September 2, 2005 Salmon and Steelhead Critical Habitat -Primary Constitnent Elements From 50 CFR Part 226 70 FR 52664-5 Select all critical habitat ESUs in the action area: IRl Puget Sound Chinook I Lower Columbia River (LCR) Chinook L Upper Willamette River (UWR) Chinook [ Upper Columbia River (UCR) spring Chinook lJ Snake River (SR) fall Chinook D SR spring-summer Chinook D Hood Canal summer chum D Columbia River chum I Ozette Lake sockeye D SR sockeye D UCR steelhead I Mid-Columbia River (MCR) steelhead D LCR steelhead I UWR steelhead D SR steelhead The primary constituent elements determined essential to the conservation of Puget Sound Chinook are: (I) Freshwater spawning sites with water quantity and quality conditions and substrate supporting spawning, incubation, and larval development Existing Conditions: There is no spawning habitat in the action area. Substrates in the action area consist of several feet of fine-grained sand and silt. Effects to PCE: NI A (2) Freshwater rearing sites with water quantity and floodplain connectivity to form and maintain physical habitat conditions and support juvenile growth and mobility; water quality and forage supporting juvenile development; and natural cover such as shade, submerged and overhanging large wood, log jams and beaver dams, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut banks. Existing Conditions: Rearing habitat in the action area is limited by degraded water quality, particularly in the summer. The stream has been largely channelized and cleared up to the banks for much of its length. Riparian vegetation downstream of the pump station and in the Black River Riparian Forest does provide some cover and overhanging wood. Large woody debris, log jams, beaver dams, side channels, or undercut banks are scarce (Refer to Section 9 of the BEfor more information on existing conditions). Effects to PCE: In-water work will disturb sediments for approximately 8 weeks, temporarily decreasing water quality for the duration of in-water work. Over the long term the project will remove nearly 3,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediments, reducing the potential for fish to be exposed to harmful contaminants. (3) Freshwater migration corridors free of obstruction with water quantity and quality conditions and natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut banks supporting juvenile and adult mobility and survival. Existing Conditions: This PCE is degraded in the action area. Water quality is poor, and natural features such as large wood, aquatic vegetation, rocks, boulders, side channels, and undercut banks are almost completely lacking. During the summer months when in-water work will take place the Black River Pump Station (BRPS) pumps are not operating and the pump station is a complete fish passage barrier (Refer to Section 9 of the BE for more information). Effects to PCE: The project will not affect migration corridors. The BRPS is already a complete barrier during the in- water work window and the project will not further degrade this condition. (4) Estuarine areas free of obstruction with water quality, water quantity and salinity conditions supporting juvenile and adult physiological transitions between fresh-and saltwater; natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, and side channels, and juvenile and adult forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation. Existing Conditions: This PCE does not occur in the action area. Effects to PCE: NI A (5) Nearshore marine areas free of obstruction with water quality and quantity conditions and forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation; and natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, and side channels. Existing Conditions: This PCE does not occur in the action area. Effects to PCE: NI A (6) Offshore marine areas with water quality conditions and forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation. Existing Conditions: This PCE does not occur in the action area. Effects to PCE: NI A Determination of Effect: If critical habitat for the ESV does not occur in the action area, no determination of effect is required for that ESU. Puget Sound Chinook: LCR Chinook UWRChinook VCR spring Chinook SR fall Chinook SR spring-summer Chinook Hood Canal summer chum Columbia River chum Ozelle Lake sockeye SR sockeye VCR steelhead MCR steelhead UWR steelhead SR steelhead I NE is no effect. NEI r [ r o o [ c u o o o o o o 2 NLAA is may affect~ not likely to adversely affect. 3 LAA is may affect, likely to adversely affect. NLAA' [R] ] ] ] I ] ] ] ] J ] I I D J J J ] ] ] ,] ] ] ] o D D The project may affect Puget Sound Chinook salmon critical habitat because: • Critical habitat has been designated in the action area. • Temporary increases in turbidity and disturbing potentially contaminated sediments could temporarily degrade PCE 2. The project is not likely to adversely affect Chinook critical habitat because: • Project impacts are temporary. • Work will take place during the in-water work window when juvenile Chinook salmon are least likely to be rearing in the action area. Conservation Measures: • In-water work will occur during the approved in-water work window (-July I to August 31). • Turbidity curtains, cofferdams, or other BMPs will be used to minimize turbidity and the spread of potentially contaminated sediments. • Turbidity curtains or cofferdams will be deployed while the pumps are shut off, allowing sediments to settle before water is pumped downstream. • Ifwaler 10 be pumped downstream of the BRPS from portable pumps does not meet Ecology surface water quality criteria it will be pumped to the on-site water treatment facility. • Sediments will be disposed at an otT-site facility permitted to accept the waste. • All water removed from the river during dewatering and decant activities will be treated to meet Ecology surface water quality criteria for turbidity and toxics before being discharged into the Black River downstream of the pump station. • A temporary erosion and sediment control (TESC) plan will be implemented during construction to prevent and reduce the potential for erosion (Appendix A). The TESC plan requires the placement and maintenance of erosion control measures on site throughout construction (see BMPs above). Erosion control measures will be applied in areas during the clearing, excavation, pipe installation, and site restoration work. These measures will include placement of straw wattles, silt fences, temporary seeding, andlor soil coverings as appropriate. • An engineer-approved spill prevention, control, and countermeasures (SpeC) plan will be implemented to guard against the release of any harmful pollutants or products. • Impacts on buffers will be minimized to the extent possible. Affected buffers will be restored and replanted post project. • All disturbed areas will be revegetated with native plant species following construction. • The project will comply with all terms and conditions of any applicable state and local regulations and permits. ,:,,", ,':" ,.; , ,'" , ;",: .. Ii ..... ··.·.·.···.··· . ", - I···· .. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , . ;' ' . HabitatData R"O~ .. • UI King County HABITAT DATA REPORT BLACK RIVER PUMP STATION SEDIMENT REMOVAL PROJECT tQ King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division HABITAT DATA REPORT Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project Prepared for ~ King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division King Street Center -DNRP 201 South Jackson Street, Room 700 Seattle, Washington 98104-3855 by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1100 Seattle, Washington 98121 Telephone: 206-441-9080 March 12, 2015 DISCLAIMER Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. has prepared this report for use by King County. The results and conclusions in this report represent the professional opinion of Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. They are based in part upon: (1) site evaluation, and (2) examination of public domain information concerning the study area. Various agencies of the State of Washington and localjurisdictions may require a review of final site development plans that could potentially affect zoning, buffer requirements, water quality, and/or habitat functions of lands in question. Therefore, the findings and conclusions in this report should be reviewed by appropriate regulatory agencies before any detailed site planning and/or construction activities. W King County CONTENTS Executive Summary ........ . . .................................................................. v Introduction ........................................................ " ...................................... 1 Study Obj ectives ...................................................................................... 1 Prqject Description ................................................................................... 2 Sediment Characteristics ..................................................................... 2 Staging Area .................................................................................... 5 Sediment Excavation. Dewatering, and Treatment ....................................... 5 Methods ...................................................................................................... 7 Review of Available Information .................................................................... 7 Field Studies ........................................................................................... 7 Results ....................................................................................................... 9 Analysis of Available Information ................................................................... 9 Previously Mapped Wetlands ................................................................. 9 Previously Mapped Streams ................................................................... 9 Documented Habitat and Vegetation ...................................................... 10 Fish and Wildlife Use ......................................................................... 13 Results of Field Studies ...................................................................... 15 Wetlands ....................................................................................... 15 Streams ......................................................................................... 16 Upland Forest/Buffer ......................................................................... 16 Habitat Connectivity and Fragmentation .................................................. 17 Critical Species Associated with On-Site Habitat Types ................................. 17 Habitat Functions and Values ............................................................... 18 Regulatory Implications .................................................................................. 19 Avoidance and Minimization Measures ................................................................. 21 Proj ect Impacts and Mitigation .......................................................................... 23 Wetland Buffers and Vegetation Clearing ........................................................ 23 Noise ................................................................................................... 23 References ............. , ................................................................................... 25 APPENDICES Appendix A Prqj ect Area Photos ti King County iii TABLES Table 1. Special Status Species and Habitats in the Project Vicinity ........................... 10 Table 2. Delineated Wetlands and Streams in the Study Area .................................... 16 FIGURES Figure 1. Study Area and Vicinity Map .................................................................. 3 Figure 2. Critical Habitats and Species in the Study Area .......................................... 11 tQ King County iv kg W·0476~·OI8 b, f" habitat dala rpt 150fil3 doc. The Black River Pump Station is a concrete dam spanning the Black River to control flooding in the lower Green River valley. Sediment that has accumulated behind the structure since its construction in the 1970s has become an operational concern and needs to be removed. King County, which operates the pump station, plans to dredge approximately 2,900 cubic yards of sediment from an area extending about 100 feet upstream from the station. Construction will begin in May of 2016 and will last about 4 months. Final sediment removal and site restoration may continue in the summer of 2017. The prqject will occur in the city of Renton. This report was prepared in accordance with Renton Municipal Code (RMC), which requires a habitat conservation assessment (Habitat Data Report) for all prqjects located within or having the potential to impact critical habitat (RMC 4-8-120 and 4-3-050). Project biologists used best available science to document critical habitat and wildlife in the prqject vicinity, assess potential impacts on those areas, and develop appropriate mitigation. Information was gathered through site visits, use of standard manuals and methods, online resources, and published and unpublished reports. The study area includes the project footprint, an area extending approximately 0.5 mile upstream of the prqject, and downstream of the dam to 68th Avenue South. Critical habitat within the prqject vicinity includes riparian, wetland, and upland habitats. Several federal- and State-listed species have been documented in the study area, and a number of other listed species have the potential to be present during project construction. Several measures have been incorporated into the project design to reduce impacts on critical habitats. Based on feedback from regulatory agenCies and other interested parties, the following Changes were made: • To minimize potential negative effects on water quality from increased sediments, the contractor will be required to dewater the work area using a temporary flow diversion structure (such as a coffer dam) before dredging, instead of being allowed the choice between dewatering or dredging in the wet. • To limit impacts on wetlands and a Great Blue Heron colony north and east of the Black River, sediment will be dewatered in a decant facility constructed south of the river instead of north of the river as originally planned. • Impact pile driving was eliminated as a construction method to prevent noise impacts on the heron colony as well as other wildlife. Turbidity will be controlled by the use of a cofferdam, turbidity curtains, the pump station itself, and other best management practices. Cleared areas will be restored post-prqject with native vegetation, ensuring no net loss of ecological function. W v King County The revised prQject will still have unavoidable temporary impacts on critical habitats, but they will affect a smaller area. Staging area construction will clear combined stream and wetland buffer on the south side of the Black River. Most of the buffer consists of mowed lawn dominated by Kentucky bluegrass (Paa pratensis). Installation of the bypass pipe on the north side of the Black River will also have impacts on stream and wetland buffers. vi kg 10-04766-018 brps habitat data rpt 150623 doc" The Black River Pump Station (BRPS) in Renton, Washington, was constructed in the 1970s to control flooding in the lower Green River valley. The pump station consists of a concrete structure placed across the Black River channel, approximately 1,700 feet upstream of the confluence with the Green River (Figure 1). Eight pumps within the structure control the quantity of downstream flow. Sediment that has accumulated behind the pump station since its construction has become an operational concern. King County Water and Land Resources Division, which operates the pump station, plans to dredge approximately 2,900 cubic yards of sediment from an area extending about 100 feet upstream from the station. The project is scheduled to begin construction in late May of 2016 and will last about 4 months. Construction may extend into 2017 if work cannot be completed in one season. The project is located on the western edge of the Black River Riparian Forest and Wetland (BRRFWJ, a 92-acre wetland complex within the Renton city limits. Renton Municipal Code (RMC) requires a habitat conservation assessment for prqjects located within or having the potential to impact critical habitat or wildlife (RMC 4-8-120). RMC (Sections 4-3-050 and 4-3-090) defines critical habitat as habitat areas that meet the following criteria: 1. Habitats associated with the documented presence of non-salmonid species proposed or listed by the federal government or State of Washington as endangered, threatened, candidate, sensitive, monitor, or priority: and/or 2. Category 1 wetlands. RMC defines critical wildlife species as non-salmonid species proposed or listed by the federal government or State of Washington as endangered, threatened, candidate, sensitive, monitor, or priority (RMC 4-3-050.K.l.a). The study area consists of the project footprint, an area extending approximately 1,500 feet upstream of the prqject footprint, and the section of the Black River extending downstream from the pump station to 68th Avenue South (Figure 1). Several federal-and State-listed species are present in the stUdy area, as well as areas designated as Priority Habitat by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). The BRRFW contains a Category 1 wetland. Study Objectives The objective of this study is to provide the City of Renton (City) enough information to assess prqject impacts on critical habitat. This report: • Describes the proposed project and study area. • Identifies and maps documented critical habitats, including those identified by WDFW's Priority Habitats and SpeCies (PHS) database and the Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Washington Natural Heritage Program (WNHP) database. lQ March 2015 - ------------------------~~~~~ Habitat Data Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Prqject • Identifies vegetation cover types. • Describes the characteristics, condition, function, and values of habitat areas. • Describes fish and wildlife use of habitat areas. • Summarizes prqject impacts and proposed impact mitigation measures. Project Description The project is located in the northwest portion of the city of Renton in King County, Washington. The specific prqject location is in Section 13 of Township 24 N, Range 4E. The Black River is in Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 9 (Green Duwamish) and Hydrologic Unit Code 170011001303 (Lower Green River). Sediment in the Black River upstream of the dam will be removed by mechanical dredging. The work area will be isolated from the Black River and dewatered. The Black River will be pumped around the pump station, then sediment will be excavated directly from the riverbed down to the concrete forebay apron and at a 4V:1H slope to grade. Before dredging begins, a staging area will be constructed on the south side of the river for equipment, sediment stockpiling, sediment dewatering, and water quality treatment. The in-water work area will then be isolated with turbidity curtains, a temporary flow diversion structure (such as a cofferdam), and/or other best management practices (BMPs). The Black River will be routed through a bypass pipe on the north side of the river for the duration of in-water work. Pump station pumps wi II be used to dewater the area unti I water levels are too low or the water becomes too turbid, at which point portable pumps will be used to remove the remaining water. Construction equipment will then be mobilized in the work area. Sediment will be dredged, then stockpiled and dewatered in the dewatering area. Dewatering water will be discharged back into the Black River once it has been treated to meet State Surface Water Quality Standards. Dewatered sediment will be hauled off-site for disposal. Once dredging is complete, in-water BMPs will be removed and the staging area wi II be restored and replanted with appropriate native vegetation. Sediment Characteristics Dewatered mechanical dredging. Sampling results indicate that sediments in the pump station forebay contain elevated levels of arsenic, cadmium, nickel, total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) (King County 2008). During dredging, the work area will be isolated using silt curtains, a cofferdam, or other BMPs to minimize the spread of contaminated sediments as much as possible. BMP installation and removal will occur when the pump station pumps are turned off, to prevent pumping turbid water downstream. A 1-foot-thick sand cap will be placed over excavated areas outside the concrete apron, and the area will be re-watered slowly once dredging is complete to minimize sediment disturbance. The dredged sediment will be disposed of at a site approved to accept these materials. W King County March 2015 -----= 2 Habitat Data Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project Figure 1. Study Area and Vicinity Map. Legend l 1 Study area C=:J Staging area In-water work zone Trail Railroad N @ a 200 400 800 _-==--=:::::JI ____ ft ~ HERRERA NAD 1983 HARN Washington State Plane North FIP$ 4601 ESRI , Acriill (2011) P, •• ""'I~GI5 ."""" "\.,"'0< .. \'2alO\10-<l476 ..... '.\P")O<""' ..... t _D."'_~ • ..,'r'"'""'_ .... _.~"'i" _l 1>.l' mod 11.-'.,,,,,, A staging area will be constructed on the south bank of the Black River to stage materials prior to and during construction (Figure 1). This area will include a pad to support the crane used to lift and position equipment into the work zone as well as an access road leading to the shoreline. A sediment dewatering and treatment area will also be constructed on the south bank. Staging area construction will clear vegetation with the regulatory stream buffer as well as portions of Wetland Band C buffers. The staging area will be restored to preconstruction grades prior to revegetation with appropriate native plants. The Black River will be pumped through a bypass pipe for the duration of in-water work. The pipe will run along the north bank of the river through portions of the buffer of Wetland D and the Black River. There may be some minor vegetation clearing in the bypass pipe alignment, resulting in combined Wetland D and stream buffer impacts. No woody vegetation will be cleared to lay the pipe, and cleared areas will be reseeded post prqject. SedllTlellt Excavatioll, Dewateting, and Treatment Sediment will be excavated using dredging buckets deployed from cranes, excavators, and front loaders. Hydraulic dredging (using suction pumps to remove sediment and entrained water) may also be used to remove sediments behind the pump station's trash racks, due to restricted access in that area. The excavated sediment may contain up to 70 percent water by volume and will need to be dewatered prior to disposal. Sediment stockpiling and decanting, and water treatment will be conducted in part of the staging area. The treatment area will be constructed using an impervious liner with a perimeter berm to contain water. Decant water will have relatively high turbidity and may have elevated levels of contaminants. Water will be treated on-site and then discharged back to the Black River. Water will likely be treated through a combination of pumping and settling in tanks, sand filtration to remove suspended solids, and, if necessary, carbon filtration to remove toxics. Drying agents may be used to speed the dewatering process. Drying agents will not be allowed to come into contact with Waters of the State. Any water discharged to the river wi II meet State Surface Water Quality Standards for turbidity and toxics. Water that does not meet water quality standards will be discharged to the sewer and directed to the nearby King County South Treatment Plant for treatment or hauled to a permitted disposal facility. Dewatered sediment will be disposed of at an approved, off-site permitted upland facility. Portable pumps will be used to remove any water that seeps past the cofferdam. Water will be pumped downstream of the pump station, unless it is too turbid to meet State surface water quality standards. Turbid water will be pumped directly to the on-site decant facility for treatment prior to being discharged back into the Black River. ~ March 2015 KingCounty Habitat Data Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 5 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Data on critical habitats in the prQject vicinity were collected using best available science, per WAC 365-195-900. Project biologists reviewed the prqject footprint and construction methods provided by the design team to determine the extent of potential impacts. Data sources used for this prqject include: • GIS base maps of the natural environment depicting the locations of aquatic resources, sensitive areas, species of interest, and existing infrastructure (USFWS 2014; King County 2014; Renton 2014a) • Records of listed species and designated critical habitat from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS 2014) and US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS; USFWS 2014) • PHS and Species of Interest data from WDFW (WDFW 2014) • WNHP species and habitat database from WDNR (WDNR 2014a) • Water quality information from the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology 2012) • Sediment quality information from studies conducted by King County (King County 2008) • Information summarized in reports from other recent projects in the vicinity (Parametrix 2011, 2013) • Information from prqject engineers regarding the prqject design and construction methods Field Studies Biologists visited the site on several occasions in 2014 and 2015 to conduct wildlife and habitat surveys, delineate wetlands, and delineate the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) on the Black River. Existing wetland and stream conditions are documented in the Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report (Herrera 2014a). Wetland and OHWM delineations were performed by Herrera biologists Julia Munger and Alicia Ward on February 21 and 24, March 19, and April 30, 2014. Wildlife and habitat surveys were conducted by Herrera biologists Alicia Ward and George Ritchotte on June 4, July 6, August 31, 2014, and January 8 and 24, 2015. Vegetation cover types were mapped using data collected during field visits and from aerial photos. The study area encompassed the project footprint, the area extending approximately 1,500 feet upstream from the pump station, and the Black River extending downstream from the pump station to 68th Avenue South (Figure 1). ti March 2015 King County Hab1tat Data ReporL-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project J Several special status species and associated habitats have been documented or could occur in the prqject vicinity (Table 1; Figure 2). Federally threatened species and critical habitat include Oregon spotted frog (Rana pretiosa) and yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus). A separate Biological Evaluation covering these species as well as salmonid species that are beyond the scope of this report (Chinook salmon [Oncorhynchus tshawytschaj, Chinook salmon critical habitat, steel head trout [0. mykissj, bull trout [Salvelinus confluentus)) has been prepared to address potential prqject impacts on species and critical habitat listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) (Herrera 2014b). Analysis of Available Information Due to its location on the edge of a large reserve in a largely urban area, and the presence of listed species and habitats, existing conditions in the BRRFW have been well-documented. Federal. State, and local agencies have all collected background data on wetlands, streams, and habitats in the vicinity. Previously Mapped Wetlands The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) documents several palustrine scrub-shrub (PSS) wetlands in the BRRFW (USFWS 2014). Several wetlands were mapped in the study area as part of King County's proposed Lake to Sound Trail (Parametrix 2011). The City identifies most of the BRRFW north of the Black River as wetland (Renton 2014a). Four wetlands were delineated in the prqject area in spring of 2014 (Figure 2, Herrera 2014a). Previously Mapped Streams The Black River is the only stream present in the study area. The hydrology of the Black River has been highly modified in the last century. The river used to drain Lake Washington and the Cedar River until 1912, when the Cedar River was diverted into Lake Washington to control flooding in the City. In 1916, the Black River was further modified by construction of the Lake Washington Ship Canal, which lowered the lake level and dried up the river. Today, the Black River is the name for the downstream reach of Springbrook Creek. The creek drains roughly 15,763 acres in the lower Green River basin before entering the Green River, about 1,700 feet downstream of the BRPS (Kerwin and Nelson 2000). The Black River is a perennial salmonid-bearing stream and is therefore designated by the City as a Class 1 water (RMC 4-3-050) as well as a Shoreline of the State (RMC 4-3-090). The river is listed as impaired on the State 303{d) list for fecal coliform and is listed as a water of concern for dissolved oxygen, temperature, and bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (Ecology 2012). The NWI categorizes the Black River in the project area as lower perennial riverine wetland and deep water habitat, with an unconsol idated bottom that has been modified by humans (USFWS 2014). UI Mar crl 2015 King County - -------- Habitat Data Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 9 Table 1. Special Status Species and Habitats in the Project Vicinity. Common Name Scientific Name Status' Presence in Study Area ~~~ Fish ---------~----------------- River lamprey Lampetra ayresi FCo, SC Likely to occur ~~--~--- Amphibians and Reptiles Oregon spotted frog Rana pretiosa FT,8E Not likely to occur Westem toad Anaxyrus boreas 8C Not likely to occur Western pond turtle Actinemys marmorata FCo,8E Not likely to occur Birds ~ -~ ----~---------- ----. -------- ---- ----- Bald "agl.,,-~ __ -'-Iali,,-eetu~l,,-ucocefJha/us ~ ~ FCo, SS Documented ~--------r--~~----~----~- Great blue heron Ardea herodias SM Documented Osprey Pandion ha/iaetus 8M Documented Pileated woodpecker Dryocopus pi/eatus 8C Documented Turkey vulture Cathartes aura 8M Likely to occur Peregrine falcon Fa/co peregrinus FCo, 88 Possible Yellow-billed cuckoo Coccyzus americanus FT,8C Not likely to occur Vaux's swift Chaefura vauxi 8C Not likely to occur Mammals Townsend's big-eared bat Corynorhinus townsendii FCo,8C Possible Plants and Habitat Pacific pea Lathyrus vestitus 8E Not likely to occur Biodiversity area and NA PH Urban deciduous riparian forest with great corridor blue heron nesting and waterfowl use. Freshwater wetlands NA PH Contains various classes of wetlands. Waterfowl concentrations NA PH Ponds provide urban wintering dabbling and diving duck habitat a FT = Federal threatened; FPT = Federal Proposed as Threatened; FCo = Federal Species of Concern; SE = State Endangered; SC = State Candidate Species; SS = State Sensitive Species; SM = State Monitored Species; PH = Priority habitat Documented Habitat and Vegetation The study area is designated as "Natural Environment" under the Shoreline Master Program because it meets the criteria of a shoreline that retains the majority of natural shoreline functions, represents ecosystems of particular scientific and educational interest, has large areas of relatively undisturbed wetlands, and supports important wildlife habitat, such as heron rookeries (Renton 2004), WDFW lists the BRRFW as a Priority Aquatic Habitat, as well as a designated Waterfowl Concentration area, due to high numbers of waterfowl that congregate there during winter months (WDFW 2014; Figure 2). The reserve is also a Biodiversity Area and Corridor, defined as an area of habitat relatively important to various species of wildlife. tQ King County ~ ~ ~~~---~------- 10 Habitat Data Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project \., ..... D· ... ' -... ' Figure 2. Critical Habitats and Species in the Study Area. Legend CJ Approximate staging area Delineated wetland Wetland buffer Wetland (WDFW PHS ) In-water work zone Railroad Trail D Biodiversity Areas and Corridor (BAC) Waterfowl concentration Great blue heron colony o Bald eagle nest Bald eagle nest buffer N @ 600 _-==--=:::::::JI ____ ft o ,5<1 300 ~ HERRERA NAD 198 3 HARN Washington State Plane North FIPS 4601 ESRI. Ae ri al (20U) """",<-_", """ ... ___ ,.J ..... ~ ",M.U"' ... "''''' ,~ ••. · ... ''' ••• M .... '''''.~ " ""OJ According to the Washington Natural Heritage Program (WNHP), Pacific pea (Lathyrus vestitus), a State endangered species, has been documented northwest of the BRRFW, There are no WNHP records of high-quality ecosystems in the study area (WDNR 2014a). A variety of special status fish and wildlife species have been documented in the study area (Table 1). WDFW PHS data note the presence of a great blue heron colony in the BRRFW, approximately 1,200 feet east of the pump station. Two bald eagle nests are located near the prqject area, one approximately 1,800 feet to the east within the BRRFW and one about 2,000 feet to the northwest (Figure 2). The nest to the northwest has not been active within the past several years (WDFW 2014; C, Anderson, WDFW, personal communication to G. Ritchotte on August 25, 2014); that pair may have moved to the nest within the riparian forest. The eagle pair within the riparian forest has been observed hunting the herons at the rookery (Suzanne Krom, Herons Forever, personal communication to G. Ritchotte on December 9, 2014; Figure 2). According to WDFW (C. Anderson, personal communication to John Koon, King County, on March 10, 2008), the BRRFW is known to provide habitat for: • Various songbird species • Woodpeckers: downy, hairy, and northern flicker • Hawks and owls: Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperil), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), barred owl (Strix varia), great-horned owl (Bubo virginianus), and western screech owl (Megascops kennicottilj • Mammals: deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus), eastern gray squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis), beavers (Castor Canadensis), raccoons (Procyon lotor), opossums (Didelphis virginiana), coyotes (Canis latrans) river otter (Lontra canadensis), and muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus) • Reptiles and amphibians: Painted turtle (Chrysemys picta), red-eared slider (Trachemys scripta elegans), Pacific tree frog (Pseudacris regilla), long-toed salamander (Rana catesbeiana), ensatina (Ensatina eschscholtzil), and bullfrogs (Rana catesbeiana) Other critical wildlife species listed below have not been documented in the study area, but have been documented nearby or have an association with on-site habitat types: • River lamprey: River lamprey are a federal Species of Concern and a State Candidate species. They have been documented in the Duwamish River/Green River watershed downstream of the BRPS (Stober and Pierson 1984) and could potentially occur in the prqject area, An unidentified lamprey species was observed during in-water work on Springbrook Creek, approximately 1 mile upstream from the BRPS (G. Ritchotte, personal observation). W Marctl 2015 King County ------------------------------ Habitat Data Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Prqject 13 • Turkey vulture: Turkey vultures, a State Monitor species, have been observed in the prQject vicinity. This is a wide-ranging species that is likely to occur within the BRRFW. • Osprey: Osprey are a State Monitor species likely to occur in the prQject area. WDFW PHS data note the presence of an osprey nest approximately 1 mile south of the prQject footprint (WDFW 2014). The open water portion of the Black River near the pump station provides osprey foraging habitat. • Peregrine Falcon: Peregrine falcon is a federal Species of Concern and a State Sensitive species that could occur in the prQject area. Peregrines usually nest on cliffs, ledges, or buildings. There is no suitable nesting habitat in the prQject area, and the nearest known aerie is approximately 8 miles away. Peregrine hunting territories extend up to 15 miles from nesting sites (Towry 1987), so these birds could forage in the project area. • Townsend's big-eared bat: Townsend's big-eared bat is a federal Species of Concern and State Candidate species. These bats are found statewide. In western Washington, they forage in lowland mixed conifer-hardwood forests and riparian wetlands and use hollow trees for roosting (Woodruff and Ferguson 2005). Although no occurrences have been documented for the prQject area, the BRRFW provides potential foraging and roosting habitat. The following species have not been documented in the prQject vicinity. They could be found there, but habitat requirements or rarity of the species make their presence unlikely. • Oregon spotted frog and western toad: The BRRFW provides potential habitat for both Oregon spotted frog and western toad. The Oregon spotted frog is listed as threatened under the ESA. They inhabit marshy edges of ponds and streams (Nordstrom and Milner 1997a). The only known Oregon spotted frog populations are in Thurston and Klickitat counties (Nordstrom and Milner 1997a; USFWS 2010). Western toads, a State Candidate Species, are found in more terrestrial habitats but occur near water bodies (Hallock and McAllister 2005). The presence of both of these species is unlikely, due to the small size of habitat, surrounding urbanization, and the rare status of these species in western Washington, as well as unreliable water levels and the presence of introduced predators, such as bullfrogs and sunfish. • Western pond turtle: Western pond turtles, a State Candidate Species, are found in streams, rivers, and ponds below 300 meters (985 feet) elevation in Washington State. They prefer open pond habitat with floating logs for basking (Hays et al. 1999). Appropriate habitat exists in the BRRFW; however, western pond turtles are unlikely to occur in the area, due to surrounding urbanization and the rare status of this species (Nordstrom and Milner 1997b). ti K",County March 2015 14 Habitat Data Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project • Yellow-billed cuckoo: Yellow-billed cuckoos are a State Candidate species, and are listed as threatened by the USFWS. Yellow-billed cuckoos nest almost exclusively in low elevation riparian habitat patches greater than 50 acres in size (58 FR 61633), which occurs in the BRRFW. However, the species is rare in Washington State-the last breeding records are from the 1930s; and only four of 17 sightings between 1956 and 2012 occurred west of the Cascades (58 FR 61634). • Vaux's swift: Snags in the study area provide potential nesting habitat for Vaux's swift, a State Candidate species that occurs in upland and wetland forest; however, Vaux's swift are more closely associated with old-growth forested habitat, which is not present in the study area (Lewis et al. 2004). The City notes that 50 bird species have been documented in the BRRFW (Renton 2014b). The BRRFW contains numerous snags that could provide foraging habitat for pileated woodpeckers (Dryocopus pi/eatus). No pileated woodpeckers were observed during site visits for this project, but they were observed during wetland delineations for the nearby Lake to Sound Trail prQject (Parametrix 2013). The ponded area upstream of the BRPS is a popular wintering location for dabbling and diving ducks. Mallards (Anas p/atyrhynchos). gadwalls (A. strepera). American widgeon (A. americana). green-winged teal (A. carolinensis). northern shovelers (A. clypeata). wood ducks (Aix sponsa). ring-necked ducks (Aythya col/aris) and buffleheads (Bucepha/a a/beo/a) were all observed during surveys conducted by WDFW in January 2008 (Chris Anderson, WDFW, personal communication to John Koon, King County, on March 10, 2008). Results of Field Studies Habitat conditions were confirmed during field visits conducted in the spring and summer of 2014. Wetlands, streams, and upland habitats all occur within the study area (Figure 2). Wetlands Four wetlands consisting of palustrine emergent, scrub-shrub, and forested classes were delineated in the prQject area. Several other wetlands extend off-site in the BRRFW. These wetlands were not delineated for this project (Table 2; Figure 2). Wetlands and streams are described in detail in the Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report (Herrera 2014a) and only briefly summarized briefly here. Emergent wetlands are dominated by reed canarygrass, soft rush (Juncus effusus), slough sedge (Carex obnupta). and yellow flag iris. Forested and scrub shrub wetlands are dominated by Pacific willow (Sa/ix /ucida). Sitka willow (S. sitchensis). red alder (A/nus rubra), and Himalayan blackberry. Marctl 2015 Habitat Data Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Prcuect U1 --------~~~! 15 Table 2. Delineated Wetlands and Streams in the Study Area. I Ecology City of Renton Cowardin Hydrogeomorphic Rating Buffer Width Wetland Size (tt'/acre) Classification a Classification b Category" (ft)d A 56.703/1.3 PEM, PSS, PFO Riverine II 225 B 1,220/0.03 PEM, PSS (J"Pre~sio~_ III 75 C 1,945/0.04 PEM. PSS. PFO Slope IV 50 D 40,30010.93 PEM. PSS Depressional III 125 Black River NA NA NA NA 100 BRRFW Not delineated PFO, PSS, PEM Riverine and I 225 wetlands· for this project depressional , US Fish and Wildlife Service classification is based on Cowardin et al. (1979): palustrine forested (PFO), palustrine scrub-shrub (PSS), and palustrine emergent (PEM). b Hydrogeomorphic classification is based on Brinson (1993). C Wetland category is based on the Ecology wetland rating system (Hruby 2004). which is required for wetlands in Renton within shoreline jurisdiction (RMC4-3-090-D). d Wetland buffer widths are based on the Ecology wetland rating, per Renton Municipal Code 4-3-090-D. • Wetlands outside possible staging area locations were not delineated or rated for this pr<)ject. Information on size, classification, and ratings was estimated based on existing documentation. Streams The Black River is the only stream present in the study area. The BRPS impounds water behind the pump station, creating a large, Slow-moving pool. Large woody debris is limited, and no undercut banks or off-channel habitat were observed during site visits. Substrates are composed of several feet of fine-grained sand and silt. Aquatic vegetation consists of pondweed (Potamogeton spp.), with cattails (Typhus latifolia) and yellow flag iris at the water's edge. A few algal mats were observed floating on the water surface during a site visit in Ju Iy 2014 (Appendix A, Photo 1). The Black River is deeply incised downstream of the pump station, confined by retaining walls or steep banks lined with riprap. Up/and Forest/Buffer Riparian vegetation upstream of the BRPS consists primari Iy of black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera), big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), red alder, willows, red osier dogwood (Comus sericea), cattails, Himalayan blackberry, reed canarygrass, and yellow flag iris (Appendix A, Photo 1). Downstream of the pump station the river is bordered by a narrow strip of riparian vegetation consisting primarily of Himalayan blackberry, with some small (2 to 4 inches dbh) willows and big-leaf maple (Appendix A, Photo 2). Upland forest is dominated by large, mature black cottonwood and red alder trees, with an understory of salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), Indian plum (Oem/eria cerasiformis), sword fern (Polystichum munitum), beaked hazelnut (Corylus comuta), red osier dogwood, and Himalayan blackberry. Himalayan blackberry is prolific near wetland and stream margins, and has established some thick patches within upland forested areas. Upland forest within the project footprint is contiguous with the larger Black River Riparian Forest, which contains a diverse assemblage of upland and wetland plant species. W K",County --------- 16 ______ ---"M"':'"arch 2015 Habitat Data Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project Wetland buffer condition varies depending on the wetland. Buffers surrounding Wetland A consist of mixed deciduous and coniferous forest. Wetland B buffer has been disturbed by maintenance of the BRPS grounds and is mainly lawn dominated by Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), with some rose (Rosa spp.) and red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa). Wetland C buffer is disturbed forested and scrub-shrub upland containing willows, alder, rose, and extends onto the lawn. Buffers surrounding Wetland D are disturbed due to the presence of a bike path to the north and the BRPS and access road to the south. The eastern portion of the buffer is relatively intact, consisting of mixed deciduous and coniferous forest (Appendix A, Photos 3 and 4). Wetland buffers within the BRRFW extend into the upland forest as described above. Habitat Conl7ectivity and Fragmentatiol7 Outside the BRRFW, land in the project vicinity is mostly developed urban land. The few remaining areas of vegetation represent patches within a highly fragmented landscape. Railroad corridors and m'!ior roads border the study area on most sides (Figure 1). A narrow vegetated corridor along Springbrook Creek provides some riparian habitat connectivity to other wetland systems to the south within the Green River valley. The Black River follows a narrow vegetated corridor that connects to the Green River corridor, providing connectivity with upstream and downstream riparian habitats; however, this corridor is interrupted by roadways, railroads, bridges, and commercial and industrial development. The King County online mapping system does not indicate any wildlife networks in the project area (King County 2014). The pump station has upstream and downstream fish migration systems. A fishway allows upstream fish passage between September and February and an air lift pump aids downstream migrants in passing the structure between April and June (Kerwin and Nelson 2000). Neither migration system is operational between June 1 and September 1 when the BRPS acts as a complete migration barrier between the Green River and Springbrook Creek. Critical Species Associated with On-Site Habitat Types Osprey and great blue heron were observed during site visits, as were several species of waterfowl. Surveys for great blue heron nests were conducted during the nesting season on June 4, 2014. Four nests were observed on the south side of the Black River near the rookery location, approximately 1,200 feet upstream of the BRPS, but no evidence of nesting or other heron activity was apparent at the nest sites. Several herons were observed foraging and roosting at the same location during site visits in June 2014 and January 2015. Numerous waterfowl were also present, including Canada geese (Branta canadensis), mallards, wood ducks, northern shovelers, buffleheads, widgeons, and ring-necked ducks. Comprehensive plant I ists were compi led during wetland del ineations for this proj ect, and no Pacific peas were observed. This species is typically found in dry, open to wooded areas and forest edges near or within historical prairies (WDNR 2014b). This habitat does not occur in the study area. W March 2015 King County Habitat Data Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal PrQject 17 Delineated wetlands in the study area generally provide low to moderate functions for water quality, hydrology, and habitat, with the exception of Wetland A, which has high water quality and habitat potential. Wetland A is well vegetated and has a high interspersion of habitat types, as well as depressional areas that can capture sediment during high water events. Wetlands further east in the BRRFW are higher value and provide a higher level of water quality, hydrology, and habitat functions. The Black River in the study area provides low-quality pool habitat for fish. There is sparse distribution of large wood, no undercut banks, and water quality is poor. Summer water temperatures are especially high and have been measured at over 20 degrees C. Riparian vegetation is well developed, but dominated in many areas by Himalayan blackberry upstream of the pump station, except immediately ac!jacent to the BRPS where the river is confined by steep riprapped slopes and retaining walls. Upland areas within the study area provide variable levels of functions, depending on the level of habitat alteration. Habitat functions are low in disturbed areas along the forest margin ac!jacent to the BRPS, railroad tracks, and Monster Road. Staging, sediment stockpiling, and water treatment will occur in a previously disturbed area between the pump station and Monster Road. Plant species diversity is lower here than other areas of the riparian forest. Invasive plant species such as reed canarygrass and Himalayan blackberry have establ ished large patches in some areas and habitat structure is less complex. Habitat functions are moderate to high in more intact portions of the BRRFW, due to high plant species diversity, the presence of mature deciduous trees and snags, and complex vegetation structure consisting of a multilevel understory and overstory. Intact, naturally vegetated portions of the study area represent habitat value to the City because they contribute to the following City goals (RMC 4-3-050): • Maintain and promote diversity of species and habitat within the city • Coordinate habitat protection with the City's open space system, whenever possible, to maintain and provide habitat connections • Help maintain air and water quality, and control erosion • Serve as areas for recreation, education, scientific study, and aesthetic appreciation In order to maintain these values on the project site, the prqject seeks to retain as much native vegetation as feasible and to compensate for any impacts that may occur from project activities by replanting cleared areas with native vegetation. tQ King County 18 March 2015 Habitat Data Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal PrQject Impacts on aquatic resources (e.g., wetlands, streams) are regulated under the federal Clean Water Act, Washington State Growth Management Act, Washington State Hydraulic Code, and the RMC Critical Areas and Shoreline Master Program Regulations. City regulations also establish development standards for buffers (including required widths) associated with wetlands and streams, and the City regulates habitat areas associated with critical fish and wildlife species. According to RMC 4-3-050 K, the Black River and the BRRFW are considered critical habitats based on presence of federal and State listed species and the BRRFW's classification as a Category I wetland and Biodiversity Area. All project activities that may affect critical habitats must evaluate alternative methods of developing the property using the following criteria in this order: (1) avoid any disturbance to the habitat, (2) minimize any impacts on the habitat, and (3) compensate for any habitat impacts. If feasible, mitigation shall be provided on-site and in-kind. A habitat/wildlife assessment is required for activities located with or abutting a critical habitat, that are adjacent to a critical habitat, or have the potential to significantly impact a critical habitat. Based on the habitat assessment, the City Department of Community & Economic Development may designate the on-site critical habitat areas and their buffers as Native Growth Protection Areas, which may require establ ishment of a conservation easement or a simi lar permanent protective mechanism (RMC 4-3-050 K. 2). ~ March 2015 King County Habitat Data Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 19 Several measures have been incorporated into the project design and construction methods to avoid and minimize impacts on sensitive species and habitats: • The prqject has been designed to avoid wetland and buffer impacts to the greatest extent possible. After discussions with regulatory agencies, the City, and Herons Forever, the staging and water treatment area was relocated from the north side of the river to the south side, thereby eliminating impacts on Wetland D and reducing potential for disturbing the heron rookery. • Impact pile driving has been eliminated from consideration to minimize noise disturbance. • In-water work will occur during the approved in-water work window (July 1 to August 31). • Silt curtains, cofferdams, and other BMPs will be implemented to minimize turbidity. • Bypassing and dewatering the excavation area will minimize turbidity. • Silt curtains will be deployed when the pump station pumps are turned off, allowing sediments to settle before water is pumped downstream. • Sediment dewatering water will be treated to Ecology Surface Water Quality Criteria for turbidity and toxics before discharge into the Black River. • Sediment will be disposed of off-site at a facility permitted to accept the waste. • All cleared areas will be revegetated with native plant species following construction. March 2015 ~ King County H(lbltat Data Reporl-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 21 \". r·' Despite implementation of minimization measures and BMPs, the project will have unavoidable temporary impacts on stream and wetland buffers. The prQject will mitigate for buffer impacts by replanting cleared areas with appropriate native vegetation. Noise Noise from construction may affect wildlife species. Project construction will occur between late May and September, which overlaps with the bald eagle and great blue heron breeding season, among other species. Because work needs to occur during the in-water work window, the prQject cannot be timed to avoid nesting. Baseline noise measurements were conducted in August 2014 to evaluate potential impacts on the heron colony during construction (Hart Crowser 2014). Measurements were conducted with and without pump operations at both the pump station structure and near the great blue heron rookery: • The baseline noise level measured at the BRPS structure without pumps operating was approximately 56 decibels (dBA), increasing to nearly 67 dBA when pump 1 was operating, and to over 79 dBA when pumps 1 and 2 were operating simultaneously. • Pump noise did not extend to the rookery: baseline noise level measured near the great blue heron colony without pumps operating was approximately 49 dBA and remained the same whether pumps were on or off. Noise levels reached as much as 62 dBA during periods of intermittent noise, such as when helicopters or trains passed by. WDFW recommends a 200-meter (656-foot) buffer around heron nesting colonies for activities that would generate sound exceeding 92 dBA (Azerrad 2012). Noise generated by construction equipment will not reach that threshold; maximum construction noise levels are estimated to be roughly 90 dBA. Project noise will decrease by about 7.5 dB per doubling distance from the source (WSDOT 2014). Construction noise will therefore decrease to about 52.5 dBA at the edge of the heron colony, only slightly above baseline noise and well below levels that would disturb herons. During design, impact pile driving was eliminated from consideration as a possible construction method to minimize potential noise impacts. The staging area was moved to reduce visual impacts on the heron COlony. No additional mitigation is proposed. ~ March 2015 King County Habitat Data Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 23 Azerrad, J.M. 2012. Management recommendations for Washington's priority species: Great Blue Heron. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. Brinson, M.M. 1993. A Hydrogeomorphic Classification for Wetlands. Technical Report WRPDE- US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. August 1993. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Publication FWS/OBS-79/31. US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services. Ecology. 2012. Washington State Department of Ecology Water Quality Assessment and 303(d) list. Available online at https:!/fortress.wa .gov/ecy/wgamapviewer Idefault.aspx7 res= 1920x1080. Accessed July 8, 2014. Hallock, L.A. and K.R. McAllister. 2005. Western toad. Washington Herp Atlas. http://wwwl.dnr .wa .gov/nhp/refdesk/herpl I. Hart Crowser. 2014. Sediment Characterization Sampling and Noise Monitoring: Black River Pump Station, Renton, Washington. Memorandum to Tom Bean, KCWLRD on December 1, 2014. Hays, D.W., K.R. McAllister, S.A. Richardson, and D.W. Stinson. 1999. Washington State Recovery Plan for the Western Pond Turtle. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. Herrera. 2014a. Draft Wetland and Stream Delineation Report, Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Prqject. Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc., Seattle, Washington. May 16, 2014. Herrera. 2014b. Draft Biological Evaluation, Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Prqject. Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc., Seattle, Washington. August 18, 2014. Hruby, T. 2004. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western WaShington -Revised. Ecology Publication 04-06-025. Washington State Department of Ecology. August 2004. Kerwin, J. and T.S. Nelson. (Eds). December 2000. Habitat limiting factors and reconnaissance assessment report, Green/Duwamish and Central Puget Sound watersheds (WRIA 9 and Vashon Island). WaShington Conservation Commission and the King County Department of Natural Resources. King County. 2008. King County Environmental Lab Matrix Report #12983, Prqject 421195. ~ Maretl 2015 King County ------------------ Habitat Data Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal PrQject 25 King County 2014. King County iMAP Map Set: Sensitive Areas. Accessed online at http://www . ki ngcounty. gov / operations/G I S/Maps/i MAP /MapSets/SensitiveAreas. aspx September 15, 2014. Lewis. J .C .. M. Whalen, and R.L. Milner. Vaux's Swift in Management Recommendations for Washington's Priority Species, Volume IV: Birds edited by E.M. Larsen, J.M. Azerrad, and N. Nordstrom. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. Pages 25-1 through 25-5. Nordstrom, N. and R. Milner. 1997a. Oregon Spotted Frog (Rana pretiosa) in Management Recommendations for Washington's Priority Species, Volume 1//: Amphibians and Reptiles edited by E.M Larsen. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. Pages 7-1 through 7-10. Nordstrom, N. and R. Milner. 1997b. Western Pond Turtle (Clemmys marmorata) in Management Recommendations for Washington's Priority Species, Volume 1//: Amphibians and Reptiles edited by E.M Larsen. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. Pages 7-1 through 7-10. Parametrix. 2011. Wetland Discipline Report, Lake to Sound Trail Segment A. Prepared for King County Parks Division. Parametrix, Inc., Bellevue, Washington. October 2011. Parametrix. 2013. Vegetation and Wildlife Discipline Report, Lake to Sound Trail. Prepared for King County Parks Division. Parametrix, Inc., Bellevue, Washington. June 2013. Renton. 2004. City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. Available online at http://rentonwa.gov/business/default.aspx?id=2684. Accessed on September 3,2014. Renton. 2014a. City of Renton online mapper. Accessed August 20, 2014 at http://www.rentonweb.org:8080/SilverlightPublic/Viewer.html?Viewer=COR-Maps . Renton. 2014b. City of Renton website. Accessed August 22, 2014 at http://rentonwa .gov/living/default. aspx?id=16494. Stober, Q.J. and K.B. Pierson. 1984. A review of the water quality and marine resources of Elliott Bay, Washington. Available online at https:/ Idigital.lib.washington.edu/researchworks/handle/1773/4027. Towry, R.K. 1987. Wildlife habitat requirements. Pages 73-210 in R. L. Hoover and D. L. Wills, editors. Managing Forested Lands for Wildlife. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver, Colorado, USA. USFWS. 2010. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Species Assessment and Listing Priority Assignment Form: Oregon spotted frog. Available online at http://ecos. fws.gov/docs/candforms pdf Irl ID02A V01.pdf. USFWS. 2014. U.S. Fish and Wildlife National Wetlands Inventory mapper. Accessed online at http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html. tQ King County __ _ 26 March 2015 Habitat Data Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Prqject WDFW. 2014. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitat and Species data. Obtained August 4, 2014. WDNR. 2014a. Washington Department of Natural Resources Rare Plants and High Quality Ecosystems data. Shapefiles downloaded on 8120/14 from http://fortress.wa.gov/dnr/app1/dataweb/dmmatrix. html. WDNR. 2014b. Washington Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Information System List of Known Occurrences of Rare Plants in Washington: Pacific pea. Available online at http://www1 . dnr. wa .gov Inhp/refdesk/fguide/pdf Ilaveo2. pdf. Woodruff, K. and H. Ferguson. 2005. Townsend's big-eared bat. Pages 24-36 in E. Larsen, J.M. Azerrad, N. Nordstrom, editors. Management Recommendations for Washington's Priority Species, Volume V: Mammals. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. WSDOT 2014. Washington State Department of Transportation Biological Assessment Guidance: Noise Impact Assessment. Available online at http://www . wsdot. wa.qov/NR/rdonlyresl 448B609A-A84E-4670-811 B- 9BC68AAD300010/BA ManualChapter7. pdf. March 2015 Habitat Data Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project W King County 27 APPENDIX A Proj ect Area Photos w _______________ K~ngCOUnty Photo 1 . Black River and riparian vegetation upstream of the BRPS . U1 Marctl2015 King County Habitat Uilto l~epOlt -Black River Pump Station Sediment Rr.moval Project A·' Photo 2. Black River and riparian condition downstream of the BRPS. March 2015 Habitat Data Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project Photo 3 . Wetland 0 and buffer facing west. March 2015 Habitat Data Report-B la ck River Pump St a t io n Sed im ent I~emoval Pfqject Photo 4. Wetland D and buffer facing northeast towards the BRRFW. tQ King County A·4 March 2015 Habitat Data Report-Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Prqject . " . , ' .. I'.' ., '. r ; " -I' . , ": . . '_ ,"I J ......• " .. ;: .. ··:'~::'·".·.;"':' ••• ·i'·;···(';:·A~~ND.IX;·~i'····: •.• { , .J.,. " ;, _ " ' .. , ( " ..• " .. ',' :,". ," '-... " -' .,' '." . -, . . SEPADetermination' • I I I I I I • I I I I I I tQ I King County ti King County Water and Land Resources Division Department of Natural Resources and Parks King Street Center 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 600 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 206-477-4800 Fax 206-296-0192 TTY Relay: 711 March 4,2015 TO: VIA: Mark Isaacson, Division Director, Water and Land Resources Division (~ Steve Bleifuhs, Section Manager, River and Floodplain Management sectiID Kerry Bauman, Senior Ecologist, River and Floodplain Management SectionYtJ FM: RE: State Environmental Policy Act (SEP A) Approval Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project Enclosed for your review and signature is the Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project. The Environmental Checklist is also included for your reference. Project Description King County plans to remove about 2,900 cubic yards of sediment that has accumulated on the concrete forebay apron located immediately upstream of the Black River Pump Station. Sediment that has accumulated upstream of the pump station since its construction in the 1970s is now an operational concern for the facility. Sediment will be removed by dewatering the work area and excavating directly from the riverbed. Excavated material will be decanted in a temporary, water-tight facility on the south river bank. Decanted water will meet water quality standards before being discharged back into the Black River. Excavated sediment will be disposed of at an approved disposal facility. Issues of Note The following issues have arisen during the planning of this project and may have implications to the Department of Natural Resources and Parks: 1. Herons Forever has expressed concern about project impacts to a Great Blue Heron rookery located in the Black River Riparian Forest northeast ofthe project site. The project team met with Herons Forever on December 9,2014, to discuss the project. Since that meeting the project decant facility has been moved from the north side of the river to the south side, avoiding wetland impacts and minimizing potential disturbance to the heron rookery, in part due to suggestions made by Herons Forever. Although the Project Mark Isaacson February 26, 2015 Page 2 Team believes these changes have addressed concerns expressed at the December meeting, Herons Forever has requested a site meeting with the Project Team, which is scheduled for March 6, 2015. Unforeseen concerns of Herons Forever could still delay the project schedule or affect construction. 2. The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe may want fish passage improvements at the pump station. Such improvements are being evaluated as part of the Black River Pump Station Needs Assessment, currently underway by Tetra Tech for King County Water and Land Resource (WLR) Division as part of the larger System-wide Improvement Framework. Fish passage concerns are not anticipated to affect the sediment removal project. 3. The Lake to Sound Trail is located near the pump station and users may be concerned about access and disturbance during project construction. King County Parks has a project to extend a portion of this trail north of the pump station, the timing of which may coincide with the sediment removal project. The Project Team is coordinating construction timing with Parks. 4. Analytical test results on sediment samples indicate arsenic, cadmium, and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) concentrations that exceed the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) Method A or B cleanup levels for unrestricted land use. In addition, sediment exceeds freshwater sediment quality criteria for TPH, bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), arsenic, cadmium, and nickel. As a result, the removal method will include provisions to control the release of contaminated sediment. The comment period for this project is scheduled to begin on March 10, 2015. In order to preserve this schedule, we would need the enclosed DNS returned with your signature by 2:00 p.m., Thursday, March 5, 2015. If you have any questions regarding the issues above or others that come to your attention, please contact me at 206-477-4637 or Steve Bleifuhs at 206-477-4726. Enclosures ~ King County Water and Land Resources Division Department of Natural Resources and Parks King Street Center 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 600 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 206-296-6519 Fax 206-296-0192 TTY Relay: 711 Determination of Non-Significance Name of Proposal: Black River Pump Station Forebay Sediment Removal Description of Proposal: King County plans to remove about 2,900 cubic yards of sediment that has accumulated on the concrete forebay apron located immediately upstream of the Black River Pump Station_ Sediment that has accumulated upstream of the pump station since its construction in the 1970s is now an operational concern for the facility. Sediment will be removed by dewatering the work area and excavating directly from the riverbed. Excavated material will be decanted in a temporary, water-tight facility on the south river bank. Decanted water will meet water quality standards before being discharged back into the Black River. Excavated sediment will be disposed of at an approved disposal facility. Location of Proposal: The project site is located at 550 Monster Road SW in the City of Renton. The property is located in the SW Y. of Section 13, Township 23N, and Range 4E W.M. Responsible Official: Positionflitle: Address: DATE: ;. S--I:)' Proponent and Lead Agency: Contact Person(s): Mark Isaacson Division Director, Water and Land Resources Division 20 I South Jackson Stre Seattle, WA 9810 -3 SIGNA TURE:r----/-.h.0~~~==:::::: ___ _ King County Depa ent of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division Kerry Bauman Environmental Scientist I1I 206-477-4637 Determination of Non-Significance Black River Pump Station Forebay Sediment Removal Page 2 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 Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. THIS INFORMA nON IS A V AILABLE TO THE PUBLIC ON REQUEST (for a nominal photocopying fee). THIS DETERMINA nON OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) is issued under Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal until after March 24, 2015. Comments must be submitted or postmarked by that date. For additional information, please contact: Kerry Bauman 206-477-4637 Kerry.bauman@kingcounty.gov King County Water and Land Resources Division 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 600 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 tQ King County ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Purpose of the Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21 RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose ofthis checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instructions for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agcncies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an E1S. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, writc "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be a significant adverse impact. Use of Checklist for Nonproject Proposals: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." In addition, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON PROJECT ACTIONS (PART D). For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of the proposed project, if applicable: Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project 2. Name of Applicant: Kerry Bauman King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: King County Water and Land Resources Division 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 600 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Phone: 206-477-4637 Fax: 206-205-5134 4. Date checklist prepared: January 5, 2015 5. Agency requesting checklist: King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division 6. Proposed timing or schedule (include phasing, if applicable): Construction would begin in spring 2015 and extend for approximately 10 weeks. A second construction season may be necessary in 2016. In-water work will be restricted to the July 1 - August 31 window. 7. Do you have any plans jar future additions, expansion, or forther activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. There are no plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. • Habitat Data Report, Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project. Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. February 2015. • Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal. Alternatives. Prepared by Hart- Crowser. August 2014. i:\lorms\environmental checklist doc 1 03/04/15 King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal • Biological Evaluation (for Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project). Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. February 2015. • Wetland and Stream Delineation Report, Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project. Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. May 2014. • Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project -Environmental Constraints memorandum. Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. May 2014. 9. Do you know whether applications are pendingjor governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the properly covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. There are no other applications pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by this proposal. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be neededfor your proposal, ifknown. Section 404 Clean Water Act -US Army Corps of Engineers Endangered Species Act Section 7 Review -National Marine Fisheries Service and US Fish and Wildlife Service Historic Preservation Act Section 106 Review --State Historic Preservation Officc and Tribal Historic Preservation Office Section 40 I Clean Water Act -Washington State Department of Ecology Hydraulic Project Approval -Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Renton Shoreline Substantial Development Permit or Exemption -City of Renton Renton Clearing and Grading Permit -City of Renton Renton Critical Areas Approval -City of Renton In addition, King County will coordinate with the affected tribes to maintain tribal treaty fishing access during construction. II. 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 nol need to repeatlhose answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on the project description.) The King County Water and Land Rcsources Division (KCWLR Division) operates the Black River Pump Station (BRPS) to provide flood control protection for the lower Green River Valley. The BRPS is located about two miles west-southwest of Renton, Washington, on the Black River about 1,700 feet upstream from its confluence with the Green River. The pump station consists of a concrete dam that spans the Black River channel, with eight pumps to convey flow from the forebay behind the dam to the downstream Black River i :\forms\environmcntal checkl ist.doc 2 03/04115 King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal channel. Plant pumps can handle Black River flow up to an estimated 2,945 cubic feet per second (cfs) capacity, which exceeds a one percent flood condition. In order to protect properties downstream, the station is not run at full capacity when the river is near levee capacity; excess inflow is held in channel storage behind the dam. Flood control is accomplished by starting the large pumps at an early stage of a storm. During normal, non-storm flow conditions, only pump P-I is used to regulate discharge past the dam, typically cycling on and off for a few hours a day (using an automated stage control system). Fish migration facilities are also included for upstream and downstream fish passage around the pump station. Sediment that has accumulated upstream of the pump station since its construction in the 1 970s is now an operational concern for the facility. The KCWLR Division proposes to remove about 2,900 cubic yards of sediment from the river channel, extending about 100 feet upstream of the pump station. 1be sediment removal area includes a concrete forebay apron (an approximately one- foot-thick concrete slab covering the I 65-foot width between the pump station retaining walls and extending 75 feet upstream ofthe pumping bays), the narrow area between the dam trash grates and pump bays, and east (upstream) of the apron up to existing grade. The sediment thickness varies from 7.0 to 15.5 feet. Sediment will be removed by dewatering the work area and excavating directly from the riverbed. Analytical test results on sediment samples indicate arsenic, cadmium, and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) concentrations that exceed the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) Method A or B cleanup levels for umestricted land use. In addition, sediment exceeds freshwater sediment quality criteria for TPH, bis(2- ethylhexyl) phthalate, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), arsenic, cadmium, and nickel. As a result, the removal method will include provisions to control the release of contaminated sediment. Project construction will entail: • Staging and site preparation, which will include constructing a sediment stockpiling, decant and treatment area, as well as a crane pad south of the forebay • Mobilizing equipment to the work area • Isolating the in-water work area turbidity curtains or using other best management practices (BMPs) • Installing a cofferdam to allow for dewatering of the sediment removal area • Placing sediment removal equipment into the work area using the crane • Sediment removal and stockpiling • Decanting stockpiled sediment and treating the wastewater • Removing in-water BMPs • Hauling sediment off site i:\[orrns\environmental checklist doc 3 03104115 King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal • Demobilizing equipment and restoring and replanting the staging area. Sediment will be removed by dewatercd mechanical excavation. This method involves isolating the sediment removal area from the river by constructing a temporary flow diversion structure (e.g .• cofferdam) spanning the entire width of the river. installing temporary pumps and piping to divert the river, and dewatering the sediment removal area (Figure I). The work area will be partially dewatered using the pump station pumps until water levels are too low or turbidity levels are too high, at which point portable pumps will be used to remove the remaining water. Sediment will then be removed using conventional excavation equipment placed into the dewatered work area using the crane. Installation of a flow diversion structure will not require pile driving. Fish will be removed from the in-water work zone prior to and during dewatering using a combination of seine and dip netting. Electrofishing may be used once other methods have removed most of the adult and sub-adult fish from the area. Any portable pumps used to dewater the area will be fitted with screens to prevent fish from being suckcd into the pumps per RCW 77.57.070. Nets will bc composed of non-abrasive nylon material. Fish handling will be kept to the minimum necessary to remove fish from the area. Fish capture and removal will be conducted by a qualified biologist. During excavation, portable pumps will remain on site to remove water that may seep past the cofferdam. Water will be pumped downstream of the pump station, unless too turbid to meet State water quality standards. If pumped water is too turbid, it will be pumped directly to the on-site facility used to treat decant water. Figure 1. Example Dcwatered Mechanical Excavation. i:\/orms\environmcntal chCGkliSLdoc 4 03/04115 King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Hydraulic dredging (using suction pumps to remove sediment and entrained water) may also be used to remove sediments within the pump bay area behind the trash racks due to difficulty accessing that area. Oncc dredging is complete a sand cap approximately 1 foot thick will be placed over the dredged area to minimize the potential for sediments to become mobilized post project. The excavated sediment may contain up to 70 percent water by volume and will need to be dewatered prior to disposal. The project will create a sediment stockpiling, decant, and water treatment area that will require leveling a section of ground south ofthe river, laying down an impervious liner, and constructing a berm around the perimeter to contain the sediment and decant water. An additional arca will likely be required for treatment offree water that drains by gravity from the sediment. Free water from the sediment stockpile will have relatively high turbidity and may have elevated levels of contaminants. Water may be directed to the nearby King County South Treatment Plant for treatment or hauled to a disposal facility, but will most likely be treated on site and discharged back to the Black River. Any water discharged to the river will meet Ecology Surface Water Quality Criteria for turbidity and toxics. Water will likely be treated through a combination of pumping and settling in tanks (with or without the use offlocculants), sand filtration to remove suspended solids, and possibly carbon filtration to remove the toxics, if needed. Drying agents may be used to speed the dewatering process. Drying agents will not be allowed to come into contact with Waters ofthe State. Water quality will be tested prior to discharge back into the Black River. If the treated water does not meet Ecology requirements, the contractor will implement additional treatment techniques or dispose of the water off site at an approved facility. The project will develop a TESC Plan and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan to describe stormwater controls and management that will be implemented for the project. Minimum measures to manage stormwater will include: • Marking clearing limits • Establishing construction access • Controlling flow rates • Installing sediment controls • Stabilizing soils • Protecting slopes • Protecting drainage inlets • Stabilizing channels • Controlling pollutants • Controlling dewatering i:\fonns\environmcnfal checklist.doc 5 03/04/15 King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal • Maintaining stormwater BMPs • Managing the project and storm water 13MPs. Dewatercd sediment will be disposed of at an upland facility approved to handle such waste. Site preparation will consist of: • Flagging the construction limits • Placing high-visibility fencing around sensitive areas that will not be cleared • Installing TESC measures, as required by the approved TESC plan • Flagging trees to be protected • Removing trees as necessary to mobilize equipment, as permitted by the construction plans and specifications • Grading and leveling the staging area • Installing the turbidity curtain. Equipment will consist of: • Support vehicles • Crane • Flow diversion structure such as a cofferdam • Turbidity curtains to control turbidity, if necessary • Pumps and piping • Excavator • Sediment transfer containers • Hydraulic dredge • Sediment dewatering equipment • Water treatment system • Dump trucks. Staging will occur on the south side ofthe river to avoid impacts to wetlands and the heron rookery north of the river. The staging area will be approximately 13,793 square feet. Staging area construction wiil temporarily remove approximately 9,125 square feet of the buffer of Wetland B and 1,267 square feet of Wetland C buffer. Temporarily cleared vegetation will be restored post project with appropriate native vegetation. Construction is scheduled to begin in spring of2015 and will take place over two seasons during the in-water work windows of2015 and 2016. Mobilization of equipment and staging area construction will start in latc May. In-water work will take place during thc approved in-water work window of July 1 to August 31 and i:\forms\environmcntal checklist.doc 6 03/04115 King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal will last about six weeks. Work will occur during daylight hours; generally from 7am to 6pm. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient iriformation 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 sifers). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity plan, 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 project site is located at 550 Monster Road SW in the City of Renton. The property is located in the SW Yo of Section 13, Township 23N, and Range 4E W.M. The Black River bisects the site (Figure 2). Figure 2. Vicinity Map (construction zone in red; impact study area in black) i:\forms\cnvironmental checklist.doc 7 03/04115 King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal B. ENVIRONME:\TT AI, ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (underline one): il!4 rolling, hilly, steep slope, mountainous, other. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Riverbank slopes exceed 40% over short distances, but the site generally has slopes less than 5%. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? if you know the classification of agricultural soils, specifY them and note any prime farmland. Soils on the project site have been mapped as Woodinville silt loam (predominantly hydric) and Puyallup fine sandy loam (partially hydric). Both soils occur on floodplains. The Woodinville soil is poorly drained, while the Puyallup soil is well drained. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? if so, describe. No, there are no indications or history of unstable soils on the project site or immediate surroundings. The soils on site are likely susceptible to liquefaction in large earthquakes. e.. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate the source offill. The project involves the excavation of approximately 2,900 cubic yards from the Black River channel. About 280 cubic yards of fill will be placed as a sand cap over the excavated area to contain any contaminated sediments exposed after excavation. The sand will be obtained from a commercial quarry. Construction of the staging and sediment decant area will require grading and levelling and area of approximately 13,793 square feet. f Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? if so, generally describe. Erosion could occur during preparation of the construction staging and sediment dewatering areas, but significant erosion is unlikely to occur because i:\forms\cnvironmental checklist.doc 8 03/04/15 King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal of the lack of extensive steep slopes on the project site and the implementation of temporary erosion and sedimentation controls described above in the description of the project (Section A.ll). g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? The site currently includes approximately 8,000 square feet of impervious area (not including the gravel parking area or access road). After construction is completed, staging areas will be restored, so that the project will not result in any additional impervious surface. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: 2. Air Temporary erosion and sediment control measures as described in the project description above (Section A.ll) would control erosion. a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (for example, dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke, greenhouse gases) during construction and when the project is completed? if any, generally describe and give approximate quantities, ifknown. During construction, minor amounts of dust will be generated by vehicular traffic. Sediment excavation and dewatering is unlikely to generate dust because material will be wet. Construction equipment and trucks hauling excavated sediment from the site will generate vehicular emissions. The attached greenhouse gas emissions worksheet provides estimated quantities of CO2 equivalent emissions. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? if so, generally describe. There are no off-site sources of emissions or odor that would affect this proposal. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to the air, if any: Impacts to air are expected to be minor and short-term (the construction period will last approxirnateiylO weeks); therefore, no measures to reduce or control impacts to air are proposed. 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)? i:\forms\envirollmcntal check[ist.doc 9 03104115 King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal If yes, describe the type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. The project will take place in the Black River, which flows west to join the Green River. The combined waterbodies flow north as the Duwamish River and enter Puget Sound at Elliott Bay. The City of Renton classifies the Black River as a Class I water. In conjunction with the proposed project, four wetlands were mapped within a study area that includes the forebay directly upstream of the Black River pump station as well as potential construction staging areas where the sediment will be temporarily placed while it is dewatered before being transported to an approved facility. One wetland (Wetland A), 1.3 acres in size and located on the north side of the Black River, is categorized as a Class 11 wetland under the Washington State Department of Ecology's rating system. Two wetlands (Wetlands Band D), 0.03 and 0.93 acres in size and located on thc south and north sides of the Black River, respectively, are categorized as Class III wetlands. One wetland (Wetland C), 0.04 acres in size and located south side of the Black River, is categorized as a Class IV wetland. Further information regarding these aquatic resources is contained in Wetland and Stream Delineation Report, Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Project prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants and dated May 2014 (draft). 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described walers? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. The project will remove sediment from the Black River. Construction staging and sediment dewatering will take place approximately 30 feet south of the river and Wetland C, and immediately adjacent to Wetland B. 3) Estimate the amount offill and dredge material that could 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 jill material. About 2,900 cubic yards of sediment will be removed from the approximately 0.34-acre concrete apron located in the Black River immediately upstream of the BRPS. Dredged material will be dewatered and treated in the staging and decant area south of the river. About 280 cubic yards of fill will be placed as a sand cap over the excavated area to contain any contaminated sediments exposed after excavation. The sand will be obtained from a commercial quarry. i:\fonns\cnvironmental checklist.doc 10 03/04/15 King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general descriplion, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. The sediment removal area will be isolated from the river by installing a temporary flow diversion structure such as a cofferdam. Temporary pumps and piping will be used to divert the river around the work zone, and the sediment removal area will be dewatered. 5) Does the proposal lie within a I DO-year floodplain? Ifso, note localion on Ihe site plan. The project will take place within the I DO-year floodplain of the Black River. 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. Thc project will not involve discharges of waste material to surface waters. Turbidity curtains, cofferdams, or other methods will be used to isolate the work zone from the Black River. Inadvertent discharges could occur if turbidity escapes the turbidity curtains or if excavated sediment re-enters the Black River during dewatering or is spilled during transport from the site and then re-enters surface waters along the transport route. However, the potential for inadvertent discharge is low and the amount, if it were to occur, would be limited. Excavated sediment will be dewatered on land. The decanted water will be treated to Department of Ecology surface water quality standards and discharged into the Black River, or, if testing indicates that contaminant levels are too high for discharge into the river, the decanted water will be hauled to the Renton treatment plant for treatment and direct discharge to Elliott Bay. b. Ground: /) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, ifknown. Groundwater will not be withdrawn for any purpose, nor will water be discharged to ground water. 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 i:\forms\environmenlal checklist-doc 11 03104115 King Connty Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal (if applicahle), or the numher of animals or humans the system(.\) are expected to serve. Waste material will not be discharged into the ground as a result of this project. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, ifany (include quantities, ifknown). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? Ifso, describe. Decanted water from sediment dewatering together with any precipitation-derived runoff from the dewatering site will be collected and treated prior to discharge to the Black River, which flows into the Duwamish River and ultimately into Elliott Bay in Puget Sound. If testing indicates that contaminant levels in the treated decant water are too high for discharge into the river, the decanted water will be hauled to the Renton treatment plant for treatment and direct discharge to Elliott Bay. The specific volume ofthis water is uncertain. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Waste materials will be prevented from entering the ground or surface waters by maintaining a clean site, properly disposing of debris and use of Best Management Practices to filter and trap material within the project site. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: 4_ Plants Waste materials (excavated sediment or water decanted from excavated sediment) are unlikely to enter groundwater. The sediment dewatering area will be protected with an impermcable liner to prevent decant watcr from entering the soil or groundwater. Small amounts of either sediment or decant water could enter the Black River as a result of either inadvertent spillage during transport or runoffleaving the dewatering site. The likelihood of either event happening is low and, if either were to occur, the amount of waste material would be small. a. Check or underline types of vegetation found on the site: o Deciduous trees: alder, maple, willow o Evergreen trees: pine, Douglas fir, western red cedar o Shrubs o Grass o Pasture i;\forms\cnvironmcntal checklistdoc 12 03/04115 King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal o Crop or grain I2'J Wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, reed canary grass o Water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other o Other types of vegetation: b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Approximately 11,551 square feet of vegetation will be removed for staging. Vegetation consists primarily of herbaceous species such as Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) but does include some red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa), red alder (Alnus rubra), and shore pine (Pinus contorta). c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. There are no known threatened or endangered plant species on or near the site. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Areas that will be temporarily cleared or disturbed for construction staging and sediment dewatering will be restored post project by planting with native vegetation. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. Himalayan blackberry and reed canarygrass occur on the project site. 5. Animals a. Check or underline any birds or animals that have been observed on or near the site, or are known to be on or near the site: I2'J Birds: hawk, heron. eagle, songbirds, other: ~ Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: I2'J Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Puget Sound Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and Puget Sound steelhead (0. mykiss), both listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, have been documented in the Black River. Puget Sound bull trout (Salvelinus conjIuentus), also listed as threatened, have been documented in the Green River approximately 1,700 feet from the pump station. i:\forms\environmcntal checklist.doc 13 03/04/15 King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. The site is located on a migration route for salmonids between Puget Sound and the Black River I Springbrook Creek. The Green River I Duwamish River valley generally supports spring and fall migration of birds. d Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: The following measures are proposed to protect wildlife and habitat: • The project staging area was moved from the north side of the river to the south side to avoid wetland impacts, as well as potential impacts to the great blue heron colony east of the pump station. • Impact pile driving was eliminated from consideration as a construction method to minimize noise impacts. • In-water work will occur during the approved in-water work window (July I to August 31). • Turbidity curtains or other best management practices will be used to minimize turbidity and the spread of potentially contaminated sediments. • Turbidity curtains will be deployed while the pumps are shut off, allowing sediments to settle before water is pumped downstream. • Ifwater pumped downstream of the BRPS from portable pumps does not meet Ecology Surface Water Quality Criteria, it will be pumped to the on-site water treatment facility. • The work area will be isolated and de-watered to control turbidity. • Fish will be removed from the work area before dewatering. • Sediment dewatering water will be treated to Ecology Surface Water Quality Criteria for turbidity and toxics before discharge into the Black River. • Drying agents will not be allowed to come into contact with Waters of the State. • A temporary erosion and sediment control plan will be implemented during construction to prevent and reduce the potential for erosion. The plan requires the placement and maintenance of erosion control measures on site throughout construction. Measures could include placement of straw wattles, silt fences, temporary seeding, andlor soil coverings as appropriate. • An engineer-approved spill prevention, control, and countermeasure plan will be implemented to guard against the release of any harmful pollutants or products. • All temporarily disturbed area~ will be re-vegetated with native plant species following construction. i:\forms\cnvironmental chccklist.doc 14 03/04/15 King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal • The project will comply with all tenns and conditions of any appl icable state and local regulations. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. Starlings, house sparrows, and non-native squirrels may occur on or near thc project site. There are no other known invasive animal species on or near the site. 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 usedfor heating, manufacturing, etc. The completed project will not have any energy requirements b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by a4iacent properties? If so, generally describe. This project will not affect the use of solar energy by adjacent properties. 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: The completed project will not use energy, and energy use during construction will be limited because of the short lO-week duration of construction. Other than requiring the contractor to maintain construction equipment in good working order, no measures to reduce or control energy impacts are needed or proposed. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? lfso, describe. Yes, sediments proposed for excavation contained elevated levels of several contaminants (see below). Handling of these sediments during excavation, dewatering, and transport for disposal presents the potential for exposure to these contaminants and a risk of spill. 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. Analytical test results on sediment samples indicate arsenic, cadmium, and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) concentrations that exceed the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) Method A or B cleanup levels for i;\fonns\environmental checklist.doc 15 03/04115 King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal unrestricted land use. In addition, sediment exceeds freshwater sediment quality criteria for TPH, bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), arsenic, cadmium, and nickel. 2) Describe existing hazardous chemicalslconditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. The elevated levels of contaminants in the excavated sediment affect project design (see subsection 5 below). 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored. used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. Lubrication oil and fuel would be used by construction equipment and small amounts are likely to be stored on site during the IO-week construction period. 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Emergency services may be required if a large spill of oil or fuel used by construction equipment occurred on site or if sediment were spilled during transport or containment, but these events and the associated need for emergency services are unlikely to occur 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: b. Noise: To mitigate the elevated levels of contaminants in the excavated sediment, project design includes measures to isolate the excavation area within the Black River during construction and to provide containment of the sediment during dewatering. These measures are described in the project description above (Section A.ll.). 1) What types of noise exist in the area that may affect your project (for example, traffic, equipment, operation, other)? There are no types of noise in the project area that would affect thc project. i:\/onns\enviromncntal checklist.doc 16 03/04115 King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or long-term basis ({or example, traffic construction, equipment operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would comefrom the site. The project would create elevated noise levels during the 10-week construction period. Levels of approximately 90 dBA would occur routinely within 50 feet of dredging equipment. Trucks transporting sediment from the site would contribute to overall traffic noise generated along transport routes. Noise from the site would occur between the hours of7:00 am and 6:00 pm. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, i{ any: Elevated noise levels would be temporary (a period of approximately 10 weeks) and the site is in an urban area with comparatively high ambient noise levels. Impact pile driving was eliminated from the design to minimize noise impacts. Noise impacts are therefore not expected to be significant, and no other measures to reduce or control noise impacts are proposed. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The project site contains a pump station consisting of a concrete dam placed across the Black River channel, with eight pumps to convey flow from the forebay behind the dam to the downstream Black River channel. Adjacent properties include a rail line, industrial buildings, and open space. The proposal wiII not affect this use or the uses of any adjacent property. b. Has the project site been used as workingfarmlands or workingforest lands? Ifso, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? if resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or noriforest use? The project site may have been used as working farmland or forest land prior to the urbanization of the Renton-Tukwila area. However, the area is not currently used for agriculture or forest production and no agricultural or forest land will be converted as a result of this proposal. I) Will the proposal affect or be afficted by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: i:\forms\cl1vironmenta[ checklist.doc 17 03/04/15 King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal No, the proposal will not affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations. c. Describe any structures on the site. The project site contains a pump station consisting of a concrete dam placed across the Black River channel, with eight pumps in an approximately 3-story structure located above the dam and spanning the river. A smaller building to the south houses the facility controls and emergency generator. A parking lot south of the facility contains fuel tanks, some piping, and a compressor. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No structures will be demolished. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The site is zoned Resource Conservation by the City of Renton . .f What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The site is within the City of Renton's Employment Area Valley comprehensive plan designation. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? The shoreline designation of the Black River at the site is Natural. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? lfso, specifY. The Black River and adjacent wetlands have been classified as critical areas by the City of Renton, and the project area lies within a designated flood hazard are. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? No people would reside or work in the completed project. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? The project would not displace any people. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: No displacement impacts would occur; therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary or proposed. i:\forms\cnv ironmenlal check] ist.doc 18 03104115 King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, ifany: The proposal would not change or significantly affect existing or projected land uses on or near the site and is compatible with those uses and the land use plans for the site and vicinity. m. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: There are no nearby agricultuml or forest lands that would be affected by this proposal; therefore, no measures to ensure compatibility are proposed, 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high-, middle-, or low-income housing. No housing units would be provided by the project. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high-, middle-, or low-income housing. No housing units would be eliminated by the project. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: No housing impacts would occur; therefore, no measures to mitigate housing impacts are proposed. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(~), not including antennas? What is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The project does not include any proposed structures. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? The project would not permanently alter or obstruct any views. During sediment removal, construction equipment, which would likely include a crane and an excavator with clamshell, will be visiblc from nearby vantage points, including from vehicles along Monster Road west of the site. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Aesthetic impacts will be minimal and temporary, occurring only during construction. Therefore, no measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts are proposed. i:\1onns\envimnmentai checklist.doc 19 03104115 -=-K=:i",ng"--=C-=o-=u=.nly"'-CE:::n::cv-=i=-:ro=-::n::cmcce=n=-::t",al,--C",h:::e:..:c,,,kl=:i::.:st'-----______ -=B-=-la"'c-=-k:...:R:ci:.:.v-=-er:..cPump Station Sediment Removal 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? During what time of day would it mainly occur? Construction activity would occur between the daylight hours of7:00 am and 6:00 pm during the late spring-summer season. Therefore, construction and construction equipment is unlikely to generate light. Some glare may be generated from construction equipment and trucks transporting equipment to and from the site or dewatered sediment from the site. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? The finished project will not create any light or glare. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? No existing off-site sources oflight or glare would affect this proposal. d. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any. Light and glare would bc minimal and also temporary (a duration of approximately 10 weeks); therefore, measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts are not proposed. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The project site is located immediately adjacent to the Black River Riparian Forest, which straddles the Black River north and east of Monster Road SW. The Metro Waterworks Park is located south of Monster Road SW within about V. mile of the project site. Both the Black River Riparian Forest and Metro Waterworks Park provide informal and formal passive recreation opportunities. Monster Road S W is designated as a bikeway by the City of Renton. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The proposed project would not displace any existing recreational uses. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: The proposal would not significantly impact recreation opportunities, in part because any effects would be temporary (approximately 10 weeks in duration); therefore, no measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation are proposed. i:\fonns\environmental checklist.doc 20 03/04115 King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal 13. Historical and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed/or, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be un ur next tu the site? I/so, generally describe. The only structures on the site are the Black River pump station and associated structures. The pump station was constructed in the 1970s and is therefore less than 45 years old. There are no buildings, structures, or sites on, or in the immediate vicinity of, the project site that are over 45 years old and eligible for or listed on national, state, or local preservation registers. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence 0/ historical, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. There are no landmarks, features, or other evidence ofIndian or historic use or occupation on the project site. The King County Historic Preservation Program performed a cultural resources review in April 2014. King County and Washington State historic registers, maps, and aerial photographs were reviewed, Shovel probes were excavated on the north and southeastern side of the staging area. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: The proposal would involve excavation of sediment transported recently (within the past several decades) into the forebay area ofthe BRPS. Surficial soils will be excavated to clear obstructions in the construction staging area and sediment dewatering area. The KCHPP cultural resources review determined that although the staging area has a High Probability of containing archaeological sites based on environmental and other factors, it has a Low Probability of containing intact archaeological resources because project- related ground disturbance will be entirely within artificial fill. The dredging area was determined as having a Low Probability of containing archaeological sites. Even though the type of activities resulting from the proposal would have a low likelihood of encountering cultural resources and there are no known cultural resources on or immediately adjacent to the construction site, the project site is along the Black River near its confluence with the Green River, and the site likely experienced substantial use by Native Americans. Therefore an unanticipated discovery plan will be developed and implemented during construction. The plan will describe procedures to follow, in accordance with state and federal laws, if archaeological materials or human remains are discovered. 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. Monster Road SW, a two-lane arterial, borders thc project site on the south and would provide access to the site. Dual existing access driveways located approximately i:\[orms\cnvironmental checklist,doc 21 03104/l5 _King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal 500 and 600 feet, respectively, east of the Monster Road bridge over the Black River, provide access to thc south side of the pump station. b. Is the site currently served by public transil~ If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The site is not served by public transit. The nearest public transit is King County bus routes that run along SW Grady Way approximately'!. mile southeast of the site and along SW Sunset Boulevard approximately Y, mile NW of the site. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The completed project would not create any additional parking spaces or eliminate any existing parking spaces. 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). The proposal will not require any improvements to any public roads or streets or pedestrian, bicycle, or state transportation facilities. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity oj) water, rail, or air transportation? llso, generally describe. The excavated sediment will be transferred to land for decanting and disposal by road. The project will not use rail or air transportation. A Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway right-of-way (Woodinville Subdivision) borders the north side of the project site. f How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by !he completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. The completed project would not generate any vehicular trips. Dewatered sediment will "bulk up", and the expected final volume of dewatered sediment that will be transported from the project site is 3,600 to 5,400 cubic yards (depending on whether drying agents need to be added to the dewatering sediments). Therefore up to 540 truck trips would be generated during transport of dewatered sediment from the site. Transport of sediment may take one or two weeks. Up to about 108 truck trips per day, or up to approximately 10-11 truck trips per hour would be generated temporarily. These estimates are based on design information. In addition to these truck trips, a small number of vehicle trips per day (likely less than 20) would be generated by construction workers travelling to and from the project site. g. Will the proposal interjixe with, ailec!, or be qffected by the movement ol agricultural andforest products on roads or streets in the area? Ifso, generally descrihe. The proposal will not interfere with, affect, or be affected by the movement of agricultural or forest products on roads or streets in the project area. i;\torms\cllvironmcntal checklist.doc 22 03104115 King County Environmental Checklist Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Transportation impacts on adjacent roadways would be short-term (a duration of one to several weeks for the bulk of the vehicular traffic generated). Monster Road S W had a daily vehicle count in 2010 in excess of 10,000 vehicles, and the additional trips from this project would be up to about 1 % of that daily volume. No significant transportation impacts are expected; therefore, no measures to reduce or control transportation impacts are proposed. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased needfor public services (jor example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? Ifso, generally describe. The project would not result in any significant increase in the need for public services. During construction, a jobsite accident could result in the need for emergency health care services, but the increased need is unlikely to be significant. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, ifany: No significant impacts on public services would result from the project; therefore, no measures to reduce or control public service impacts are proposed. 16. Utilities a. Underline utilities currently available at the site: electricity. natural gas, water. refuse service, telephone. sanitary sewer._septic 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 that might be needed. No utilities are proposed for the project. C. 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: Sf Title: Date Submitted: i:\forms\cnvironmental checklist.doc 23 03104115 ATIACHMENTA GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION CALCULATIONS Black River Pump Station Sediment Removal Embodied Emissions (Construction) COR$tructlon Hours of Fuel Total fuel Fuel Type HEAVY EQUIPMENT Dllratlon Conttructlon consumption consumption (weeks) Igal/nr) 18allonsl Cranes [lZ-40ton) 10 660 , 1980 Diesel SO-ton c)(cavator 0.'1 ba 10 '60 10 6600 Diesel Sediment transport balie 10 660 10 6600 Diesel Hydraulic dredge 10 660 20 13200 Diesel Dump trucks (540 trips of 5 hours each) NA 2700 3.7 9990 Diesel PIckup truck 121 10 1320 3 3960 Gasoline Portable water pl.lmp 10 660 1 660 Gasoline 9ru~h cutter 1 66 1 66 Gasoline .&SIImptlol1l: ~iesel 38,370 lypiCIII ,onSllu'lion day i, 11'1("'" 17.00 am 10 6:00 pm) G<l501ine 4,686 Total 43,056 Ibs COle I COle (Ibs) gallon of fuel 26.55 52,569 26.55 175,230 26.55 175,130 26.55 350,460 26.55 255,235 24.3 96,228 24.3 16,038 24.3 1,604 1,Ola,724 113,810 1,132,593 COle (metric tons) 23.8 79.5 79.5 159.0 120.3 43.6 7.' 0.7 462.1 51.7 513.7 T T T 01.11 COle ot .. ICO,e 01.11 COle