Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA E03-014 - BOEING - CONTAMINATED SEDIMENT REMOVALBOEING COMPANY 9905 E MARGINAL WAY S E03 -014 Date: To: Cizy of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Boeing Sediment Removal NOTICE OF DECISION July 22, 2003 The Boeing Corporation The Duwamish River Coalition Project Performance Corporation Department of Ecology Shoreline Division Department of Fish and Wildlife Department of Natural Resources NOAA US Army Corp of Engineers State Department of Ecology, SEPA Division PROJECT: In May of 2003, The Boeing Company submitted for approval to dredge a .02 acre within the Duwamish Waterway. The dredging will remove about 100 cubic yards of contaminated material fill in front of the south storm drain from the Boeing Developmental Center. This fill material contains hazardous substances in excess of State sediment standards. A vacuum truck will be used to remove the sediment. The truck and other associated equipment will be parked in an adjacent paved parking lot. The water from the sediment will be drained on site. Clean fill will be imported and added to the area that is dredged. The excavated material will be disposed at a site that is permitted to receive such hazardous waste. FILE NUMBERS: E 03 -014 ASSOCIATED FILES: None APPLICANT: The Boeing Company REQUEST: SEPA Determination LOCATION: Boeing Developmental Center, 9905 E Marginal Way S. Tukwila, WA NE ''A Section 4, T23., R4E., WM. This notice is to confirm the decision reached by Tukwila's SEPA Official to issue a Determination of Non- significance (DNS) for the above project based on the environmental checklist and the underlying permit application. Project materials including the application, any staff reports, and other studies related to the permits are available for inspection at: Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. The project planner is Brandon J. Miles who may be contacted at (206) 431 -3670 for further information. The decision is appealable to the Superior Court pursuant to the Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions, Revised Code of Washington (RCW 36.70C). Last saved 07/22/03 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I. LLB S 1-,10. HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing Project Number: E03- 014 Determination of Non - Significance Person requesting mailing: DRAN I Notice of Public Meeting Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Notice of Action Planning Commission Agenda Pkt Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application. for Shoreline Mgmt Permit __ __ FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 )( Other I'k'Ti (.E. OF V'+F�G�5101 Was mailed to each of the addresses listed 'on this 4540 day o fayY in the year 20 O. P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM Project Name: 60Ei N &j CoR PPRATT pNl Project Number: E03- 014 Mailer's Signature: 1,.. Person requesting mailing: DRAN I P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM CHECKLIST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW /SHORELINE PERMIT MAILINGS FEDERAL AGENCIES U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS () U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY () EDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION `() S. DEPT OF H.U.D. ( ) DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE 1 NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES ( ) OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY ( ) TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ( ) DEPT NATURAL RESOURCES ( ) OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR plEPT OF COMM. TRADE & ECONOMIC DEV. EPT OF FISHERIES & WILDLIFE ( DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SHORELAND DIV DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION* OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL * SEND CHKLIST W/ DETERMINATIONS * SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION KING COUNTY AGENCIES ( ) BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD () FIRE DISTRICT #11 () FIRE DISTRICT #2 ( ) K.C. WASTEWATER TREATMENT DIVISION ( ) K.C. DEPT OF PARKS & REC ( ) K.C. ASSESSOR'S OFFICE ( ) TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) TUKWILA LIBRARY () RENTON LIBRARY () KENT LIBRARY () CITY OF SEATTLE LIBRARY ( ) QWEST () SEATTLE CITY LIGHT ( ) PUGET SOUND ENERGY () HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT () SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ( ) AT &T CABLE SERVICES ( ) KENT PLANNING DEPT ( ) TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: ( ) PUBLIC WORKS ( ) POLICE ( ) PLANNING ( ) PARKS & REC. ( ) CITY CLERK ( ) FIRE ( ) FINANCE () BUILDING ()MAYOR SCHOOLS /LIBRARIES UTILITIES CITY AGENCIES ( ) HEALTH DEPT ( ) PORT OF SEATTLE ( ) K.C. DEV & ENVIR SERVICES -SEPA INFO CNTR ( ) K.C. TRANSIT DIVISION - SEPA OFFICIAL ( ) K.C. LAND & WATER RESOURCES ( ) FOSTER LIBRARY ( ) K C PUBLIC LIBRARY ()HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) OLYMPIC PIPELINE ( ) VAL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( ) WATER DISTRICT #20 ( ) WATER DISTRICT #125 ( ) CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS ( ) BRYN MAWR- LAKERIDGE SEWERNVATER DISTRICT ( ) RENTON PLANNING DEPT ( ) CITY OF SEA -TAC ( ) CITY OF BURIEN ( ) TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ( ) TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE - SEPA INFO CENTER - DCLU ( ) STRATEGIC PLANNING OFFICE* * NOTICE OF ALL SEATTLE RELATED PLNG PROJ. OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES () PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL () W K C CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE ) CULTURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM ( ) FISHERIES PROGRAM ( ) WILDLIFE PROGRAM MEDIA ( ) SEATTLE TIMES () SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL P:\ADM INISTRATI V E \FORMS \CHKLI ST. DOC )' UWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE () P.S. AIR POLLUTION CLEAN AGENCY ( ) ABOUND TRANSIT DUWAMISH RIVER CLEAN -UP COALITION *SEND NOTICE OF ALL APPLICATIONS ON DUWAMISH RIVER ( ) HIGHLINE TIMES ( ) CI.TUKWILA.WA.US.WWW PUBLIC NOTICE MAILINGS FOR PERMITS SEPA MAILINGS Mail to: (comment period starts on date of mailing) Dept. of Ecology Environmental Review Section *Applicant *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list) *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination KC Transit Division — SEPA Official would like to receive information about all projects that might affect transit demand Send These Documents to DOE: SEPA Determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed or sent to newspaper) SHORELINE MAILINGS: Notice of Application for a Substantial Development Permit must be mailed to owners and to property owners within 500 feet of subject property, comments are due 30 days after the notice of application is mailed/posted. The notice of Application for Shoreline Substantial Development Permit must include a statement that any person desiring to submit written comments on the application or desiring to receive notification of the final decision on the application may do so within 30 days of the notice of application. If a hearing will be held on the application, the hearing notice must include the information that written comments may be submitted, or oral presentation made at the hearing. Shoreline Permit Notice of Decision: Mail to: (within 8 days of decision; 21 -day appeal period begins date received by DOE) Department of Ecology Shorelands Section State Attorney General *Applicant *Indian Tribes *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list). *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination Send These Documents to DOE and Attorney General: Permit Data Sheet Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) Shoreline Permit Application Form (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) - Site plan, with mean high water mark & improvements — Cross - sections of site with structures & shoreline - Grading Plan — Vicinity map SEPA determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Any background studies related to impacts on shoreline Notice of Application Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed) P:\ADMINI STRATI V E \FORMS \CHKLIST. DOC . • East Marginal Associates 700 N 36th St, Seattle WA 98103 Dept Natural Resources attn: Rex Thompson 950 Farman Av N, Enumclaw WA 98022 attn: Rex Thompson • • City of Tukwila Department of Community Development / 6300 Southcenter BL, Suite 100 / Tukwila, WA 98188 / (206) 431 -3670 DETERMINATION OF NON - SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) File Number: E03 -014 Applied: 05/09/2003 Issue Date: 06/27/2003 Status: ISSUED Proponent: THE BOEING COMPANY Lead Agency: City of Tukwila Description of Proposal: The Boeing Company proposes to remove approximately 100 cubic yards of contaminated sediment from an approximate .02 acres area immediately in front of the south storm drain from the Boeing Developmental Center. The Boeing Developmental Center is located on th eastern shore of the Duwamish River. This action would occur in the intertidal area for 2 -4 day between August 8 -12, 2003. Sediment remval would occur during low tides when the action area is "in the dry" above the water line. Location of Proposal: Address: 9905 EAST MARGINAL WY S TUKW Parcel Number: 0003400018 Section/Township /Range: NE 1/4 Section 4, T23N., RO4E., WM The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under 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 information is available to the public on request. This DNS is issued under WAC 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by JUN I1 NI I c2.00 3 . The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. (,)\--- 1,..A.2 Z 7 , Zc) 3- Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431 -3670 Date Any appeal shall be linked to a specific governmental action. The State Environmental Policy Act is not intended to create a cause of action unrelated to a specific governmental action. Appeals of environmental determinations shall be commenced within the time period to appeal the governmental action that is subject to environmental review. (RCW 43.21C.075) doc: Miscperm E03 -014 Printed: 06 -27 -2003 Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I. L S l HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing X Determination of Non - Significance Person requesting mailing: 25)Z4001/1 Notice of Public Meeting Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Notice of Action Planning Commission Agenda Pkt Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit __ __ FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Other Was mailed to each of the addresses 7 i s ted on this .7'" day o fjovE in the year 20 CO P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM Project Name: r06/ '( (70/14)*()/ Project Number: E D 3 -WY Mailer's Signature: L &SLr /E Person requesting mailing: 25)Z4001/1 P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM CHEST: ENVIRONMENTAL. REVIEW /SHORELINE P•T MAILINGS FEDERAL AGENCIES U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS DERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE 6 U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ( )J.S. DEPT OF H.U.D. �(f NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES ( ) OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY ( TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT DEPT NATURAL RESOURCES ( OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR WEPT OF COMM. TRADE & ECONOMIC DEV. DEPT OF FISHERIES & WILDLIFE 1 EPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. EPT OF ECOLOGY, SHORELAND DIV DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION` ( ) OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL * SEND CHKLIST W/ DETERMINATIONS • SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION KING COUNTY AGENCIES () BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD ( ) FIRE DISTRICT #11 () FIRE DISTRICT #2 () .C. WASTEWATER TREATMENT DIVISION K.C. DEPT OF PARKS & REC K.C. ASSESSORS OFFICE ( ) TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) TUKWILA LIBRARY () RENTON LIBRARY ( ) KENT LIBRARY ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE LIBRARY ) OWEST () SEATTLE CITY LIGHT ( ) PUGET SOUND ENERGY ( ) HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT () SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ( ) AT &T CABLE SERVICES ( ) KENT PLANNING DEPT ( ) TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: ( ) PUBLIC WORKS ( ) POLICE ( ) PLANNING ( ) PARKS & REC. ( ) CITY CLERK ( ) FIRE ( ) FINANCE ( ) BUILDING ( ) MAYOR SCHOOLS/LIBRARIES UTILITIES CITY AGENCIES HEALTH DEPT ORT OF SEATTLE K.C. DEV & ENVIR SERVICES -SEPA INFO CNTR ) K.C. TRANSIT DIVISION - SEPA OFFICIAL (K.C. LAND & WATER RESOURCES ( ) FOSTER LIBRARY () K C PUBLIC LIBRARY ( ) HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) OLYMPIC PIPELINE ( ) VAL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( ) WATER DISTRICT #20 ( ) WATER DISTRICT #125 ( ) CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS ( ) BRYN MAWR- LAKERIDGE SEWER/WATER DISTRICT ( ) RENTON PLANNING DEPT ( ) CITY OF SEA -TAC ( ) CITY OF BURIEN ( ) TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS () UKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY OF SEATTLE - SEPA INFO CENTER - DCLU ( STRATEGIC PLANNING OFFICE' • NOTICE OF ALL SEATTLE RELATED PLNG PROJ. OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES ( ) PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL ,(14 SW K C CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ��(`� MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE ( ) CULTURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM j FISHERIES PROGRAM ( ) WILDLIFE PROGRAM ( ) SEATTLE TIMES ( ) SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL P:\ADMINISTRATI V E \FORMS \CHKLIST.DOC MEDIA DUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE ( P.S. AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY ( ) SOUND TRANSIT Scout Lp oc) 04/ k,) Ci(U7, ( ) HIGHLINE TIMES ( ) CI.TUKWILA.WA.US.WWW l�kwc,v'(',1 12ivc✓ c 1 -up Cot.1li)wi 5�1 fir0- kvt 4J e- Sre44tc1 w4 61 '313 June 30, 2003 • Ciiy of Tukwila Department of Communii Development- C � ®� ateve Lancaster, Director Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Mr. James Bet The Boeing Company PO Box 3707 M/C JW -12 Seattle, WA 98109 RE: SEPA Determination Dear Mr. Bet: 8 2003 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT P1) Enclosed you will fmd the SEPA determination and staff report for the Boeing Sediment Removal project on the Duwamish River. The City has issued a Determination of Non - significance (DNS). The 14 -day comment period began on Friday, June 30, 2003 and will end on July 14, 2003. I have also enclosed a letter stating that the project is exempt from obtaining a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. Please note that in order for the project to.be exempt you must obtain an HPA from the Department of Fish and Wildlife. The City will need a copy of the HPA once it is issued. If you have any questions, you can call me at (206) 431 -3684 or email me at bmiles@ci.tukwila.wa.us. Sincerely, Brandon J. Miles Assistant Planner cc. File (03 -014) a ir,,m ic%b") Henn #inn • T..4.a: /s WWchlnetnn 0R1RR • Ahnno• 2nti- AV -71S717 • Far. 7M5.441. 74SAS • Cizy of Tukwila • Steven M Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM To: Steve Lancaster From: Brandon Miles` \�' Date: June 25, 2003 Re: E03 -014 (SEPA Determination) Boeing Company Boeing Developmental Center 9905 E Marginal Way S, NE '/4 Section 4, T23., R4E., WM Dredging within the OHWM in the Duwamish Waterway Project Description: In May of 2003, The Boeing Company submitted for approval to dredge a .02 acre within the Duwamish Waterway. The dredging will remove about 100 cubic yards of contaminated material fill in front of the south storm drain from the Boeing Developmental Center. This fill material contains hazardous substances in excess of State sediment standards. A vacuum truck will be used to remove the sediment. The truck and other associated equipment will be parked in an adjacent paved parking lot. The water from the sediment will be drained on site. Clean fill will be imported and added to the area that is dredged. The excavated material will be disposed at a site that is permitted to receive such hazardous waste. Agencies with Jurisdiction: Department of Ecology (DOE) Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Department of Natural Resources (DNR) NOAA US Army Corp of Engineers (COE) Other Required Permits: HPA (WDFW) 401 Water Quality Certification (DOE) 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 McLeod USA fiber Optic L2000 -008 Staff Report • • Aquatic Resources Use Authorization Notification (DNR) Section 404 (COE) Section 10 (COE) The project is part of planned action with the Department of Ecology, which allows the City to exempt the project from having to obtain a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. Summary of Primary Impacts: • Earth The work will be preformed within the OHWM of the Duwamish Waterway. The site is generally flat with the steepest grade being about 5 percent. The type of soils found on the site are mainly sand and silty sand. Once the contaminated fill is removed it will be replaced with similar, clean material. The contaminated materials will be disposed at a site that is permitted to receive such materials. There is no history of unstable slopes in the area and erosion is not expected to occur. In addition, a silt fence will be constructed around all work areas. •Air Some emissions from construction vehicles will occur. These will be minor and will not have a significant effect on neighboring properties or the environment. Water The sediment that is removed will be drained on site. Plants As the project is within the OHWM the plant materials found are consistent with wet soil plants, such as cattail, buttercup, bullrush, and skunk cabbage. The work will require that a small amount of marine moss be removed. After the work is completed one pre - commercially thinned Douglas Fir tree (6 inches n diameter) with root wad attached will be anchored in the sediment removal area. This will enhance nearshore intertidal habitat for juvenile salmonids. In addition, 15 1- gallon containers of the native Lyngby's Sledge will be planted to improve the availability of native salt marsh vegetation in the project area. q : \carol\M c Leod\sepa- staffrpt.doc McLeod USA fiber Optic L2000 -008 Staff Report Animals • • The animals that are on or near the site include the following birds, heron and kingfisher. As the project is within the OHWM of the Duwamish Waterway the following are present, salmon, trout, and shellfish. Three animal species that are listed at threatened are located within or the near the project area. These include, the bald eagle, Puget Sound chinook salmon, and the Coastal/Puget Sound bull trout. The site is also home to a candidate species the Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia coho salmon. The applicants have filed for the necessary Federal and State permits. The Corps of Engineers has required that a Biological Evaluation be completed, which the City has reviewed and accepted as part of the SEPA review. The project should not impair existing animal life in or near the project site. In fact, the goal of the project is to enhance the habitat environment. To enhance riparian and aquatic vegetation Carex lyngbyi will be planted to improve the availability of native salt marsh vegetation. Large wood debris will also be placed on site which will improve the habitat for juvenile salmon. BMPs will be employed during construction to reduce any degradation to the habitat area. • Energy/Natural Resources Construction activities might use electric power, gasoline and diesel internal combustion engines. • Environmental Health Noise generated by construction equipment will occur on a short-term basis. The site is located within an industrial area of the City. There are no residential units that will be impacted from the activities taking place on the property. The project does involve the removal of hazardous material., PCBs. The PCBs will be removed by trained staff and disposed of at a site that is permitted to receive such materials. q: \carol \M c Leod\sepa- staffrpt.doc McLeod USA fiber Optic L2000 -008 Staff Report • • • Land /Shoreline Use • • The current zoning on the property is Manufacturing Industrial Center Heavy Industrial. The surrounding land uses are industrial. The project will be occurring within the shoreline area of the Duwamish River. This area is subject to the King County Shoreline Master Program. The shoreline environment is designated as urban. As noted, this project is part of a Planned Action by DOE, thus the City can exempt the project from obtaining a Shoreline Substantial Permit. Housing No housing is proposed nor will any residential structures be removed. Aesthetics The project will have no impact on the aesthetics in the area. Light and Glare N/A • Recreation • Limited boating does occur on the Duwamish River. The project is temporary and will not impact boating in the area. In addition, the work will be performed in August during low tide. This will allow the work to take place above water and will not have an impact on boaters. Historic and Cultural Preservation No known places or landmarks exist within the project area. Transportation The work will not have an impact on transportation elements in the area. Public Services N/A q: \carol\M c Leod\.sepa- staffrpt. doc McLeod USA fiber Optic L2000 -008 Staff Report • • • Utilities Project will not increase demand on the utility systems. Recommendation: Determination of Non - Significance The BMPs listed in the "Biological Evaluation" will prevent any degradation to surrounding habitat during construction. The applicants are also required to obtain additional permit from State and Federal Agencies. q: \carol\Mc Leod\sepa- staffrpt.doc May 23, 2003 • City of Tukwila • Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Ms. PJ Cummings Duwamish River Cleanup Coalition 5410 First Ave NE Seattle, WA 98105 RE: SEPA checklist for Boeing Clean-up project Dear Ms. Cummings: Enclosed you will find the SEPA checklist and notice of application for the Boeing Company. The SEPA application was submitted to the City on May 9, 2003. The comment period began on May 20, 2003 and will end June 3. The City will also issue Boeing an exemption from obtaining a Shoreline Permit. This is allowed under WAC 173 -27 -040 (3), which exempts hazardous substance remedial actions from the requirements of the State Shoreline Act. If you have any questions, you can call me at (206) 431 -3684 or email me at bmiles@ci.tukwila.wa.us. Sincerely, ranndon . Miles Assistant Planner cc. (File 03 -014) 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 H(AULIC PROJECT APPROVIIL pougeneti of RCW 77.55.100 - appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 RCW Mod DATE OF ISSUE: June 25. 2003 State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 4 Office 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard Mill Creek, Washington 98012 LOG NUMBER: ST- F8340 -01 PERMITTEE The Boeing Company ATTENTION: Jim Bet Post Office Box 3707 M/C IW -12 Seattle, Washington 98124 206- 679 -0433 AUTHORIZED AGEI$T OR CONTRACTOR Project Performance Corporation ATTENTION: Tom McKeon, 16935 Southeast 39th Street Bellevue, Washington 98008 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Replace Permanent Fixed Buried Below Bed Natural Earth Sand and Gravel (Replace approximately 100 Cubic Yards of Contaminated Sediments with Clean Sediments) PROJECT LOCATION: Boeing Development Center, 9905 East Marginal Way South, Tukwila, Washington 47.51196 North Latitude, 122.29737 West Longitude # WRIA WATER BODY 1 09.0001 Duwamish River TRIBUTARY TO Elliott Bay PROVISIONS 1/4 SEC. SEC. TOWNSHIP RANGE COUNTY NE 04 23 Noith 04 East King 1. TIMING LINIITATIONS: The project may begin immediately and shall be completed by March 1, 2007, provided that sediment removal shall occur only between July 1 and August 20. 2. NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT: The Area Habitat Biologist listed below shall be contacted at least three working days prior to start of work, and again within seven days of completion of workto arrange for compliance inspection. 3. Work shall be accomplished per plans and specifications entitled, "REFERENCE #: 2003 - 00441 ", dated May 30, 2003, submitted to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), except as modified by this HPA. These plans and the conservation measures and best management practices attached to the application reflect design criteria per Chapter 220 -110 WAC. These documents reflect mitigation procedures to significantly reduce or eliminate impacts to fish resources. A copy of these documents shall be available on site during construction. 4. If at any time, as a result of project activities, fish are observed in distress, a fish kill occurs, or water quality problems develop (including equipment leaks or spills), operations shall cease and WDFW at (360) 534 -8233 and Washington Department of Ecology at (425) 649 -7000 shall be contacted immediately. Work shall not resume until further approval is given by WDFW. 5. The conservation measures and best management practices listed in the attachment to the application shall be used to provide proper protection of fish life. 6. Extreme care shall be taken to ensure that no petroleum products, hydraulic fluid, sedirrients, sediment -laden water, chemicals, or any other toxic or deleterious materials are allowed to enter or leach into the river or associated wetlands. SEPA: DNS by City of Tukwila final June 4, 2003 APPLICATION ACCEPTED: June 25, 2003 ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: Boone 030 [P2] D....e 1 ..F 2 Ravin Deyartaaud dad WHAM HYDRAULIC HYPRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAZ RCW 77.55.100 - appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 RCW DATE OF ISSUE: June 25, 2003 State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 4 Office 16018 Mlll Creek Boulevard Mill Creek, Washington 98012 LOG NUMBER: ST- F8340 -0I Larry Fisher (425) 649 -7042 �,,. for Director Area Habitat Biologist 0 WDF' GENERAL PROVISIONS This Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) pertains only to the provisions of the Fisheries Code (RCW 77.55). Additional authorization from other public agencies may be necessary for this project. Compliance with this HPA does not ensure compliance with the federal Endangered Species Act or any other local, state or federal laws. This HPA shall be available on the job site at all times and all its provisions followed by the permittee and operator(s) performing the work. This HPA does not authorize trespass. The person(s) to whom this HPA is issued may be held liable for any loss or damage to fish life or fish habitat which results from failure to comply with the provisions of this HPA. Failure to comply with the provisions of this Hydraulic Project Approval could result in a civil penalty of up to one hundred dollars per day or a gross misdemeanor charge, possibly punishable by fine and/or imprisonment. All HPAs issued pursuant to RCW 77.55.100 or 77.55.160 are subject to additional restrictions, conditions or revocation if the Department of Fish and Wildlife determines that new biological or physical information indicates theineed for such action. The permittee has the right pursuant to Chapter 34.04 RCW to appeal such decisions. All HPAs issued pursuant to RCW 77.55.103 may be modified by the Department of Fish and Wildlife due to changed conditions after consultation with the permittee: PROVIDED HOWEVER, that such modifications shall be subject to appeal to the Hydraulic Appeals Board established in RCW 77.55.130. APPEALS - GENERAL INFORMATION IF YOU WISH TO APPEAL A DENIAL OF OR CONDITIONS PROVIDED IN A HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL, THERE ARE INFORMAL AND FORMAL APPEAL PROCESSES AVAILABLE. A. INFORMAL APPEALS (WAC 220 - 110 -340) OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO RCW 77.55.100, 77.55.103, 77.55.106, AND 77.55.160: A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the following Department actions may request an informal review of: (A) The denial or issuance of a HPA, or the conditions or provisions made part of a HPA; of (B) An order imposing civil penalties. It is recommended that an aggrieved party contact the Area Habitat Biologist and discuss the concerns. Most problems are resolved at this level, but if not, you may elevate your concerns to his/her supervisor. A request for an INFORMAL REVIEW shall be in WRITING to the Department of Fish and Wildlife, 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia. Washington 98501 -1091 and shall be RECEIVED by the Department within 30 -days of the denial or issuance of a HPA or receipt of an order imposing civil penalties. The 30- day time requirement may be stayed by the Department if negotiations are occurring between the aggrieved party and the Area Habitat Biologist and/or his/her supervisor. The Habitat Protection Services Division Manager or his/her designee shall conduct a review and recommend a decision to the Director or its designee. If you are not satisfied with the results of this informal appeal, a form"' appeal may be filed. irinhigeos &PROW 1ISad wpm HY.AULIC PROJECT APPROV•, -: RCW 77.55.100 - appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 RCW DATE OF ISSUE: June 25, 2003 State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 4 Office 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard Mill Creek. Washington 98012 LOG NUMBER: ST- F8340 -01 B. FORMAL APPEALS (WAC 220 -110 -350) OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO RCW 77.55.100 OR 77.55.106: A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the following Department actions may request an formal review of: (A) The denial or issuance of a HPA, or the conditions or provisions made part of a HPA; (B) An order imposing civil penalties; or (C) Any other "agency action" for which an adjudicative proceeding is required under the Administrative Procedure Act, Chapter 34.05 RCW. A request for a FORMAL APPEAL shall be in WRITING to the Department of Fish and Wildlife, 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, Washington 98501 -1091, shall be plainly labeled as "REQUEST FOR FORMAL APPEAL" and shall be RECEIVED DURING OFFICE HOURS by the Department within 30 -days of the Department action that is being challenged. The time period for requesting a formal appeal is suspended during consideration of a timely informal appeal. If there has been an informal appeal, the deadline for requesting a formal appeal shall be within 30 -days of the date of the Department's written decision in response to the informal appeal. C. FORMAL APPEALS OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO RCW 77.55.103 or 77.55.160: A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the denial or issuance of a HPA, or the conditions or provisions made part of a HPA may request a formal appeal. The request for FORMAL APPEAL shall be in WRITING to the Hydraulic Appeals Board per WAC 259 -04 at Environmental Hearings Office, 4224 Sixth Avenue SE, Building Two - Rowe Six, Lacey, Washington 98504; telephone 360/459 -6327. D. FAILURE TO APPEAL WITHIN THE REQUIRED TIME PERIODS RESULTS IN FORFEITURE OF ALL APPEAL RIGHTS. IF THERE IS NO TIMELY REQUEST FOR AN APPEAL, THE DEPARTMENT ACTION SHALL BE FINAL AND UNAPPEALABLE. Page 3 of 3 JOINT AQUATIC RESOURCES PERMIT APPLICATION FORM (JARPA) (for use in Washington State) PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT IN BLACK INK ❑ Application for a Fish Habitat Enhancement Project per requirements of RCW 77.55.290. You must submit a copy of this completed JARPA application form and the (Fish Habitat Enhancement JARPA Addition) to your local Govemment Planning Department and Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife Area Habitat Biologist on the same day. NOTE: LOCAL GOVERNMENTS —You must submit any comments on these projects to WDFW within 15 working days Based on the instructions provided, I am sending copies of this application to the following: (check all that apply) CM Local Government for shoreline: • Substantial Development • Conditional Use • Variance • Exemption • Revision • Floodplaln Management 17 Cry Areas Ordinance ® Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for HPA (Submit 3 copies to WDFW Region) II Washington Department of Ecology for 401 Water Quality Certification (to Regional Office- Federal Permit Unit) ® Washington Department of Natural Resources for Aquatic Resources Use Authorization Notification ® Corps of Engineers for Il Section 404 1311Seclion 10 permit ❑ Coast Guard for General Bridge Act Perri-al • For Department of Transportation projects only: This project will be designed to meet conditions of the most current Ecology/Department of Transportation Water Quality Implementing Agreement SECTION A - Use for all permits covered by this application Be sure to ALSO complete Section C (Signature Bloch for al permit applications. 1. APPLICANT The Boeing Company MAILING ADDRESS PO BOX 3707 MJC MI-12, attrr: Jim Bet WORK PHONE E-MAIL ADDRESS 208 679 0433 james.n.bet faboeing.com HOME PHONE FAX # 208 788 5343 If an agent is acting for the applicant during the permit process, complete #2. Be sure agent signs Section C (Skyrature Block) for all permit applications 2. AUTHORIZED AGENT Tom McKeon, Project Performance Corp. MAILING ADDRESS 16935 SE 39" St, Bellevue, WA 98008 , WORK PHONE E-MAIL ADDRESS 425 643 4834 tmckeongppc.com HOME PHONE FAX # 425 649 0643 3. RELATIONSHIP OF APPLICANT TO PROPERTY: ® OWNER 13 PURCHASER 13 LESSEE 0 OTHER: Owner 4. NAME, ADDRESS, AND PHONE NUMBER OF PROPERTY OWNER(S), IF OTHER THAN APPLICANT: 5. LOCATION (STREET ADDRESS, INCLUDING CITY, COUNTY AND ZIP CODE, WHERE PROPOSED ACTIVITY EXISTS OR WILL OCCUR) Boeing Developmental Center, 9905E Marginal Way 8, Tukwila WA 98108 LOCAL GOVERNMENT WITH JURISDICTION (CITY OR COUNTY) City of Tukwila WATERBODY YOU ARE WORKING IN _ Duwamish River TRIBUTARY OF WRIA # a IS THIS WATERBODY ON THE 303(d) LIS17 YES x12:1 NO 0 IF YES, WHAT PARAMETER(S)? pH http: //w vw.e v.wa.gov /programs/wgrlin}:s /impaired wtrs.htnil WEBSITEFOR303d LIST %SECTION NE SECTION 04 TOWNSHIP 23N RANGE 04E GOVERNMENT LOT. SHORELINE DESIGNATION LATTRJDE & LONGITUDE: . 47.51 122.31 ZONING DESIGNATION Commercial TAX PARCEL NO: 0003400018 DNR STREAM TYPE, IF KNOWN 6. DESCRIBE THE CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY, AND STRUCTURES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. HAVE YOU COMPLETED ANY PORTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY ON THIS PROPERTY? 0 YES T81 NO. FOR ANY PORTION OF THE PROPOSED ACi1VITY ALREADY COMPLETED ON THIS PROPERTY, INDICATE MONTH AND YEAR OF COMPLETION. The site is fully developed, wilt initial development in the early 1950's IS THE PROPERTY AGRICULTURAL LAND? O YES Till NO ARE YOU A USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANT? 0 YES 1J NO 7a. DESCRIBE THE PROPOSED WORK THAT NEEDS AQUATIC PERMITS: COMPLETE PLANS AND SPEC1RCATIONS SHOULD BE PROVIDED FOR ALL WORK WATERWARD OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK OR LINE, INCLUDING TYPES OF EQUIPMENT TO BE USED. IF APPLYING FOR A SHORELINE PERMIT, DESCRIBE ALL WORK WITHIN AND BEYOND 200 FEET OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK IF YOU HAVE PROVIDED ATTACHED MATERIALS TO DESCRIBE YOUR PROJECT, YOU STILL MUST SUMMARIZE THE PROPOSED WORK HERE ATTACH A SEPARATE SHEET IF ADDITIONAL SPACE IS NEEDED. The proposed work involves dredging a small area around an existing storm drain outfall located on the Duwamish Waterway, the estimated quantity of sediments to be removed and replaced with dean fill is 100 cubic yards. The immediate area around the outfall contains hazardous substances in excess of the State sediment standards (SMS defined in WAC 173 -204). The sediment will be removed at a low -tide condition when it is above the waterline. The sediments removed will be processed at a nearby upland facility for dewatering and then disposed of at an off -site landfill that is permitted to accept the materials. The excavated area will be backfilled with a clean fill material that is imported to the site. PREPARATION OF DRAWINGS: SEE SAMPLE DRAWINGS AND GUIDANCE FOR COMPLETING THE DRAWINGS. ONE SET OF ORIGINAL OR GOOD QUALITY REPRODUCIBLE DRAWINGS f jBE ATTACHED. NOTE APPLICANTS ARE ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PROJECT SITE, BUT THESE DO NOT SUBSTITUTE FOR DRAWINGS. THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND COAST GUARD REQUIRE DRAWUGS ON 8.1/2X ft INCHSHEET& URGER DRAWINGS MAYBE REQUIRED BY OTHER AGENCIES. 7b. DESCRIBE THE PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED WORK AND WHY YOU WANT OR NEED TO PERFORM IT AT THE SITE PLEASE EXPLAIN ANY SPECIFIC NEEDS THAT HAVE INFLUENCED THE DESIGN. The immediate area around the outfall contains hazardous substances in excess of the State sediment standards (SMS defined in WAC 173 -204). Prior dredging was conducted in the general area in 1999, this small area was not dredged at that time and the planned dredging is intended to address the limited area of contamination that is remaining. The work is being implemented under the Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) under the oversight of Ecology. The sediment will be removed at a low -tide condition when it is exposed above the waterline. 7c. DESCRIBE THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO CHARACTERISTIC USES OF THE WATER BODY. THESE USES MAY INCLUDE FISH AND AQUATIC LIFE, WATER QUALITY, WATER SUPPLY, RECREATION, and AESTHETICS. IDENTIFY PROPOSED ACTIONS TO AVOID, MINIMIZE, AND MITIGATE DETRIMENTAL IMPACTS, AND PROVIDE PROPER PROTECTION OF FISH AND AQUATIC LIFE IDENTIFY WHICH GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS YOU HAVE USED. ATTACH A SEPARATE SHEET IF ADDITIONAL SPACE IS NEEDED. No impacts anticipated. A number of conservation measures and best management practices (BMPs) would be employed during project activity to minimize potential adverse effects on species/habitat and to enhance habitat on completion. See attached sheet for conservation measures and BMPs. 7d. FOR IN WATER CONSTRUCTION WORK, WILL YOUR PR BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATE OF WASHINGTON WA ALrTY STANDARDS FOR TURBIDITY WAC,17 .201A -140? I$1 YES 0 NO (SEE USEFUL DEFI AND INSTRUCTIONS) 0 YES 181 NO SUBMIT WITH APPLICATION. 0 YES 0 NO SUBMIT WITH APPLICATION. 0 YES 0 NO ETC.): & INDICATE IF THEY ARE ON THE COUNTY'S LISPOF HYDRIC SOILS. SOILS INFORMATION CAN BE OBTAINED (NRCS): OF WETLANDS? 0 YES 0 NO submit -a mitigation plan to the Corps and Ecology for approval along with the JARPA form in addition to en epproved mitigation plan if your project impacts wetlands that we e) greeter than 14 eve in size, or the JARPA lam and mitigation plan to Ecology for an individual 401 certification if a) orb) applies. 8. WILL THE PROJECT BE CONSTRUCTED IN STAGES? Bi YES 0 NO PROPOSED STARTING DATE 8/8/03 ESTIMATED DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 1 week 9. CHECK IF ANY TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT STRUCTURES WILL BE PLACED: O WATERWARD OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK OR LINE FOR FRESH OR TIDAL WATERS; AND/OR OWATERWARD OF MEAN HIGHER HIGH WATER LINE IN TIDAL WATERS 10. W1LL FILL MATERIAL (ROCK, FILL, BULKHEAD, OR OTHER MATERAL) BE PLACED: yes, the area Of dredged sediments will be replaced with clean fill 0 WATERWARD OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK OR LINE FOR FRESH WATERS? IF YES, VOLUME (CUBIC YARDS) /AREA (ACRES) MI WATERWARD OF THE MEAN HIGHER HIGH WATER FOR TIDAL WATERS? IF YES, VOLUME (CUBIC YARDS) 100 AREA 0.02 (ACRES) 11. WILL MATERIAL BE PLACED IN WEf/WDS? IF YES: A IMPACTED AREA IN ACRES: 0 YES 181 NO SUBMIT WITH APPLICATION. 0 YES 0 NO SUBMIT WITH APPLICATION. 0 YES 0 NO ETC.): & INDICATE IF THEY ARE ON THE COUNTY'S LISPOF HYDRIC SOILS. SOILS INFORMATION CAN BE OBTAINED (NRCS): OF WETLANDS? 0 YES 0 NO submit -a mitigation plan to the Corps and Ecology for approval along with the JARPA form in addition to en epproved mitigation plan if your project impacts wetlands that we e) greeter than 14 eve in size, or the JARPA lam and mitigation plan to Ecology for an individual 401 certification if a) orb) applies. B. HAS A DELINEATION BEEN COMPLE i bp / IF YES, PLEASE C. HAS A WETLAND REPORT BEEN PREPARED? IF YES, PLEASE D. TYPE AND COMPOSITION OF FILL MATERIAL (E.G., SAND, E MATERIAL SOURCE: F. UST ALL SOIL SERIES (TYPE OF SOIL) LOCATED AT THE PROJECTSRE FROM THE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE G. WILL PROPOSED ACTIVITY CAUSE FLOODING OR DRAINING IF YES, IMPACTED AREA IS _ ACRES OFDRAINED WETLANDS. NOTE If your project will impact greater than II of an acre of wetl and, NOTE: a 401 water quality certification will be requi ed torn Ecology b) tidal wetlands or wetlands adjacent to tidal water. Reese submit 12. STORMWATER COMPUANCE FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THIS PROJECT IS (OR WILL BE) DESIGNED TO MEETECOLOGYS IF YES— WHICH MANUAL WILL YOUR PROJECT BE DESIGNED ff NO— FOR CLEAN WATER ACT SECTION 401 AND 404 PERMITS DEMONSTRATES THE STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM YOUR PROJECT ONLY: ' MOST CURRENT STORMWATER MANUAL, OR AN ECOLOGY APPROVED LOCAL STORMWATER MANUAL x YES 0 NO 70 MEET 2002 Ecology SWM Manual . ONLY— PLEASE SUBMT170 ECOLOGY FOR APPROVAL, ALONG WITH THIS JARPA APPL.fCATK)A( DOCUMENTATION THAT OR ACTIVITY WILL COMPLY WITH THE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS, WAC 173.201(A) 13. WILL EXCAVATION OR DREDGING BE REQUIRED IN WATER OR WETLANDS? Dredging will be completed in Dwramish River when river Is at low tide ® YES ONO IF YES: A. VOLUME 100 (CUBIC YARDS) /AREA 0.02 (ACRES) B. COMPOSITION OF MATERIAL TO BE REMOVED: sand/silt C. DISPOSAL SITE FOR EXCAVATED MATERIAL: off-site landfill D. METHOD OF DREDGING: vacuum buck 14. HAS THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) BEEN COMPLETED? SEPA LEAD AGENCY: SEPA DECISION: DNS, MDNS, EIS, CO YES ADOPTION, EXEMPTION DECISION DATE (END OF COMMENT PERIOD): 0 NO SUBMIT A COPY OF YOUR SEPA DECISION LETTER TO WDFW AS REQUIRED FOR A COMPLETE APPLICATION 15. LIST OTHER APPLICATIONS, APPROVALS, OR CERTIFICATIONS FROM OTHER FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL AGENCIES FOR ANY STRUCTURES, CONSTRUCTION, DISCHARGES, OR OTHER ACTIVITIES DESCRIBED IN THE APPLICATION 0.E, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, HEALTH DISTRICT APPROVAL, BUILDING PERMIT, SEPA REVIEW, FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION LICENSE (FERC), FOREST PRACTICES APPLICATION, ETC.) ALSO INDICATE WHETHER WORK HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND INDICATE ALL EXISTING WORK ON DRAWINGS NOTE FOR USE WITH CORPS NATIONWIDE PERMITS, IDENTIFY WHETHER YOUR PROJECT HAS OR WILL NEED AN NPDES PERMIT FOR DISCHARGING WASTEWATER AND/OR STORMWATER. TYPE OF APPROVAL ISSUING AGENCY IDENTIFICATION NO. DATE OF APPLICATION DATE APPROVED COMPLETED? 16. HAS ANY AGENCY DENIED APPROVAL FOR THE ACTIVITY.RE APPLYING FOR OR FOR ANY ACTIVRY DIRECTLY i ELATED ACTIVITY DESCRIBED HEREIN? 0 YES X NO IF YES, EXPLAIN: SECT16N B Use for Shoreline and Corps ofE s permits g 17a TOTAL COST OF PROJECT. THIS MEANS THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PROJECT, INCLUDING MATERIALS, LABOR, MACHINE RENTALS, ETC. $70,000 17b. IF A PROJECTOR ANY PORTION OF A PROJECT RECEIVES FUNDING FROM A FEDERAL AGENCY, THAT AGENCY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ESA CONSULTATION. PLEASE INDICATE IF YOU WILL RECEIVE FEDERAL FUNDS AND WHAT FEDERAL AGENCY IS PROVIDING THOSE FUNDS. SEE INSTRUCTIONS FOR INFORMATION ON ESA FEDERAL FUNDINIG 0 YES ID NO IF YES, PLEASE UST THE FEDERAL AGENCY 18. LOCAL GOVERNMENT WITH JURISDICTION: City of Tukwila 19. FOR CORPS, COAST GUARD, AND DNR PERMITS, PROVIDE NAMES, ADDRESSES, AND TELEPHONE NUMBERS OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS, LESSFFS, ETC... PLEASE NOTE SHORELINE MANAGEMENT COMPLIANCE MAY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL NOTICE— CONSULT YOUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT. NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER SIGNA .F APPLICANT DATE £ I -7 I0"3 SIGNA l - ' OF LANDOWNER (EXCEPT PUBLIC ENTITY LANDOWNERS, E.G. DNR) THIS APPLICATION MUST BE SIGNED BY THE APPLICANT AND THE AGENT, IF AN AUTHORIZED AGENT IS DESIGNATED. SECTION C - This section MUST be completed for any permit coveted by this a 20. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE FOR A PERMIT OR PERMITS TO AUTHORIZE THE ACTIVITIES DESCRIBED HEREIN. I CERTIFY THAT I AM FAMILIAR WITH THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS APPLICATION, AND THAT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, SUCH INFORMATION IS TRUE, COMPLETE, AND ACCURATE 1 FURTHER CERTIFY THAT I POSSESS THE AUTHORITY TO UNDERTAKE THE PROPOSED ACTIVITIES 1 HEREBY GRANT TO THE AGENCIES TO WHICH THIS APPLICATION IS MADE, THE RIGHT TO ENTER THE ABOVE-DESCRIBED LOCATION TO INSPECT THE PROPOSED, IN- PROGRESS OR COMPLETED WORK 1 AGREE TO START WORK ONLY AFTER ALL NECESSARY PERMITS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED. SIGNATURE OF APPUCANT P.1-...----...* r DATE %7(03 SIGNATURE O 9R® AG /cam �— DATE Spy° 3 DATE I HEREBY DESIGNATE TO ACT AS MY AGENT IN MATTERS RELATED TO THIS APPLICATION FOR PERMIT(S). 1 UNDERSTAND THAT IF A FEDERAL PERMIT IS ISSUED, I MUST SI N THE PERMIT. SIGNA .F APPLICANT DATE £ I -7 I0"3 SIGNA l - ' OF LANDOWNER (EXCEPT PUBLIC ENTITY LANDOWNERS, E.G. DNR) THIS APPLICATION MUST BE SIGNED BY THE APPLICANT AND THE AGENT, IF AN AUTHORIZED AGENT IS DESIGNATED. 18 U.S.0 §1001 provides that Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knovvingly 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. COMPLETE IC emu s escn a�n >Roodva a 0 a :SU as. Ot:sn ore llne;::sucn: as: inanne;::S e:::laaoon:::marstT:::DOa:: swam tt batik tow :tiank;: or e; mat eta tsucftas:san e uikheadIra ii:any} n: tne:eve an! e:proDosed :Winds" ors ores:wiii ex afieiuFitio e :tees : aoOve: the : avers ra indicate the a raximate bcatian 0 number a identiatun exis and 'WINK that weans e:a 1cauon:lnvoives: a: cony tionai „use ::or:vanance. ono e:mas er ograrn lcn: Dro.VIaeS 0 etrtay tteasx�nditisutaluse;ar: e�±ari :sous rt These Agencies are Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action employers. For special accommodation needs, please contact the appropriate air in the instructions. Agency Reference #: Circulated by: AGENCY USE ONLY (local govt. or agency) Date Received: JOINT AQUATIC RESOURCES PERMIT APPLICATION FORM (JARPA) (for use in Washington State) PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT IN BLACK INK ❑ Application for a Fish Habitat Enhancement Project per requirements of RCW 77.55.290. You must submit a copy of this completed JARPA application form and the (Fish Habitat Enhancement JARPA Addition) to your local Government Planning Department and Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife Area Habitat Biologist on the same day. NOTE: LOCAL GOVERNMENTS — You must submit any comments on these projects to WDFW within 15 working days. Based on the instructions provided, I am sending copies of this application to the following: (check all that apply) 0 Local Government for shoreline: O Substantial Development • Conditional Use • Variance • Exemption • Revision • Floodplain Management • Critical Areas Ordinance O Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for HPA (Submit 3 copies to WDFW Region) 1 Washington Department of Ecology for 401 Water Quality Certification (to Regional Office - Federal Permit Unit) 0 Washington Department of Natural Resources for Aquatic Resources Use Authorization Notification 0 Corps of Engineers for: 0 Section 404 O Section 10 permit • Coast Guard for General Bridge Act Permit • For Department of Transportation projects only: This project will be designed to meet conditions of the most current Ecology /Department of Transportation Water Quality Implementing Agreement SECTION A - Use for all permits covered by this application. Be sure to ALSO complete Section C (Signature Block) for all permit applications. 1. APPLICANT The Boeing Company MAILING ADDRESS PO BOX 3707 M/C IW -12 WORK PHONE E -MAIL ADDRESS 206 679 0433 james.n.bet @boeing.com HOME PHONE,- FAX # 425 865 6608 If an agent is acting for the applicant during the permit process, complete #2. Be sure agent signs Section C (Signature Block) for all permit applications 2. AUTHORIZED AGENT Tom McKeon, Project Performance Corp. MAILING ADDRESS 16935 SE 39th St, Bellevue, WA 98008 , WORK PHONE E -MAIL ADDRESS 425 643 4634 tmckeon CO ppc.com HOME PHONE FAX # 425 649 0643 3. RELATIONSHIP OF APPLICANT TO PROPERTY: ® OWNER ❑ PURCHASER ❑ LESSEE ❑ OTHER: owner 4. NAME, ADDRESS, AND PHONE NUMBER OF PROPERTY OWNER(S), IF OTHER THAN APPLICANT: 5. LOCATION (STREET ADDRESS, INCLUDING CITY, COUNTY AND ZIP CODE, WHERE PROPOSED ACTIVITY EXISTS OR WILL OCCUR) Boeing Developmental Center, Tukwila WA LOCAL GOVERNMENT WITH JURISDICTION (CITY OR COUNTY) City of Tukwila WATERBODY YOU ARE WORKING IN .Duwamish River TRIBUTARY OF WRIA # 9 IS THIS WATERBODY ON THE 303(d) LIST? YES xIRl NO ❑ IF YES. WHAT PARAMETER(S)? pH http: / /www.ccy.wa.gov /programs /wq /links /impaired wtrs.httal WEBSITE FOR 3034 LIST SECTION NE SECTION 04 TOWNSHIP 23N RANGE 04E GOVERNMENT LOT SHORELINE DESIGNATION LATITUDE & LONGITUDE: 47.51 122.31 ZONING DESIGNATION TAX PARCEL NO: 0003400018 DNR STREAM TYPE, IF KNOWN JARPA, Revised 7/02 Contact the State of Washington Office of Permit Assistance for latest version, 360/407 -7037 or 800/917 -0043 1 6. DESCRIBE THE CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY, AND STRUCTURES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. HAVE YOU COMPLETED ANY PORTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY ON THIS PROPERTY? ❑ YES El NO FOR ANY PORTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY ALREADY COMPLETED ON THIS PROPERTY, INDICATE MONTH AND YEAR OF COMPLETION. The site is fully developed, with initial development in the early 1950's IS THE PROPERTY AGRICULTURAL LAND? ❑ YES ® NO ARE YOU A USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANT? ❑ YES ® NO 7a. DESCRIBE THE PROPOSED WORK THAT NEEDS AQUATIC PERMITS: COMPLETE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS SHOULD BE PROVIDED FOR ALL WORK WATERWARD OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK OR LINE, INCLUDING TYPES OF EQUIPMENT TO BE USED. IF APPLYING FOR A SHORELINE PERMIT, DESCRIBE 1L�Lt WORK WITHIN AND BEYOND 200 FEET OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK. IF YOU HAVE PROVIDED ATTACHED MATERIALS TO DESCRIBE YOUR PROJECT, YOU STILL MUST SUMMARIZE THE PROPOSED WORK HERE. ATTACH A SEPARATE SHEET IF ADDITIONAL SPACE IS NEEDED. The proposed work involves dredging a small area around an existing storm drain outfall located on the Duwamish Waterway, the estimated quantity of sediments to be removed and replaced with clean fill is 100 cubic yards. The immediate area around the outfall contains hazardous substances in excess of the State sediment standards (SMS defined in WAC 173 -204). The sediment will be removed at a low -tide condition when it is above the waterline. The sediments removed will be processed at a nearby upland facility for dewatering and then disposed of at an off -site landfill that is permitted to accept the materials. The excavated area will be backfilled with a clean fill material that is imported to the site. PREPARATION OF DRAWINGS: SEE SAMPLE DRAWINGS AND GUIDANCE FOR COMPLETING THE DRAWINGS. ONE SET OF ORIGINAL OR GOOD QUALITY REPRODUCIBLE DRAWINGS MUST BE ATTACHED. NOTE: APPLICANTS ARE ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PROJECT SITE, BUT THESE DO NOT SUBSTITUTE FOR DRAWINGS. THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND COAST GUARD REQUIRE DRAWINGS ON 8 -1/2 X 11 INCH SHEETS. LARGER DRAWINGS MAY BE REQUIRED BY OTHER AGENCIES. 7b. DESCRIBE THE PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED WORK AND WHY YOU WANT OR NEED TO PERFORM IT AT THE SITE. PLEASE EXPLAIN ANY SPECIFIC NEEDS THAT HAVE INFLUENCED THE DESIGN. The immediate area around the outfall contains hazardous substances in excess of the State sediment standards (SMS defined in WAC 173 -204). Prior dredging was conducted in the general area in 1999, this small area was not dredged at that time and the planned dredging is intended to address the limited area of contamination that is remaining. The work is being implemented under the Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) under the oversight of Ecology. The sediment will be removed at a low -tide condition when it is exposed above the waterline. 7c. DESCRIBE THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO CHARACTERISTIC USES OF THE WATER BODY. THESE USES MAY INCLUDE FISH AND AQUATIC LIFE, WATER QUALITY, WATER SUPPLY, RECREATION, and AESTHETICS. IDENTIFY PROPOSED ACTIONS TO AVOID, MINIMIZE, AND MITIGATE DETRIMENTAL IMPACTS, AND PROVIDE PROPER PROTECTION OF FISH AND AQUATIC LIFE. IDENTIFY WHICH GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS YOU HAVE USED. ATTACH A SEPARATE SHEET IF ADDITIONAL SPACE IS NEEDED. No impacts anticipated. A number of conservation measures and best management practices (BMPs) would be employed during project activity to minimize potential adverse effects on species /habitat and to enhance habitat on completion. See attached sheet for conservation measures and BMPs. JARPA, Revised 7/02 Contact the State of Washington Office of Permit Assistance for latest version, 360/407 -7037 or 800/917 -0043 2 7d. FOR IN WATER CONSTRUCTION WORK, WILL YOUR PR BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATE OF WASHINGTON WAVALITY STANDARDS FOR TURBIDITY IF AND INSTRUCTIONS) WAC 173.201A -110? © YES ❑ NO (SEE USEFUL DEFIN 12. STORMWATER COMPLIANCE FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THIS PROJECT IS (OR WILL BE) DESIGNED TO MEET ECOLOGY'S IF YES — WHICH MANUAL WILL YOUR PROJECT BE DESIGNED If NO — FOR CLEAN WATER ACT SECTION 401 AND 404 PERMITS DEMONSTRATES THE STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM YOUR PROJECT 8. WILL THE PROJECT BE CONSTRUCTED IN STAGES? O YES ❑ NO PROPOSED STARTING DATE: 8/8/03 ESTIMATED DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 1 week 9. CHECK IF ANY TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT STRUCTURES WILL BE PLACED: ❑ WATERWARD OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK OR LINE FOR FRESH OR TIDAL WATERS; AND /OR OWATERWARD OF MEAN HIGHER HIGH WATER LINE IN TIDAL WATERS 10. WILL FILL MATERIAL (ROCK, FILL, BULKHEAD, OR OTHER MATERIAL) BE PLACED: yes, the area of dredged sediments will be replaced with clean fill ❑ WATERWARD OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK OR LINE FOR FRESH WATERS? IF YES, VOLUME (CUBIC YARDS) /AREA (ACRES) ® WATERWARD OF THE MEAN HIGHER HIGH WATER FOR TIDAL WATERS? IF YES, VOLUME (CUBIC YARDS) 100 AREA 0.02 (ACRES) ADOPTION, EXEMPTION DECISION DATE (END OF COMMENT PERIOD): 11. WILL MATERIAL BE PLACED IN WETLANDS? ❑ YES ® NO IF YES: A. IMPACTED AREA IN ACRES: B. HAS A DELINEATION BEEN COMPLETED? IF YES, PLEASE SUBMIT WITH APPLICATION. ❑ YES ❑ NO C. HAS A WETLAND REPORT BEEN PREPARED? IF YES, PLEASE SUBMIT WITH APPLICATION. ❑ YES ❑ NO D. TYPE AND COMPOSITION OF FILL MATERIAL (E.G., SAND, ETC.): E. MATERIAL SOURCE: F. LIST ALL SOIL SERIES (TYPE OF SOIL) LOCATED AT THE PROJECT SITE, & INDICATE IF THEY ARE ON THE COUNTY'S LIST OF HYDRIC SOILS. SOILS INFORMATION CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE (NRCS): G. WILL PROPOSED ACTIVITY CAUSE FLOODING OR DRAINING OF WETLANDS? ❑ YES ❑ NO IF YES, IMPACTED AREA IS _ ACRES OFDRAINED WETLANDS. NOTE: If your project will impact greater than of an acre of wetland, submit a mitigation plan to the Corps and Ecology for approval along with the JARPA form .NOTE: a 401 water quality certification will be required from Ecology in addition to an approved mitigation plan if your project impacts wetlands that are: a) greater than h acre in size, or b) tidal wetlands or wetlands adjacent to tidal water. Please submit the JARPA form and mitigation plan to Ecology for an individual 401 certification if a) or b) applies. 12. STORMWATER COMPLIANCE FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THIS PROJECT IS (OR WILL BE) DESIGNED TO MEET ECOLOGY'S IF YES — WHICH MANUAL WILL YOUR PROJECT BE DESIGNED If NO — FOR CLEAN WATER ACT SECTION 401 AND 404 PERMITS DEMONSTRATES THE STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM YOUR PROJECT ONLY: MOST CURRENT STORMWATER MANUAL, OR AN ECOLOGY APPROVED LOCAL STORMWATER MANUAL x YES ❑ NO TO MEET 2002 Ecology SWM Manual ONLY — PLEASE SUBMITTO ECOLOGY FOR APPROVAL, ALONG WITH THIS JARPA APPLICATION, DOCUMENTATION THAT OR ACTIVITY WILL COMPLY WITH THE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS, WAC 173.201(A) 13. WILL EXCAVATION OR DREDGING BE REQUIRED IN WATER OR WETLANDS? Dredging will be completed in Duwamish River when river is at low tide ® YES ONO IF YES: A. VOLUME: 100 (CUBIC YARDS) /AREA 0.02 (ACRES) B. COMPOSITION OF MATERIAL TO BE REMOVED: sand /silt C. DISPOSAL SITE FOR EXCAVATED MATERIAL: off -site landfill D. METHOD OF DREDGING: vacuum truck 14. SEPA STATE R CA j AL',OLIIt1 ILsa i 0� (SEPA) BEEN COMPLETED? SEPA DECISION: DNS, MDNS, EIS, ADOPTION, EXEMPTION DECISION DATE (END OF COMMENT PERIOD): ❑ NO SUBMIT A COPY OF YOUR SEPA SEPA DECISION LETTER TO WDFW AS REQUIRED FOR A COMPLETE APPLICATION 15. LIST OTHER APPLICATIONS, APPROVALS, OR CERTIFICATIONS FROM OTHER FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL AGENCIES FOR ANY STRUCTURES, CONSTRUCTION, DISCHARGES, OR OTHER ACTIVITIES DESCRIBED IN THE APPLICATION (I.E., PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, HEALTH DISTRICT APPROVAL, BUILDING PERMIT, SEPA REVIEW, FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION LICENSE (FERC), FOREST PRACTICES APPLICATION, ETC.) ALSO INDICATE WHETHER WORK HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND INDICATE ALL EXISTING WORK ON DRAWINGS. NOTE: FOR USE WITH CORPS NATIONWIDE PERMITS, IDENTIFY WHETHER YOUR PROJECT HAS OR WILL NEED AN NPDES PERMIT FOR DISCHARGING WASTEWATER AND /OR STORMWATER. TYPE OF APPROVAL ISSUING AGENCY IDENTIFICATION NO. DATE OF APPLICATION DATE APPROVED COMPLETED? JARPA, Revised 7/02 Contact the State of Washington Office of Permit Assistance for latest version, 360/407 -7037 or 800/917 -0043 3 • 16. HAS ANY AGENCY DENIED APPROVAL FOR THE ACTIVITY YOU'RE APPLYING FOR OR FOR ANY ACTIVITY DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED HEREIN? ❑ YES X NO IF YES, EXPLAIN: JARPA, Revised 7/02 Contact the State of Washington Office of Permit Assistance for latest version, 360/407 -7037 or 800/917 -0043 4 8-07 -201 9:30PM FROM use rbr sboreJdre and of P. 2 1Ta TOTAL COST OP PROJECT. THUS REAMING FAR MARKET VALVE OF TNF PROJECT. Sd0LUD1NG MATERIALS. LABOR, MACHe& RENTALS. ETC. 570,000 17b. If A PROJECT Oft ANY PORTION OF A PROJECT RErENES AAVOI4 FROM A FEDERAL AGENCY, THAT AGENCY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ESA CONSULTATION. PLEASE INDICATE IF YOU NIL REGIME FEDERAL FUNDS AND WHATFEDERAL AGENCY Et PROWDING TIME FIR'CS SEE NSTRUGTNS FOR INFORMATION ON ESA" R 0ERAI FUNDINIG D YES to NO IF YEa PLEASE LIST THE FEDERAL AGENCY - - is. LOCAL OOYE RNmE T WfM JURo301CfbN cover TUlm a - IR. FOR CO RPS, COAsr GUARD, ANO1Jr1R Pt3lNr19. PROV07E NArRES ADDRESSES, AMO TELEPHONE NLAJBERS OP ADJOINING PROPERTY °WNERS. LEssEE5. ETC... P1EASSNOTS' SHORELINE IdAIYAGEMF TGO VVANCSMAYREQUIRBAODmcwALA017 CE— CONSULTYOURLOCALGOVERIVINEM. ' NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER SIGNATURE OF APPUCANT DATE SIGNATURE o LANDOWNER AFT PUBIC ENTITY LANDOWNERS E.G. DNR) • THIS APPUCATIOti Mtn BE SIGNED By THE AP LICANT AND THE Att$KT. IF AN AUTHORIZED AGENT IS DECORATED • i 7ili3 deC�OD e/t/Sibg :�f aillr p�a1� e70Yer6d 6) this 20. AFPLK/AT101N 1S HEREBY MADE FOR A PERMIT OR PERMITS TO AUTHCRI2E THE ACTIVITIES DESCRIBED HEREON. 1 morTIFY THAT 1 AM FAMILIAR WITH THE IN TQRMATION c TAINED IN THIS APPLICATION, AND THAT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND MAP, SUCH INFORMATIONS TRUE. COMPLETE Arta MX IRATE t FURTHER CERTIFY THAT I POSSESS THE AUTHORITY TO UNDERTAKE THE PROPC1l9ED ACTIVITIES 1 HEREBY GRANT TO THE AGENCIES TO WHICH THIS APPLICAT1ON IS MADE. THE RIGHT TO ENTER THE ABOUEDBBCRIBED LOCATION TO INSPECT THE PROPOSED. IN-PROGRESS OR COMPLETED WORK I AGREE TO START WORK ONLY AFTER ALL NECESSARY PERMITS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE / 4 /ZS ! ° 3 soNATuRE DATE O , L1/7.• DATE I HEREBY DESIGNATE • TOAST AS MY AGENT IN MATTERS RELATED TO T IS APPUCATION FOR PERM1T(S) 1 UNDERSTAND TttAT IF A FEDERAL PERMIT I5 ISSUED. I MUST SIGN THE PERMIT. SIGNATURE OF APPUCANT DATE SIGNATURE o LANDOWNER AFT PUBIC ENTITY LANDOWNERS E.G. DNR) • THIS APPUCATIOti Mtn BE SIGNED By THE AP LICANT AND THE Att$KT. IF AN AUTHORIZED AGENT IS DECORATED • i is U.S.0 11100, protedos ent Whammy. enaymamawlMNntliownsacand. nydtpmbeIentaapenwor Mei /MedMetesknoMglyUnif eanoe to. a cowls up try any ltiatl BOOM, ordeMO inntenni fast a urges sing rate. lleatlaus, ofoae+autmt statements a mpeeremBMens or maims or wen pnytrytrtritiltring ordocumau knowing srmeto cadges IWOIN e.lfotbcue or amountstatemont MN. snee betted not more Iron s1o,0o0 or Implsonod not "nom thin a yell" erDoti • " Ceifelk isD'81f LOCAL OFFICIAL • . . .. • •A. Natt ra.ot. the.eodating shorellrte. (Des=cribe type.of shbre ine; auth as marine, t rn, lake, lagoon. Marsh, bog, swamp, flood' • plain, •f[oodway, delta type of bead*, such as accretion, erosion;. high bank, low bank, or dike; Material such as sand, gravel,. mud. Gay, rock, •riprap; and'extent.and type 'Of bii1kheading; if any) . . B. In the event that any otthe proposed buildings oretructures will'enceed a height of thirty-five feet above ttle•average grade .. • level,, indicate the approximate location of and number of residential units, existing and potential, thatwill have an obstructed view. ' • C.•.if the 'application involves a conditional use or variance, set forth in full that portion oiitletnaster program.which provides-that the proposed use may be a conditional use, or,: In the case of a variance: from which the variance' Is being satighi.: • • Those Aoerinilm w Equal Opporhoity and AtfYntadrr Action eerlplovors. For epsoiat IOOtmmodelIOn nee0.S, Mane mint the epproprlMe Agency In the Inslrut . • Ciiy of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF APPLICATION DATED May 20, 2003 The following applications have been submittal to the City of Tukwila Dchartmcnt of Comm,i nits r'ev -Irtni is for review and decision. APPLICANT: The Boeing Company AGENT: Tom Mckeon LOCATION: 9905 East Marginal Way S OWNER OF THE PROPERTY: Elocing Cu: ...iv FILE NUMBERS: E03 -014 PROPOSAL: The Boeing Company is proposing to dre,!_ .• :, _•,::all ;,: a :.:.:td existing storm drain out -fall located on the Duwamish WalerAay. The estimated sediment area to be removed is 100 cubic yards. The sediment to be removed contains hazardous substances in excess of the State sediment standards. The work will be within the ordinary high water mark and as required by Washington State Law the applicants have submitted a SEPA application. The sediment that will be removed will be drain of water onsite and disposed off -site in a landfill that is permitted to receive such materials. OTHER REQUIRED PERMITS: Shoreline Permit (Exemption) HPA (Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife) Section 404 Permit (US Corps of Engineers) Section 10 Permit (US Corps of Engineers) 401 Water Quality Certification (Washington State Department of Ecology) These files can be reviewed at the Department of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100, Tukwila, WA. Please call (206) 431 -3670 to ensure that the file(s) will be available. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT You can submit comments on this application. You must submit your comments regarding the State Environmental Policy Act in writing to the Department of Community Development by 5:00 p.m. on June 3, 2003. If you have questions about this proposal contact Brandon J. Miles, Planner -in- charge of this project at (206) 431 -3684 or by email at bmiles @ci.tukwila.wa.us. Anyone who submits written comments will become parties of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • Cizj' of Tukwila • Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Please send comments to: City of Tukwila Planning Attn: Brandon J. Miles 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 APPEALS You may request a copy of any decision by the Planning Commission on a project or obtain information on your appeal rights by contacting the Department of Community Development at (206) - 431 -3670. A decision from the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council. The Department will provide you \\ itl, information on appeal if you are interested. DATE OF APPLICATION: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: NOTICE OF APPLICATION POSTED: May 9, 2003 May 12. 2n0 May 20, 2003 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION /, L ESL_/ HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing Project Number: ECRS 014 Determination of Non - Significance Person requesting mailing:R,AQIEl Notice of Public Meeting Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Notice of Action Planning Commission Agenda Pkt Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda x Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit __ __ FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Other Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this Lb day of MAY in the year 20 03 P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM Project Name: 3CE*NCt 0:44PAII4/ Project Number: ECRS 014 Mailer's Signature: L_-►. L , Person requesting mailing:R,AQIEl P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM • • May 9, 2003 Ms. Minnie Dhaliwal City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 Tukwila WA 98199 ProjecQ Performance Coaporalior 16935 SE 39`"Sf, Bellevue, FPJA 96000 ph: 425 643 4634, fax: 426 649 0643 Subject: SEPA Review for Sediment Removal Action, South Storm Drain, Boeing Developmental Center Dear Ms. Dhaliwal, As we have discussed The Boeing Company is planning a sediment removal action in the Duwamish River at the Boeing Developmental Center in Tukwila, Washington. The enclosed material is an application for a SEPA review by the City of Tukwila. The planned work is to be completed by Boeing under oversight and approval from the Washington State Department of Ecology. We are working with a tight deadline to finish all permitting and complete the work in August 2003. All of the other permits /reviews (Section 404 and 10 permits by the Corps of Engineers, Section 401 certification by Ecology, Endangered Species Act review by the Corps /Fisheries, Hydraulic Project Application with WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife) have been submitted. Your assistance in processing /review of this application is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions or need any additional information please call me at (425 643 4634) or Jim Bet at (206 679 0433). Thank you for your help. Sincerely, Tom McKeon, P.E. cc: Jim Bet, Boeing PRO, ECT per (.,r€nance CORPORATION 16935 SE 391° Street, Bellevue, WA 98008 ph: 425 643 4634, fax: 425 649 0643, email: tmckeon @ppc.com • May 8, 2003 Ms. Minnie Dhaliwal City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 Tukwila WA 98199 IIIPPerformance Coxporalior 13535 SE 39thSt, Bellevue, WA 68008 ph: 425 643 4334, fax: 426 646 0343 RECEIVED MAY 0 9 2003 DEVELOPMENT Subject: Permitting for Sediment Removal Action, South Storm Drain, Boeing Developmental Center Request for Exemption from Shoreline Development Permit Dear Ms. Dhaliwal, As we have discussed The Boeing Company is planning a sediment removal action in the Duwamish River at the Boeing Developmental Center in Tukwila Washington. The work is to be completed by Boeing under oversight and approval from the Washington State Department of Ecology. The Ecology contact on the project is Rick Thomas (425 649 7208) in the Ecology Northwest Region Office. The removal area is very small, covering 0.02 acres and the volume of sediments to be removed is estimated at 100 cubic yards. Following removal, the area will be restored to the conditions prior to removal and the work plan (submitted to Ecology) includes habitat enhancement in the limited work area. Based on a review of the Tukwila Shoreline permit application, this project should be exempt from a Shoreline Development Permit because it is a hazardous waste remediation project that is subject to oversight and approval by the Department of Ecology. This letter is a formal request for an exemption from the Shoreline Development Permit. All of the other permits /review (SEPA review by Tukwila, Section 404 and 10 permits by the Corps, Section 401 certification by Ecology, Endangered Species Act review by the Corps /Fisheries) are to be completed. If you have any questions or need any additional information please call me at 425 643 4634 or Jim Bet at 206 679 0433. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Tom McKeon, P.E. cc: Jim Bet, Boeing PRO EC per T on i 3a lice CORPORATION 16935 SE 39th Street, Bellevue, WA 98008 ph: 425 643 4634, fax: 425 649 0643, email: tmckeon @ppc.com • CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E-mail tukplan@ci.tukwila.wa.us SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW APPLICATION NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LISTALL 10 DIGIT PARCEL NUMBERS. Boeing Developmental Center 9905 East Marginal Way South Tukwila, WA 98108 tax parcel 0003400018 OnarteNE Section: 04 Township:23N Range: 04E (This information may be found on your tax statement.) DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • • has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: James Bet Address: The Boeing Company, P.O.Box 3707 M/C JW -12, Seattle, WA ql"° Phone: ( 206 ) 679 -0433 FAX: Signature:__ Date:_ L9 /C3 FOR STAFF USE ONLY SIERRA TYPE P-SEPA Planner: File Number: Application Complete (Date: ) Project File Number: Application Incomplete (Date: ) Other File Numbers: NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LISTALL 10 DIGIT PARCEL NUMBERS. Boeing Developmental Center 9905 East Marginal Way South Tukwila, WA 98108 tax parcel 0003400018 OnarteNE Section: 04 Township:23N Range: 04E (This information may be found on your tax statement.) DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • • has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: James Bet Address: The Boeing Company, P.O.Box 3707 M/C JW -12, Seattle, WA ql"° Phone: ( 206 ) 679 -0433 FAX: Signature:__ Date:_ L9 /C3 City of Tukwila Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist Date: 5/8/03 Applicant Name: The Boeing Company, Developmental Center Street Address: 9905 East Marginal Way South Tukwila, WA 98108 City, State, Zip: Telephone: (206) 679 -0433 Directions This Screening Checklist has been designed to evaluate the potential for your project to result in potential "take" of chinook salmon, coho salmon, or cutthroat trout as defined by Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act The checklist includes a series of "Yes" or "No" questions about your project, organized into four parts. Starting with Part A on Page 1, read each question carefully, circle "Yes" or "No," and proceed to the next question as directed by the checklist To answer these questions, you may need to refer to site plans, grading and drainage plans, critical areas studies, or other documents you have prepared for your project. The City will evaluate your responses to determine if "take" is indicated. NOTE TO REVIEWERS In addition to this SEPA review application, a Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) has been submitted to the Corps of Engineers for a Section 404 Permit and a Section 10 Permit. As part that permitting, the Corps has required that a Biological Evaluation be completed that is to be submitted the State and Federal agencies (National Marine Fisheries Service and WA Fish and Wildlife) responsible for compliance with the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Biological Evaluation is attached. Part A: Please review and answer each question carefully: Consider all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1-0 Will the project require any form of grading? Grading is .defined as any excavating, filling, clearing, or creation of impervious surface, or any combination thereof, which alters the existing ground surface of the earth (see Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 18.06, Zoning Code, Page 18 -11). Please circle appropriate response.. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 (9- Continue to Question 1 -1 (Page 3) 2 -0 Will the project require any form of clearing ?. Clearing means the removal or causing to be removed, through either direct or indirect actions, any vegetation from a site (see Chapter.. 18.06, Page 18 -8). Please circle appropriate response. Continue to Question 3 -0 YES - Continue to Question 2 -1 (Page 4) . 3-0 Will the project require work, during any time of the project, below the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers or in wetlands? Ordinary high water mark is the mark that is found by examining the bed and banks of a stream and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual as to distinctly mark the soil from that of the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation (see TMC Chapter -. 18.06, Page 18 -15). Please circle appropriate response: -NO - Continue to Question 4-0 _ _. _ _ -' _ _ .__ - - - : . g_ Continue to Question 3 -1 (Page 5) 4-0 "ill the project result in the processing or handling, storage, or treatment of hazardous substances? This does not include the proper use of fuel stored in a vehicle's fuel tank.:... Hazardous substances are any liquid, solid, gas, or sludge, including any material, substance, product, commodity, or waste, regardless of quantity, that exhibits the characteristics or criteria of hazardous waste as defined by Washington Administrative Code 173 -303 (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Tukwila Zoning Code, Page 18 -11). This includes fuel or other chemicals stored on -site during construction. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 5 -0 $R- Continue to Question 5 -0 5-0 Will the project result in the withdrawal, injection, or interception of groundwater? Examples - of projects that may affect groundwater include, but are not limited to: construction of anew well, change in water withdrawals from an existing well, projects involving prolonged .. . . construction dewatering, projects installing French drains or interceptor trenches, and sewer lines. For the purpose of this analysis, projects that require a geotechnical report pursuant to the requirements of TMC 18.45.060 and 18.45.080E.4, or would require a geotechnical report if not exempt under TMC 18.45.080A, should answer Yes. Please circle appropriate response. (- Continue to Question 6-0 YES - Continue to Question 6-0 City of l ukwtla tWScreentng Checklist . Part A (continued 6-0 Will the project involve landscaping or re= occurring outdoor maintenance that includes the regular use of fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides? This does not include the one-time use of transplant fertilizers. Landscaping means natural vegetation such as trees, shrubs, groundcover, and other landscape materials arranged in a manner to produce an aesthetic effect appropriate for the use of the land (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Tukwila Zoning Code, Page 18- 13). For the purpose of this analysis, this includes the establishment of new lawn or grass. Please circle appropriate response. Checklist Complete YES — Checklist Complete Part B: Please answer each question below for projects that include grading. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1 -1 Will the project involve the modification of a watercourse bank or bank of the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers between the ordinary high water mark and top ofbank? This includes any projects that will require grading on any slope leading to a river or stream, but will not require work below the ordinary high water mark. Work below the ordinary high water mark is covered in Part C. Please circle appropriate response. - Continue to Question 1 -2 YES - Continue to Question f-2 1 -2 Could the construction, operation, or maintenance of the project result in sediment transport off site or increased rates of erosion and/or sedimentation in watercourses, the Green/Duwamish . . rivers, or the Black River? Most projects that involve grading have the potential to result in . increased erosion and/or sedimentation as a result of disturbances to the soil or earth. If your project involves grading and you have not prepared a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan specifically designed to retain 100 percent of the runoff (including during construction) from impervious surface or disturbed soils, answer Yes to this question. Hymn' project is normally exempt under the Tukwila Municipal Code and would not require the preparation of a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan, BUT may still result in erosion or sediment transport off site or beyond the work area, answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO Continue to Question 1 -3 Continue to Question 1 -3 1 -3 Will the project result in the construction of new impervious surfaces? Impervious surfaces include those hard surfaces which prevent or restrict the entry of water into the soil in the manner that such water entered the soils under natural conditions prior to development; or a hard surface area that causes water to run off the surface in greater quantity or at an increased rate of flow from the flow presented under natural conditions prior to development (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Tukwila Zoning Code, Page 18 -12). Such areas include, but are not limited to, rooftops, asphalt or concrete paving, compacted surfaces, or other surfaces that similarly affect the natural infiltration or runoff patterns existing prior to development. Please circle City of 1"ukzvzla L WScreening checklist a propriate response. Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 1-4 1-4 Will your project generate stormwater from the creation of impervious surfaces that will not be infiltrated on site? For the purpose of this analysis, infiltration includes the use of a stormwater treatment and management system intended to contain all stormwater on site by allowing it to seep into pervious surface or through, other means to be introduced into the ground. If your project involves the construction of impervious surface and does not include the design of a stormwater management system specifically designed to infiltrate stormwater, answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) Part C: Please review each question below for projects that include clearing. Review each . question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to . . construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance.. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. • . 2 -1 Will the project involve clearing within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a . . watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question -3 -0 - (Page:2) ,_ :: - :- - -- -: _ YES - Continue to Question 2 -2 2 -2 Will the project involve clearing of any trees within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers ?. A tree is defined by TMC 18.06.845 as any self - supporting woody plant, characterized by one main trunk, with a.. potential diameter - breast - height of 2 inches or more and potential minimum height of 1:O feet: Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -3 YES - Continue to Question 2 -3 2 -3 Will the project involve clearing of any evergreen trees from within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish. or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis evergreen means any tree that does not regularly lose all its leaves or needles in the fall. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2-4 YES - Continue to Question 24 ,. 24 Will the project involve clearing within 100 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a. watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 1) YES - Continue to Question 2 -5 2 -5 Will the project involve clearing within 40 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 3-0 (Page 2) catty of Tukwila kW Screening Checklist Part D: Please review each question below for projects that include work below the ordinary high water mark of watercourses or the Duwamish/Green or Black Rivers or in wetlands. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 3-1 Will the project involve the direct alteration of the channel or bed of a watercourse, the Green/Duwamish rivers, or Black River? For the purpose of this analysis, channel means the - area between the ordinary high water mark of both banks of a stream, and bed means the . stream bottom substrates, typically within the normal wetted-width of a stream. This includes both temporary and permanent modifications. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -2 0- Continue to Question 3 -2 3-2 Will the project involve any physical alteration to a watercourse or wetland' connected to the Green/Duwamish River? For the purpose of this analysis, "connected to the river means" flowing into via a surface connection or culvert, or having other physical characteristics that allow for access by salmonids. This includes impacts to areas such as sloughs, side channels, remnant oxbows, ditches formed from channelized portions of natural watercourses or any area that may provide off channel rearing = habitat for juvenile fish from the Duwamish River. This includes both temporary construction alterations and permanent modifications. Watercourses or wetlands draining to the Green/Duwamish River that have a hanging culvert, culvert with a flap gate, diversion, or any entirely man -made or artificial structure that precludes fish access should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. e- Continue to Question 3 -3 YES - Continue to Question 3 -3 3-3. Will the project result in the construction of a new structure or hydraulic condition that could be a barrier to salmoinid passage within the watercourse or the. Green/Duwamish or Black. Rivers? For the purpose . of this analysis, a barrier means any artificial or human modified:; structure or hydraulic condition that inhibits the natural upstream or downstream movement of sa∎ onids, including both juveniles and adults. Please circle appropriate response. Continue to Question 3-4 YES - Continue to Question 3-4 3-4 Will the project involve a temporary or permanent change in the cross - sectional area of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, the cross- sectional area is defined as a profile taken from the ordinary high water mark on the right bank to the ordinary high water mark on the left bank. Please circle appropriate response: NO - Continue to Question 3 -5 a= Continue to Question 3 -5 3-5 ' ` i 1 the project require the removal of debris from within the ordinary high water mark of a City of Tut= t; 5creemng Checklist watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, debris includes, but is not limited to fallen trees, logs, shrubs, rocks, piles, rip -rap, submerged metal, . and broken concrete or other building materials. Projects that would require debris removal from a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers as part of a maintenance activity should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -6 e- Continue to Question 3-6 3-6 Will the project result in impacts to watercourses or wetlands that have a surface connection to another watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers but do not contain habitat conditions that support salmonid use? Such areas may include, but not be limited to hillside seeps and wetlands isolated from the watercourse or river that have a surface water connection to the watercourse or river but are not assessable, nor would be assessable to salmonids under natural conditions. Wetlands with a "functions and values" rating for baseflow /groundwater support of 9 and above (or moderate) as described in Cooke (1996) should be included. Please circle appropriate response. Continue to Question 3 -7 YES - Continue to Question 3 -7 3-7 Will the project include the construction of artificial waterways or wetlands connected to a watercourse containing salmonids? For the purpose of this analysis, the construction of artificial waterways or wetlands includes wetlands, channels, sloughs, or other habitat feature created to enhance wildlife use, particularly waterfowl use, or may be attractive to wildlife, articularly- waterfowl. Please circle appropriate response. ; e04 _ - Continue to Question 3 -8 YES - Continue to Question 3 -8 3-8 Will the project include bank stabilization? For the purpose of this analysis, bank stabilization includes, but is not limited to, rip -rap, rock, log, soil, or vegetated revetments, concrete structures, or similar structures. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 4 -0 (Page 2) 19- Continue to Question 4-0 (Page 2) . • • WAC 197 -11 -960 Environmental checklist. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Purpose of checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C 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 of this 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. Govemmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. 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 the 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, write "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 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 NONPROJECT 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. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Sediment Removal at Boeing Storm Drain Outfall 2. Name of applicant: The Boeing Company 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Jim Bet P. O. Box 3707 M/C IW 12 Seattle, WA 98124 -2207 206 - 679 -0433 4. Date checklist prepared: 22 Apr 03 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila, WA Dept. of Ecology 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): 8/8/03 to 8/15/03 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. A biological assessment was done by PPC, some sampling in the area has been conducted by Ecology and Boeing. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for govemmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No other proposals are pending. 10. List any govemment approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. JARPA form 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses 2 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • • and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The proposed work involves dredging a small area around an existing storm drain outfall located on the Duwamish Waterway, the estimated quantity of sediments to be removed and replaced with clean fill is 100 cubic yards. The immediate area around the outfall contains hazardous substances in excess of the State sediment standards (SMS defined in WAC 173- 204). The sediment will be removed at a low -tide condition when it is above the waterline. The sediments removed will be processed at a nearby upland facility for dewatering and then disposed of at an off -site landfill that is permitted to accept the materials. The excavated area will be backfilled with a clean fill material that is imported to the site. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Boeing Developmental Center at Tukwila, WA NE'/. Section 4, T23N, R04E EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Fit, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 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. Sand and silty sand d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Sediment removed will be replaced with clean sand. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No 3 • • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Zero % h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: A silt fence will be installed in the area downgradient of the work area. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. None, the material to be removed will be wet b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year -round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Duwamish Waterway; flows into Elliot Bay 2). Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. The project entails removal of sediments from the tide flats. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. A maximum of 100 cubic yards of contaminated sediments will be removed and replaced with a like amount of clean fill (sand). No 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. The project will take place in the intertidal zone. 4 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • • 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. No b. Ground: No 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None will be discharged. c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. No water runoff will be generated. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: A silt screen will be installed downgradient from the work site. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grass pasture crop or grain X wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? A small amount of marine moss will be removed. 5 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPUCANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Fall Chinook and Dolly Varden c. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: None 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other Kingfisher mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other fish: bass, salmon, tmut, herring, shellfish, other. b.. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Fall Chinook and Dolly Varden c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Large woody debris (stump with rootball) will be placed on 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 used for heating, manufacturing, etc. None b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No 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: Not applicable 7. Environmental health 6 • • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 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? If so, describe. Sediments containing PCBs will be removed. None 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: A Project Health and Safety Plan will be written and followed b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? The project is located in an industrial area. 3) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long -term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indi- cate what hours noise would come from the site. Construction noises would occur at the same time as and be similar from surrounding industrial noises. 4) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: All work will be done between hours of 7 and 6 pm 8. Land and shoreline use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No Industrial c. Describe any structures on the site. There are no structures in the surrounding tideflats. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No 7 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPUCANT • • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Industrial f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Industrial g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Unknown h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive area? If so, specify. No I. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Not applicable 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, mid- dle, or low-income housing. None b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: 8 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT No impacts • • 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? No structures b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: No aesthetic impact 11. Light and glare a. What type of Tight or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None b. Could Tight or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None d. Proposed measures to reduce or control Tight and glare impacts, if any: Not applicable 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Boating b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No 9 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPUCANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation op- portunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Not applicable 13. Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preser- vation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Not applicable 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. Not applicable b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Not applicable c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Not applicable d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transporta- tion? If so, generally describe. No 10 • • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. None g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Not applicable 15. Public services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire pro- tection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Not applicable 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse serv- ice, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. None b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity, which might be needed. None 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: Date Submitted: 11 to BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air, pro- duction, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wildemess, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 12 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • • 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. 13 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY • • ESA LISTED SALMONIDS CHECKLIST Applicant Information Project Information Name The Boeing Company Name Sediment Removal Phone 206 - 679 -0433 Location: Boeing Developmental Center Description Remove a maximum of 100 cu yds of PCB contaminated sediments from the intertidal zone in front of the Boeing storm drain outfall. This worksheet was designed to help project proponents and government agencies identify when a project needs further analysis regarding adverse effects on ESA (Endangered Species Act) listed salmonids. Salmonids are salmon, trout and chars, e.g. bull trout. For our purposes, "ESA listed salmonids" is defined as fish species listed as endangered, threatened or being considered for listing. If ESA listed species are present or ever were present in the watershed where your project will be located, your project has the potential for affecting them, and you need to comply with the ESA. The questions in this section will help determine if the ESA listings will impact your project. The Fish Program Manager at the appropriate Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) regional office can provide information for the following two questions 1. Are ESA listed salmonids currently present in the watershed in which your project will be located? Yes X No Please describe. Fall Chinook and Dolly Varden 2. Has there ever been an ESA listed salmonid stock present in this watershed? Yes X No Uncertain Please describe. Fall Chinook and Dolly Varden If you answered "yes" to either of the above questions, you should complete the remainder of this checklist. September 1999 1 • • PROJECT SPECIFICS: The questions in this section are specific to the project and vicinity. 1. Name of watershed: Duwamish Waterway/ Green River 2. Name of nearest waterbody: Duwamish Waterway 3. What is the distance from this project to the nearest body of water? 0 Often a buffer between the project and a stream can reduce the chance of a negative impact to fish. 4. What is the current land use between the project and the potentially affected water body (parking lots, farmland, etc)? The project is in the intertidal zone. 5. Is the project above a: • natural permanent barrier (waterfall) Yes No X • natural temporary barrier _(beaver pond) Yes No X • man -made barrier (culvert, dam) Yes No X • other (explain) : 6. If yes, are there any resident salmonid populations above the blockage? Yes No Don't know 7. What percent of the project will be impervious surface (including pavement & roof area)? None , 0 %. September 1999 2 • • FISH MIGRATION: The following questions will help determine if this project could interfere with migration of adult and juvenile fish. Both increases and decreases in water flows can affect fish migration. 1. Does the project require the withdrawal of: i. Surface water? Yes No X Amount Name of surface water body ii. Ground water? Yes No X Amount From where Depth of well 2. Will any water be rerouted? Yes No X If yes, will this require a channel change? 3. Will there be retention or detention ponds? Yes No X If yes, will this be an infiltration pond or a surface discharge to either a municipal storm water system or a surface water body? If to a surface water discharge, please give the name of the waterbody. 4. Will this project require the building of new roads? Yes No X . Increased road mileage may affect the timing of water reaching a stream and may impact fish habitat. 5. Are culverts proposed as part of this project? Yes No X 6. Will topography changes affect the duration /direction of runoff flows? Yes No X If yes, describe the changes. 7. Will the project involve any reduction of the floodway or floodplain by filling or other partial blockage of flows? Yes No X If yes, how will the loss of flood storage be mitigated by your project? September 1999 3 • • WATER QUALITY: The following questions will help determine if this. project could adversely impact water quality. Such impacts can cause problems for listed species. Water quality can be made worse by runoff from impervious surfaces, altering water temperature, discharging contaminants, etc. 1. Do you know of any problems with water quality in any of the streams within this watershed? Yes No X If yes, describe. 2. Will your project either reduce or increase shade along or over a waterbody? Yes No X Removal of shading vegetation or the building of structures such as docks or floats often result in a change in shade. 3. Will the project increase nutrient loading or have the potential to increase nutrient loading or contaminants (fertilizers, other waste discharges, or runoff) to the waterbody? Yes No X 4. Will turbidity be increased because of construction of the project or during operation of the project? Yes No X In -water or near water work will often increase turbidity. 5. Will your project require long term maintenance, i.e. bridge . cleaning, highway salting, chemical sprays for vegetation management, clearing of parking lots? Yes No X If yes, please describe. September 1999 4 • • VEGETATION: The fdllowing questions are designed to determine if the project will affect riparian vegetation, thereby, adversely impacting salmon. 1. Will the project involve the removal of any vegetation from the stream banks? Yes No X If yes, please describe the existing conditions, and the amount and type of vegetation to be removed. 2. If any vegetation is removed, do you plan to re- plant? Yes No X If yes, what types of plants will you use? September 1999 5 • • RESOURCES Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Website www.wa.gov /wdfw/ This site has useful information on fish habitat. -Washington Department of Ecology Website www.ecy.wa.gov Click on the Water Quality button on the left side of this page. National Marine Fisheries Services Website Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) maps can be found at www.nwr.noaa.gov Click on the Endangered Species Act (ESA) links to view the ESU maps and other information. NOTE: Most applicants should have the information necessary to answer most of the questions in this checklist. Additional information will need to be obtained by local and state agencies if it appears that the project is likely to affect ESA listed species. September 1999 6 • • Biological Evaluation For Proposed Sediment Removal Near Outlet From Boeing Developmental Center South Storm Drain, Duwamish River, Tukwila, Washington prepared for: THE BOEING COMPANY SHARED SERVICES GROUP prepared by: PROJECT PERFORMANCE CORPORATION April 22, 2003 • • Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. PROJECT HISTORY 1 3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2 3.1 PROJECT LOCATION 2 3.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES 2 3.3 NEED AND PURPOSE 4 3.4 CONSERVATION MEASURES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS) 4 4. PROJECT AND ACTION AREA DESCRIPTIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE 5 4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE AND ACTION AREA 6 4.1.1 Water and Sediment Contamination 7 4.1.2 Bathymetry/Shoreline Modifications 8 4.1.3 Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, Turbidity 9 4.1.4 Substrate /Armoring and Benthic Community 9 4.1.5 Large Woody Debris 10 4.1.6 Off - channel Habitat and Refugia 10 4.1.7 Aquatic /Riparian Vegetation 11 5. THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES 11 6. EVALUATION OF PROJECT IMPACTS ON PROTECTED SPECIES 11 6.1 BALD EAGLE 12 6.1.1 Utilization of the Action Area 13 6.1.2 Effects of the Proposed Action 13 6.1.3 Effect Determination 13 6.2 PUGET SOUND CHINOOK SALMON 13 6.2.1 Utilization of the Action Area 14 6.2.2 Effects of the Proposed Action 15 6.2.3 Effect Determination 15 6.3 COASTAL/PUGET SOUND BULL TROUT 16 6.3.1 Utilization of the Action Area 16 6.3.2 Effects of the Proposed Action 17 6.3.3 Effect Determination 17 6.4 PUGET SOUND /STRAIGHT OF GEORGIA COHO SALMON 17 6.4.1 Utilization of the Action Area 17 6.4.2 Effects of the Proposed Action 18 6.4.3 Effect Determination 18 7. INTERRELATED AND INTERDEPENDENT EFFECTS 18 8. CUMULATIVE EFFECTS 18 8.1 FEDERAL PROJECTS 19 9. ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT ASSESSMENT 19 10. REFERENCES 20 APPENDIX A NMFS AND FWS SPECIES LISTS 32 PPC Proj # 1214 -090 DRAFT 4/22/03 • • 1. INTRODUCTION The Boeing Company (Boeing) proposes to remove approximately 100 cubic yards of contaminated sediment from an approximate 0.02 -acre (-25 ft x 35 ft) area immediately in front of the south storm drain from the Boeing Developmental Center (DC). The Boeing DC is located on the eastern shore of the Duwamish River in Tukwila, Washington. This action would occur in the intertidal area (approximate elevation +8 to +3 feet [ft] Mean Lower Low Water [MLLW]) for 2 -4 days between August 8 -12, 2003. Sediment removal would occur during low tides when the action area is "in the dry" above the water line. The general site location is shown in Figure 1. Photos of the project area are presented in Photos 1 -3. The work is proposed as a sensible follow -on removal action for one small area that was not addressed in a prior adjacent removal action for the Norfolk Combined Sewer Outflow (CSO) Sediment Remediation Project completed by King County in February and March 1999 (KCWPCD 1996, KCDNR 2002). The goal of the proposed removal action is to remove sediments that exceed the Sediment Quality Standard (SQS) for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) to eliminate this as a source for contamination of the cap placed in the 1999 removal action. In accordance with Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended, this document examines the potential impacts of the proposed action on federally threatened, endangered, and candidate species that may occur in the project vicinity. This biological assessment (BA) also addresses potential effects of the proposed action on Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) (Magnuson- Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act [MSA] as amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996). Direct and indirect effects are assessed over the short term ( <1 year) and the long term ( >1 year). 2. PROJECT HISTORY As indicated above, the area adjacent to the proposed project area was the site of a prior sediment removal action conducted near the Norfolk CSO by King County. Dredging, disposal, and capping of contaminated sediment from this outfall were completed in March 1999. The 1999 removal action addressed an area of approximately 0.7 acres and removed approximately 5,200 cubic yards of contaminated sediments. Sediments removed from the nearby upper navigational turning basin (Turning Basin #3) were used to backfill the site to original grade and restore the bottom habitat. The site hydraulic permit (HPA) issued by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) required that the cap be monitored for a period of five years to evaluate possible recontamination of the backfill material. Data from the 2001 sampling (King County 2001) showed an increase in PCB concentrations from all four monitoring stations, and there was no evidence of recontamination by any other chemicals of concern. This post - remedial monitoring at the Norfolk CSO sediment remediation site raised concerns regarding the potential for recontamination of the cap. To evaluate this potential recontamination problem, several sampling events and source control evaluations have been conducted by Boeing, King County and Ecology. The primary conclusion derived from these additional investigations is that an area adjacent to the Boeing storm drain contains contaminated sediments above the SQS and that erosion of these sediments is the likely cause of increased contaminant concentrations observed in the cap monitoring program. This small area was not addressed in the 1999 removal action. PPC Proj # 1214 -090 1 DRAFT 4/22/03 • • Subsequent to completion of the 1999 removal action, the area was listed on the EPA's National Priorities List (NPL) and the project location is now within the boundaries of the Lower Duwamish Waterway Superfund site. A chronological summary of previous sediment sampling completed in the Duwamish Waterway in the area of the Norfolk CSO and the proposed action can be found in PPC (2003). In July 2002, Boeing conducted a pressure wash clean out of the Boeing DC south storm drain system (the proposed removal action is below the outfall of this storm drain system). The regulatory framework for this sediment removal work is under the Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) administered by Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) under the Model Toxics Control Act. Implementation of the removal action under the VCP program is proposed as the most expeditious way to complete the project. 3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 Project Location The south storm drain from the Boeing DC facility and proposed project site are located in King County, Washington, within the City of Tukwila, Township 23N, Range 4E, Section 4, SW 1/4 of NE 1/4. The site vicinity map showing the surrounding area is presented in Figure 1. A map showing topographical /drainage features in the immediate project area is shown in Figure 2. The site is located on the eastern shoreline at approximately River Mile (RM) 5.5 of the Duwamish River. The area is situated between the South 102nd Street Bridge located upstream and the Boeing concrete bridge located downstream. Turning Basin #3 is located approximately 0.2 miles downstream. The project site is located on property owned by Boeing and on state -owned lands managed by the Washington Department of Natural Resources 3.2 Project Description and Construction Techniques The proposed action is to remove contaminated sediments immediately in front of the Boeing DC south storm drain that exceed the SQS, and to dispose of the removed materials in a landfill. The planned removal approach is to use a vacuum truck (on the road surface at the top of the bank) to remove contaminated sediments. The removal work will be conducted at a low -tide condition when the removal area is exposed above the water line. Approximately 100 cubic yards of sediment will be removed from an approximate 0.02 -acre (-25 ft x 35 ft) area. PCBs are not expected to exceed SQS at depths below 3 feet. However, if PCBs are found above SQS at the 3 -foot depth, the implementation plan will be to remove sediments to a depth not to exceed approximately 3 feet and cap the deeper contamination with the clean fill. Figures 3 and 4 show cross - sections of the proposed sediment removal area, including relative elevations MLLW. Work is proposed to occur during daylight hours in the intertidal area (approximately +8 to +3 ft MLLW) for 2 -4 days during August 8 -12,. 2003. The proposed work was scheduled to coincide with the lowest tides during the August 1 -31, WDFW- recommended in -water work window for the Duwamish River to avoid /minimize potential effects on salmonids and their habitat (see Sections 3.4 and 6.2). Removal activities are expected to require operations over multiple low -tide cycles (expected to be up to 4 tide cycles) to complete. All work in the intertidal area would occur during the daily approximate 3 -hour period of low tides when the action area is above the water line. Low tides during August 8 -12, 2003, will be approximately -2 ft MLLW. During low tides, sediment will be removed from lowest elevations first. PPC Proj # 1214 -090 2 DRAFT 4/22/03 • • The area planned for removal will be marked with stakes driven into the sediments. A silt fence will remain in place until removed sediment has been replaced with clean sediment (estimated 2- 4 days) to minimize potential erosion /turbidity /siltation between tide cycles. The silt fence will be of sufficient length to surround the work area. An anchored geomembrane fabric will be used to cover the sediment removal area when the area is inundated (tidal cycles between work periods) to minimize and avoid release of contaminated sediments. (Notably, existing contaminated sediments are currently exposed to tide cycles.) A vacuum truck will be used to remove sediments to the desired depth. The staging area for the vacuum truck, roll -off bins, and other equipment will be in the Boeing parking area located east of and on the bluff, approximately 12 -15 feet above the removal area. When the vacuum truck is full, it will be backed up to a lined roll -off bin and the contents deposited in containers for dewatering (e.g., 10 -yard or 20 -yard roll -off bins). The staging area will include health and safety exclusion areas with temporary hazard warning tape to define exclusion areas. All water generated from dewatering will be contained in a tank. When the sediments are sufficiently dewatered, an absorbent material (such as zeolite or fly ash) will be added to the roll -off bins and mixed with a backhoe to absorb any free liquids remaining in the sediment. After completion of waste characterization, the materials will be shipped to an appropriate pre- approved landfill by truck: either a Subtitle D landfill or a Subtitle C landfill if the material is characterized as a hazardous waste. Disposal decisions will be made to meet the applicable regulatory requirements. Following completion of the removal work and any necessary verification sampling, the excavated area will be backfilled using a sand slurry pumped from the road surface at the top of the bank. Clean backfill material will be purchased from a local supplier. This material will consist of similar grade and type of sediment that was removed (Le., fine - grained sand /silt/gravel mixture) in order to restore pre - removal habitat conditions. The backfill will be placed to return the surface to approximately the original elevation and topography prior to removal activities. After the backfill operations are complete, the silt fence and stakes will be removed. Portions of the area directly at and around the outfall contain a large amount of riprap rock, broken concrete, scrap metal, and other unnatural debris. Sediments around riprap areas will be removed to the extent practical. Smaller existing non - native debris (e.g., small broken concrete, stray rip rap rocks, metal, other human -made debris) in the work area that can be gathered by hand will be removed to the extent possible within safety /stability limitations to improve fish and wildlife habitat. This debris will be removed from the shoreline area by a crane located in the Boeing parking lot located on the bluff above the shoreline. Debris will be disposed at an authorized off -site disposal, storage, or recycling site. This debris removal is intended to improve potential intertidal habitat for juvenile salmonids (see Section 4). The project will include compliance monitoring to meet the requirements of WAC 173 - 340 -410 specifically to include protection monitoring, performance monitoring, and confirmational monitoring. Protection monitoring during construction work will be implemented to meet the requirements of the HASP. Performance monitoring will include sediment samples collected from the planned excavation area as well as waste characterization samples to determine disposal requirements. The type of post - removal confirmational monitoring will be developed after the depth of contamination and depth of planned removal are established. If the removal action can effectively remove all contamination (above the SQS) to a 3 -foot depth, no further confirmational sampling will be required. If some material is left in place because it occurs at depths at or below 3 feet, and is capped with a clean fill material, the confirmational sampling will include a sampling approach similar to that used for the prior Norfolk CSO removal action in the immediate area (annual sampling for 5 years). PPC Proj # 1214 -090 3 DRAFT 4/22/03 • • The proposed approach is considered implementation of a permanent solution to the maximum extent practicable (PPC 2003). The removal of sediments above the SQS is a permanent solution. The treatment options for sediments are not practical for the small quantity to be removed; thus, disposal (landfill) represents the only practical alternative. If some of the sediments at depth have to be capped (i.e., contamination is deeper than 3 feet) the replacement 3 feet of clean cap should act as a permanent barrier. This is consistent with the prior removal action in the immediate area. Further project detail is summarized in the project work plan (PPC 2003). 3.3 Need and Purpose The purpose of the proposed action is to remove the small area of remaining contamination above SQS present in front of the Boeing storm drain that was not addressed in the 1999 Norfolk CSO removal action (sediments in the intertidal zone near the outfall of the Boeing storm drain). This action is being implemented to eliminate this area as a potential source for recontamination of the cap placed in the 1999 sediment removal action. 3.4 Conservation Measures and Best Management Practices (BMPs) A number of conservation measures and best management practices (BMPs) would be employed during project activity to minimize potential adverse effects on protected species and their habitat and to enhance habitat as follows: • All work would be completed between August.8 -12, 2003. This work window avoids the sensitive migration periods identified for salmonids (including the bull trout) by the WDFW in the WAC (WAC 220 - 110 -271 and WAC 220 - 110 -206). It also avoids the wintering period for bald eagles. The closest bald eagle nest is located 3.5 miles from the project site and thus would not be affected by the project (see Section 6.1). • All removal work would be conducted in the dry at low -tide condition (0.5 to -2 ft MLLW) when the removal area is exposed above the water line. This work is expected to be completed within four low -tide cycles. • Work would occur during daylight hours only • All large project equipment (vacuum truck and sand pumping) will be land -based and used from the parking area located at the top of the bank to the east of the removal area. • All fill material shall be graded in the dry in the upper bank parking area. • The staging area for roll -off bins and other equipment will be the paved upland parking area. • All water generated from dewatering will be contained in a tank. When the sediments are sufficiently dewatered, an absorbent material (such as zeolite or fly ash) will be added to the roll -off bins and mixed with a backhoe to absorb any free liquids remaining in the sediment. • The staging area will include health and safety exclusion areas with temporary hazard warning tape to define exclusion areas. • Project activities will be conducted to minimize siltation of the work area. This will include: (1) covering the sediment removal area with an anchored geomembrane fabric when the area is covered with water (between tide cycles before backfill) to minimize and avoid _ release of contaminated sediments; and (2) constructing a silt fence around all work areas where material is being removed and /or placed. The silt fence will be of sufficient length PPC Proj # 1214 -090 4 DRAFT 4/22/03 to surround the work area during the 2 -4 -day work period, and will be anchored to ensure proper performance. • No materials will be stockpiled below the ordinary high water mark. • New sediment material will be clean and consist of similar grade and type of removed sediment (i.e., fine - grained sand /silt mixed with gravel) to replace with in -kind habitat. • Smaller existing non - native debris (e.g., small broken concrete and small stray rip rap rocks, metal, other human -made debris) in the work area that can be gathered by hand will be removed to the greatest extent possible within safety /stability limitations to improve fish and wildlife habitat. This debris will be removed from the shoreline by a crane located in the paved parking lot on the bluff above the shoreline. Debris will be disposed at an authorized off -site disposal, storage, or recycling site. ■ Any beach Togs potentially moved during construction shall be immediately replaced after placement of the new substrate; however, none are anticipated to be moved. • One pre - commercially thinned Douglas fir tree (-6 inches dbh [diameter at breast height]) with root wad attached will be anchored in the sediment removal area after it has been filled as recommended by the WDFW (Foster 2003) to enhance nearshore intertidal habitat for juvenile salmonids by providing LWD. Root wads provide cover for juvenile salmonids from predators and attachment points for food items. ■ No woody riparian vegetation will be disturbed or removed for the project. • To enhance habitat and food sources for fish and wildlife, 15 1- gallon containers of the native Lyngby's sedge (Carex lyngbyi) are proposed to be planted to improve the availability of native salt marsh vegetation in the project area. Species- specific planting and growing conditions as specified by the native nursery source will be followed. • The project will include compliance monitoring to meet the requirements of WAC 173 -340- 410 specifically to include protection monitoring, performance monitoring, and confirmational monitoring. 4. PROJECT AND ACTION AREA DESCRIPTIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE Land use in the vicinity of the site is primarily industrial and commercial, with residential areas located within 1 km. The site parallels the southern boundary of the Boeing DC and Boeing Field. Shoreline enhancements (e.g., planting of vegetation) and trail improvements were recently conducted on the bank above the project site for the Boeing Redevelopment Plan and the programmatic EIS for corridor redevelopment. The lower 10 miles of the Duwamish River (including the reach in which the project is located) has been almost completely altered from its predevelopment condition (Blomberg et al. 1988). Downstream of the project site intensive port and industrial development has occurred along the banks of the Duwamish Waterway; the lower 7 miles of the Duwamish River estuary is the approximate limit of past dredging impacts (ACOE 1998). Depth of river fill in the vicinity of the project site is generally Tess than 7 ft, except in the former river channel, where depth may be greater to create uplands (Sweet, Edwards & Associates, and Harper Owes 1985). The Duwamish River in the project vicinity is not maintained for vessel traffic. The shoreline in this area has been altered from natural conditions and consists predominantly of steep bluffs with non - native, disturbed vegetation and a narrow estuarine marsh vegetation zone. The project shoreline and intertidal zones were most recently dredged in 1999, and were previously dredged and altered for shoreline and industrial development. The following description of the immediate project area and adjacent area is based on a site visit conducted on April 4, 2003 (tide elevation +0.7 ft.), and a survey of the general area conducted in February 1996 (tide elevation +5 to +4) for the adjacent Norfolk CSO cleanup (KCWPCD 1996). PPC Proj # 1214 -090 5 DRAFT 4/22/03 • • The project shoreline is distinctly separated by a steep bank ( -12 -15 feet high) joining a sloping intertidal mud shoreline (see photos). Pilings (primarily wingwalls), a few logs ( -12 -15 feet long), riprap, and rock and broken concrete piles are found in the intertidal and /or subtidal zones at and adjacent to the site (Photo 1). Riprap surrounds the mouth of the Boeing outfall. A -2-3-foot deep S- shaped channel created by runoff from the Boeing outfall extends from the outfall to the river (see photos). An intertidal mudflat is located immediately downstream, and extends as far as the downstream bridge. The steep upper bank from the lower riprap /rubble line to the top of the bank is covered predominantly with thickly overgrown, non - native Himalayan blackberries. In the immediate project area at the point of transition between the blackberries and the lower mud slope, a very narrow (less than approximately 1 -2 feet wide) band of scattered, limited salt marsh vegetation occurs. A Carex spp. (possibly C. lyngbyi) and a Plantago spp. were observed in this area during the April 2003 site visit. (Note: this area will not be adversely affected by the project; however, native plants are proposed to be planted here; see Sections 3.4 and 4.1.7). Several pilings are set in the beach near the immediate project site (see Photo 1). Downstream of the upper turning basin, the river is maintained as a navigable waterway (Duwamish Waterway) by the Corps of Engineers (Corps). Turning Basin #3 (0.2 miles downstream of the project site) is dredged approximately every 2 years. Upstream, the Duwamish River begins at the confluence of the Black and Green Rivers at approximately RM 12 (the project site is located at approximately RM 5.5). In the immediate area of the site, the Duwamish is a salt -wedge estuary, with tides influencing its entire length (Dexter et al. 1981). As is typical of a salt -wedge estuary (by definition) little mixing of the salt wedge and river water occurs. The distance upstream to the toe of the salt wedge (salinity at least 25 ppt) depends on the tidal amplitude and freshwater discharge. During periods of low flow, the salt wedge extends upstream to approximately RM 10. During periods of high flow, the salt wedge extends to a location short of RM 8 (Stoner 1972). The toe of the salt wedge is generally located upstream of the site. Little mixing of the salt wedge and river water occurs (Dexter et al. 1981). The salinity of the upper river water layer increases in a downstream direction, but the salinity of the bottom layer remains fairly constant (except at the toe of the salt wedge, which is generally located upstream of the Norfolk outfall) (Santos and Stoner, 1972). The Duwamish River at the project site will generally be highly stratified, with the thickness of the fresh and salt -water layers varying with tides and river discharge. Salinity of interstitial waters adjacent to the project area has been reported to range from 5 to 16 ppt (KCWPCD 1996). 4.1 Environmental Baseline and Action Area The following evaluation is loosely based upon the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Matrix of Pathways and Indicators (NMFS 1996, 1999), which is a set of guidelines designed to facilitate and standardize the determination of effects of projects /actions on listed anadromous salmonids in freshwater environments. NMFS guidelines for the estuarine environment are not available; however, they have been adapted to the estuarine environment by others (e.g., SAIC 2000, Foster Wheeler 2000). A set of estuarine habitat indicators has been developed specifically for the Duwamish estuary for the Duwamish /Diagonal Sediment Remediation Project (DDSRP) BA (RM 1.86)(KCWTD 2002) and the Turning Basin #3 Habitat Restoration Project (TB3HRP) BA (RM 5.2)(MIT 2000). The action area for this study is defined the same as in the DDDSRP BA: the immediate project site (RM 5.5) as well as adjacent, downstream, and upstream areas where direct, indirect, or cumulative effects, or the effects of interrelated and interdependent activities, may be experienced during and following the proposed action. This action area is defined as the extent of the Duwamish River salt wedge estuary (approximately RM 7 downstream to the river's mouth). PPC Proj # 1214 -090 6 DRAFT 4/22/03 • • The TB3HRP and DDSRP BAs described and rated the existing baseline conditions of the action area in detail based on a number of habitat indicators (MIT 2000, KCWTD 2002). These habitat indicators were rated as "properly functioning ", "at risk ", or "not properly functioning" per terminology in the NMFS guidelines (NMFS 1999, MIT 2000, KCWTD 2002). The effect (restore, maintain, or degrade) that the proposed project would be expected to have on each indicator at the action area (i.e., the Duwamish River salt -wedge estuary) and project site scales, was then assessed, again using NMFS (1999) terminology. Existing baseline conditions of the action area and anticipated effects of the proposed action are summarized in Table 1. The following subsections are limited to a general overview and analysis of the habitat indicators and additional site - specific information as relevant to the proposed project. Additional detail for the action . area can be found in MIT (2000) and KCWTD (2002). Species- specific effects are described in Section 6. Table 1. Modified NMFS Indicator Checklist for Documenting Existing Environmental Baseline and Effects of the Boeing Sediment Removal in the Duwamish Estuary Action Area. t Estuarine Habitat Indicators Environmental Baseline in Duwamish Estuary Action Area Effects of the Action Properly Functioning At Risk Not Properly Functioning Restore Maintain De • rade Water Contamination X X Temporary* Sediment Contamination X X* Bathymetry/Shoreline Modifications X X Temporary* Temperature X X Dissolved Oxygen X X Turbidity X X Temporary* Substrate /Armoring X X Benthic Community X Short term* Large Woody Debris (LWD) X X* Off - channel Habitat X X Refugia X X Aquatic /Riparian Vegetation X X* Baseline conditions for the Duwamish Estuary action area based on analyses from MIT (2000) and KCWTD (2002). = project area only Temporary = possibly degraded in the project area during the 2 -4 days of project activity. Short term = <1 year in the immediate project area. 4.1.1 Water and Sediment Contamination The Duwamish River is rated as Class B freshwater according to state water quality standards from the mouth at Elliott Bay upstream to RM 11 (WAC 173- 201A). The lower Duwamish River estuary is also on the Washington Department of Ecology (DOE) 303(d) List of Threatened or Impaired Waterbodies, because it has exceeded state quality standards for over 50 different contaminants (Ecology 2002). These contaminants are presently released into the lower Duwamish River estuary in sewage overflows and industrial runoff. In the vicinity of the project site, pH levels are of concern (WDOE 2002). PPC Proj # 1214 -090 7 DRAFT 4/22/03 • • Contaminants occur in the water column and sediments in the lower Duwamish River estuary. See Section 2 for a historical description of sediment quality in the project vicinity. A risk assessment conducted in the lower Duwamish River found minimal risks to aquatic life from chemicals in the water column, no risks to juvenile salmon from direct exposure to chemicals in the water, and no risks to salmon smolt from consuming amphipods in the Duwamish estuary (DREBWQAT 1999). In a recent study, all observed and predicted water column exposure concentrations fell below water quality criteria (DREBWQAT 1999). However, due to factors described above, the Duwamish estuary action area is considered not properly functioning with respect to water and sediment contamination (MIT 2000, KCWTD 2002). Water quality may be degraded temporarily in a very localized area as a result of disturbance of contaminated sediments during the 2 -4 days of sediment removal. As stated in Sections 1 and 2, the immediate project site (0.02 acres at elevation +8 to +3 ft MLLW) is currently characterized by contaminated sediments that exceed the state SQS. These contaminated sediments are currently exposed and have the potential to be disturbed daily by tidal changes. It is possible that sediment removal may expose higher levels of contaminated sediments from below the sediment surface for the 2 -4 days of this activity. However, potential release of these contaminants to estuarine waters will be minimized to the maximum extent practicable by implementing BMPs and following applicable state Hydraulic Code Rules (WAC 220 -110) and associated HPA and DOE permits and requirements (see Section 3.4). Specifically to minimize potential release of sediments, silt fences will be installed during sediment removal. In addition, an anchored geomembrane fabric will be used to cover the sediment removal area when the area is inundated for 2 -4 days during high tides (see Section 3.4 Conservation Measures). The Duwamish river is a depositional river; the current in front of the project area is relatively slow (--1 ft/sec), particularly during the low -flow August period, and no scouring of the shoreline occurs in this area. Release of a minor amount of contaminated sediment above current levels is possible. However such potential releases would be minimal based on BMPs described above and immediate dilution in water to background concentrations. Furthermore, this potential minor release would be expected to be localized and temporary given the hydrodynamics of the project area. In the long term (i.e., immediately following the removal action), sediment and water quality are expected to improve as a result of the project (in a localized area) due to removal of contaminated sediment. 4.1.2 Bathymetry/Shoreline Modifications The river bottom near the edge of the shoreline in the project vicinity (except the immediate sediment removal area) was dredged and replaced with sediment from Turning Basin #3 during the Norfolk CSO sediment cleanup activity in 1999 (KCWPCD 1996, Ecology 2003)(see Section 2). In addition, the Duwamish shoreline and bathymetry have been modified from natural conditions over the years due to industrial development and activities. Therefore, the bathymetry in the project vicinity has been previously altered. As a result, bathymetry /shoreline modification is rated not properly functioning for the Duwamish estuary action area ( KCTWD 2002). A bathymetry survey was conducted at the Norfolk site in 1992; this survey encompassed the proposed project site. The survey identified depths between 0 and -6 feet MLLW for the river, and up to +2 feet MLLW for a portion of the intertidal zone. Bathymetry showed that a shallower intertidal area extends 50 to 100 feet offshore, and the river bottom then slopes more steeply to a depth of 6 feet, where the bottom becomes flat in the middle of the river. A -2 -3 foot deep S- shaped channel created by runoff from the Boeing outfall extends from the outfall to the river in PPC Proj # 1214 -090 8 DRAFT 4/22/03 • • the proposed sediment removal area (see Photo 3). Bathymetry would be temporarily disturbed by the project but would be restored to pre - project conditions within 2 -4 days. 4.1.3 Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, Turbidity Temperature and dissolved oxygen indicators are rated properly functioning for the action area (KCWTD 2002), and are not expected to be altered by the proposed project. The Duwamish River is generally an area of high sedimentation (KCDNR et al. 2001). Overall, turbidity fluctuates from lower levels in summer months and during flood tides, to higher levels during storm events in winter months and during ebb tides (KCWTD 2002). Turbidity also is known to increase near CSOs and other outfalls (KCWTD 2002). The annual suspended sediment discharge from the Duwamish River was estimated to be 1.7 x 103 metric tons per year, based on daily measurements of suspended sediments in the mid -1960s (Dexter et al. 1981). Data collected for the Elliott Bay Waterfront Recontamination Study (EBDRP 1996) indicates an average total Duwamish River TSS load of 7.6 x 103 metric tons per year, based on records for the 1943 -1983 period. High, anthropogenically derived turbidity as a result of the various outfalls along the Duwamish estuary warrants a not properly functioning rating for the Duwamish estuary action area (KCWTD 2002). Turbidity will be minimized to the extent possible during the proposed action by implementing BMPs and conservation measures. These measures include removing sediment in the dry during low tides and installing silt fences and placing a cover over the sediment removal area (see Section 3.4). When the tide rises to cover the new clean fill material, a small localized increase in turbidity may occur. However, existing turbidity is already naturally high in the project vicinity due to the depositional nature of the Duwamish River and the fine soft mud /silt sediment in the intertidal area. In summary, due to BMPs and conservation measures, and the small size (0.02 acre), duration (-3 hours of above -water work per day for 2 -4 days) and timing (August 8 -12, 2003) of the project, potential turbidity effects are expected to be insignificant. 4.1.4 Substrate /Armoring and Benthic Community Substrate /armoring in the Duwamish estuary has been greatly altered and modified due to industrial and shoreline development, riprapping, quay walls, etc. Much of the natural intertidal areas have been lost due to shoreline modifications as described above for the bathymetry/ shoreline modifications indicator. Substrate at the project site consists of an intertidal mudflat characterized by soft, fine - grained sand /silt sediment based on the April 2003 site visit and previous field investigations (KCWPCD 1996, PPC 2003). In the area of the Boeing DC south storm drain outfall, this fine sediment is mixed with gravel and cobbles. The top sediment layers have been deposited naturally by river movement and tides, but also by placement of sediment from Turning Basin #3 in the surrounding areas during the 1999 Norfolk CSO sediment cleanup activity (KCWTD 1996, Ecology 2003). As a result of past sediment cleanup and other activities in the area, the benthic community has been disturbed but has recolonized the sediment. Attached epibiota at and adjacent to the project site was represented only by a few barnacles (Balanus glandula) attached to rocks, rubble and pilings (KCWTD 1996, April 2003 site visit). The mud itself did not seem to support significant macroscopic infaunal organisms but was aerobic for several centimeters; this may have been attributable to flood deposition a week before the survey (KCWTD 1996). In the context of the Duwamish salt -wedge action area as a whole, the substrate /armoring and benthic community indicators for the action area have been rated not properly functioning (KCWTD 2002). PPC Proj # 1214 -090 9 DRAFT 4/22/03 • • The proposed action would remove approximately 100 cubic yards of existing contaminated sediment, but it would be replaced with clean in -kind (i.e., similar grain and type) sediment, and the pre - project elevation would be restored. Thus, the substrate type would not change after the project is completed. This action would also remove the benthic community from this small ( -25 ft x 35 ft) area. However, the benthic community is expected to reestablish itself in Tess than one year based on other studies (McCauley et al. 1977, Richardson et al. 1977, Romberg et al. 1995, Wilson and Romberg 1995), particularly given the small size of the disturbed area. Thus, potential adverse effects would be minimal because the project footprint represents only a very small portion of the available foraging habitat in the vicinity, and any dip in epibenthic abundance would be short term. Removing contaminated sediment would help to restore and improve sediment conditions for salmonids and their epibenthic prey. 4.1.5 Large Woody Debris Historically, large floods transported and deposited large woody debris (LWD) and sediments that changed the configurations of the main active channel of the Duwamish, side channels, and sloughs important in providing habitat for fish and wildlife (KCDNR et al. 2001). Large woody debris is considerably reduced in the estuarine - influenced portions of the Duwamish River due to changes in flooding events and shoreline modifications. Thus, the LWD indicator is currently rated as not properly functioning for the action area (KCWTD 2002). The only LWD observed at the project site during the winter 1996 site visit consisted of several large wood stumps. Three large logs ( -12 -15 feet long) were observed adjacent to the sediment removal area during the April 2003 site visit. No LWD is anticipated to be moved during the project. However, if any LWD needs to be moved to accommodate sediment removal, it will be replaced as originally found. To provide habitat enhancement, one pre - commercially thinned Douglas -fir tree (with root ball attached) is proposed to be anchored at the project action site between approximately +8 and +3 feet MLLW. Thus, the project will not adversely affect and will improve the availability of LWD in a very localized area. 4.1.6 Off - channel Habitat and Refugia Off- channel habitat for watersheds includes backwaters with cover and low- energy off- channel areas such as ponds, pools, sloughs, and oxbows that provide high - quality rearing habitat for juvenile salmon; refugia consist of high - quality remnant habitat that provides important rearing habitat for juvenile salmon (NMFS 1996, Johnson et al. 2001). Several habitat restoration projects have been completed in the lower Duwamish River estuary, which have created and restored off - channel habitat and refugia for juvenile salmonids (NOAA 2003). Historically, however, off- channel habitat and refugia have been destroyed or severely modified in the action area by decades of dredging, filling, CSL effluent, and extensive industrial activity (KCWTD 2002). No such habitat currently exists in the project area based on site visits conducted in winter 1996 and spring 2003. However, a shallow ( -2 -3 feet deep) S- shaped channel runs perpendicular to the flow of the river from the mouth of the Boeing outfall, created by the outfall runoff (Photos 1 -3). Off - channel habitat and refugia habitat indicators are considered not properly functioning in the Duwamish estuary action area as a whole due to historical loss of these habitats (KCWTD 2002). The proposed action would temporarily change (2 -4 days) the morphology and elevation of a very localized area of the intertidal area, including the existing shallow outfall channel. However, this area would be restored to pre - project morphological and elevation conditions. Thus, the project would maintain off - channel habitat and refugia conditions for the long term. PPC Proj # 1214 -090 10 DRAFT 4/22/03 • • 4.1.7 Aquatic /Riparian Vegetation The aquatic /riparian vegetation indicator was used specifically for this BA, and is a combination of the riparian reserve indicator (KCWTD 2002) and the aquatic vegetation indicator (Foster Wheeler 2000). Shoreline vegetation and intertidal habitats have been greatly altered in the lower 10 miles of the Duwamish River due to dredging, industrialization, shoreline and channel modification, physical armoring and riprap (Blomberg et al. 1988, KCWTD 2002). Only 2 percent of the original intertidal mudflats, marshes, and riparian habitats are estimated to remain along the Duwamish estuary (Blomberg et al. 1988). Due to the loss of intertidal and riparian vegetation over the years in the action area as described above, the action area is rated as not properly functioning for aquatic /riparian vegetation (KCWTD 2002). As summarized in Section 4.0, uplands of the project site are characterized by a steep terrestrial bluff covered thickly with non - native Himalayan blackberry bushes. A sloping intertidal mud shoreline occurs at the foot of this bluff. A narrow ( -1 -2 feet wide) band of limited salt marsh vegetation occurs at this transition point. No eelgrass was observed in the project area during the winter and spring site visits, and none has been reported for this area in past site visits and reports (KCWTD 1996, EBDRP 1997). No macrophytes were observed during the April 2003 site visit, and none were reported during the February 1996 site visit (KCWTD 1996). The proposed action will not damage or remove any native vegetation. To enhance riparian and aquatic vegetation, 15 1- gallon containers of the native Carex lyngbyi are proposed to be planted to improve the availability of native salt marsh vegetation in the project area. Thus, the project will not adversely impact and will improve and restore aquatic /riparian vegetation in a localized area. 5. THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES Per Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA, federally funded, constructed, permitted, or licensed projects must consider impacts to federally listed and proposed threatened or endangered species. The NMFS Northwest Region web sites were consulted on March 25, 2003, to determine which species under NMFS' jurisdiction potentially occur in the project area (http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/1habcon/habweb/listnwr.tem (Appendix A). A species list request was sent to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) on March 18, 2003; a FWS species list for the project vicinity was received on April 4, 2003 (Appendix A). Three federally threatened species may or are known to occur in the project vicinity: the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), Puget Sound chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), and Coastal /Puget Sound bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus). In addition, the federal candidate Puget Sound /Strait of Georgia coho salmon (0. kiscutch) occurs there. 6. EVALUATION OF PROJECT IMPACTS ON PROTECTED SPECIES The following sections describe the natural history, utilization of the action area, and anticipated effects of the proposed action on the three federally listed and one federal candidate species that may or are known to occur in the project vicinity. Anticipated project effects on these four species and Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) are summarized in Table 2. EFH is discussed further in Section 9. PPC Proj # 1214 -090 11 DRAFT 4/22/03 Table 2. Determination of Effects on Federally Listed and Candidate Species and EFH. Common Name. Federal Status Agency Effects" Comments Bald Eagle Threatened FWS NLTAA Project occurs outside wintering period. No nests <3.5 miles. Puget Sound Chinook Salmon Threatened NMFS NLTAA Project occurs in WDFW- approved in -water work window. Shoreline work conducted in the dry for 2 -4 days. Potential adverse effects temporary/short -term, localized, minimal. Beneficial effects: clean up sediment, native revegetation, remove debris, add LWD. Coastal -Puget Sound Bull Trout Threatened FWS NLTAA Same as chinook. Puget Sound/ Straight of Georgia Coho Salmon Candidate NMFS NLTAA Same as chinook. EFH for Pacific Salmon, Groundfish, and Coastal Pelagic Species NMFS WNAA • Same as chinook. NLTAA = May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect, WNAA = Would N Ad ot verse Affec 6.1 Bald Eagle The Washington State bald eagle population was listed as threatened under the ESA in February 1978. Since DDT was banned in 1972, bald eagle populations have rebounded. The bald eagle was proposed for de- listing in July 1999. Birds and fish are the primary food sources for bald eagles in Puget Sound and estuarine areas, but bald eagles will also take a variety of mammals and turtles (both live and as carrion) when fish are not readily available (Knight et al. 1990). Eagles in tidally influenced habitats also scavenge and pirate more prey than do eagles at rivers or lakes, possibly resulting from expanded feeding opportunities provided by dead and stranded prey on tide flats (Watson and Pierce 1998). The bald eagle wintering season extends from October 31 through March 31. Food is recognized as the essential habitat requirement affecting winter numbers and distribution of bald eagles. Other wintering considerations are communal night roosts and perches. Generally large, tall, and decadent stands of trees on slopes with northerly exposures are used for roosting; eagles tend to roost in older trees with broken crowns and open branching (Watson and Pierce 1998). Bald eagles select perches on the basis of exposure and proximity to food sources. Trees are preferred over other types of perches, which may include pilings, fence posts, powerline poles, the ground, rock outcrops, and Togs (Steenhof 1978). Bald eagles typically breed /nest between early January 1 and August 15 in Washington state (Bicknell 2001 in KCWTD 2002). The characteristic features of bald eagle breeding habitat are nest sites, perch sites, and available prey. Bald eagles nest primarily in uneven -aged, multi- storied stands with old- growth components. Factor such as tree height, diameter, tree species, position on the surrounding topography, distance from water, and distance from disturbance also influence nest selection. Snags, tree with exposed lateral branches, or trees with dead tops are PPC Proj # 1214 -090 12 DRAFT 4/22/03 • • often present in nesting territories and are critical to eagle perching, movement to and from the nest, and as points of territorial defense. 6.1.1 Utilization of the Action Area The FWS indicated that wintering bald eagles may occur in the project vicinity (Appendix A). The closest designated bald eagle use site to the project site is 2 miles away, and the closest nest site is 3.5 miles away (Stofel 2003; WDFW 2003). No typical roosting or overwintering habitat occurs in the project area (Partee 2003). No suitable perching, nesting, or roosting habitat was observed during the April 2003 site visit along the bluffs above the project site, which consists of the Boeing parking lot and other industrialized areas. 6.1.2 Effects of the Proposed Action The work window for the project is August 8 -12, 2003. This work period does not overlap the bald eagle wintering season, and does overlap the end of the bald eagle nesting season. However, the minimum distance required to avoid potential disturbance to nesting bald eagles is 0.5 miles (FWS 1999), and the closest designated bald eagle use site is 2 miles away. No potential bald eagle habitat would be affected by the project. Noise associated with project activities is not expected to disturb any bald eagles that may forage in the project vicinity. Industrial noise and activities are already ongoing in the vicinity, and bald eagles that may use the vicinity are likely well - acclimated to such activities and noise. Prey availability is not expected to be affected before, during, or after construction. 6.1.3 Effect Determination In summary, the proposed project may affect but is not likely to adversely affect the bald eagle. Foraging nesting bald eagles could possibly occur in the action area, but the work period is short, project activities are relatively minor, industrial noise and activity are ongoing, and the project would not adversely affect potential foraging opportunities or other eagle habitat. The project will remove contaminated sediment and thus remove a source of water, sediment, and prey contamination, thereby improving bald eagle habitat. 6.2 Puget Sound Chinook Salmon Puget Sound chinook salmon in the Green /Duwamish River are considered part of the Puget Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) and were listed as a federally threatened species in 1999. On April 30, 2002, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia approved a NMFS consent decree withdrawing critical habitat designations for 19 salmon and steelhead populations on the U.S. West Coast, including for Puget Sound chinook salmon (NMFS website October 2002). Puget Sound chinook salmon spawn, hatch, and rear in streams and rivers flowing into Puget Sound. Puget Sound chinook are of the ocean -type race (NMFS 1998). These chinook migrate to sea during their first year of life, normally within 1 -3 months after emergence from freshwater spawning gravel. Growth and development to adulthood occurs primarily in estuarine and coastal waters (NMFS 1998). These fish return to their natal river to spawn in the fall and subsequently die (Myers et al. 1998). Incubation of eggs is generally completed by the end of February. Young chinook reside in stream gravel for 2 -3 weeks after hatching (Wydoski and Whitney 1979) before moving to lateral stream habitats (e.g., sloughs, side channels, and pools) for refugia and food during their migration downstream and out to Puget Sound. PPC Proj # 1214 -090 13 DRAFT 4/22/03 • • The amount of time juveniles spend in estuarine areas is dependent on their size at downstream migration and rate of growth. In estuaries, chinook salmon fry ( <40 mm long) prefer protected habitats with lower salinity where they move from the edges of marshes during high tide to protected tidal channels and creeks during low tide (Healey 1991). As these fish grow, they move into more saline waters and increasingly less- protected habitats. Juveniles disperse to deeper marine areas when they reach approximately 64 -75 mm in fork length (Simenstad et al. 1982). Peak emigration occurs from March to June (WDF 1975), concentrating from April to late May (Simenstad et al. 1982). While residing in upper estuaries as fry, juvenile chinook have an affinity for both benthic and epibenthic prey items such as amphipods, mysids, and cumaceans (Simenstad et al. 1982). 6.2.1 Utilization of the Action Area The Duwamish River is an important migratory route and rearing, holding, and transition area for anadromous salmonids in the Green /Duwamish River basin (Salo and Grette 1986, Warner and Fritz 1995, NOAA Restoration Center 1998). Of the five Pacific salmonid species, chinook salmon are most dependent on estuaries during the early stages of their life cycle (Varanasi et al. 1993). The lower 6.2 to 8 miles of the Duwamish estuary (the project site is at approximately RM 5.5) is an important transition zone for juvenile salmonid acclimation to saltwater (Parametrix 1980). The upper reaches of the Green River beginning at Duwamish RM 11 and the lower reaches of its tributaries provide important salmonid spawning habitat (KCWTD 2002). Spawning does not occur in estuaries. Escapement levels into the Green River between 1990 and 1998 ranged from 2,479 to 10,584 with a mean of 6,893 chinook (MIT 2000). Adult chinook salmon begin entering the lower Duwamish River in early July and upstream migration peaks in late August to early September (NOAA Restoration Center 1998). Turning Basin #3 (located approximately 0.2 miles downstream from the project site) is a major holding area for adult chinook waiting to ascend to the spawning grounds in the Green River. Above this reach, the river is narrower with increasing river velocity; thus energy expenditure is presumably less for adults if they hold downriver at Turning Basin #3 (MIT 2000). Adult chinook are generally not found in the Duwamish estuary after the end of the first week of October (MITF unpub. data in MIT 2000). Spawning occurs in September and October and young chinook usually emerge by February. The lowermost known extent of chinook spawning in the Green /Duwamish River is approximately RM 24 (MIT 2000), which is approximately 18 miles upstream from the project site. Upon emerging from gravel, juvenile chinook either migrate downstream to the estuary to rear as fry or spend weeks to several months rearing in freshwater before leaving for the estuary (MIT 2000). Side channel surveys in the Green River between RMs 34 and 44 found juvenile chinook use of side channels (R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. 1999). This suggests an extended freshwater rearing phase for Green River chinook (MIT 2000). Chinook residing in upstream freshwater habitats (or hatcheries) can be >70 mm long when they reach the estuary. Warner and Fritz (1995) found that the bulk of juvenile chinook reached the estuary as a fingerling rather than as a (smaller) fry migrant. These fish are capable of moving offshore very soon after migrating from the river and are Tess dependent on estuarine rearing (MIT 2000). Juvenile chinook occur in the Duwamish estuary from mid - February through early September, primarily from March -June, with a peak in late May (MIT 2000, Partee 2003). The observed peak of juvenile chinook in the Duwamish estuary and at Turning Basin #3 (RM 5.2) corresponds with the release of hatchery fingerlings (Warner and Fritz 1995). Juvenile chinook have been found in PPC Proj # 1214 -090 14 DRAFT 4/22/03 Q •1 abundance near Kellogg Island (RM 1.8, approximately 4 miles downstream of the project site) between April and June (Parametrix 1982), where they feed on copepods, amphipods, insects, annelids, and small fish (Varanasi et al. 1993). After the second week of June, the number of juvenile chinook decreases quickly: by July, less than 2 were collected per beach seine (Warner and Fritz 1995). Juvenile chinook apparently slow their outmigration movement into the estuary near RM 7 to begin their acclimation to salt water. Thus, an important saltwater transition zone for juvenile chinook appears to be located between about Duwamish RM 7 and 5 (Warner and Fritz 1995), an area that straddles the proposed project site (RM 5.5). Densities of juvenile chinook were higher at Turning Basin #3 (RM 5.2) than at nine other sampling stations between Duwamish RM 1.6 and 10.4 (Warner and Fritz 1995). This suggests that Turning Basin #3 is an important rearing area for juvenile chinook. Extensive mudflats and appropriate salinity regime likely account for the large numbers of juvenile chinook observed. Chinook juveniles in the lower Duwamish River are expected to be outmigrating as early as March. However, juvenile chinook salmon may be present year round in the lower Duwamish River estuary (Erstad 2002 in KCWTD 2002, Partee 2003). 6.2.2 Effects of the Proposed Action The sediment removal project is proposed to occur for 2 -4 days in the dry between August 8 -12, 2003. Thus, the project will not overlap the standard WDFW- endorsed work closure period for salmonids for estuaries (March 15 -June 14) and the Duwamish River (September 1 -July 31) (WAC 220 - 110 -271 and WAC 220 - 110 -206). Therefor, the project is scheduled for periods when in -water and shoreline activities would be expected to have the least direct or indirect impacts on salmonids. As summarized above, juvenile chinook salmon have been found in the Duwamish estuary between February and early September; however, the peak occurs in May and very few have been caught in July through September. Adult chinook salmon migrate from Puget Sound up the Duwamish from early July through October, with numbers peaking in late August to early September. Thus, very few juvenile chinook and relatively small numbers of adult chinook may occur in the project vicinity during project activities. Juvenile chinook have a stronger affinity for nearshore shallow water than adults do; thus, adult chinook are less likely to occur in intertidal areas. Adult salmonids use the shoreline primarily for orientation during migrations. As summarized in section 4, the only habitat indicators that may be negatively affected in a localized area by the project either temporarily or in the short term are water contamination, bathymetry, turbidity, and benthic community (Table 1). These effects would be temporary (the 2- 4 days of project activity) or limited to the short -term (<1 year) and a very small (0.02 acre) area. These potential effects are summarized in Table 1 and were described in detail in Section 4. The project may benefit chinook salmon and enhance habitat in a localized area by removing contaminated sediment, removing small non - native debris, planting native salt marsh plants, and placing /anchoring one large piece of LWD in an area generally lacking natural vegetation and LWD. 6.2.3 Effect Determination In summary, the project may affect but is not likely to adversely affect Puget Sound chinook salmon. This determination is made based primarily upon the following: (1) implementation of BMPs, (2) the small size /area, scope, and duration of the project, (3) project scheduling within WDFW- recommended fish protection work windows, (4) the low likelihood that chinook would be present in intertidal zones of the project area, (5) conducting all sediment removal activities in the PPC Proj # 1214 -090 15 DRAFT 4/22/03 • •, dry when the area is not covered with water, and (6) the temporary, short-term and minor nature of project impacts as described for the habitat indicators in Section 4. In the long term, the proposed activity will enhance habitat in a localized area of the Duwamish estuary action area as described above. 6.3 Coastal /Puget Sound Bull Trout The Coastal /Puget Sound bull trout population segment was listed as a threatened species under the ESA in 1999. Bull trout populations have declined through much of the species' range; some local populations are extinct, and many other stocks are isolated and may be at risk (Rieman and McIntyre 1993). A combination of factors, including habitat degradation, expansion of exotic species, and exploitation has contributed to the decline and fragmentation of indigenous bull trout populations. Bull trout movement in response to developmental and seasonal habitat requirements makes their movements difficult to predict both temporally and spatially. A recent WDFW (1999) summary paper on bull trout in the Stillaguamish Basin provided some general information on bull trout distribution in Puget Sound river basins. Newly emergent fry tend to rear near spawning areas, while foraging juvenile and sub - adults may migrate through river basins looking for feeding opportunities. Post -spawn adults of the non - resident life form quickly vacate the spawning areas and move downstream to forage, some returning to their "home" pool for additional rearing. Anadromous sub - adults and on- spawning adults are thought to migrate from marine waters to freshwater areas to spend the winter 6.3.1 Utilization of the Action Area Little data are available on the life history and distribution of bull trout in Puget Sound River basins (WDFW 1999). Bull trout have not been found in headwaters of the Green River despite extensive surveys (Watson and Toth 1994), and they have not been found in the Green River above Howard Hanson Dam (FWS and NMFS 1995, 1996). Typical preferred spawning habitat conditions are not known to occur in tributaries of the Duwamish /Green Rivers (Partee 2003). Spawning does not occur in estuaries. Bull trout have been captured in estuarine parts of the Duwamish River, including at Turning Basin #3 in the project vicinity (Warner and Fritz 1995, Hotchkiss 2003), and could potentially be present year -round in the area (Partee 2003). Young adult and subadult bull trout are known to occur in the project vicinity (Hotchkiss 2003). It is not known whether bull trout captured in the Duwamish estuary were produced in the basin or strayed from other locations. Anadromous sub - adults and adults utilize estuarine and nearshore marine habitats in Puget Sound for the feeding opportunities these areas present. Bull trout potentially occurring in the project vicinity are likely occasional migrating and /or foraging individuals (Foster 2003, Hotchkiss 2003, Partee 2003). Based on research in the Skagit Basin (Kraemer 1994), anadromous bull trout juveniles migrate to the estuary in April -May, then re -enter the river from August- November. Most adult bull trout entered the estuary in February- March, and returned to the river in May -June. Sub - adults (fish that are not sexually mature but have entered marine waters) move between the estuary and lower river throughout the year. Small numbers of subadults have been found in the general project vicinity during the late season in August/September (Hotchkiss 2003). PPC Proj # 1214 -090 16 DRAFT 4/22/03 6.3.2 Effects of the Proposed Action As summarized above, foraging or migrating bull trout may be present year -round in small numbers in the vicinity of the proposed project and action area; however, their presence and habits in the lower Duwamish are largely unknown (KCWTC 2002). Small numbers of subadult and juvenile bull trout have been found in the project vicinity in August/September. Project activities will occur between August 8 -12. This period falls within the WDFW- recommended in- water work window for the Duwamish River (August 1 -31) and estuarine areas of Puget Sound (June 15 -March 14) (WAC 220 - 110 -271 and WAC 220 - 110 -206). The work period also abides by the FWS- recommended in -water work window for bull trout in estuarine areas (July 16- February 14). Anticipated project effects would be the same as those described for the Puget Sound chinook salmon above (see Section 6.2.2 and 6.2.1). 6.3.3 Effect Determination In summary, the project may affect but is not likely to adversely affect Coastal Puget Sound bull trout. This determination is made based upon the proposed work schedule, project duration (2 -4 days), small scope and size /area of sediment disturbance, conducting sediment removal in the dry, and implementation of BMPs and conservation measures and other analyses described for the chinook salmon (see Sections 2, 3.4, 4 and 6.2). In the long term, the project is expected to benefit populations of bull trout and their habitats by removing or isolating contaminated sediment from the environment, thereby eliminating future food web bioaccumulation of contaminants from this localized source. In addition, proposed habitat enhancements (including providing LWD and planting native salt marsh vegetation) may benefit bull trout in a localized area (see Section 3.4). 6.4 Puget Sound /Straight of Georgia Coho Salmon The Puget Sound /Straight of Georgia Coho salmon ESU was designated as a candidate for federal listing in 1995. Coho salmon is an anadromous species common to many coastal streams. Spawning occurs only in freshwater in late winter and early spring in streams that are usually fast flowing (Laufle et al. 1986). Juvenile coho salmon typically spend one year to 18 months in freshwater before migrating to the ocean. Shallow areas associated with backwater pools, beaver ponds, or side channels comprise early rearing habitat (Reeves et al. 1989). 6.4.1 Utilization of the Action Area Spawning by coho salmon occurs in many tributaries of the Duwamish and Green rivers (Erstad 2002 in KCWTD 2002). No spawning occurs in the project area; however, spawning occurs in Hamm Creek approximately 0.8 miles downstream of the project site (Divens 1997). Coho salmon juveniles migrate downstream from mid - February through mid -May, with a peak in mid- to late April corresponding with hatchery releases (Warner and Fritz 1995). Adult coho migrate upstream in late August through December (Salo and Grette 1986, WDFW and WWTT 1994). There does not appear to be a peak during the upstream migration (MITFD unpub. data in MIT 2000). Coho smolts are less dependent on estuaries for acclimatization to salt water and growth due to their relatively large size (70 -120 mm) at outmigration. Thus, their estuary residency times are shorter than for chum or chinook. PPC Proj # 1214 -090 17 DRAFT 4/22/03 6.4.2 Effects of the Proposed Action As summarized above, juvenile coho salmon are known to use the project vicinity as a migration corridor from mid - February through mid -May. Adult coho migrate upstream through the project area from late August through December. Thus, project activities scheduled to occur August 8 -12 would not overlap with periods when coho are expected to occur in the project area. Furthermore, project activities will occur within the WDFW- recommended in -water work window for the Duwamish River (August 1 -31) and estuarine areas of Puget Sound (June 15 -March 14) (WAC 220 - 110 -271 and WAC 220 - 110 -206). Anticipated project effects would be the same as those described previously for the Puget Sound chinook salmon above (see Table 1 and Sections 6.2.2 and 6.2.3). 6.4.3 Effect Determination In summary, the project may affect but is not likely to adversely affect Puget Sound /Straight of Georgia coho salmon. This determination is made based upon factors described previously for the chinook salmon (see Section 6.2.2). In addition, the proposed work schedule does not overlap with the known occurrence of coho in the project vicinity. Through the long term, the project is expected to benefit populations of coho and their habitat as described for the chinook salmon. 7. INTERRELATED AND INTERDEPENDENT EFFECTS Interdependent activities are those that have no independent utility apart from the proposed action. Interrelated activities are those that are part of the primary action and are dependent upon that action for their justification. One planned activity is considered an interrelated activity to the proposed sediment removal activity. This is Boeing's planned repair of the storm drain outfall whose discharge is located adjacent to the proposed sediment removal area. This action is considered a stormwater BMP and involves placing a detention basin to keep soil from entering the storm drain. A sediment trap /oil -water separator would be placed in the drainage pipe located in the upland Boeing parking lot on the bluff above the proposed sediment removal action site. This activity would have no impact on the waterway; all work would occur in the paved parking lot. The project is currently in a design stage and is planned for August 2003 to coincide with the period of lowest groundwater levels. Because the proposed storm drain repair described above will have no impact (or very limited) on the waterway, no interrelated effects are expected on the waterway. If the projects occur simultaneously, noise levels may increase slightly in the parking lot area. However, industrial noise and activities are ongoing in this area; thus, the minimal added temporary noise would not be expected to affect any wildlife that may occur nearby. 8. CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Cumulative effects are the effects of unrelated future state or private activities that do not involve a federal nexus. No known non - federal activities are scheduled to occur within the shoreline vicinity of the proposed sediment removal action (Gierloff 2003, Romberg 2003) other than the one interrelated Boeing activity described above. Furthermore, a search completed for the DDSRP BA also reported no such activities in the same action area (KCWTD 2002). PPC Proj # 1214 -090 18 DRAFT 4/22/03 8.1 Federal Projects Three lower Duwamish sediment - dredging projects (see below) may occur in the Duwamish estuary approximately 3 -12 months after the proposed Boeing sediment removal action. Two of these projects are sediment cleanup projects (the DDSRP and the Lockheed dredging and pile removal), and one is a maintenance - dredging project (Turning Basin #3). These federally regulated projects will be independently evaluated for impacts on federally listed species and their habitats by the sponsoring agency, and are not required to be evaluated in this BA. Two additional projects may occur in the future (Romberg 2002 in KCTWD 2002), but are not yet planned and are likely to have their own federal nexus because they will require a Corps permit. These are (1) repair work on two sewer siphons buried in the river bottom, and (2) piling removal activities at the loading dock located offshore from the former Diagonal Avenue treatment plant outfall. These projects are described in further detail in the DDSRP BA (KCWTD 2002). None of the above projects or any others are known to be occurring in the action area at the same time as the proposed Boeing sediment removal action. Because of this factor combined with the minor, short -term localized effects of the proposed sediment removal action described herein, no cumulative negative effects related to the proposed project are expected. However, the proposed project will contribute cumulatively in a localized manner to ongoing activities planned and undertaken in the past to restore natural fish and wildlife habitat in the Duwamish Estuary (NOAA 2003). As summarized previously, localized habitat enhancement for the proposed project includes removing contaminated sediment, placing one large piece of LWD, and planting native salt marsh vegetation. 9. ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT ASSESSMENT (EFH) The action area is designated as EFH for various life stages of 18 species of groundfish, 4 coastal pelagic species, and 3 species of Pacific salmon (PFMC 1999, KCWTD 2002). The proposed project would temporarily affect approximately 0.02 acre of EFH potentially utilized by these species. Effects of the proposed action on EFH would be essentially identical to those discussed throughout this document, particularly in Sections 4 and 6.2. Based on these analyses, overall the proposed action would not adversely affect EFH for federally managed fisheries in Washington waters for reasons described for the chinook. In the long term, EFH would benefit from the proposed action through localized removal of contaminated sediment, placement of LWD, and planting of native salt marsh vegetation (see Section 3.4). PPC Proj # 1214 -090 19 DRAFT 4/22/03 • •l 10. REFERENCES ACOE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 1998. Additional Water Storage Project, Draft Feasibility Report and EIS: Howard Hanson Dam, Green River, Washington. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, WA. Blomberg, G., Simenstad, C., and P. Hickey. 1988. Changes in the Duwamish River Estuary Habitat Over the Past 125 Years. In Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting on Puget Sound Research. Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, Seattle, WA. Dexter, R., D. Anderson, E. Quinlan, L. Goldstein, R. Strickland, S. Pavlou, J. Clayton, R. Kocan and M. LandoIt. 1981. A Summary of Knowledge of Puget Sound Related to Chemical Contaminants (Technical Memorandum OMPA -13). Prepared by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Boulder, CO. Divens, K. A. 1997. Hamm Creek Fish Kill Investigation. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Habitat Management Program. Response and Resource Damage Assessment Section. Olympia, WA. DREBWQAT. 1999. Duwamish River and Elliott Bay Water Quality Assessment Team. Parametrix, Inc., and King County DNR. Kind County Combined Sewer Overflow Water Quality Assessment for the Duwamish River and Elliott Bay. Volume 1, Appendix B, Appendix C. February 1999. EBDRP (Elliott Bay /Duwamish Restoration Program)., 1996. Norfolk Recontamination Modeling Report. Prepared for the Elliott Bay /Duwamish Restoration Program Panel by K. Schock and R. • Shuman, King County WPCD. April 1996. Seattle, WA. EBDRP. 1997. Final Norfolk Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Sediment Remediation Project Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact. Seattle, WA. May 1997. Ecology (Washington State Department of Ecology). State 303(d) List. Washington State Department of Ecology. Data obtained on March 25, 2003, from the following web site: http: / /www. ecy. wa. gov /p rog ra m s /wq /303d/ 1998 /s rias /1998_wate r_segs. pdf. Ecology. 2003. Norfolk Combined Sewer Overflow (Duwamish River) Sediment Cap Recontamination, Phase I Investigation. Environmental Assessment Program, Olympia, Washington. Waterbody No. WA -09 -1010, Publication No. 03 -03 -004. February 2003. Fisher, L. 2003. Biologist, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Habitat Office, Bellevue, Washington. Telephone conversation with M. Smultea, Project Performance Corporation. March 25 and 26. Foster Wheeler Environmental Corporation. 2000. Biological Assessment Nearshore Confined Aquatic Disposal Operable Unit B, Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Bremerton, Washington. Remedial Action Contract II (RACII) /Delivery Order No. 0067. FWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 1999. Biological Assessment Preparation and Review. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Western Washington Office. August 1999. 47 pp. PPC Proj # 1214 -090 20 DRAFT 4/22/03 • •, FWS and NMFS. 1996. Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Issuance of a Permit to Allow Incidental Take of Threatened and Endangered Species. Plum Creek Timber company, L.P. Lands in the 1 -90 Corridor King and Kittitas Counties, WA. Gierloff, N. 2003. Planning Supervisor, City of Tukwila, Planning Department. Telephone conversation with M. Smultea, Project Performance Corporation. March 31. Healey, M. C. 1991. Life History of Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). Pp. 311 -394 in Groot and Margolis, editors. Pacific Salmon Life Histories. UBC Press, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Hotchkiss, D. 2003. Port of Seattle, Seattle, Washington. Telephone conversation with M. Smultea, Project Performance Corporation. March 24. Johnson, D. H., N. Pittman, E. Wilder, J. A. Silver, R. W. Plotnikoff, B. C. Mason, K. K. Jones, P. Roger, T. A. O'Neil, and Charley Barrett. 2001. Inventory and Monitoring of Salmon Habitat in the Pacific Northwest -- Directory and Synthesis of Protocols for Management/Research and Volunteers in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, WA. 212 pp. KCDNR (King County Department of Natural Resources). 2001. Norfolk CSO Sediment Remediation Project, Five -Year Monitoring Program, Annual Monitoring Report - Year Two, April 2001. King County Department of Natural Resources, Water and Land Resources Division, Seattle, WA. KCDNR, Battelle Marine Sciences Laboratory, Pentec Environmental, Striplin Environmental Associates, and Shapiro Associates, Inc. 2001. Reconnaissance Assessment of the State of the Nearshore Ecosystem: Eastern Shore of Central Puget Sound, Including Vashon and Maury Islands (WRIAs 8 and 9). May 2001. Seattle, WA. KCWPCD (King County Water Pollution Control Division). 1996. Norfolk CSO Sediment Cleanup Study Elliott Bay /Duwamish Restoration Program. Elliott Bay /Duwamish Restoration Program, NOAA Restoration Center Northwest, National Marine Fisheries Service, Seattle, Washington. Panel Publication 13. KCWTD (King County Wastewater Treatment Division). 2002. Biological Assessment Duwamish /Diagonal Sediment Remediation Project. Prepared for King County Wastewater Treatment Division, Seattle, Washington. Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc., Seattle, Washington. November 6. Knight, R. L., P. J. Randolph, G. T. Allen, L. S. Young, and R. J. Wigen. 1990. Diets of Nesting Bald Eagles, Haliaetus leucocephalus, in Western Washington. Canadian Field Naturalist 104:545 -551. Kraemer, C. 1994. Some Observations on the Life History and Behavior of the Native Char, Dolly Varden (Salvelinus malma) and Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) of the North Puget Sound Region. Unpublished Report, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Laufle, J. C., G. B. Pauley, and M. F. Shepard. 1986. Species profiles: Life Histories and Environmental Requirements of Coastal Fishes and Invertebrates (Pacific Northwest) - Coho PPC Proj # 1214 -090 21 DRAFT 4/22/03 • •1 Salmon. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Report 82 (11.48). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, TR EL -82 -4. McCauley, J. F., R. A. Parr, and D. R. Hancock. 1977. Benthic Infauna and Maintenance Dredging -A Case Study. Pergamon Press, Water Research 11: 233 -242. MIT (Muckleshoot Indian Tribe). 2000. Biological Assessment for the Turning Basin #3 Aquatic Habitat Restoration Project, as Amended. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Department. May 17. Myers, J. M., R. G. Kope, G. J. Bryant, D. Teel, L. J. Lierheimer, T. C. Wainwright, W. S. Grand, F. W. Waknotz, K. Neely, S. T. Lindley, and R. S. Waples. 1998. Status review of chinook salmon from Washington, Idaho, Oregon, and California. NOAA Technical Memorandum. NMFS - NWFSC -35. Northwest Fisheries Science Center, Seattle, WA. NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 1996. Making Endangered Species Act Determinations of Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the Watershed Scale. Prepared by the National Marine Fisheries Service Environmental and Technical Services Division Habitat Conservation Branch. August. NMFS. 1998. Endangered and Threatened Species: Proposed Endangered Status for Two Chinook Salmon ESUs and Proposed Threatened Status for Five Chinook Salmon ESUs; Proposed Redefinition, Threatened Status, and Revision of Critical Habitat for One Chinook Salmon ESU; Proposed Designation of Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat in California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho. Federal Register 63(45): 11482-11520. March 9, 1998. NMFS. 1999. A Guide to Biological Assessments. Prepared by the National Marine Fisheries Service, Washington Habitat Conservation Branch, Lacey, WA. Revised March 23, 1999. NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 2003. NOAA Damage Assessment and Restoration Program, Northwest Region, Elliott Bay /Duwamish River Overview of NRDA Restoration website, March 19, 2003. http: // www.darcnw.noaa.gov /eb- rest.htm NOAA DARP. 2003. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Damage Assessment and Restoration Program Northwest Region Elliott Bay /Duwamish River Overview of Natural Resources Damage Assessment (NRDA) Restoration web site, March 30, 2003. http://www.darcnw.noaa.gov/eb-rest.htm NOAA Restoration Center. 1998. Seaboard Lumber Site Aquatic Habitat Restoration Project. Environmental Assessment. Seattle, WA. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Seattle, WA. Parametrix, Inc. 1980. Port of Seattle Terminal 107 Fisheries Study. Prepared for the Port of Seattle. Seattle, WA. Parametrix, Inc. 1982. 1980 Juvenile Salmonid Study. Prepared for the Port of Seattle. Seattle, WA. Partee, R. 2003. Biologist, City of Tukwila, Washington. Telephone conversation with M. Smultea, Project Performance Corporation. March 24 and 31. PPC Proj # 1214 -090 22 DRAFT 4/22/03 • • PPC (Project Performance Corporation). 2003. Work Plan for the Boeing Sediment Removal Near Outlet from DC South Storm Drain, Duwamish, River, Tukwila, Washington. PFMC. 1999. Identification of Essential Fish Habitat for Pacific Salmon, Appendix A of Amendment 14 to Pacific Coast Salmon Plan. Pacific Fisheries Marine. R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. 1999. Juvenile Salmonid Use of Lateral Stream Habitats Middle Green River, Washington. 1998 Data Report Draft. Redmond, WA. Reeves, G.H., F.H. Everest, and T. E. Nickelson. 1989. Identification of Physical Habitats Limiting the Production of Coho Salmon in Western Oregon and Washington. General Technical Report PNW- GTR0245. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR. Richardson, M. D., A. G. Carey, Jr., and W. A. Colgate. 1977. Aquatic Disposal Field Investigations Columbia River Site, Oregon. Appendix C: the Effects of Dredged Material Disposal on Benthic Assemblages. U.S. Army Corp of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Dredged Material Research Program Technical Report D- 77 -30, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Rieman, B. E. and J. D. McIntyre. 1993. Demographic and Habitat Requirements for Conservation of Bull Trout. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. General Technical Report INT -302. Romberg, P. 2003. Voice message from P. Romberg, King County, Seattle, WA, to M. Smultea, Project Performance Corporation. April 7, 2003. Romberg, P., C. Homan, and D. Wilson. 1995. Monitoring at Two Sediment Caps in Elliott Bay. Pp. 289 -299 in Puget Sound Research 1995: Proceedings. Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, Olympia, WA. SAIC. 2000. Final Biological Assessment, Dry Dock Operations at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and SUBASE Bangor, Bremerton, Washington. Prepared for Engineering Field Activity, Northwest, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Poulsbo, Washington. November. Salo, E. O. and G. B. Grette. 1986. The Status of Anadromous Fish of the Green /Duwamish System. Final Report Submitted to the Seattle District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Simenstad, C. A., K. L. Fresh, and E. O. Salo. 1982. The Role of Puget Sound and Washington Coastal Estuaries in the Life History of Pacific Salmon: an Unappreciated Function. Pp. 342 -364 in V. Kennedy, ed. Estuarine Comparisons. Academic Press, New York. Steenhof, K. 1978. Management of Wintering Bald Eagles. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report FWS /OBS- 78 -79. Stofel, J. 2003. Email from J. Stofel, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, to M. Smultea, Project Performance Corporation. March 27, 2003. Stoner, J. D. 1972. Determination of Mass Balance and Entrainment in the Stratified Duwamish River Estuary, King County, Washington. Environmental Quality, Geological Survey Water - Supply Paper 1873 -F. Prepared in Cooperation with the Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington. US Department of the Interior. PPC Proj # 1214 -090 23 DRAFT 4/22/03 • • Varanasi, U., E. Casillas, M. R. Arkoosh, T. Hom, D. A. Misitaano, D. W. Brown, S. L. Chan, T. K. Collier, B. B. McCain, and J. E. Stein. 1993. Contaminant Exposure and Associated Biological Effects in Juvenile Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). From Urban and Nonurban Estuaries of Puget Sound. Prepared by the National Marine Fisheries Service, Seattle, WA. Warner, E. J., and R. L. Fritz. 1995. The distribution and growth of Green River Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and Chum Salmon (0. keta) Outmigrants in the Duwamish Estuary as a Function of Water Quality and Substrate. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Fisheries Department, Water Resources Division, Auburn, WA. Watson, J. D., and D. J. Pierce. 1998. Ecology of Bald Eagles in Western Washington with an Emphasis on the Effects of Human Activity. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Wildlife Research Division, Olympia, WA. Watson, G. and S. Toth. 1995. Limiting Factors Analysis for Salmnonid Fish Stock in the Plum Creek's Cascades Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) Area. Plum Creek Timber Col., LP., Technical Report No. 13, Seattle, WA. 58 pp. WDF (Washington Department of Fisheries). 1975. A Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization, Volume 1, Puget Sound Region. Washington Department of Fisheries, Olympia, WA. WDFW (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife). 1998. Salmonid Stock Inventory, Appendix: Bull Trout and Dolly Varden. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Fish Program, Olympia, WA. WDFW. 1999. Bull Trout in the Stillaguamish River System. Unpublished Report. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Region 6, Mill Creek, WA. WDFW. 2003. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife -- Habitats and Species Report in the Vicinity of T23R04E Section 4, Report Date: April 1, 2003. Database report obtained from Washington Department and Fish and Wildlife, Priority Habitats and Species, Olympia, WA. WDFW and WWTT (Western Washington Treaty Indian Tribes). 1994. 1992 Washington State Salmon and Steelhead Stock Inventory Report. Wilson, D., and P. Romberg. 1995. Elliott Bay /Duwamish Restoration Program: Pier 52 -55 Sediment Cap and Enhanced Natural Recovery Area Remediation Project, 1993 Data. Prepared for the Elliott Bay /Duwamish Restoration Program Panel by the King County Department of Metropolitan Services, Seattle, WA. Wydoski, R. S., and R. R. Whitney. 1979. Inland Fishes of Washington. University of Washington Press, Seattle, WA. PPC Proj # 1214 -090 24 DRAFT 4/22/03 • • Figure 1. Site vicinity map. PPC Proj # 1214 -090 25 DRAFT 4/22/03 1 • Figure 2. Site plan, and topographical and drainage features. PPC Proj # 1214 -090 26 DRAFT 4/22/03 1 • Figure 3. Cross - section of the proposed sediment removal area in front of the Boeing south storm drain, surrounding topography, landmarks, and associated elevations (ft MLLW). PPC Proj # 1214 -090 27 DRAFT 4/22/03 • • Figure 4. Cross - section of the Boeing south storm drain outfall channel and surrounding topography, nearby landmarks, and associated elevations (ft MLLW). PPC Proj # 1214 -090 28 DRAFT 4/22/03 Photo 1. View of project vicinity and Boeing DC building from west side of the Duwamish River. Norfolk CSO on far right . Boeing South Storm Drain to left of Norfolk CSO. Tidal elevation approximately +0.7 feet MLLW, April 4, 2003. PPC Proj # 1214 -090 29 DRAFT 4/22/03 Photo 2. View looking south on east side of Duwamish River of Boeing DC South Storm Drain (on left). Historical storm drain on right, not currently used . Approximate tide elevation +0.7 feet MLLW, April 4, 2003. PPC Proj # 1214 -090 30 DRAFT 4/22/03 Photo 3. View looking north on east side of Duwamish River of Boeing DC South Storm Drain, including channel created by outfall drainage. Approximate tide elevation +0.7 feet MLLW, April 4, 2003. PPC Proj # 1214 -090 31 DRAFT 4/22/03 • • SITE ADDRESS Parcel # •IetroScan / King (WA) Owner Name Site Address • YB Owner Phone 142304 9006 142304 9009 142304 9033 336590 0015 336590 0030 336590 0705 336590 0710 336590 0715 336590 0720 336590 0725 336590 0730 336590 0735 336590 0740 336590 0765 336590 0770 336590 0775 336590 0780 336590 0790 336590 0795 336590 0815 336590 0830 336590 0845 336590 0850 336590 0855 336590 0865 336590 0875 336590 0880 336590 0891 336590 0905 336590 0907 336590 0925 336590 0975 336590 1015 336590 1016 336590 1035 336590 1055 336590 1055 336590 1075 336590 1085 336590 1090 336590 1091 336590 1095 336590 1100 336590 1105 336590 1110 336590 1115 336590 1120 336590 1122 336590 1130 336590 1131 336590 1140 336590 1145 336590 1150 336590 1152 336590 1155 336590 1236 336590 1237 336590 1317 336590 1320 336590 1330 336590 1335 Lund Charles Alan /Annette 6500 S 132nd St Seattle 981 City Of Seattle Spu *no Site Address* Ibanez Ronelo T /Annette D 6641 S 132nd St Seattle 981 Goerltiz Peter K /Lesley El 14475 56th Ave S Tukwila 98 Reid Samuel T /Madonna M 14434 55th Ave S Tukwila 98 Swingler Richard G /Diane L 14210 57th Ave S Tukwila 98 Lindberg C 0 Quarnstrom Gar W Rigdon Robert W /Robin L Markind Craig;+ Judkins Romelle P Morgan Susan M Strand Eric L Kochhar Kanwaljit S Reed Jacquelyn E Stenson F Lee 5701 S 142nd St Tukwila 981 5725 S 142nd St Tukwila 981 14209 58th Ave S Tukwila 98 14217 58th Ave S Tukwila 98 14221 58th Ave S Tukwila 98 14225 58th Ave S Tukwila 98 14235 58th Ave S Tukwila 98 5708 S 142nd St Tukwila 981 14416 57th Ave S Tukwila 98 14112 57th Ave S Tukwila 98 2001 206 - 772 -6196 1959 1990 206 - 431 -1563 1956 1983 1910 206 - 527 -9445 1910 206 - 242 -9200 1908 1944 1929 1930 2002 1908 F Lee Stenson Construction 14112 57th Ave S Tukwila 98 Stenson F Lee 14112 57th Ave S Tukwila 98 Stenson F Lee 14112 57th Ave S Tukwila 98 Golden Nugget Holdings Llc 14025 Interurban Ave S Tukw 1941 Tukwila Land Corp 14027 Interurban Ave S Tukw 1950 Tukwila Land Corp 14027 Interurban Ave S Tukw Tukwila Land Corp 14027 Interurban Ave S Tukw Tukwila Land Corp 14051 Interurban Ave S Tukw The Southland Corporation 14057 Interurban Ave S Tukw Barbanti Marco T 14065 Interurban Ave S Tukw Tukwila Interurban Inv Co 14101 Interurban Ave S Tukw Tukwila Interurban Invest *no Site Address* Tukwila Leahy Robert W & Dorothy P 5722 S 142nd St Tukwila 981 South Center Properties In 14081 58th Ave S Tukwila 98 Tukwila City Of 14000 Interurban Ave S Tukw City Of Tukwila *no Site Address* Tukwila City Of Tukwila 14000 Interurban Ave S Tukw City Of Tukwila 5829 S 140th St Tukwila 981 1970 Grand Central Properties T 14040 Interurban Ave S Tukw 2002 B B N Trust 14060 Interurban Ave S Tukw 1965 B B N Trust 14060 Interurban Ave S Tukw 1971 B B N Trust 14060 Interurban Ave S Tukw Johnson Leo E Jr & Marian 14210 58th Ave S Tukwila 98 Larson Mark M /Patricia J;+ 14216 58th Ave S Tukwila 98 O'brien Timothy Michael 14217 59th Ave S Tukwila 98 Moore Kurt J 14222 58th Ave S Tukwila 98 King David F & Sue A 14230 58th Ave S Tukwila 98 Mcleland - wieser Richard C/ 14234 58th Ave S Tukwila 98 Edgar Steven R 14240 58th Ave S Tukwila 98 Mills William S & Sandra H 14250 58th Ave S Tukwila 98 S W I Inc 14254 58th Ave S Tukwila 98 Spence Michael D 5810 S 144th St Tukwila 981 Garcha Javinder Kaur 5826 S 144th St Tukwila 981 Story Ronald D;Benedict Ba 5828 S 144th St Tukwila 981 1950 Mac Veigh Bruce S *no Site Address* Tukwila 1975 1953 509 - 328 -1734 1965 1953 206 - 243 -4013 1967 1965 1910 206 - 242 -4785 1908 1965 1918 206 - 244 -8998 1988 206 - 242 -7660 1908 206 - 439 -7096 1908 206 - 433 -6935 1901 206 - 431 -9000 1947 1994 1945 Mac Veigh Bruce S Bernhard James L Gagh Amrik S Whitten Todd L /Stacey J Alvarez Samuel III Baldwin Garrett M Hawley Ruth E Ives Helen K Industrial Properties Inc Viewcrest Wpig Llc 14245 59th Ave S Tukwila 98 1982 14241 59th Ave S Tukwila 98 1962 14235 59th Ave S Tukwila 98 1976 14231 59th Ave S Tukwila 98 1977 5817 S 144th St Tukwila 981 2000 5827 S 144th St Seattle 981 1965 14414 59th Ave S Tukwila 98 1907 14406 59th Ave S Tukwila 98 1904 14430 59th Ave S Tukwila 98 14438 59th Ave S Tukwila 98 1962 Information compiled from various sources. Real Estate Solutions makes no representations or warranties as to the accuracy or completeness of information contained in this report. 206 - 241 -3976 206 - 772 -0436 206 - 772 -0436 206 - 242 -7996 206 - 246 -7230 206 - 244 -7857 206 - 242 -6206 Parcel # 336590 1390 336590 1395 336590 1400 336590 1405 336590 1415 336590 1425 336590 1425 336590 1435 336590 1440 336590 1445 336590 1450 336590 1460 336590 1470 336590 1475 336590 1480 336590 1485 336590 1490 336590 1505 336590 1510 336590 1515 336590 1524 336590 1525 336590 1570 336590 1665 336590 1680 336590 1685 336590 1690 336590 1700 336590 1701 336590 1710 336590 1710 336590 1715 336590 1720 336590 1721 336590 1750 336590 1756 336590 1757 336590 1758 336590 1765 336590 1766 336590 1795 336590 1795 336590 1810 336590 1835 336590 1836 336590 1845 336590 1846 336590 1850 336590 1851 336590 1881 336590 1881 336590 1890 336590 1890 336590 1940 336590 1945 336590 1955 336590 1960 336590 1970 336590 1975 377920 0255 efetroScan / King (WA) Owner Name Site Address • YB Owner Phone Red House Properties Llc 14501 Interurban Ave S Tukw 1987 Metro Land Development Inc 14451 Interurban Ave S Tukw Metro Land Development Inc 14401 Interurban Ave S Tukw Metro Land Development Inc 14351 Interurban Ave S Tukw Segale Mario A 14341 Interurban Ave S Tukw Baum Pamela J 14305 Interurban Ave S Tukw Baum Pamela J 14305 Interurban Ave S Tukw Myck Leanne M;+ 14301 Interurban Ave S Tukw Ebenezer Church Of God In 14275 Interurban Ave S Tukw Mcintosh Kathy J;Hawkins K *no Site Address* Tukwila Sivertsen David R *no Site Address* Tukwila Hartman Lori L S 14237 Interurban Ave S Tukw 1912 The Southland Corp 14201 Interurban Ave S Tukw Ricks Timothy B;Ward Miche 14228 59th Ave S Tukwila 98 The Southland Corp 14201 Interurban Ave S Tukw The Southland Corp 14201 Interurban Ave S Tukw Obrien Timothy 14100 Highland Dr S Tukwila The Southland Corp 14201 Interurban Ave S Tukw Obrien Timothy 14212 59th Ave S Tukwila 98 1935 The Southland Corp 14201 Interurban Ave S Tukw Kisner Brian A /Lisa L L 14082 58th Ave S Tukwila 98 Hewitt Raymond W 14208 58th Ave S Tukwila 98 Guardian Properties Llc 6437 S 144th St Tukwila 981 Knudson Jerry 6301 S 143rd St Tukwila 981 Knudson Gerald 6230 S 143rd P1 Tukwila 981 Knudson Gerald C 6341 S 143rd St Tukwila 981 Knudson Jerry 6234 S 143rd P1 Tukwila 981 Engstrom Donald G 6238 S 143rd P1 Tukwila 981 Engstrom Donald G 6400 S 143rd P1 Tukwila 981 Engstrom Donald G 6400 S 143rd P1 Tukwila 981 Engstrom Donald G 6400 S 143rd P1 Tukwila 981 Hinkson Leslie 6411 S 143rd St Tukwila 981 Hinkson Leslie P /Janet L 6424 S 143rd P1 Tukwila 981 Stray Frederick M & France 6421 S 143rd St Tukwila 981 Burke Robert M & Alberta M 6431 S 143rd St Tukwila 981 Sanft Louie 6438 S 143rd P1 Tukwila 981 Smith Grant D /Deborah J 6427 S 143rd St Tukwila 981 Sanft Louie 6430 S 143rd P1 Tukwila 981 Dawes Clyde W 6439 S 143rd St Tukwila 981 Sanft Louie 6440 S 143rd P1 Tukwila 981 Sanft Louie 6460 S 144th St Tukwila 981 Sanft Louie 6460 S 144th St Tukwila 981 Sanft Louie 6440 S 144th St Tukwila 981 Fouty Charles L /Elaine J 6426 S 144th St Tukwila 981 Fouty William A 6423 S 143rd P1 Seattle 981 Knudson Jerry 6421 S 143rd P1 Tukwila 981 Knudsen Jerry 6412 S 144th St Tukwila 981 Patera David P /Holly E 6417 S 143rd P1 Tukwila 981 Parshall Noel R /Melody A;K 6402 S 144th St Tukwila 981 Fairway Center Associates 14220 Interurban Ave S Tukw Fairway Center Associates 14220 Interurban Ave S Tukw Sanft Louie /Adolph /Ruth M 6350 S 143rd St Tukwila 981 Sanft Louie /Adolph /Ruth M 6350 S 143rd St Tukwila 981 Justin James L /Gail Ana 6406 S 143rd St Tukwila 981 Simvest Capital Llc 6410 S 143rd St Tukwila 981 Tukwila Terminal Llc 6440 S 143rd St Tukwila 981 Tukwila Terminal Llc 6440 S 143rd St Tukwila 981 1981 Tukwila Terminal Llc 6440 S 143rd St Tukwila 981 1981 Tukwila Terminal Llc 6440 S 143rd St Tukwila 981 City Of Tukwila 14001 Beacon Coal Mine Rd S 206 - 575 -3200 1943 1958 1943 1923 425 - 775 -4600 1937 253 - 946 -0772 1943 1964 206 - 433 -7956 1976 206 - 861 -1713 1915 206 - 861 -1713 1962 1967 1976 1973 253 - 630 -0163 1979 253 - 630 -0163 1966 206 - 722 -6824 1915 206 - 246 -7639 206 - 242 -0268 206 - 722 -6824 1966 206 - 722 -6824 1968 206 - 722 -6824 1984 206 - 722 -6824 1942 1947 1947 206 - 861 -1713 1984 206 - 861 -1713 1944 1947 1990 1990 1975 206 - 722 -6824 1975 206 - 722 -6824 1965 253- 752 -7852 1963 Information compiled from various sources. Real Estate Solutions makes no representations or warranties as to the accuracy or completeness of infonnation contained in this report. • • APPENDIX A NMFS AND FWS SPECIES LISTS (need to insert species list letter from FWS—Mari faxed to Tom 4- 11 -03) PPC Proj # 1214 -090 32 DRAFT 4/22/03 • • Northwest Region Species List Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, and Candidate Species under National Marine Fisheries Service Jurisdiction that Occur in Oregon, Washington, and Idaho Listed Species Coho Salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) • Southern Oregon /Northern California Coasts Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU)(Threatened) • Oregon Coast ESU (Threatened) Chinook Salmon (0. tshawytscha) • Snake River Fall -run ESU (Threatened) • Snake River Spring /Summer -run ESU (Threatened) • Puget Sound ESU (Threatened) • Lower Columbia River ESU (Threatened) • Upper Willamette River ESU (Threatened) • Upper Columbia River Spring -run ESU (Endangered) Chum Salmon (0. keta) • Hood Canal Summer -run ESU (Threatened) • Columbia River ESU (Threatened) Sockeye Salmon (0. nerka) • Snake River ESU (Endangered) • Ozette Lake ESU (Threatened) Steelhead (0. mykiss)1 • Upper Columbia River ESU (Endangered) • Snake River Basin ESU (Threatened) • Lower Columbia River ESU (Threatened) • Upper Willamette River ESU (Threatened) • Middle Columbia River ESU (Threatened) Sea -run Cutthroat Trout (0. clarki clarki) • Umpqua River ESU (Endangered) Proposed for Listing Chinook Salmon • Southern Oregon /Northern California Coastal ESU (Proposed Threatened) • Sea -run Cutthroat Trout • Southwestern Washington /Columbia River ESU (Proposed Threatened) Candidates for Listing Coho Salmon • Puget Sound /Straight of Georgia ESU • Lower Columbia River /Southwest Washington ESU Steelhead • Klamath Mountains Province ESU • Oregon Coast ESU Sea -run Cutthroat Trout • Oregon Coast ESU Office of Habitat Conservation, HQ I NMFS Northwest Region I NMFS I NOAA I DOC Source: Obtained from National Marine Fisheries Service Web site (March 22, 2002), PPC Proj # 1214 -090 33 DRAFT 4/22/03 • • CITY OF TUIKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E-mail: tnkolan(ci.tukwila.wa.us AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING. The undersigned being duly swan and upon oath states as follows: 1. 1 am the cumeat owner of the property which is the subject ofthis application. 2. All statements contained in theapplicationshavebunprepare dbymeor myagents andaetrueandconect tothebestofmylmowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, ag nts,engineers, contractors or other native/s •the right to enter upon Owner's teal property, located at r - ♦ / .. v K td alb( Sxthepurpose , ., cation review, for , tad time to complete that purpose. 66 5. Owner agree9 to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result ofthe sole negligence ofthe City. 6. The City shall, at its discretion , camel the application without ref nd of foes, if the applicant does not respond to specific requests for items on the "Complete Application Checklist' within n inety (90) days. 7. Non- responsiveness to a City infomtation request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refined of fees. EXECUTED at Sea ++ ! e. (City), LAJA (sne>.oa May 9) 02003 7kor►0.. s D. Ga. LLa_clie r 94bs E. tiae144t.1 IJa.y So ;Z)0 13- 5'H 88 3 (Phone (Signalize) On this day personally appeared before me TA 01114 S Pe 6'0S.11adieI me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instroment and adatowledged that he/she signed the same as his/her vbluntary act and deed for the uses and proposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS 9 ± DAY OF M o.(' a ®D 3 NOTARY P C for the State of Washingon t�� jj residing at eQ *1' /e. G(/, My Commission expires on N b . 46, tt V f./ .7 kNoah Public State of Washington O. M. SOPHIE COLOMBI My Appointment Expires Nov 26, 2005 L OOV'T LOT 2 S.E. 1/4 AND N. 1/4 SECAON 4, TOWNSHIP 23 N, RANGE 4 E, W.M. KIN COUNTY. WASHINGTON l� —POWT R2TLB0' W AND 684.78' N OF B.E. COR 030W D.LC. RCN PIPE BY DENIM DESOtIPRON 587'63'48'8 1391.83' o \,O ' 14 N.E 108 6 CON. Of LAND V 1087 —I DEEDS P0. 222 8 a9 • 37319'24'E 82.88' APPROBATE LOCATION MEAN NOON WATER (NOT SURVEYED) GOVERMENT MEANDER LINE AND REMITS CF UPLANDS OWNERSHIP FUND 8/0 RE8Aft ANO CAP 33' W OF LINE 28 48 589'44'05'E 18 [SOUTH LINE OF TIMOTHY CROW 0.1.C. 1572.42' (RUIIY,CALC) TO MEANDER POST 187r5 (BR11 TO NNW) N.o ' S �EV GOVERNMENT MEANDER LINE GOVERMENT \/ MEANDER UNE \ 06 • • i REFERENCES PLAT - COMMERCIAL WATERWAY DISTRICT N0. 1, SHOWING DUW/4115H WATERWAY, SECTIONAL, DONATION 0.894 •ANO PRESENT SHORELINE MEANDERS OF THE DUWAMISN RIVER, R10141 -0F -WAY SHEET N0. 10. APPROVED APRIL 4, 1017. PUT - KEY MAP, COMMERCIAL WATERWAY DISTRICT N0. 1, SHOWING COORDINATE POSITION OF SECTION AND QUARTER CORNERS BOUNDARIES OF DONATION 0.6945 AND THE LOCATION Of 114E PROPOSED COMMERCIAL WATERWAYS, DATED AUOUST 16, 1011. 0.LO. TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., NOVEMBER 10, 1861 0.LO. FIELD NOTES EDWIN RICHARDSON, CONTRACT H0. 88, DATED MAY 25, 1881 - FIELD NOTES OF THE MEANDER OF THE LEFT AND RGIIT BANKS OF THE DUWAMISH RIVER AND OF THE 1940114Y GROW 0ONATICN LAND CLAW NOS. 44 AND 48. UNRECORDED SURVEYS BY H.R. RU1H60LD, PLS, MAP 4/56 - SLOAN TRACT, DATED DECEMBER 1010 WORKSHEET FOR CASCADE PPE AND FWME COMPANY. NO DATE ROCCO TRACT, AUGUST 14, 1930 WORKSHEET FOR ALL TAX LOTS WITHIN GOVERNMENT LOT 8, NO DATE 111D BOOK NOS. 27, 70, 120, 103 AND 108 DEEDS OF CONVEYANCE AUDITOR'S FILE NOS. 4631312. 4831313. 4631318, 4831318, 4851954 AND 4858515, RECORDING NOS. 6505311811, 8505311612 AND 8500120160. UNRECORDED 5311)117 BY BENNETT- FISHER AND ASSOCIATES JOB N0. 57332, DATED AUGUST 10, 1957 UNRECORDED SURVEY BY 811514 HOED AND HITCHNG'S CONSTRUCTORS PACIFIC, DRAWING NOS. 76241 AND 83171.01, DAZED JANUARY 10, 1878. 0411(0 RDE0 SURVEYS BY HORTON DENNIS AND 4550061ES DUWAMISH NOUSHOAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT INTERSECTION OF PROPOSED WATERWAY 16711 111051540 NAVIGATION 01ANNU.. DATED MARDI 11, 1957. /ONO COUNTY LOCATION OF MILLER ROAD, JOB N0. 6827 -P -5, DATED APRIL 29. 1057. WATERWAY BOUNDARY SKETCH JOB N0. 6827 -A -4, DATED JANUARY 27, 1958. MISCELLANEOUS SKETCHES AND LEGAL OESCIPDONS PREPARED FOR 6011940. 1058 -1057. DEVELOPMENTAL CENTER PROPERTY -BOEING, JO8 N0. 6827 -A -4, DATED MAY. 1098. DE5WONE PARKING LOT, BOEING, JOB N0. 6827 -P -5, DATED MAY, 1937. RECORDS OF SURVEY BUSH ROM AND 40 10 11 495-NC.. `AIU,ME.0- OF- SUFVEIA PAGE 102 LUND AND ASSO0ATE5, VOLUME T1-Df SURVEYS, PACE 239 JONES ASSOCIATES. INC.. VOLUME 17 OF SURVEYS, PACE 272 HORTON DENNIS 6 ASSOCIATES VOLUME 21 OF SURVEYS, PACE 123 BUSH ROM AND RT04IN03, NC., VOLUME 30 OF SURIEY5, PACE 171 NEWARK AN0 ASSOCIATES VOLUME 40 OF SURVEYS. PACE 228 LAND AND CONSTRUCTION SURVEYS, INC., VOLUME 55 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 50 • GENERAL NOTES 1) A 1ECA T1810 1NEOL0011E, A 01000 ELECTRONIC DISTANCE METER AND NA2 LEVEL WAS USED FOR 111E GROUND 5UR)EY PORTION OF THIS SURVEY. TROUBLE 4,000 59 RAPID STATIC RECEIVERS WERE UTILIZED FOR GLOBAL P05100NIN0 BASS OF BEARING. 2) ALL 90NUMEN1S SHOWN AS FOUND WERE FIELD TASTED 04110740 THE MONTH OF 4110U9T, 1007. 3) 11111 SURVEY COAIP1E5 111111 THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 'ERROR OF CLOSURE' OF 4, 70,000 FOR WASWN0T0N STATE PLANE COORDINATES AS SET FORTH PER W.A.C. 332- 130 -090 (AND P0911014AL TOLERANCE LEVELS OF LESS THAN 0.011 METERS) 1) ALL COORDINATES AND DISTANCES ARE WASHINGTON STATE PLANE GROUND VALUES AND ARE BASED ON 114E U.S. SURVEY FOOT. THE STATE PLANE COORDINATES WERE DERIVED FROM A CL08AL POSITIONING SYSTEM (CPS) NETWORK BY DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES. INC. URUDNO 1110 FOLLON'NO N.O.S. CON1R0. STATIONS DURATION 10334 HAFT 1000 AND PT. 'B' 1982. 5) NO PROPERTY CORNERS WERE SET IN CQUUNCDON 1MTH TARS SURVEY AND THIS SURVEY DOES NOT REFLECT ANY EASEMENTS OF RECORD MISC H MAY ENCUMBER THE UPLAND PROPERTIES. S.E. 1/4 AND N.C', 1/4 SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 23 N, RANCE 4 115 W.M. KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON LAND DESCRIPTIONS TAX LOT 0423049010 -1 A PORTION OF THE G. TMOTHY GROW OO44y0ON LAND QNM No, 44 M SEC0ON 4, ' TORTISHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST. 149.,1 DESCRIBED AS FCULOWS BE01NN110 AT TIIE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTI1EAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION; THENCE NORTH 00'22'20' EAST AL0110 MEI EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 1,358,74 FEET; THENCE NORTH 8011'40' NEST 1,597.3E FEET TO A PONT ON THE WEST MARGIN OF COUNTY ROAD N0, 57, SAID POINT BEND MARKED BY AR IRON PIPE AND BEND ALSO DIE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND HERETOFORE DEEDED TO THE WAUCONOA INVESTMENT COMPANY AND RECORDED M VOLUME 1057 OF DEEDS, PAGE 220: THENCE CONTINUING A1UY40 THE NO11114 60UNDARY UNE OF DIE ABOVE MENTIONED TRACT OF LAND, NORTH 0011'40' 1W5T 140.51 FEET TO 1HE TRUE PONT OF BEONMNC, THENCE C004TIN11540 NORTH 8911'40' 14°3011,242.06 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE EASTERLY UNE OF COMMERCIAL WATERWAY DISTRICT N0. I; THENCE SOUTH 29'00'00' EAST ALONG SND•EASERLY UNE 582.70 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN SAID UNE; THENCE SOUTH 43170'00' 641)' AL0 (0 SAID EASTERLY UNE 299.88 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION Of SAID EASTERLY UNE 48H1THE U.S. GOVERNMENT MEANDER UNE OF THE DUWAMISH RIVER; THENCE NORTH 7017110'1 EAST AIONO SAID MEANDER UNE 469.80 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 7419'52' EAST AONp SAID MEANDER UNE 312.70 FEET TO A POINT WHICH BEARS 5(81TH 0014'34' WEST FEMME TRUE POINT OF BEOINMN9; THENCE NORTH 0014'34' EAST 671.82 FEET, MOE OR LESS. TO THE TRUE POINT OF 8E0N18140. TAX LOT 0123040018 -2 A PORTION OF 0(0 0. TIMOTHY GROW 004ADON LAND CLAM N0. 44 IN SECTION 4, T011145HP 23 N00TI4, RANGE 4 EAST. WM..IDESCRI0ED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT HE 50011EAST CORNER IF .THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION; THENCE NORTH 0072'28' EAST ALONG HE;UST LINE OF SAID SECTION 1,358.74 FEET; THENCE NORTH 8011'40' NEST 1,507.39FEET TO A PONT ON 1110 WEST MARGIN OF COUNTY ROAD N0. 57. AND THE TRUE F01147 OF BE8RNO, SND POINT BEND MARKED 161 AN IRON PPE AND BEING ALSO DIE 60144 A5T CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND HERETOFORE DEEDED TO 114E WAUCONDA INVESTMENT COMPANY AND RECORDED IN VOLUME 1057 OF DEEDS. PACE 229; MINCE ALONU DE NORTH BOUNDARY UNE Of THE ABOVE MENTIONED TRACT OF LAND. NORH '8011'40' NEST 149.51 FEED THENCE SOUTH 0014'34' NEST 811.02 FEET TO LEI U.S GOVERNMENT MEANDER UNE OF THE DUWAMISH RVER; THENCE SOUTH 74'2012'IEAST 153.03 FEET ALONG SAID MEANDER UNE TO A POINT ON THE NEST UNE 05AID COUNTY ROAD NO. 57; THENCE NORTH 0014'34' EAST ALONG SAID WES,LOE, 550.07 FEET TO TIE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. TAX LOT 0423040018 THAT PORTION OF THE FOLLOWING DE5018EO TRACT 1.11140 WESTERLY or UST MARGINAL WAY; BE01441140 AT A PONT W10C14 15 NORT100'21'24' EAST 58462 FEET FROM THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF 5E611014 4, TOWNSI7123 N0RD1, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M.; THENCE WEST 1,101.75 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 38111'10'4EST TO THE RIGHT BANK OF THE DUWAMISH RIVER; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG •0 1TIVE9 BANN TO 040 SOUTH UNE OF THE CROW DONAR04 CLAIM; THENCE EAST IA FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO A POINT 1,457.08 FEET WEST OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID 5ECON 4; THENCE SOUTH 57'40'40' EAST 35.57 FEET TO A PONT 20 FEET SOUTH OF THE 507111UNE OF SAID CROW DONATION CLAW; THENCE EAST 1.425.14 FEET TO THE EAST UNE F SECTION 4; THENCE SOUTH 0011'24' NEST 138.94 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINN11' EXCEPT THAT PORTION 1)190 WITHIN SOUTH 104TH STREET (H.& MILLER ROAD 140. 5); I (BEING KNOWN AS LOTS 1, 2, 3 AND DIJ P�OR0ON OF LOTS 4 AND 5 LYING WESTERLY OF EAST MARGINAL WAY, TOELLNER'S AODION, IACCORDM0 TO THE UNRECORDED PUT THEREOF). TAX LOT 0423040150 THAT PORTION Of GOVERNMENT LOTS O RD 7 ANDIOF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUDEAST QUARTER. SECTION 4, 001474517.23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., L8140 NORTHEASTERLY OF NORTHEASTERLY BO UDARY LINE OF PROPOSED 11X0114900 OF DUWAMISH WATERWAY, 411101 IS 225 FE£NORTHEASTERLY, MEASURED AT 80117 ANGLES FROM SOUTHEASTERLY PROJECTION OF CDIERU4E CF COMMERCIAL WATERWAY, LESS THAT PORTION 01140 SOUTH OF A LINE '300 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID 5ECO014 AND EASTERLY OF A UNE 300 'ET WESTERLY OF 114E WESTERLY MARGIN OF HIGHWAY 09. • D.N.R. WORK AREA DESCRIPTION THAT PO,0ON OF 711E OUWANISH RIVER WATERWAY A5 51101474 014 OIGIIT -CF -WAY SHEET 10, PLAT OF COMMERCIAL WATERWAY DISTRICT N0. I, 9101600 OUWAM191 WATERWAY, SECTIONAL, WEAPON CLAIM AND PRESENT SHORELINE MEANDERS 0' 111E DUWA191 RIVER, APPROVED APRIL 4, 1517, SAID WATERWAY LOCATED IN A PORTON OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., KING COUNTY, WA90NGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUIII LINE OF DIE TIMOTHY GROW DONATION LAND CLAIMS NOS. 44 AND 40 141111 111E EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION. A I/O' 10014 PIPE FLUSH WITH THE SURFACE FOUND IN PLACE. FROM 4111101 THE 0657 QUARTET, CORNER OF SAM SECTION, A 4 INCH X 4 NCH CONCRETE MONUMENT 111111 .l IN0• MASS CAP 2 FEET UELOW THE SURFACE, BEARS SOUTH 01'30'33' NEST, 721.90 FEET DI5TAN9 /1161407 NORTH 88'44'05' WEST ALONG SAID 50001 UNE 1,872.42 FEET 70 AN ANGLE 1'ONI ON THE 001•ERNMEN711EIND0) UNE FOR THE RIGHT DANN OF THE DURMAST RIVER; THENCE NORTH 7310'24' NES1 ALONG SAID MEANDER UNE 4.03 FEET. MORE OP LESS, 70 111E INTERSECTION WITH THE UNE OF MEAN 1091 WATER FOR 5AI0 RIGHT BANK AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 73'19'24' WEST ALONG SAID MEANDER 1I14E 281,95 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0417'04' EAST 330.81 FEEL MORE OR LESS, 10 THE UNE Of MEAN HIGH WATER FOR DIE LEFT BANK OF SAID TIBER; THENCE S0U111WESIE4LY A10440 SAID MEAN 1001 WATER LINE AND AS SUBTENDED 01 A 0(0RD 141101 BEARS SOUTH 5810'46' EAST 189.16 FEET; 0)471'4(0 NORTH 81'65.00' EAST 294.61 FEET TO THE UNE OF MEAN HIGH WATER FOR SAID RIGHT DANK; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID MEAN HIGH WATER LINE AND AS SUBTENDED BY A CHORD 141001 DEARS NORTH 411410' NEST 295.06 FEET TO T146 P0147 OF 8707474740. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL CONTAINS 116259 SQUARE FEET OR 2.65 ACRES, 14011E 01 LESS. WORK AREA FOR EQUIPMENT STAGING - BOEING THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 6, SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, 6.00„ KIND COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DE50i7ED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE EAST MATTER CORNER IF 5810 SECTION, A 4 INCH BY 4 7401 CONCRETE MONIINENT NM 3 ARCH BRASS DISK 2 17,07 DELOW SURFACE FO1N0 IN PLACE, FROM WHICH A ONE -HALF NCH IRON PIPE FLUSH M1TH SURFACE MARKING THE INIER5ECOON OF THE EAS1 U145 OF 5410 SECTION NTH 111E 505111 U1,16 OF DIE TIMOTHY GROW 00NAD0N LAND CLAIM NOS. 44 ANO 45 DEARS NORM 01.30•33' EAST 721.90 FEET DISTANT; THENCE NORTH 7938'05' WEST 1,751.50 FEET TO 11I5 PONT OF BEGINNING; RIENCE NORTH 4112'44' NEST 153.77 FF,77; 11ENCE NORM 40177.10' EAST 47.98 FEED "411ENCEi40RTH- 10'15'05' EAST 45.17 FEET, MORE OR LESS. 10 111E UNE OF MEAN HIGH WATER FOR 114E LEFT DANN OF TE OUw1M191 RISER; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY /MONO 5910 MEAN HIGH WATER LIN7 TO A POINT 141801 DEARS NORTH 4007'10' EAST FROM 711E POINT OF BEON49NCI, A140 SUBTENDED DY A 010710 04004 BEARS SOUTH 5919'48' EAST 10618 FEET; 111ENCE SOUTH 40177'16' NEST 137,27 FEET TO DIE PONT OF BEGINNING. 510 ABOVE OE5C010ED PARCEL CONTAINS 10,422 5011411E FEET OR 5.12 ACHES, MORE 011 LESS. WORK AREA FOR DREDGING ACTIVITIES - BOEING A 701111074 OF 111E 71140THY CROW DONATION LAND CLAIM NO, 44 AS 511(16150 IN 5EC0ON 4, T01,449124 23 NORTH, RANCE 4 EAST, W.M., KING COUNTY, W45HIN0701, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE EAST OUARIER CORNER OF 5810 5563014, A 4 INCH BY 4 INCA CONCRETE MONUMENT WHIT 3 1401 CRASS DI514 2 FEET BELOW SU1174(, 7151140 04 PLACE; THENCE NORTH 01'30'33' EAST ALONG 171E EAST UNE OF SAID SECTION 1,358.74 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87'57'46' WEST 1.507.39 FEET 10 71I5 NORTHEAST CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN TRACT OF 18740 AS DEEDED 10 1146 WAIICOTRA INVE517.4EN1 COMPANY AS RECORDED N 1701614E 1057 OF OEEUS PACE 22n, RE6OR05 OF 5A10 COUNTY, SAID CORNER 9E140 ON THE NEST RIGHT -OF -WAY MARGIN CF COUNTY ROAD N0. 57. AS E510000(1E0; THENCE SOUTH 0110'20' WEST AL0N0 SAID MARGIN 840.35 FEET, NITRE OR LESS. TO THE U140 OF MEAN 0001 WATER FM THE RIGHT (RANK OF VIE DUW4411011 RIVEN 6140 THE POINT OF BEGINNING; 114041E CONTINUING SOLIDI 0170 '20' WEST ALONG SAID MARGIN 5.28 FEET TO THE GOVERNMENT MEANDER LINE AS ESTAOL19IFD FOR SAID BANK; THENCE NORTH 7310'24' WEST ALONG SAM MEANDER UNE 241.47 FEET; THENCE N0901 7814'54' EAST 113.19 FEET TO 5910 MEAN HIGH WATER UNE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID 10414 1801 WATER LINE AND AS 31J51ENDE0 BY A CHORD 40101 BEARS swill 531655' EAST 151.52 FEET, 10 111E POINT OF 1100114NOHG. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL CONTAINS 7,720 50100E FEET 011 0.18 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE ICATE THIS MAP CORRECTLY REPRESENTS A SURVEY' MADE BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN CON= FORMANCE WITH THE SURVEY RECORDING ACT AT THE REQUEST OF KING COUNTY MATER RE5WRCE5 - - ON ~rem 1907 .o I1 /Z61.g7. / N TURF DATE 6 CERTIFICATE NO. 2855Z RECORDING CERTIFICATE FLED FOR RECORD 1)118 , DAY OF 10 AT - - -N. IN BOOK • OF SURVEYS AT PACE _AT ENE REQUEST OF 0.4140 EVANS AND ASSOCIATES. NC. °W904 0 mows A T1ECR041 �� �1 SUPT. OF RECORDS/DEPUTY AUDITOR EXPIRES�a.malmTVln>mmy E I 0. RECORD OF SURVEY FOR KING COUNTY WATER RESOURCES DAVID EVANS 1 Gis�iSi =mid_ AND ASSOCIATES, grarilta 416 - 1143'rl4 AN /Al :NU.El 03.1.. BP,LLIBVUI; WA. 90008-1040 (200) 480 -8871 SHEET 3 OF 3 SCALE SURVEYED FIELD BOOK DRAWN CHECKED RAB FILE 1(c0X00J1 • FROM DOWNTOWN SEATTLE 7 -127 KING COUNTY AIRPORT OFFIC E CENTER (FAA) pSik 0.0 • 900 Sedi - t Removal ea a utlet of DC South • rm Drain 99 EXIT 158 EXIT 157 EXIT 157 99 EAST MARGINAL WAY CORPORATE PARK 599 TU K WILA FROM KEN & AUBURN 900 oc?;i_ArzrEAvc• WM. I O.V. DEVELOPMENTAL CENTER FIGURE 1 SITE VIC INITY MAP JO. .0. DNR proporty Area to dredged 100 cubic yards from 0.02 acres Area to be backfilled fo lowing dredging, 100 cubic yards over 0.02 acres ■•• Current Channel Configuration from Outran (July 2002) • 28— 24 — 22— 18 — • 16 — - .c • 4- 2 —: Cross-section is based on Pfior surveyed maps. PhotograPhs. and measurements. No surveying . was done for this diagram. Prior survey was done by Thomas 0. Serve, Registered Surveyor, in 1999. 7 to 1 Vertical Exaggeration a ' - Area planned for sediment removal action 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1. 1 1 I 1' 1 1 1 1 0 14 28 42 56 70 84 98 112 126 • 140 Horizontal scale ki feet ti 101135 SE ,M 40309 REVISION NQ: J? 1 me wits 1 RLL' CROSS SEC.SIQJ FIGURE 3: gross Section A - A' DEsQ CU9d1'. BOEING/DC aim L.00ATIOf TJU PROJECT NO: 1214060 Rafe 26 - 24 - 22- 20 - 18- 10- 8- 6- 4- 2- 0 -2 0 Cross section is based on prior surveyed maps, photographs, and measurements. No surveying was done for this diagram. Prior survey was done by Thomas O. Service, Registered Surveyor, in 1999. MHHW - MHW 7 to 1 Vertical Exaggeration Existing Pilings OHW OHW _ _ _ 1 Boeing Storm Sewer \\ 1 Outfall Channel \' Arefi planned for sediment removal action MLLW Wooden Wing Wall Near Norfolk CSO I 14 I 28 I 42 15 1 I 70 84 I I I I I I I I Horizontal scale in feet 98 112 126 140 agleam Project Performance Corporation 16935 SE 39th St Bellevue, \AA 98008 REVISION NO.: 0 1 DATE: 4/8,W 1 FILE: CRS SEC B.SIm Figure 4 Cross Section B - B' CESD JJD CJiK'D TJM CLIENT: BOEING/DC LOCATION: Developmental Center PROJECT NO.: 1214-090 FIGURE: Parcel map of areas near sediment removal action planned for DC south storm drain outlet DC parcel # is 0003400018 Parcel # Owner listed by King County Address 0003400018 The Boeing Company 9905 East Marginal Way S, Tukwila WA 98108 0003400028 The Boeing Company 0003400026 The Boeing Company ° 0423049183 The Boeing Company 0423049016 The Boeing Company 0423049183 The Boeing Company ° 0423049150 The Boeing Company . 0003400023 East Marginal Associates 700 N 36°1 St, Seattle WA 98103 Gov't Lot Dept Natural Resources 950 Farman Av N, Enumclaw WA 98022 attn: Rex Thompson