«DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE COLUMBIA STOCK RANCH SECTION 536 ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECT The environmental ...»
6.14. Executive Order 11593, Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment, May 1971 This order ensures Federal agencies provide leadership in preserving, restoring, and maintaining the historic and cultural environment of the Nation. Federal agencies are directed to administer cultural properties under their control in a spirit of stewardship and trusteeship for future generations. Federal agencies shall initiate measures necessary to direct policies, plans and programs in a way that federally-owned sites, structures, and objects of historical, architectural or archaeological significance are preserved, restored, and maintained for the inspiration and benefit of the people. In addition, Federal agencies are ordered to consult with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation to institute procedures to assure that Federal plans and programs contribute to the preservation and enhancement of non-federally owned sites, structures, and objects of historical, architectural or archaeological significance.
The goals and objectives of the Proposed Action, as well as requirements of the Section 536 authority do not interfere with this Executive Order, and as a result, the Proposed Action is in compliance with this Executive Order.
6.15. Executive Order 12898, Environmental Justice, 11 February 1994 It is critically important to devote attention to the potential impacts of Corps of Engineer ecosystem restoration projects on vulnerable segments of the human population. The Corps is not aware of any social equity concerns. Demographic groups that are disproportionately affected by the proposed project, whether they are adolescents, the unemployed, women, members of groups that are racially, ethnically or culturally distinctive, or occupational, cultural, political or value based community groups should use the public comment period to make their concerns known to the Corps of Engineers. It is the belief and value of the Corps of Engineers that no category of persons, particularly those that might be considered more sensitive or vulnerable as a result of age, gender, ethnicity, race, occupation or other factors, should have to bear the cost of adverse social impacts.
No subsistence, low-income or minority communities would be affected by the Proposed Action because these populations do not occur in or directly adjacent to the CSR project area. As a result, no environmental justice communities would incur a disproportionate share of adverse social impacts resulting from implementation habitat restoration actions on the CSR project site. For this reasons, the Proposed Action is in compliance with this Executive Order.
April 22, 2016 Page 65
6.16. Executive Order 13112, Invasive Species This Executive Order established the National Invasive Species Council and required federal agencies (to the extent practicable) to identify actions that may spread invasive species and use relevant programs and authorities to prevent the introduction of invasive species; to research, monitor and otherwise control invasive species; to restore native species and habitat conditions in ecosystems that have been invaded; and promote public education on invasive species.
The Corps would minimize the spread of invasive species by ensuring all equipment used in construction of the habitat restoration elements in the CSR project site are clean and free of invasive species. For this reason, the Proposed Action is in compliance with this Order.
6.17. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, 6 November 2000 The United States has a unique legal relationship with Indian tribal governments as set forth in the Constitution of the United States, treaties, statutes, Executive Orders, and court decisions.
This order requires federal agencies to formulate and establish “regular and meaningful consultation and collaboration with tribal officials in the development of Federal policies that have tribal implications, to strengthen the United States government-to-government relationships with Indian tribes, and to reduce the imposition of unfunded mandates upon Indian tribes”. This consultation is meant to work towards a mutual consensus and is intended to begin at the earliest planning stages, before decisions are made and actions are taken.
The Corps initiated formal government-to-government coordination in October 2015 by sending letters to the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon, Condederated Tribes of the Siletz Indians, and the Cowlitz Indian Tribe. In addition, the Corps initiated government-to-government coordination with the four Columbia River treaty tribes in April 2016: the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs, Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation and the Nez Perce Tribe. To date, no response has been received from any Tribe in response to the letter requesting coordination.
6.18. Executive Order 13186, Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds, 10 January 2001 This executive order further strengthens the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act. Each Federal agency taking actions that have, or are likely to have, a measureable negative effect on migratory bird populations is directed to develop and implement a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the USFWS that shall promote the conservation of migratory bird populations and resources.
The Department of Defense signed an MOU with the USFWS 31 July 2006, to comply with this Executive Order (http://www.dodpif.org/plans/migratory/mbtadod.php). The MOU states the DoD shall, among other things, “encourage incorporation of comprehensive migratory bird management objectives in the preparation of DoD planning documents (…including NEPA analyses).” This NEPA document analyzed the potential for migratory birds to be affected by the proposed action. No conservation measures were integrated into the proposed action because the construction activities have limited potential to affect migratory birds.
April 22, 2016 Page 66
6.19. Executive Order 13514, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, 5 October 2009 This executive order requires that Federal agencies shall increase energy efficiency; measure, report and reduce their greenhouse gas emissions from direct and indirect activities; conserve and protect water resources through efficiency, reuse and storm-water management; eliminate waste, recycle and prevent pollution; leverage agency acquisitions to foster markets for sustainable technologies and environmentally preferable materials, products and services;
design, construct, maintain and operate high performance sustainable buildings in sustainable locations; strengthen the vitality and livability of the communities in which federal facilities are located; and inform federal employees about and involve them in the achievement of these goals.
The proposed action is in compliance with this Order because all actions would be conducted in a manner as to prevent pollution and chemical spills by following BMPs.
6.20. Other Laws and Executive Orders All actions involved in restoring and enhancing estuarine habitat at the CSR project site are confined to the Lower Columbia-Clatskanie watershed; the Lower Columbia-Clatskanie watershed is outside of the Oregon coastal zone and the project site is a floodplain area that is inaccessible to marine mammals, consequently having no effects to marine mammals during or after construction. No portion of the Columbia River is designated as a “wild and scenic river”, therefore the project site does not warrant protections provided under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.
For these reasons, the following laws do not require further evaluation for impact or
assessment for compliance:
Coastal Zone Management Act, 1972 Marine Mammal Protection Act, 1972 Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act (Section 103), 1972 Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 1968
7. COORDINATION AND DISTRIBUTIONPublic concerns identified through public comments would aid in determination of whether or not an EIS is necessary for the Proposed Action. If it is determined that an EIS is not required, a FONSI would be prepared and signed, concluding the NEPA process.
This draft EA and a draft FONSI are being issued for a 30-day public review period, beginning 25 April 2016 and ending 25 May 2016. The draft documents are available at the Corps’ website: http://www.nwp.usace.army.mil/Media/Announcements.aspx.
A public notice was sent to all interested parties and stakeholders for the public review period,
including the following agencies and user groups:
AT&T Corporation Century Link City of Columbia City, Oregon April 22, 2016 Page 67 City of Rainier, Oregon City of St. Helens, Oregon Columbia County, Oregon Columbia Riverkeeper Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians Cowlitz Indian Tribe Deer Island Drainage Improvement Company (diking district) MCI Fiber Optics NOAA Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service Natural Resources Conservation Service Northwest Natural Pipeline Northwest Pipeline Oregon State Historic Preservation Office Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development Oregon Department of Parks and Recreation Oregon Department of State Lands Oregon Department of Transportation Oregon Natural Resources Council Oregon Water Resource Department, District #18 Watermaster Portand & Western Railroad State of Oregon, Governor’s Office U.S. Environmental Protection Agency U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service April 22, 2016 Page 68
8. REFERENCES AND LITERATURE CITEDAllard, D.J., T.A. Whitesel, Lohr, S., and M.L.Koski. 2015. Western Pearlshell Mussel Life History in Merrill Creek, Oregon: Reproductive Timing, Growth, and Movement, 2010-2014 Project Completion Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Columbia River Fisheries Program Office, Vancouver, WA. 29 pp. www.fws.gov/columbiariver/publications.html Bottom, D. L., E. A. Simenstad, A. M. Baptista, D. A. Jay, L. Burke, K. K. Jones, E. Casillas, and M. B.
Schiewe. 2001 (unpublished). Salmon at River's End: The Role of the Estuary in the Decline and Recovery of Columbia Salmon. National Marine Fisheries Service, Seattle, W A.
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). 2005. Guidancer on the Consideration of Past Actions
in Cumulative Effects Analysis. June 24, 2005. Available at:
http://www.gsa.gov/graphics/pbs/CEQ_Guidance_Consideration_PastActions_Cumulativ eEffectsAnalysis.pdf CEQ. 2011a. Federal agency climate change adaptation planning: Implementing instructions. 4 March 2011. President’s Council on Environmental Quality, Office of the White House,
Washington, DC. Available at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ceq/adaptation_final_imple menting_instructions_3_3.pdf CEQ. 2011b. Federal agency climate change adaptation planning: Support Document. 4 March
2011. President’s Council on Environmental Quality, Office of the White House,
Washington, DC. Available at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ceq/adaptation_support_doc ument_3_3.pdf CEQ. 2014. “Effective Use of Programmatic NEPA Reviews,” Memorandum for Heads of Federal Departments and Agencies. December 18, 2014.
Corps. 1996. Lower Columbia River Bi-state Water Quality Program, Fish, Wildlife, and Wetlands GIS Habitat Mapping. Prepared for the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. Portland District, Portland OR.
Corps. 1999. Columbia River Channel Improvement Study, Final Integrated Feasibility Report and Environmental Impact Statement. Portland, OR.
Corps. 2009a. Sediment Evaluation Framework for the Pacific Northwest. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington Department of Ecology, Washington Department of Natural Resources, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, National Marine Fisheries Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Northwestern Division.
Corps. 2009b. Estuary Habitat Memorandum of Agreement on Columbia River Estuary Habitat Actions between the State of Washington, the Bonneville Power Administration, the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. September 16, 2009.
Corps. 2011a. Endangered Species Act biological assessment for anadromous salmonids, green sturgeon, Pacific eulachon, marine mammals & marine turtles for Columbia River channel operations and maintenance, mouth of the Columbia River to Bonneville Dam, Oregon and Washington. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District, Portland, Oregon. April 2011 Amended August 2011.
April 22, 2016 Page 69 Corps. 2011b. USACE Climate Change Adaptation Policy Statement. 3 June 2011. Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, Washington, DC.
http://www.corpsclimate.us/docs/USACEAdaptationPolicy3June2011.pdf Corps. 2012. USACE 2012 Climate Change Adaptation Plan and Report. 23 June, 2012.
https://corpsclimate.us/docs/2012_USACE_Adaptation_Plan_and_Report_23_June_2012 %20final.pdf Corps. 2013. 2013 Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan. 28 June 2013. Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, Washington, DC.
http://www.usace.army.mil/missions/sustainability/strategicsustainabilityperformance plans.aspx Expert Regional Technical Group (ERTG). History and Development of a Method to Assign Survival Benefit Units. Revised December 2011. ERTG 2010-03.
ERTG. 2013. Calculating Survival Benefit Units for Subactions Involving Floodplain Lakes.
September 2013. ERTG 2013-01.
ERTG. 2013. ERTG Analysis of Water Levels for Site Determination in Tidal-Dominated Regions.
October 2013. ERTG 2012-01, Rev. 1.
Graves, J.K., J.A. Christy, and P.J. Clinton. 1995. Historic Habitats of the Lower Columbia River.
Columbia River Estuary Study Task Force, Astoria OR.
Independent Scientific Advisory Board (ISAB). 2000. The Columbia River Estuary and the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. A Review of the Impacts of the Columbia River's Hydroelectric System on Estuarine Conditions. Conducted for the Northwest Power Planning Council in conjunction with studies by National Marine Fisheries Service.
ISAB. 2007. Climate change impacts on Columbia River Basin fish and wildlife. ISAB Climate Change Report, ISAB 2007-2, Northwest Power and Conservation Council, Portland, OR.
Jones, Philip. 2005. Lower Coast Fork Willamette River Watershed Assessment. Final Report, June 2005. Prepared for Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council.
Miller, J. A. and C. A Simenstad. 1997. A comparative assessment ofa natural and created estuarine slough as rearing habitat for juvenile Chinook and coho salmon. Estuaries 20:792-806.
Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NPCC). 2002. Lower Columbia River and Columbia River Estuary Subbasin Summary. Available at http://www.cbfwa.org/FWProgram/ReviewCycle/fy2003ce/workplan/020517LowerCo lEstuary National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries). 2008. Endangered Species Act Section 7(a)(2) Consultation Biological Opinion and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Consultation on Remand for Operation of the Federal Columbia River Power System, 11 Bureau of Reclamation Projects in the Columbia Basin and ESA Section 10(a)(1)(A) Permit for Juvenile Fish Transportation Program. NMFS, Portland, Oregon. 5 May 2008. (Revised and reissued pursuant to court order NWF v. NMFS, Civ. No. CV 01-640-RE (D. Oregon.) NOAA Fisheries. 2010. Endangered Species Act Section 7(a)(2) Supplemental Consultation on Remand for Operation of the Federal Columbia River Power System, 11 Bureau of Reclamation Projects in the Columbia Basin and ESA Section 10(a)(1) Permit for Juvenile April 22, 2016 Page 70 Fish Transportation Program. NMFS, Northwest Region. 20 May 2010.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2012. Fisheries Office of Protected Resources. “Stellar Sea Lion.” http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/pinnipeds/stellersealion.htm.
NOAA Fisheries. 2014. Endangered Species Act Section 7(a)(2) Summplemental Biological Opinion for the Consultation on Remand for Operation of the Federal Columbia River Power System. NMFS, Northwest Region. 17 January 2014. NWR-2013-9562.
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (Oregon DEQ). 2010. Integrated water quality
assessment database. Available at:
Oregon DEQ. 2012. Oregon’s 2012 Integrated Report Assessment Database and 303(d) List.
Available at: http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/assessment/rpt2010/search.asp Oregon DEQ. 2013. Development of Oregon Background Metals Concentrations in Soil.
Technical Report prepared by ODEQ Cleanup Program, Land Quality Division (Annette Dietz).
Simenstad, C. A., K. L. Fresh, and E. O. Salo. 1982. The role ofPuget Sound and Washington coastal estuaries in the life history of Pacific salmon: an unappreciated function, pp. 343In Estuarine Comparisons, V.S. Kennedy, ed. Academic Press, New York, NY.
Simenstad c.A., L.F. SmaIL and C.D. McIntire. 1990. Consumption processes and food web structure in the Columbia River estuary. Progress in Oceanography 25:271-297.
Simenstad, C. A. and J. R. Cordell. 2000. Ecological assessment criteria for restoring anadromous salmonid habitat in Pacific Northwest estuaries. Ecology Engineering 15:283-302.
Tetra Tech. 1996. Lower Columbia River Bi-State Program -The Health of the River, 1990-1996.
Integrated Technical Report. Prepared for Oregon Department of Environmental Quality and Washington Department ofEcology.
Thomas, D. W. 1983. Changes in the Columbia River Estuary Habitat Types Over the Past Century. Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce (CREST) Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program, Astoria, OR.
U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCSP). 2009. Our Changing Planet: The U.S. Climate Change Science Program. Available at http://www.usgcrp.gov/usgcrp/Library/ocp2009/ U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, see Corps U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2009. Assessment of Fishes, Habitats and Fish Passage at Tide gates on Deer Island Slough and lower Tide Creek, 2009 Project Report. August
2009. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Columbia River Fisheries Program Office, Vancouver, WA.
USFWS. 2010a. Presence, distribution and movement of select aquatic species in Tide Creek, Merrill Creek and Deer Island Slough, Columbia County, Oregon, 2009 Progress Report.
March 2010. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Columbia River Fisheries Program Office, Vancouver, WA.
USFWS. 2010b. Bull Trout Final Critical Habitat Justification. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office, Boise, Idaho.