WATER RESOURCES - Lewis County WA...1 3.3 WATER RESOURCES 2 This section describes existing water resources in the study area and summarizes their characteristics, 3 describes potential

3.3‐1

3.3 WATER RESOURCES 1

This section describes existing water resources in the study area and summarizes their characteristics, 2 describes potential impacts to these resources from Project construction, operation, and 3 decommissioning, and addresses applicable mitigation measures. Water resources evaluated include 4 surface water and water quality, stormwater, groundwater, water supplies, floodplains, and critical 5 aquifer recharge areas. See Section 3.4 for information on wetlands and fish. 6

3.3.1 Study Methodology 7

The study area for water resources includes areas within and adjacent to the Project Area encompassing 8 the proposed locations of the WTGs, access roads, other support facilities, and gen‐tie line to the Tono 9 substation. Information related to existing water resources was obtained from Ecology’s Water Resources 10 Inventory Area (WRIA), USGS topographic maps, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 11 floodplain data, and other information sources. Surface waters were investigated during field surveys 12 conducted April‐November 2017 and July and August of 2018 by Chambers Group, Inc. (CGI 2018, 13 Appendix 3.3‐1). Surveys involved a desktop analysis of mapped stream data (including DNR hydrology 14 data, USGS national hydrography dataset, WDFW fish distribution data, and USFWS National Wetland 15 Inventory (NWI) followed by a field inventory of streams observed within the turbine micrositing corridor, 16 or within proximity of (i.e., 200 feet to either side) the gen‐tie line alignment. Streams were inventoried 17 (i.e., documented as present) based on the presence of flowing water, and an apparent definable 18 OHWM/bed and bank (Simmons 2018). Stream center lines were digitized in the field using GPS. Surveys 19 did not include stream duration assessments, delineation of ordinary high water, or surveys for fish 20 presence in streams. 21

3.3.2 Regulatory Framework 22

3.3.2.1 Surface Water 23

A "watershed" is an area draining into a river, lake, or other waterbody. The USGS delineates watersheds 24 at the federal level using Hydrologic Unit Codes (HUCs). At the state level, Chapter 90.82 of the RCW sets 25 a framework for addressing state‐wide watershed planning including water quality and supply issues, as 26 well as establishing instream flows and addressing salmon habitat needs. Ecology and other state natural 27 resources agencies have divided the state into 62 WRIAs to delineate the state's major watersheds 28 (Ecology 2017a). 29

Fish and wildlife depend on adequate water, as do many recreational activities; therefore, rules are 30 established through the WAC to ensure that sufficient water is present in rivers and streams. WAC 173‐31 500, the Water Resources Management Program, authorizes Ecology to establish required “instream 32 flow” for specific locations for a defined time and typically following seasonal variations. Typically 33 measured in cubic feet per second (cfs), instream flows are usually defined as the flow needed to protect 34 and preserve instream resources and values such as fish, wildlife, and recreation. 35

Stream buffers retain streamside vegetation, which helps regulate instream temperature. Table 3.3‐1 36 provides the definitions of waters, according to WAC 222‐16‐030. Lewis County and Thurston County 37 critical areas regulations (LCC 17.38 for non‐agricultural activities and TCC 24.25 respectively) adopt 38 similar water type definitions. Table 3.3‐1 also identifies the associated required buffer width in 39 accordance with county critical areas ordinances. 40

3.3‐2

Table 3.3‐1. Stream Type and Buffer Requirements 1

Stream Type Definition1 Lewis County Buffer Width LCC 17.38‐420

Thurston County Buffer Width TCC 24.25.0202

Type S = Shoreline (formerly Type 1)

Shorelines of the state3 (perennial)

150 feet 250 feet

Type F Water A = Fish‐Bearing (formerly Type 2 or 3)

Other perennial streams; high to moderate fish, wildlife, and human use Waters other than Type S waters that contain fish habitat and have width of greater than 10 feet

Type F Water A4: 150 feet Type F Water B4: 100 feet

250 feet for streams >20 feet wide 200 feet for streams 5‐20 feet wide 150 feet for streams <5 feet wide

Type Np = Non‐Fish Perennial (formerly Type 4)

Perennial non‐fish habitat streams

75 feet 150 feet for streams draining to Type S or F streams or directly to Puget Sound 225 feet for Type Np and Ns streams with high mass wasting potential See note5

Type Ns = Non‐Fish Seasonal (formerly Type 5)

Seasonal non‐fish habitat streams

75 feet

1. The full definition is provided in WAC 222‐16‐031, LCC 17.35A.660 2 2. Thurston County 2017 3 3. Shorelines of the state are also managed in accordance with the Shoreline Management Act, as implemented through each 4

of Lewis and Thurston counties Shoreline Management Programs 5 4. Type F Water A are waters other than Type S waters that contain fish habitat and have width of greater than 10 feet; Type F 6

Water B are waters other than Type S waters that contain fish habitat and have width of less than 10 feet. LCC 17.35A.680 7 5. Other streams not listed above, including streams without a surface connection to other waters require a buffer of 100 feet 8 9 Washington’s Shoreline Management Act (SMA) was passed by the State Legislature in 1971 and adopted 10 by voters in 1972 (Chapter 90.58 RCW). The overarching goal of the SMA is "to prevent the inherent harm 11 in an uncoordinated and piecemeal development of the state’s shorelines." The SMA emphasizes 12 accommodation of appropriate uses that require a shoreline location, protection of shoreline 13 environmental resources and protection of the public’s right to access and use shorelines (RCW 14 90.58.020). The SMA applies to all shorelines of the state within Washington, including: all marine waters; 15 streams, and rivers with more than 20 cfs mean annual flow; lakes 20 acres or larger; upland areas called 16 shorelands that extend 200 feet landward from the edge of these waters; wetlands associated with 17 shorelines (see Section 3.4 Biological Resources for discussion on wetlands); and some or all of the 100‐18 year floodplain associated with shorelines (depending on local jurisdictions) (Ecology 2017b). 19

Under the SMA, each city and county whose jurisdiction includes shorelines of the state must prepare and 20 adopt a Shoreline Master Program (SMP) that is based on state laws and rules but is tailored to the specific 21 geographic, economic, and environmental needs of the community. The local SMP is essentially a 22 shoreline‐specific combined comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance, and development permit system. 23 Lewis County recently adopted a new, amended SMP on November 7, 2017. Thurston County is in the 24 process of updating their SMP, with a target completion date of 2019. In addition to their respective SMPs, 25 LCC Chapter 17.25 and TCC Title 19 contain provisions for shoreline management. 26

3.3‐3

Per Chapter 77.55 RCW and Chapter 220‐660 WAC, most projects in or around water bearing fish and 1 their habitat require a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) from WDFW. This includes new or improved 2 stream crossings (roads) and aerial utility crossings that could impact fish. The HPA program is designed 3 to protect fish life and ensure projects meet state conservation standards for fish and their aquatic 4 habitat. 5

3.3.2.2 Water Quality 6

Section 305(b) of the CWA requires that each state conduct water quality assessments to determine 7 whether its streams, lakes, and estuaries are sufficiently “healthy” to meet their designated best uses. 8 This information is updated and reported to the USEPA every two years. The state’s 305(b) report is the 9 primary source of information for developing the “Impaired Waters” list for the state, known as the 303(d) 10 list. Impaired waterbodies are those that do not meet water quality standards for specific designated uses 11 and are included on the state 303(d) list (a list of all surface waters in the state for which beneficial uses, 12 such as drinking, recreation, aquatic habitat, and industrial use, are impaired by pollutants). Washington 13 State is required to periodically prepare a list of water quality limited waterbody segments as determined 14 through the use of the state’s water quality standards. In Washington, Ecology is responsible for assessing 15 water quality and determining whether waters meet specified water quality standards. Chapter 173‐201A 16 WAC sets forth surface water quality standards and Chapter 173‐204 WAC addresses sediment 17 management standards for Washington State. All waters in the state, where water quality data or 18 information are available, are assessed and placed into one of 5 categories: Categories 1 through 4, or 19 Category 5 (which represents 303(d)‐listed waters). 20

Under Section 404 of the CWA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) regulates the discharge of 21 dredged and/or fill material in waters of the U.S. Such projects require authorization from the USACE. 22 Section 401 of the Water Quality Act requires that any applicant for a Section 404 permit also obtain a 23 water quality certification from the state. The purpose of the certification is to confirm that the discharge 24 of fill materials is compliant with the state’s applicable water quality standards. Ecology issues Section 401 25 water quality certifications in Washington State. 26

The purpose of the Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) rule is to help facilities prevent 27 a discharge of oil into navigable waters or adjoining shorelines. This rule is part of the USEPA’s oil spill 28 prevention program and was published under the CWA. The rule may be found at Title 40, Code of Federal 29 Regulations, Part 112. A facility is covered by the SPCC rule if it has an aggregate aboveground oil storage 30 capacity greater than 1,320 gallons or a completely buried storage capacity greater than 42,000 gallons, 31 and there is a reasonable expectation of an oil discharge into or upon navigable waters of the U.S. or 32 adjoining shorelines (USEPA 2010). 33

3.3.2.3 Stormwater Runoff 34

The CWA, Section 402, established the NPDES to limit pollutant discharges into waterbodies including 35 streams and rivers. The NPDES program regulates stormwater discharges from municipal separate 36 stormwater systems, construction activities, and industrial activities. Coverage under Ecology’s 37 Construction Stormwater General Permit (CSWGP) is required for any clearing, grading, or excavating if 38 the Project site discharges stormwater from the site to surface waters or into storm drainage systems that 39 discharge to surface waters, and disturb one or more acres of land. The CSWGP requires application of 40 stabilization and structural practices to reduce the potential for erosion and the discharge of sediments 41 from the site. The permit also requires construction sites within western Washington to implement 42

3.3‐4

stormwater BMPs contained in Ecology’s Stormwater Management Manual, local stormwater manuals, 1 or BMPs that are demonstrably equivalent (Ecology 2014). 2

LCC Chapter 15.45 contains provisions for stormwater management. A stormwater permit is required for 3 activities regulated under LCC Chapter 15.45, which include construction that adds 5,000 square feet or 4 more of impervious surfaces, and developments that will discharge to surface waters (Lewis County 5 2017b). 6

Thurston County implements stormwater protection requirements through the application of its Drainage 7 Design and Erosion Control Manual (DDECM) (Thurston County 2016). The DDECM sets standards for 8 reducing and managing stormwater runoff on new development and redevelopment projects in the 9 unincorporated areas of Thurston County. Stormwater protection provisions are also implemented 10 through Thurston County’s critical aquifer recharge area (CARA) regulations for commercial and industrial 11 land uses involving use, handling, storage, disposal, or transportation of hazardous materials or 12 dangerous/extremely dangerous wastes, as defined in Chapter 173‐303 WAC (TCC 24.10.100.E). 13

Ecology also regulates discharges of process water, stormwater, and water from mine dewatering into 14 waters of the state associated with sand and gravel operations, rock quarries, and similar mining 15 operations under their Sand and Gravel General Permit. This permit also covers concrete batch operations 16 and hot mix asphalt operations (both portable and fixed operations). Untreated discharge water from 17 sand and gravel operations may harm fish, aquatic life, and water quality (Ecology 2017c). 18

3.3.2.4 Groundwater 19

The federal Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S. Code § 300f) was passed by Congress in 1974 to protect 20 public health by regulating the nation’s public drinking water supply. The Act applies to drinking water 21 and its sources—rivers, lakes, reservoirs, springs, and groundwater wells (USEPA 2004). Section 1424(e) 22 of the Safe Drinking Water Act includes protections for sole‐source aquifers, which are aquifers designated 23 as the sole or principal drinking water source for an area and that, if contaminated, will create a significant 24 hazard to public health. 25

LCC Chapter 17.38 Critical Areas contains regulations for protection of CARAs. Lewis County has three 26 categories of CARAs: “Category I – Severe Aquifer Sensitivity” areas provide rapid recharge and have 27 highly permeable soils; “Category II – Moderate Aquifer Sensitivity” areas have soils which encourage 28 runoff and slows water entry into the ground; and “Category III – Slight Aquifer Sensitivity” areas with low 29 groundwater availability (LCC17.38.820). 30

Thurston County regulates CARAs through TCC Chapter 24.10 – Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas. Thurston 31 County has three categories of CARAs: “Category I, extreme aquifer sensitivity” which includes areas with 32 rapid recharge, wellhead protection areas, and aquifers that are extremely vulnerable to contamination; 33 “Category II, high aquifer sensitivity” which includes areas with slightly lower recharge, and aquifers that 34 are highly vulnerable to contamination; and “Category III, moderate aquifer sensitivity” in areas with 35 aquifers present that have surface soils which encourage runoff and slows water entry into the ground, 36 and aquifers which are moderately vulnerable to contamination (TCC 24.10.010). 37

3.3.2.5 Public and Private Domestic Water Supply 38

Ecology is tasked with protecting the state's drinking water supplies, including groundwater. Ecology 39 regulates the minimum standards for well construction in Washington. The Washington State Department 40

3.3‐5

of Health (DOH) is tasked with protecting public health and is the lead state agency on drinking water for 1 larger water systems. Chapter 246‐290 WAC and Chapter 246‐291 WAC address Group A public water 2 supplies (systems that regularly serve 15 or more service connections, or 25 or more people per day for 3 60 or more days per year) and Group B public water systems (systems with less than 15 service 4 connections, serving less than 25 people per day, or serving 25 or more people per day fewer than 60 days 5 per year), respectively. 6

The Washington Wellhead Protection Program has been in place since 1994, when the WAC was revised 7 to include mandatory wellhead protection measures for all Group A1 public water systems that use wells 8 or springs as their water supply source. WAC 246‐290‐135, Source Water Protection, outlines the 9 requirements for wellhead protection areas. The delineation of the wellhead protection area boundaries 10 includes the sanitary control area; 6‐month, 1‐year, 5‐year, and 10‐year time of travel boundaries for 11 groundwater; and a buffer, if needed. In addition, all “groundwater‐using” Group A systems are also 12 required to submit a susceptibility assessment to DOH, Office of Drinking Water as part of their Wellhead 13 Protection Program (DOH 2005). Assessment of the source waters focuses on the physical susceptibility 14 to contamination. Low, moderate, and high susceptibilities are assigned, defined as follows: 15

• Low susceptibility systems have met stringent criteria for source hydrogeologic setting, historical 16 water quality, and well construction 17

• Moderate susceptibility systems have met the same stringent criteria for historical water quality 18 and well construction as low susceptible systems but are located within a higher risk 19 hydrogeologic setting 20

• High susceptibility systems are not able to meet one or more of the moderate susceptibility 21 requirements. 22

Article III of the Thurston County Environmental Health Code governs the construction and 23 decommissioning of water wells in Thurston County (Thurston County 2014). Chapters 246‐290 and 246‐24 291 WAC, which are incorporated by reference into Article III, establish the minimum standards for water 25 supply in the state of Washington. Chapter 173‐160 WAC is also incorporated by reference and governs 26 the construction and decommissioning of water wells to protect the drinking water resource. Proposed 27 wells require issuance of a Public Water Supply Permit by a Thurston County health officer. 28

Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill (SB) 6091, which passed on January 18, 2018, has recently changed how 29 counties in Washington decide to approve or deny building permits that use wells for a water source. The 30 key point of the decision effectively shifted the responsibility of determining whether there is enough 31 water available to legally support new developments from the state (Ecology) to individual counties. This 32 decision was particularly fueled by concerns over permit‐exempt domestic wells and their effect on 33 instream flows for projected waters or existing senior water rights. In response to this new bill, many 34 counties are changing their decision‐making processes and regulations surrounding the permitting of 35 buildings and developments that would rely on domestic wells for their water. Ecology has interpreted 36 the new law to limit water use under the exemptions in RCW 90.44.050 for domestic water use and 37 watering of a non‐commercial lawn or garden (Ecology 2018a). Ecology further interpreted that the other 38 uses exempt from permitting (industrial use including irrigation and stock watering) are not restricted 39 beyond existing legal limitations under RCW 90.44.050, and, in some cases, restrictions identified in 40 instream flow rules adopted under RCW 90.22 or 90.54. Commercial uses also typically fall under the 41 industrial exemption and thus are not affected by the new law. 42

3.3‐6

As discussed below, the O&M Facility, and its associated water supply well, is located within a WRIA (No. 1 13, Deschutes) where domestic wells are subject to domestic well withdrawal restrictions under SB 6091. 2 Thurston County has not yet formally adopted any new regulations or protocols as a result of SB 6091; 3 however, Thurston County has indicated that they intend to begin working on identifying regulatory 4 revision needs and completing those revisions over the short‐term planning horizon. In the interim, they 5 will rely on their discretion and will take the new ruling into consideration when reviewing and processing 6 building permit requests, especially new developments that propose to source their water from wells 7 (Sahatjian 2018). 8

3.3.2.6 Floodplains 9

Washington’s floodplain management law is found in Chapter 86.16 RCW. This law states that prevention 10 of flood damage is a matter of statewide public concern and places regulatory control with Ecology. 11 Implementing policies for this RCW are found in Chapter 173‐158 WAC. Ecology provides grants to local 12 communities to reduce losses to life and property and protect the environmental functions of floodplains. 13 Ecology is also the state coordinating agency providing technical assistance to local governments in 14 implementing the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) which is part of FEMA (Ecology 2004). 15

The respective codes for Lewis County (LCC Chapter 15.35) and Thurston County (TCC Chapter 24.20) 16 regulate development in frequently flooded areas, which are areas within the 100‐year frequency 17 floodplain (Zone A hazard area) as designated by the current FEMA flood hazard maps or the NFIP Flood 18 Insurance Rate Maps. 19

3.3.3 Affected Environment 20

3.3.3.1 Surface Water 21

The majority of the study area is located within HUC 17100103 Upper Chehalis, while the northern part 22 of the study area is within HUC 17110016 Deschutes (Washington State 2017). The study area is located 23 within two WRIAs including WRIA 13 Deschutes and WRIA 23 Upper Chehalis (Ecology 2017c). 24

WRIA 13 Deschutes encompasses 270 square miles in central Thurston County. It contains 22 lakes and 25 six principal independent streams: Deschutes (the largest), McLane, Woodland, Woodard, Percival, and 26 Green Cove (Thurston County 2004). The USGS gauging station on the Deschutes River at river mile 25.9 27 is located near Rainier. The Deschutes River drains approximately 89.8 square miles. The average 28 discharge for the 2016 water year was 298.8 cfs (USGS 2017a). 29

For purposes of water resources planning under the Washington State Watershed Planning Act of 1998, 30 the Chehalis Basin was divided into two WRIAS: WRIA 22 Lower Chehalis, and WRIA 23 Upper Chehalis 31 (which includes a portion of the study area). The upper basin of the Chehalis River drains 1,294 square 32 miles. The USGS gauging station on the Chehalis River located at river mile 33.3 near Porter effectively 33 measures flow for all of WRIA 23, as it is the point where the river leaves the upper basin (Chehalis Basin 34 Partnership 2004). The average discharge for the 2016 water year at this station was 5,081 cfs (USGS 35 2017b). 36

The USGS gauging station on the Skookumchuck River at river mile 6.4, located north of Centralia, is the 37 closest gauging station to the Project Area. The Skookumchuck River in Thurston County drains 38 approximately 112 square miles. The average discharge for the 2016 water year was 423.9 cfs (USGS 39 2017c). 40

3.3‐7

Surface water resources in and near the study area are shown on Figure 3.3‐1 and listed on Table 3.3‐2 1 Based on review of DNR hydrology data, there are several mapped streams that occur within the study 2 area, including named and unnamed streams. The study area for streams includes the turbine micrositing 3 corridor, as well as areas within proximity of (i.e., 200 feet to either side) the gen‐tie line alignment. There 4 are 12 named streams and 27 unnamed (perennial) streams that occur within the study area. 5

Only four of the DNR‐mapped unnamed streams were field verified as present along the gen‐tie line (see 6 Figure 3.3‐1). In addition, some unnamed streams which are not captured in the DNR hydrology data were 7 also documented during field surveys, primarily along access roads located in the Thurston County portion 8 of the Project (see Figure 3.3‐1) (CGI 2018, Appendix 3.3‐1). 9

Tenino

Rainier

Bucoda

Centralia

Chehalis

£¤507

LEWIS COUNTY

THURS TON COUNTY

SkookumchuckReservoir

LakeLawrence

McIntosh Lake

Skookumchuck R.

Deschutes R.

Hanaford Cr.

Skookumchuck R.

N. Fork Newaukum R.

Coal Cr.Eleven Cr.

Fall Cr.

Lara

mie

Cr.

Pheeny Cr.

Snyder Cr.Tw

elve Cr.

Packwood Cr.

Range Cr.

Run

Cr.

TransAltaPonds

Unnamed1226915467319

Unnamed1228413467471

Unnamed1228650467607

Unnamed1226596467288

Unnamed1226593468508

Unnamed1228169467633

Unnamed1226880467312

Unnamed1226813467295

Unnamed1226467468324

Unnamed1227015467334

Unnamed1226387467155

Unnamed1226380468240

Unnamed1226482468350

Unnamed1227882467553

Unnamed1226973467335

Unnamed1228202467580

Unnamed1228022467612

Unnamed1228649467565

Unnamed1227980467586

Unnamed1227904467561

Unnamed1227218467317

Unnamed1227106467339

Unnamed1227016467308

Unnamed1226863467289

Unnamed1225988467332

Unnamed1226369468237

Unnamed1226356468238

Unnamed1227084467332

FIGURE 3.3-1SURFACE WATER RESOURCES

Project Area

Gen-Tie Micrositing Corridor

Turbine Micrositing Corridor

SKOOKUMCHUCK WIND PROJECT

9/16/2018F

0 1 2 Miles

0 1 2 Kilometers

SOURCES: CHAMBERS GROUP 2017, LEWIS CO. 2016, THURSTONCO. 2016, USFWS 2017, USGS NHD 2017, WADNR 2015, WSDOT

WADNR Streams / Rivers in Study Area

CGI 2017 Field Verified Stream

SMA Jurisdiction Stream / River

SMA Jurisdiction Lake

WADNR Lake / Pond

NWI Wetland

' t , J .,.

--

? _,,.

/. /"'--

---- -w M M

1111111

D -

I I I I I I

3.3‐9

Table 3.3‐2. Streams in Study Area 1

Name Period Potential Project Impact

Coal Creek Perennial Within gen‐tie right‐of‐way but no aerial crossing

Eleven Creek Unknown Existing Access Road Crossing and Collector System Cable

Fall Creek Unknown Existing Access Road Crossing

Hanaford Creek Perennial Aerial Crossing by gen‐tie line

Laramie Creek* Perennial Existing Access Road Crossing

North Fork Newaukum River Unknown Close proximity (100 feet or less) to existing access road and collector system cable but not directly crossed

Packwood Creek Perennial Aerial Crossing by gen‐tie line

Pheeny Creek Unknown Existing Access Road Crossing

Range Creek Unknown Existing Access Road Crossing

Run Creek* Unknown Existing Access Road Crossing

Run Creek* Perennial Existing Access Road Crossing

Skookumchuck River Perennial Existing Access road improvement in stream buffer (Thurston

County)

Twelve Creek Unknown Close proximity (100 ft or less) to existing access road and

collector system cable but not directly crossed

Unnamed (1225988467332) Perennial Existing Access Road Crossing and Collector System Cable

Unnamed (1226356468238) Perennial Existing Access Road Crossing


Unnamed ( 1226593468508) Perennial Existing Access Road Crossing




Unnamed (1226973467335) Perennial Aerial Crossing by gen‐tie line


Unnamed (1226880467312)* Perennial Aerial Crossing by gen‐tie line

















Unnamed (1228292467503) Perennial Aerial Crossing by gen‐tie line Source: Washington DNR stream data 2 *These unnamed streams have been field verified during stream surveys performed by Chambers Group Inc. Apr‐Nov 2017 (CGI 3 2018, Appendix 3.3‐1). 4

3.3‐10

Wetlands are discussed in Section 3.4. In addition, known or potential fish presence for streams listed 1 above in Table 3.3‐2 above is discussed in Section 3.4. 2

3.3.3.2 Water Quality 3

Review of Ecology’s 303(d) list indicates that Reichel Creek (mapped as an “unknown” tributary to 4 Deschutes River per DNR data) is the only 303(d) listed stream that occurs within the study area. Reichel 5 Creek was 303(d) listed for bacteria in 1996, and for temperature and dissolved oxygen in 2008. In 6 addition, the Deschutes River, located immediately north of the Project’s O&M Facility, is also 303(d) listed 7 for temperature, dissolved oxygen, and fine sediment. (Ecology 2018b). 8

Ecology issued the Final Water Quality Improvement Report and Implementation Plan for the Deschutes 9 River and other creeks in December 2015; the TMDL set for the Deschutes River states that the highest 10 allowable 7‐day average of the daily maximum temperature must not exceed 16°C (60.8°F). Temperature 11 affects the physiology and behavior of fish and other aquatic life. It also affects the physical and biological 12 properties of the water body, which can increase the harmful effects of other pollutants and stream 13 characteristics. For example, the warmer a stream is, the less oxygen it can hold for the organisms the 14 stream supports. Therefore, temperature is an influential factor which can limit the distribution and 15 health of aquatic life (see Section 3.4 for more information) (Ecology 2015). 16

No 303(d) listed streams are within or adjacent to the study area in WRIA 23 Upper Chehalis (Ecology 17 2017d). In general, removal of trees and other vegetation along much of the upper Chehalis River has 18 reduced shading, contributing to high dry‐season temperatures. The TMDL study recommends increasing 19 vegetative shading along the Chehalis River and its tributaries (Chehalis Basin Partnership 2004). 20

3.3.3.3 Stormwater Runoff 21

Ridgelines in the Project Area are generally oriented northwest‐southwest. Stormwater runoff from the 22 ridge upon which the WTGs and Project substation will be constructed drains downslope either toward 23 the Skookumchuck River from the north side of the ridgeline or the North Fork Newaukum River from the 24 south side of the ridgeline. A portion of the gen‐tie line will also be constructed in areas of steep slopes, 25 where stormwater drains downslope. A portion of the gen‐tie line and the O&M Facility will be 26 constructed in valleys where stormwater hydrology is dependent on localized soil drainage, elevation 27 changes, and established surface water drainages. 28

Study area soils range from being classified as well‐drained to very poorly‐drained based on soil type of 29 location onsite, with a range of very slow to very rapid runoff, and slight to moderate hazard for erosion. 30 The presence of scour, sedimentation, steep slopes, seasonal and perennial streams, and the soil 31 classifications suggest that surface water runoff and infiltration within the study area vary greatly 32 throughout the site depending on soil type and landscape (USDA 1999, 2000, 2002, 2005, 2011, 2017). 33 Refer to Section 3.1, Earth for more information. 34

3.3.3.4 Groundwater 35

The area of the proposed O&M Facility lies within the boundary of the Puget Sound aquifer system, which 36 occurs in unconsolidated glacial deposits. This is a major regional aquifer system that provides 37 groundwater supply to many wells. No major aquifers exist in the remaining majority of the study area. 38 Very few wells exist in the study area south of the Puget Sound aquifer system, and these are small wells 39 used for domestic purposes (Ecology 2017d). Sedimentary bedrock wells are typically less than 400 feet 40

3.3‐11

deep. A few shallow domestic wells exist in portions of the study area where a suitable thickness of 1 gravelly or sandy sediments occurs and are typically less than 100 feet deep. 2

Review of Ecology’s well reports shows approximately 66 wells within the same Township/Range/Sections 3 as the Project Area. This includes 15 water wells, 31 resource protection wells (such as monitoring wells 4 and observation wells), 7 decommissioned wells, and 13 multiple well types for a total of 66 wells (Ecology 5 2018c). 6

Groundwater was encountered at depths of 10 to 19 feet below grade at five of the 12 geotechnical 7 borings drilled in the study area in April 2017 (RGI 2017). The depth to groundwater near the existing 8 bridge over the Skookumchuck River was approximately 10 feet below ground surface in silty sandy gravel 9 in three borings. In the WTG string area, groundwater was encountered at approximately 18 feet below 10 ground surface in silty sand in one of four borings. 11

CARAs are mapped by each county and include areas with a critical recharging effect (rain or snowmelt 12 that infiltrates soil) on aquifers used for potable (drinking) water. Figure 3.3‐2 identifies aquifer recharge 13 areas and sensitivities of these aquifers. In Lewis County, aquifer recharge areas range from Class I – 14 Severe to Class III – Slight); the study area primarily occurs within slight and moderate (Category I and II) 15 CARAs and does not occur within any severe category III CARAs. In Thurston County, CARAs range from 16 extreme (Category III) to low (Category I); the majority of the study area is located in low Category I CARAs, 17 however the proposed O&M Facility is within the extreme Category III CARA (Thurston County 2010). No 18 sole source aquifers underlie the study area (USEPA 2017). 19

20

Tenino

Rainier

BucodaSkookumchuck

Reservoir

LakeLawrence

McIntosh Lake

ReichelLake

Skookumchuck R.

Deschutes R.

Hanaford Cr.

Skookumchuck R.

N. Fork Newaukum R.

PackwoodCreek

£¤507

John

son

Cre

ek R

d

Vail Cut Off Rd

Thompson

CreekRd

SkookumchuckRd

LEWIS COUNTY

THU RSTON COUNTY

O&M Facility

O&M Area

Laydown Area

Laydown/BatchplantOption 1

Laydown Area

BatchplantOption 2

Laydown AreaLaydown/

BatchplantOption 3

Project Substation

FIGURE 3.3-2AQUIFER SENSITIVITY AREAS

Gen-Tie Line Corridor


Project Area

Proposed Turbine Location

Collector System Cable


Work Area

Existing Access Road


9/16/2018F

0 1 2 Miles

0 1 2 Kilometers

SOURCES: CHAMBERS GROUP 2017, LEWIS CO. 2016, THURSTONCO. 2016, USGS NHD 2017, WADNR 2017, WSDOT 2017

Aquifer Recharge Area

I - Severe

II - Moderate

III - Slight

..... ,. '' . ,, ,.

• ~ .. .I ~

' ..

'

--- - - ■

D c]

0

I 1 I I I

3.3‐13

3.3.3.5 Public and Private Domestic Water Supplies 1

No public water supplies exist within the study area. Private water supplies are limited to water supply 2 wells serving the Weyerhaeuser property and property owners along the gen‐tie line route (Heinemeyer 3 2017). 4

Within Thurston County, near the study area, there are no wellhead protection areas (Thurston County 5 2009). The nearest are located near Lacey, approximately 12 miles northwest of the study area. 6

According to the Lewis County well maps, no public wells are identified near the study area, and the 7 nearest public well is along Wigley Road near Centralia, approximately 2 miles west of the gen‐tie line 8 terminus (Lewis County 2013). 9

3.3.3.6 Floodplains 10

The only portion of the study area within the floodplain is located along Vail Cut Off Road, which will 11 provide access to the proposed O&M Facility. Figure 3.3‐3 shows the flood hazard areas in the vicinity of 12 the study area. There are no Zone A hazard areas within the area of the proposed WTGs. For the gen‐tie 13 line alignment, there are several short sections that cross or run adjacent to the 100‐year flood zones for 14 Hanaford Creek, Snyder Creek, Packwood Creek and other unnamed streams; however, there will be no 15 poles placed within the flood zones. 16

17

Tenino

Rainier

BucodaSkookumchuck

Reservoir

LakeLawrence

McIntosh Lake

ReichelLake

Skookumchuck R.

Deschutes R.

Hanaford Cr.

Skookumchuck R.

N. Fork Newaukum R.

£¤507

John

son

Cre

ek R

d

Vail Cut Off Rd

Thompson

CreekRd

SkookumchuckRd

LEWIS COUNTY

THU RSTON COUNTY

O&M Facility

O&M Area

Laydown Area

Laydown/BatchplantOption 1

Laydown Area

Batchplant Option 2

Laydown AreaLaydown/

BatchplantOption 3

Project Substation

FIGURE 3.3-3FLOOD HAZARD AREAS

Gen-Tie Line Corridor


Project Area

Proposed Turbine Location

Collector System Cable


Work Area

Existing Access Road


9/15/2018F

0 1 2 Miles

0 1 2 Kilometers

SOURCES: CHAMBERS GROUP 2017, FEMA 2017, LEWIS CO. 2016,THURSTON CO. 2016, USGS NHD 2017, WDNR 2017, WSDOT 2017

FEMA 100-year Floodzone

Stream / RiverM

D 1111111

0

I I I I I I

3.3‐15

3.3.4 Impacts of the Proposed Action 1

3.3.4.1 Construction 2

Surface Water – Direct Impacts 3

Table 3.3‐1 summarizes the impacts to streams and their buffers resulting from construction of the 4 Project. For the most part, while portions of stream and stream buffer are located within the Project Area, 5 the Project will be sited to avoid streams and stream buffers to the maximum extent practicable. All 6 construction activities will avoid work within streams, and no surface waters will be filled as a result of 7 Project construction. Potential impacts to surface waters for each element of the Project are described 8 below. As indicated, new impacts to surface water bodies will be avoided to the extent possible; therefore, 9 minimal impacts are expected to natural hydrology and stormwater runoff already occurring with the 10 watersheds where the Project will be constructed. Potential impacts are described below based on 11 current engineering and design, acknowledging that refinements will be made to the design, intended to 12 continue to avoid impacts to water resources. The descriptions below represent an overview of expected 13 impacts to surface waters and associated mitigation. Impacts and associated mitigation will be further 14 refined as the Applicant works with regulatory agencies to apply for requisite permits. 15

Permits will be obtained through the following permit programs: 16

Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application(s) (JARPA) or other materials required to support 17 compliance with Section 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act. 18

Critical Area Report (and Certification) that discusses the wetlands and applies a buffer based on 19 wetland function. The impacts in the buffer would be calculated and appropriate mitigation 20 proposed. 21

Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (SSDP) / Conditional Use Permit (CUP) – Lewis County 22

Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (SSDP) – Thurston County 23

New or Improved Access Roads 24

Existing Project access roads will cross the following named streams: Eleven Creek, Fall Creek, Laramie 25 Creek, North Fork Newaukum River, Pheeny Creek, Range Creek, Run Creek, Skookumchuck River, and 26 Twelve Creek. In addition, 7 unnamed perennial tributaries to the Deschutes River or Skookumchuck River 27 will be crossed by existing access roads between the WTGs and the O&M Facility. Existing access roads 28 will be utilized in their existing condition for each of these stream crossings, and there will be no 29 modifications to any of the existing stream crossings. 30

Within Thurston County, a short segment of access road improvements will occur within areas adjacent 31 to the Skookumchuck River. These improvements will require cut and fill within the 250‐foot regulated 32 buffer of the Skookumchuck River to implement widening of the road. The Skookumchuck River is 33 considered a Shoreline of the State, and is regulated under the Thurston County SMP. As discussed in 34 Section 3.8, Land Use and Recreation, a shoreline permit application has been prepared and submitted 35 to Thurston County for approval of the access road improvement within the Skookumchuck River 36 shoreline jurisdiction area (RES 2017). 37

3.3‐16

WTGs and the Turbine Micrositing Corridor 1

Construction of the WTGs will not impact any of the streams that occur within the turbine micrositing 2 corridor since there are no streams that occur within the temporary impact areas surrounding each of the 3 WTGs. Streams that occur within the general vicinity of WTGs are Fall Creek, Range Creek, Eleven Creek, 4 and North Fork Newaukum River; these streams are primarily affected by access roads and collector 5 system cables as opposed to WTG construction areas. As previously stated, all roads, existing and 6 proposed, will avoid impacts to surface waters to the greatest extent feasible. 7

Medium Voltage Electrical Collection System 8

The proposed electrical collector system crosses two streams (Eleven Creek and an unnamed stream 9 [1225988467332]) where the collector cable runs parallel to an existing access road. In addition, two 10 streams (North Fork Newaukum River and Twelve Creek) come within close proximity to the collector 11 system cable (approximately 100 to 200 feet) but will not be impacted by the construction footprint for 12 the collector system (approximately 50 to 100‐foot right‐of‐way width). 13

Where the collector system crosses streams, cable will be installed within the footprint of existing access 14 roads to the maximum extent possible. Alternatively, the cable may be bored under the stream if site 15 conditions indicate that is a reasonable and less impactful option. Should work activities need to extend 16 outside of the existing access road footprints, then temporary trenching within the stream channels will 17 be required. Trenching activities within streams will be conducted in the dry season, when water is absent, 18 to the maximum extent possible. If streams contain water at the time of construction, the stream will be 19 temporarily dewatered or re‐directed to enable construction work to occur. Following construction, the 20 stream and channel topography will be returned to its original condition. 21

Gen‐tie Line Alignment 22

The proposed gen‐tie line alignment will aerially cross Hanaford Creek (shoreline of the state – Rural or 23 Urban Conservancy environment) and Packwood Creek (shoreline of the state – High Intensity), as well as 24 19 unnamed tributaries to Hanaford Creek. In addition, a small segment of Coal Creek occurs along the 25 edge of the gen‐tie line right‐of‐way corridor where it meets Hanaford Creek, but the stream does not 26 cross under the gen‐tie line itself and therefore will not be subject to any aerial crossing. 27

Construction of the Project gen‐tie line will require vegetation clearing along an up to 200‐foot wide 28 corridor in order to ensure safe operation of the line (referred to as the “fall corridor”). Vegetation clearing 29 will consist of initial removal of merchantable trees; all other trees will be cut to the stump. Only emergent 30 grasses and low‐growing shrubs will be allowed to regrow within this corridor. This is required as a safety 31 precaution because any downed trees have the potential to interfere with an active transmission line, 32 with the potential of attendant fire risk. With the exception of vegetation clearing, construction work in 33 the vicinity of these streams will be limited to construction vehicles accessing the creek’s shoreline area 34 in order to aerially string the gen‐tie line across, most likely using a line gun. Any new gen‐tie line 35 structures will be placed outside of the regulated stream buffers, as well as outside of shoreline 36 jurisdiction for shorelines of the state (Hanaford Creek and Packwood Creek). The vegetation clearing 37 within regulated shorelines will occur in a maximum of a 200‐foot by 200‐foot area on either side of the 38 OHWM for a total of no more than 1.8 acres per crossing. The Applicant is undergoing evaluation and 39 permitting for these areas with the intent being to minimize impacts to the greatest extent feasible. 40

3.3‐17

Construction of the gen‐tie line will require two crossings of the regulated shoreline jurisdiction for 1 Hanaford Creek, located on private Weyerhaeuser property and one crossing of regulated shoreline 2 jurisdiction for Packwood Creek. In addition to the utility line crossing, vegetation clearing to account for 3 the “fall corridor” will occur within the 200‐foot shoreline jurisdiction of Hanaford Creek and Packwood 4 Creek, including any associated wetlands or floodplains, up to the OHWM of Hanaford Creek and 5 Packwood Creek. All structures and the maintenance road (discussed in further detail below) will be 6 placed outside of the 200‐foot shoreline jurisdictional area and no grading or earthmoving will occur 7 within that area. Construction work and activities within the shoreline management area of Hanaford 8 Creek and Packwood Creek will be limited to construction vehicles accessing the shoreline area in order 9 to string the gen‐tie line across the creek (most likely using a line gun), as well as the vegetation clearing 10 described above. No other activities, excavation or grading, etc. will occur within the shoreline areas of 11 Hanaford Creek or Packwood Creek. 12

As is discussed in detail in Chapter 2, a two‐track maintenance road (12 to 16 feet wide) will be constructed 13 and used for operation throughout the life of the project. Roadway construction will occur outside of any 14 identified wetlands or sensitive resources (i.e., riparian vegetation) common to wetlands; all access roads 15 will dead‐end at the 200‐foot shoreline jurisdictional areas. There will be no roadway construction within 16 wetland features, and the maintenance road was located in areas known to lack wetlands. Finally, the 17 gen‐tie line traverses an area regulated by a conservation easement within the Chehalis Basin Wetland 18 Mitigation Bank (CBWMB). Transmission structures and tree clearing will be located within the “no‐mow 19 zone” regulated by the conservation easement as a wetland buffer in order to ensure the safe operation 20 of the gen‐tie line in the case of downed trees. In all areas where gen‐tie line development occurs within 21 the conservation easement, the Applicant will coordinate required permits with USACE and Ecology, and 22 implement site stabilization to maintain the function of that buffer (seeding and potentially emergent 23 shrubs), and will purchase mitigation credits within the Chehalis Basin Wetland Mitigation Bank. 24

O&M Facility 25

Construction of the O&M Facility and temporary use of the property surrounding the building for 26 construction laydown and materials storage will not impact any streams or their buffers. 27

Surface Water – Instream Flows 28

Instream flows will not be affected by Project construction as water will not be withdrawn from surface 29 waters. Construction water will be sourced from offsite municipal water sources (City of Yelm); water will 30 be delivered to the site via water trucks. 31

Water Quality 32

Undesirable temperature is the primary indication of existing impaired waterbodies in the Project Area, 33 resulting primarily from exposure of stream surfaces following harvesting of trees. Further degradation as 34 a result of Project construction activities is not expected to occur since vegetation removal will not occur 35 within stream buffers, except for minimal removal in the shoreline area of the Skookumchuck River, 36 Hanford Creek, and Packwood Creek to allow for safe operation of the gen‐tie line. Construction impacts 37 could degrade water quality if erosion and subsequent stream sedimentation are not appropriately 38 controlled. 39

Potential water pollutants that will be used and transported onsite include diesel fuels and gasoline, 40 lubricating and mineral oils, and chemical cleaners. Leaks or spills resulting from the transportation, 41

3.3‐18

storage, or use of fuel or chemicals during construction activities could occur and may affect water quality, 1 depending on the size of the spill/leak, presence of secondary containment measures, and proximity to 2 surface waters. 3

Stormwater Runoff 4

Stormwater runoff potential will be the greatest during construction of the Project, when soil will be 5 disturbed during construction of roads, WTG foundations, and other Project facilities. Precipitation during 6 construction could result in stormwater runoff and has the potential to exacerbate erosion and 7 sedimentation. Sedimentation affects water quality physically, chemically, and biologically. The 8 concentration of suspended sediments increases turbidity in receiving waters and affects availability of 9 light for photosynthesis. Sedimentation can destroy fish spawning beds and macroinvertebrate habitat. 10 Sediment often carries organic matter, nutrients such as phosphorus, and chemicals, all of which can 11 impact the water quality of a stream. If nutrients are bound to the sediment particles, a decrease in 12 dissolved oxygen levels in the stream may result, leading to adverse impact to aquatic life. 13

A total of approximately 34 acres of vegetation (approximately 0.88 acre per WTG) will be permanently 14 cleared in the areas surrounding the WTGs to accommodate placement of WTG crane pads, pedestals, 15 graveled areas surrounding the pedestals, and graveled access road segments. These permanently cleared 16 areas will generally be graveled and managed to be free of vegetation. This clearing could result in impacts 17 to precipitation interception and runoff in areas around the WTGs. New and improved access roads can 18 create preferential pathways for stormwater flow, which could result in more stormwater runoff toward 19 streams. Clearing activities associated with access roads will be performed in accordance with road 20 construction standards outlined in Weyerhaeuser’s lease terms. 21

The O&M Facility will be constructed on a level parcel of land, where stormwater currently infiltrates. 22 During construction, if uncontrolled, stormwater runoff may cause preferential channels for offsite 23 discharge. 24

Groundwater 25

No impacts to regional groundwater availability are anticipated from construction. Up to 20 acre‐feet 26 (approximately 6.5 million gallons) of water will be consumed during construction. Water will be supplied 27 by the City of Yelm, in Thurston County. The City has indicated that they have the appropriate water rights 28 and adequate supply to meet the Project’s requirements without affecting other users (Bedlington 2017). 29 Water used during construction will either evaporate, infiltrate into the ground surface, or be collected 30 and otherwise disposed of off‐site. 31

Groundwater may be encountered during Project excavation activities conducted in low‐lying areas but 32 likely will not be in sufficient quantities to affect surface resources (such as by causing erosion or increased 33 runoff). If groundwater is encountered during excavation and construction activities and dewatering is 34 required, the water generated from dewatering will be discharged to upland areas through a hose, 35 allowing distribution of the water over a large surface area to facilitate evaporation and/or infiltration. In 36 addition, dissipaters, sediment basins, and/or fabric bags will be used, if necessary, to avoid transport of 37 silt into adjacent areas. No direct discharge to surface waters or riparian areas will occur during 38 dewatering; upland discharge will be done away from surface waterbodies. No wellhead protection areas 39 or source water protection areas will be affected either during construction of the Project. 40

3.3‐19

Groundwater quality could be degraded through infiltration of stormwater runoff. Groundwater quality 1 degradation could also result from fuel or chemical spills during construction activities. 2

Although the amount of impervious surface will increase by approximately 0.34 acres (15,000 square feet) 3 with the construction of the Project, impacts to groundwater recharge during operation will be negligible 4 as stormwater generated within the Project Area will eventually discharge into surface waters or ground 5 (and then groundwater). 6

Under Lewis County development regulations, utility lines and facilities, and regional transmission 7 facilities are allowed in aquifer recharge areas, subject to the protective policies and mitigation 8 requirements established in LCC 17.38.840. The low‐intensity activity associated with placing gen‐tie line 9 poles as part of the Project will have no impact in aquifer recharge areas. 10

Under Thurston County development regulations, commercial uses that do not use or generate hazardous 11 waste are allowed in aquifer recharge areas, subject to the protective policies and mitigation 12 requirements established in TCC 24.10.030. An onsite septic system is proposed to serve the new O&M 13 Facility, which is located within the Category I, extreme aquifer sensitivity CARA. Onsite sewage disposal 14 systems are permitted in the Category I CARA when consistent with TCC 24.10.160, which includes certain 15 size systems, monitoring, and reporting requirements. 16

Public and Private Domestic Water Supplies 17

Construction of the Project will require water for road construction, concrete production, wetting of 18 concrete, dust control, and other activities (see Section 3.5, Energy and Natural Resources for more 19 information on water consumption). No ground or surface water will be withdrawn from the Project Area 20 during construction. 21

Project construction‐related water use is not expected to affect water levels in private wells in the vicinity 22 of the Project Area, as water will likely be sourced outside of the immediate vicinity of Project construction 23 locations, from local municipal water utility sources (City of Yelm) under existing water rights. Blasting 24 activities will only be conducted on the ridges at or near WTG locations, where there is no groundwater 25 or wells present. There are no public water supplies within the Project Area; therefore, no construction‐26 related impacts are anticipated to public water supplies. 27

Floodplains 28

Only a few small portions of the Project Area, including access to the site on Vail Cut Off Road and small 29 portions along the gen‐tie line, are located within a 100‐year floodplain. No construction of Project 30 facilities is proposed within regulated floodplains. The use of an existing roadway located in a floodplain 31 for delivery of construction materials and equipment will not result in placement of fill in the flood plain 32 or otherwise affect flood storage. Additionally, new maintenance roads will be designed to avoid all 33 sensitive resources and floodplains. There will be no increased risk of flood damage as a result of Project 34 construction. 35

3.3‐20

3.3.4.2 Operation 1

Surface Water, Water Quality, and Stormwater Runoff 2

No significant impacts to surface water, water quality, and stormwater runoff are anticipated from 3 operation of the Project. Approximately 335 acres will be permanently disturbed from Project facilities 4 including roads, WTGs, and support facilities. Some of this permanently disturbed area will include 5 impervious surfaces such as concrete and compacted gravel. Impervious surfaces repel water and prevent 6 precipitation from infiltrating soils. The primary source of impervious surfaces for the Project are the WTG 7 foundations, as well as the O&M Building. These areas are surrounded by pervious surfaces, including 8 gravel and forested lands, which generally allow for stormwater to infiltrate but could experience altered 9 patterns of infiltration or stormwater runoff as a result of permanent vegetation clearing or grade 10 changes. The creation of preferential pathways for stormwater flows by access roads will be minimized 11 through the use of existing roads for most of the Project’s access routes. Thus, the Project will generate 12 little stormwater runoff, and the runoff that is generated is anticipated to infiltrate naturally into adjacent 13 areas. 14

Groundwater 15

Operation of the Project will have minimal or no impacts to groundwater. The primary operational impact 16 of concern is the potential of an accidental release of toxic materials to the environment (such as a vehicle 17 fuel spill). However, considering the small volume of hazardous materials which may be present during 18 operations, the risk of contamination is very low. 19

As groundwater withdrawals for the Project (annual average of less than 5,000 gallons per day) and the 20 amount of new impervious surface created are small, and risk of spills/contamination is low, impacts to 21 county‐designated CARAs are unlikely. 22


Project operation will require water use primarily for the bathrooms, showers, and kitchen in the O&M 24 Facility. The Project will install an industrial/commercial water supply well with an average annual water 25 supply of less than 5,000 gallons per day. The proposed groundwater well for the O&M Facility will be 26 designed and constructed per the guidelines of Article III of the Thurston County Environmental Health 27 Code. The well will be sited where it is not subject to ponding or flooding; where it is protected from the 28 100‐year flood; and in consideration of the local geologic and hydrologic conditions, including a 29 prohibition on construction anywhere the groundwater is under the direct influence of surface water. An 30 Applicant‐owned 100‐foot radius sanitary control area (SCA) will be established around the proposed 31 groundwater well to protect it from potential contamination. The SCA must be free of existing 32 contamination, structures, Operations Support System (OSS) components, stormwater control structures, 33 or any potential sources of contamination. The size and area of the SCA will be approved by a Thurston 34 County health officer. During review of the SCA, the health officer may determine that the size of the 100‐35 foot‐radius SCA be adjusted depending on the local geologic and hydrologic conditions. 36

All water from the O&M Facility will be discharged to a septic tank installed onsite (designed in accordance 37 to Thurston County’s Environmental Health Code Article IV – Sewage Disposal requirements; Thurston 38 County 2012), and thus most of the water used will be returned to the aquifer. There will be no process 39 water generated onsite, and no water associated with plant operations will be discharged to surface 40 waters. Soils at the O&M Facility were evaluated to determine feasibility for installation of a septic system 41

3.3‐21

and were recommended as feasible; see Section 3.1, Earth Resources for more information (Riley Group 1 2017). 2

The Project will not require any new water rights or authorizations beyond the exempt well for the O&M 3 Facility (Ecology 2018d). 4

The Project will not require the use of any water for cooling or any other industrial use, and there will be 5 no industrial wastewater discharge from the Project. 6

Floodplains 7

Project operations are not anticipated to impact floodplains as changes to the base flood elevation will 8 not occur. 9

3.3.4.3 Decommissioning 10

Decommissioning activities will be similar in type but shorter in duration compared to those anticipated 11 during construction. Water will be used primarily for dust suppression. Surface water runoff and erosion 12 will be the impact of greatest concern during decommissioning when soil is disturbed. 13

3.3.5 Impacts of the No Action Alternative 14

Under the No Action Alternative, the Project would not be constructed. Ongoing forestry practices on 15 Weyerhaeuser lands would presumably continue. Effects from forestry practices on water resources will 16 continue at levels similar to the present. 17

3.3.6 Mitigation Measures 18

3.3.6.1 Construction and Decommissioning 19

Surface Water, Water Quality, and Stormwater Runoff 20

Erosion and sedimentation control will be standard practice during the active construction, restoration, 21 and cleanup stages of the construction process, along with decommissioning (see Section 3.1.6 for more 22 information on proposed mitigation measures and BMPs). Any work associated with the gen‐tie line, 23 which may be adjacent to streams (or wetlands), will adhere to applicable laws, including federal, state, 24 and local regulations. The Project will use the existing Weyerhaeuser roadway system. The anticipated 25 road improvements and new access spur roads to each WTG site will not require any new stream crossings 26 or any modification of existing stream crossings. Where new culverts are necessary to channelize 27 stormwater captured on road surfaces, they will be installed pursuant to the DNR Road Maintenance and 28 Abandonment Plans and county requirements for stormwater control, as well as road construction 29 standards outlined in the Applicant’s lease terms with Weyerhaeuser. Culverts will be maintained to allow 30 for unobstructed passage for water, including prompt removal of any blockages, to protect roadbeds, and 31 prevent sedimentation of downstream waterbodies. Water and sediment control measures will be in 32 place at all waterbodies and their buffers either crossed by access roads or otherwise not impacted by 33 surface disturbance. 34

A Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit will be requested from 35 Lewis County for the gen‐tie line aerial crossings and vegetation clearing of Hanaford Creek and Packwood 36

3.3‐22

Creek, respectively, and from Thurston County for the access road improvement within the 1 Skookumchuck River shoreline jurisdiction area and vegetation removal/tree clearing. No in‐water work 2 will be performed in either of these surface waters. All structures will be placed outside of the 200‐foot 3 regulated shoreline jurisdiction of Hanaford Creek and Packwood Creek. Construction work and activities 4 within the shoreline management areas of Hanaford Creek and Packwood Creek will be limited to 5 construction vehicles accessing the shoreline areas in order to string the gen‐tie line across the creek, 6 most likely using a line gun, and conduct vegetation removal/tree clearing required to safely operate the 7 transmission line. No other activities, excavation or grading, etc. will occur within the shoreline areas of 8 Hanaford Creek or Packwood Creek. Minor fill within the shoreline management area associated with the 9 Skookumchuck River will be performed using soil present onsite from adjacent excavation operations. Soil 10 erosion will be reduced through implementing a SWPPP and erosion control BMPs, and all construction 11 activities will comply with the applicable county critical areas regulations pertaining to erosion hazards. 12

If required by WDFW, an HPA from WDFW will be received for all new aerial stream crossings for the gen‐13 tie line and any new or improved stream crossings along access roads. Construction related to the gen‐tie 14 line will be at least 200 feet from stream banks on either side, and no heavy equipment will be used in the 15 stream bed or riparian corridor for construction, where avoidance is feasible. Where avoidance of the 16 riparian corridor is not possible, equipment and vehicles will be kept above the ordinary high water mark 17 and existing crossings will be used to the maximum extent possible. 18

If these impacts are identified and cannot be avoided, including from vegetation clearing within the 19 regulated shoreline areas or their buffers, impacts will be permitted through the appropriate local, state, 20 and federal agencies. Should impacts require mitigation, it is expected that mitigation would be provided 21 one or more of the following: 22

1. Reseeding/site stabilization 23

2. Purchase of mitigation credits with the Chehalis Basin Wetland Mitigation Bank 24

3. Through acquiring conservation parcels in Pacific County in southwest Washington as mitigation 25 for marbled murrelets and eagles (discussed further in Section 3.4.6.3). These parcels contain 26 riparian habitat and present potential restoration/enhancement opportunities to mitigate for 27 impacts to wetlands. 28

The Applicant is working with the requisite permitting agencies to evaluate potential impacts and 29 determine the appropriate mitigation as part of the permitting process under the Critical Areas Ordinance, 30 Shoreline Management Act, and the Clean Water Act. All of the requisite permits will be obtained prior to 31 any impacts to wetlands. The Applicant will continue to avoid any wetland impacts to the greatest extent 32 possible through design refinements. Therefore, excavation or fill activities that may occur within 33 wetlands and vegetation clearing within the regulated shorelines will be fully mitigated through 34 restoration/restabilization efforts, purchase of mitigation bank credits, or additional mitigation benefits 35 through a conservation easement planned for purchase by the Project where riparian habitat is present 36 and potential opportunities for restoration and enhancement exist. 37

The Applicant or its construction contractor will obtain coverage under Ecology’s Sand and Gravel permit 38 for establishment of temporary rock crushing and concrete batching activities at the construction site. 39

Coverage under Ecology’s CSWGP will be received for the Project and a SWPPP has been developed and 40 will be implemented manage stormwater discharge and prevent erosion and sedimentation into nearby 41 waterbodies. The Project will also comply with the applicable local stormwater capture, control, and 42

3.3‐23

treatment requirements required by Lewis and Thurston counties (see Section 3.3.2.3) for construction 1 activities in each of the counties. See Section 3.1.6.1, Earth for more information on proposed mitigation 2 measures and BMPs. 3

Expansion of existing roads and new road segments will include the standard long‐term drainage 4 requirements specified by Weyerhaeuser for its roads and installed to comply with DNR regulations. In 5 accordance with the Applicant’s lease terms for road construction standards on Weyerhaeuser property, 6 any soils, slash, or debris will be placed away from streams, stream buffers, and floodplains and stabilized 7 to avoid stream entry. Depending on road gradients, soil conditions and proximity to any waters or ground 8 water seeps, drainage features such as ditches, relief culverts, berms, or waterbars will be included in the 9 road design, where appropriate, to prevent erosion and sedimentation of waters. Overall, with the 10 implementation of the mitigation measures above, stormwater hydrology adjacent to Project 11 construction areas is not expected to be affected, as construction stormwater discharges will be 12 appropriately managed. 13

Project construction staging areas will not be located within 100 feet of waterbodies to reduce the 14 potential for contamination from spills. Stormwater pollutants will be managed by effective source 15 control. All pollutants, including waste materials and demolition debris, will be handled and disposed of 16 in a manner that does not result in contamination of stormwater. Concrete truck wash water will be 17 collected into lined wash pits to avoid runoff and liners will be disposed of appropriately after use. 18 Potential water pollutants that will be used and transported onsite (including fuels, lubricating fluids and 19 chemical cleaners) will be handled and stored according to the SWPPP and the Spill Prevention, Control 20 and Countermeasure Plan (SPCC Plan).The Applicant will use BMPs to control the use of disposal and 21 waste materials during and following Project construction, including implementation of a spill prevention, 22 contamination, and control plan. The Applicant will store hazardous materials, such as lubricants, in 23 approved containers and storage facilities. The Applicant will avoid storing, transferring, or mixing of oils, 24 fuels, or other hazardous material where accidental spills could enter surface water or groundwater. 25 Maintenance, fueling, and repair of heavy equipment and vehicles will be conducted using spill prevention 26 and control measures. Onsite fueling tanks will include secondary containment. Fuel tank and truck 27 storage as well as vehicle fueling will be at least 100 feet from all streams, dry or flowing. Contaminated 28 surfaces will be cleaned immediately following any spill incident. The Applicant will provide on‐call spill 29 response services either through a contract with a qualified environmental remediation services firm or 30 with qualified in‐house personnel. 31

Groundwater 32

In accordance with Thurston County’s CAO (TCC 24.10.030), the Applicant will submit a report identifying 33 appropriate BMPs and describing how they will be used to prevent degradation of groundwater quality 34 for activities within CARAs. Construction activities within Lewis County CARAs will comply with LCC 35 requirements (Section 17.38.840). 36

If groundwater is encountered during construction‐related excavations it will be pumped from the 37 excavation at a controlled rate to re‐infiltrate into the soil at a nearby upland site. 38


Prior to obtaining a Lewis County building permit, the Applicant will provide evidence of adequate water 40 supply for the Project. 41

3.3‐24

Water used during construction will be purchased by the contractor from an offsite municipal vendor with 1 a valid water right and transported to the Project Area in tanker trucks. There will be no water treatment 2 requirements or methods onsite. Water used for dust suppression and concrete production will be 3 reclaimed (non‐potable), to the extent feasible. Non‐toxic dust control agents such as lignin may be added 4 to water used for dust suppression to improve efficiency and reduce water use. 5

Floodplains 6

Structures associated with the gen‐tie line will be sited to avoid development within the floodplain. 7

3.3.6.2 Operation 8

Final designs for the permanent stormwater BMPs will be incorporated into the final construction plans 9 and specifications. An operations manual for the permanent BMPs will be prepared and implemented 10 throughout operation of the Project. Final stormwater control measures will include measures to capture 11 and infiltrate stormwater onsite in order to maintain the natural hydrology surrounding Project facilities. 12

Operational BMPs will be adopted and implemented as part of the SPCC Plan and will include good 13 housekeeping, preventive and corrective maintenance procedures, steps for spill prevention and 14 emergency cleanup, employee training programs, and inspection and record keeping practices as 15 necessary to prevent stormwater pollution. The wind farm operators and employees will periodically 16 review the SPCC Plan against actual practice to ensure that the controls identified in the plan are adequate 17 and that employees are adhering to them. 18

As part of the required Public Water Supply Permit from Thurston County, an Applicant‐owned 100‐foot 19 radius SCA will be established around the proposed groundwater well at the O&M Facility to protect it 20 from potential contamination. The SCA must be free of existing contamination, structures, OSS 21 components, stormwater control structures, or any potential sources of contamination. The size and area 22 of the SCA will be approved by a Thurston County health officer. During review of the SCA, the health 23 officer may determine that the size of the 100‐foot‐radius SCA be adjusted depending on the local geologic 24 and hydrologic conditions. 25

3.3.7 Connected Action 26

Construction of the interconnection will involve delivery and installation of a step‐up transformer in the 27 Tono substation yard, and conductoring to interconnect the gen‐tie line to the step‐up transformer, and 28 the transformer to the remainder of the substation. These activities will not require excavation or 29 significant ground disturbance either inside or outside the developed area of the yard. Gravel covering 30 existing developed surfaces may be temporarily displaced by the installation activity and will be replaced 31 or repaired to match pre‐existing conditions. The location where the transformer will be placed is already 32 developed and there are no naturally occurring streams or wetlands present. 33

Construction related stormwater runoff could occur if the installation activities are conducted during rainy 34 weather. Temporary construction stormwater controls will be installed if needed during the construction 35 activity. Following construction, the graveled area will be returned to pre‐existing conditions. Permanent 36 stormwater flows from the substation yard will not be changed. 37

3.3‐25

3.3.8 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 1

Construction of the Project will cause temporary erosion and the potential for sediment contribution to 2 downslope tributary streams and the risk of accidental spills of petroleum products. Implementing 3 stormwater BMPs will avoid or minimize effects to water quality. With the mitigation proposed by the 4 Applicant identified in Section 3.3.6 and required by applicable permit conditions, impacts to water 5 resources and aquatic systems will be minimized. Based on the temporary duration and limited extent of 6 the potential impacts to water resources, these construction impacts will not be significant. During 7 operations permanent BMPs and an SPCC Plan will be implemented to minimize erosion and 8 sedimentation. Operations will not result in ongoing ground disturbing activities. A water supply well will 9 be installed in accordance with Thurston County regulations. Through ongoing implementation of 10 stormwater BMPs and spill plans, operational impacts to water resources will be mitigated to non‐11 significance. 12

3.3.9 References 13

Bedlington, C. 2017. Email correspondence between Chad Bedlington, City of Yelm, and Arron Lowe, RES 14 “Wind farm Construction Water Source.” March 1, 2017. 15

Chambers Group, Inc. (CGI). 2018. Skookumchuck Wind Energy Project Water Resources Report. 16 Prepared for Skookumchuck Wind Energy Project LLC. May 2018. 17

Chehalis Basin Partnership. 2004. Chehalis Basin Watershed Management Plan – Supplement Section III, 18 Basin Description. April 9, 2004. 19

Heinemeyer, G. 2017. Personal communication with Weyerhaeuser. March 2017. 20

Lewis County. 2013. Public Wells – Well Depths map. Revised February 12, 2013. 21

Lewis County. 2017a. Lewis County Code 17.35.680 Protection. Available online: 22 http://www.codepublishing.com/WA/LewisCounty/?LewisCounty17/LewisCounty1735.html#17.35.680. 23 Accessed July 17, 2017. 24

Lewis County. 2017b. Lewis County Code Chapter 15.45 Stormwater Management. Available online: 25 http://lewiscountywa.gov/attachment/115/CH1545StormwaterManage.pdf. Accessed July 21, 2017. 26

RES. 2017. Application for Thurston County Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. December 15, 27 2017. 28

The Riley Group, Inc. (RGI). 2017. On‐Site Septic System Evaluation, Proposed O&M Building. July 13, 29 2017. 30

Simmons, M. 2018. Email correspondence between Michael Simmons, Chambers Group, Inc. and B. 31 Sahatjian, HDR. “Skook – Stream Surveys – results/data.” February 21, 2018. 32

Thurston County. 2004. Deschutes Watershed Plan – Highlights of the Draft WRIA 13 Management Plan. 33 September 2004. 34

3.3‐26

Thurston County. 2009. Shoreline Master Program 2009 Update Draft – Critical Areas, Hydrologic map. 1 October 19, 2009. 2

Thurston County. 2010. Existing Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas and McAllister Geologically Sensitive 3 Area (map). September 23, 2010. 4

Thurston County. 2012. Environmental Health Codes, Article IV – Sewage Disposal. Available online: 5 http://www.co.thurston.wa.us/health/ehadm/pdf/Article_IV_Int.pdf. February 14, 2012. 6

Thurston County. 2014. Environmental Health Codes, Article III – Drinking Water Supplies. Available 7 online: http://www.co.thurston.wa.us/health/ehadm/pdf/Article_III.pdf. January 1, 2014. 8

Thurston County. 2016. Drainage Design and erosion Control Manual. December 2016 Edition. 9

Thurston County. 2017. Thurston County Code Table 24.25‐1 Standard Freshwater Riparian Habitat Area 10 Widths. Available online: http://www.co.thurston.wa.us/planning/critical_areas/adopted‐11 ordinance/cao‐attachment‐b‐chapter‐24‐25‐fish‐and‐wildlife‐habitat‐conservation‐areas.pdf. Accessed 12 July 17, 2017. 13

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1999. National Cooperative Soil Survey. Mukilteo 14 Series. Available online: https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/OSD_Docs/M/MUKILTEO.html. Accessed 15 February 8, 2018. 16

USDA. 2000. National Cooperative Soil Survey. Jonas Series. Available online: 17 https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/OSD_Docs/J/JONAS.html. Accessed February 8, 2018. 18

USDA. 2002. National Cooperative Soil Survey. Baumgard Series. Available online: 19 https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/OSD_Docs/B/BAUMGARD.html. Accessed February 8, 2018. 20

USDA. 2005. National Cooperative Soil Survey. Godfrey Series. Available online: 21 https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/OSD_Docs/G/GODFREY.html. Accessed February 8, 2018. 22

USDA. 2011. National Cooperative Soil Survey. Pheeney Series. Available Online at: 23 https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/OSD_Docs/P/PHEENEY.html. Accessed February 8, 2018. 24

USDA. 2017. National Cooperative Soil Survey. Chehalis Series. Available online: 25 https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/OSD_Docs/C/CHEHALIS.html. Accessed February 8, 2018. 26

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2004. Understanding the Safe Drinking Water 27 Act. EPA 816‐F‐04‐030. June 2004. 28

USEPA. 2010. Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Regulation – A Facility 29 Owner/Operator’s Guide to Oil Pollution Prevention. EPA 540‐K‐09‐001. June 2010. 30

USEPA. 2017. Region 10: the Pacific Northwest | Sole Source Aquifer Maps. Available online: 31 https://yosemite.epa.gov/r10/water.nsf/Sole+Source+Aquifers/ssamaps. Accessed July 18, 2017. 32

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2017a. Water‐Year Summary for Site USGS 12079000. Available online at 33 https://wdr.water.usgs.gov/. Accessed August 16, 2017. 34

3.3‐27

USGS. 2017b. Water‐Year Summary for Site USGS 12031000. Available online: 1 https://wdr.water.usgs.gov/. Accessed July 18, 2017. 2

USGS. 2017c. Water‐Year Summary for Site USGS 12026400. Available online: 3 https://wdr.water.usgs.gov/. Accessed July 20, 2017. 4

Washington State. 2017. Washington State Open Data Bridge, Hydrologic Accounting Units (8 digit HUC). 5 Available online: http://geo.wa.gov/datasets/de1373e9f5394e5284660c939c038689_0. Accessed July 6 10, 2017. 7

Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). 2004. Floodplain Management in the State of 8 Washington. Ecology Publication #04‐06‐016. March 2004. 9

Ecology. 2014. Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (SWMMWW). As Amended in 10 December 2014. 11

Ecology. 2015. Deschutes River, Percival Creek, and Budd Inlet Tributaries Temperature, Fecal Coliform 12 Bacteria, Dissolved Oxygen, pH, and Fine Sediment Total Maximum Daily Load | Water Quality 13 Improvement Report and Implementation Plan. Ecology Publication #15‐10‐012. December 2015. 14

Ecology. 2017a. Water Resource Inventory Areas (WRIA). Available online: 15 http://www.ecy.wa.gov/water/wria/index.html. Accessed July 10, 2017. 16

Ecology. 2017b. Introduction to the Shoreline Management Act. Available online: 17 http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/sma/st_guide/intro.html. Accessed July 24, 2017. 18

Ecology. 2017c. Sand and Gravel General Permit. Available online: 19 http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/sand. Accessed July 21, 2017. 20

Ecology. 2017d. Washington State Water Well Report Viewer. Available online: 21 https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/waterresources/map/WCLSWebMap/default.aspx. Accessed August 7, 22 2017. 23

Ecology. 2018a. ESSB 6091 – Streamflow Restoration Initial Policy Interpretations. Available online: 24 https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/wrdocs/WaterRights/wrwebpdf/6091EcologyPolicyInterpretations.pdf 25 Accessed May 10, 2018 26

Ecology. 2018b. Washington State Water Quality Atlas. Available online: 27 https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/wqamapviewer/map.aspx. Accessed February 8, 2018. 28

Ecology. 2018c. Washington State Water Well Report Viewer. Available online: 29 https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/waterresources/map/WCLSWebMap/default.aspx. Accessed February 8, 30 2018. 31

Ecology 2018d. Skookumchuck Wind Energy Project (2017101332) Comment Letter. February 1, 2018. 32

Washington State Department of Health (DOH). 2005. Washington’s Source Water Assessment Program 33 (SWAP). DOH Publication #331‐148. June 2005 (Revised). 34

Documents

WATER RESOURCES - Lewis County WA...1 3.3 WATER RESOURCES 2 This section describes existing water resources in the study area and summarizes their characteristics, 3 describes potential