Concerns of Quinault Nation, EPA Slow Port of Chehalis

A regional general permit renewal for the Port of Chehalis has been prolonged due to an extended comment period as concerns from the Quinault Indian Nation and the Environmental Protection Agency are addressed.

The five-year permit, which expired in September 2016, allows the port to fill wetlands while utilizing its Pleasant Valley Mitigation Site, which has 40 acres of credit to offset development in wetlands elsewhere.

The public comment period was extended on Nov. 8, 2016, after the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the permit’s issuing agency, received a request from the Quinault Indian Tribe for an extension. 

The extended comment period has since closed and the Army Corps will address the issues that arose, while balancing them with the potential for economic growth. 

The tribe submitted a detailed list of concerns it has in regard to the permit. 

Port commissioners expressed frustration that the permit had not yet been renewed, in part because it could hinder projects currently taking place at the port that would provide jobs to the local community.

The projects, dubbed “Project Desert” and “Project Sighthound,” would bring hundreds of jobs to the area. Project Desert would initially offer 200 jobs, and grow to 300 within five years, while Project Sighthound would initially bring in 300 jobs, and increase to 700 jobs at full buildout. 

“From the port’s perspective when we received those comments, it was a little disappointing,” Randy Mueller, chief executive officer of the port, said at a meeting last week. 

The port has addressed all of the concerns in a technical document submitted to the Corps of Engineers. Mueller said some of the concerns presented by the Quinault Indian Nation were misconceptions. Mueller told port commissioners he extended an invitation to the tribe for a tour of the area to address and clear up some of those misconceptions, but he had not received a response as of Jan. 12. 

Fawn Sharp, president of the Quinault Indian Nation, said in a letter to Kiley Zaubi, the project manager for the Army Corps of Engineers, that as the only federally-recognized Indian tribe with treaty-reserved rights in the Chehalis Basin, the tribe has “significant concerns” regarding the project.

“The RGP is limited to actions that have a minimal effect or a minimal cumulative effect, but there are no standards of what effects are considered minimal, nor any standards on cumulative effects,” Sharp said. “With the current degraded condition of the Chehalis Watershed, we question whether even minimal detrimental effects should be permitted under Regional General Permits.”

In the technical document compiled by Ecological Land Services Inc. on behalf of the port, the report states a cumulative impact assessment prepared for the permit examined the past, present and potential future cumulative impacts from projects within the proposed RGP area, as well as on a broader scope, which addressed the concern. 

Among the tribes concerns were the proposed wetland fill location, and the degradation of fish habitat, specifically for salmon. 

Sharp also said the tribe does not think the proposal meets the requirements under the regional general permit because the proposals for 40 acres exceeds the acreage limit. The initial permit, according to Sharp, was for 28 acres, but the renewal exceeds that amount.

“This change reflects a 60 percent increase in the amount of wetland proposed for filling, and in addition to exceeding the 25-acre limit in RGP 9. Modifications of this magnitude should not be considered a renewal of an existing permit,” Sharp stated in the letter. “Regional General Permit 9 requires classifying resource losses that are specifically identifiable or reasonably likely to occur, but the proposal is not evaluating the likely impact of the increased impervious surface likely to occur as part of the industrial development.” 

Another concern Sharp mentioned stems from the programmatic environmental impact statement, which presented four options to reduce flooding in the Chehalis Basin. Sharp said the proposal needed to be examined to make sure no fill is proposed in the 100-year floodplains of the Berwick and Dillenbaugh creeks and the Newaukum River. 

Sharp also said the tribe is concerned about detrimental effects to area creeks.

“The mitigation is narrowly focused on wetland function and completely ignores any potential restoration actions for the creek,” Sharp said in regard to Stearns Creek, which was channelized. “We are concerned that by putting this area into a mitigation site the wetland mitigation will not improve the fish habitat, and may even preclude any future restoration actions in these creeks. ... We cannot support locking in the currently degraded condition by restoring the wetland only.” 

Sharp stated both the tribe and the state of Washington recognize the need to complete “major restoration actions” on the Chehalis River and said maintaining the existing conditions will not accomplish the needed improvement or support the protection of the tribe’s treaty right. 

The Quinault Indian Nation also echoed concerns raised by the Environmental Protection Agency in a comment letter dated Nov. 8, 2016. 

R. David Allnutt, director of the office of Environmental Review and Assessment, said in the letter that actions under the permit could lead to increased flooding.

“The proposed loss of 40 acres of wetlands would result not only in a loss of flood storage to the basin, but would also likely result in increased runoff to the affected creeks, resulting in greater synchronicity of the increased flood discharges to the river,” Allnutt said in the letter. “This would exacerbate flooding locally as well as in areas downstream of the proposed project, which would contribute to water quality degradation and negatively impact fish and other aquatic resources of importance in the Chehalis basin.”

Allnutt added the EPA does not believe the impacts would be minimal, and stated a RGP for the proposed discharge is not the appropriate instrument for the port’s project. 

In the port’s response, the report stated the entity “has no intent to impact the Quinault Indian Nation’s exercise of federally guaranteed fishing rights,” and “seeks to avoid impacting fish or fish habitat,” which would be accomplished by locating the potential projects outside of the 100-year floodplain. 

It would also meet or exceed current stormwater standards and conservation recommendations, engage the Endangered Species Act and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Consultation. The Pleasant Valley Mitigation Site includes fish habitat enhancement measures that were previously recommended by the Cowlitz Indian Tribe, the report states. 

“The Quinault Indian Nation should not overlook that each potential permit action under the RGP will require a thorough review of threatened and endangered species under the Federal Endangered Species Act and Essential Fish Habitat under the Magnuson-Stevens Fisher Conservation and Management Act … which is a lengthy process with no guarantee of the (Ecological Land Services’) occurrences.” 

The technical document addressed the Quinault’s concerns that the proposal does not meet the requirements under the RGP by stating the same projects could be permitted individually. The RGP was sought out because the port wanted to ensure projects within the permit’s boundary were “reviewed as a whole rather than fragmenting the permitting on a project-specific basis,” as was done in the past. 

The port further said its goal was always to have up to 40 acres of wetland fill, and the 25-acre cap in the original RGP was because the mitigation site was in its infancy.

“That question has now been resoundingly answered in the crucible of time, efforts and expense of the Port through the gain of 66 acres high functioning wetlands and aquatic/floodplain resources, including 1,200 acre-feet of Chehalis Basin flood reduction over 6 years, fish habitat and water quality treatment.” 

The Pleasant Valley Mitigation Site’s success has been applauded by agencies who have reviewed it, stated the document. 

The port also stated the mitigation site does not increase flooding, but instead reduces the volume and slows the velocity of floodwaters, while filtering pollutants and improving water quality which in turn benefits fish, their habitat and other issues. 

Other comments received by the Corps of Engineers included those from a family on Sanderson Road and the Nisqually Indian Tribe. 

The concerns the family expressed were about flooding along Jackson Highway and their property, declining fish runs in Dillenbaugh Creek, and included a request that an inspection be conducted of areas before wetlands are filled in. 

Since the property is situated upstream of the RGP boundary, the port said that greatly minimizes any flooding impact the property would experience from future work within the permit’s boundaries. It also stated the declining fish runs in the creek were likely not caused by port actions, but instead were part of a statewide trend. The technical document said wetlands within the permit’s boundary are assessed by agency staff before it is filled, as is the case for wetland permitting in the state of Washington. 

As for the Nisqually Indian Tribe, it requested a cultural resources survey be conducted by a qualified archeologist, which the port said the RGP already requires. They also asked that an inadvertent discovery plan be implemented, and that the tribe is informed if there are discoveries of cultural resources or human burials.

The port responded and said if any human burials, cultural resources or historic properties are found, a stop work order would be issued immediately. It also said the tribe would be informed of any discoveries, as would the Corps of Engineers and the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation.

Zaubi, the project manager with the Army Corps, said the entity had a government to government meeting with the Quinault Indian Tribe to further address the issues they brought forth. She said the Corps is obligated to thoroughly address their concerns. 

The port is not able to attend the government to government meeting, but was assured it would be provided with an update afterward.