FINAL

RESTORATION PLAN AND 

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

 FOR

THE TENYO MARU OIL SPILL

Prepared by:

The Tenyo Maru Oil Spill Natural Resource Trustees

Makah Indian Tribe

State of Washington

Department of Ecology (WDOE)

Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)

Department of Natural Resources (WDNR)

U.S. Department of Commerce

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

U.S. Department of the Interior

 Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)

National Park Service (NPS)

Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)

April 4, 2000
INFORMATION SHEET

Final Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment 

for the July 22, 1991, Tenyo Maru Oil Spill 

Cooperating Agencies: Makah Indian Tribe; U.S. Department of Commerce represented by the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; the U.S. Department of the Interior

represented by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park Service, and the Bureau of

Indian Affairs; and the State of Washington represented by the Department of Ecology,

Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Department of Natural Resources.

Supplementary Information: This Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment (RP/EA)

has been prepared by the Tribal, State, and Federal Natural Resource Trustees to address

restoration of natural resources injured by the July 22, 1991 oil spill that resulted from a collision

between the Japanese fishing vessel Tenyo Maru and Chinese freighter Tuo Hai 20 miles

northwest of Cape Flattery off the Washington coast. Beaches were oiled from Vancouver,

British Columbia to northern Oregon. Numerous seabirds were killed and substantial amounts of

oil were observed in kelp beds. The restoration activities of the RP/EA include the combination

of protection and enhancement activities that have the greatest potential to restore the injured

natural resources, with particular emphasis on seabirds. 

Contact Person: Cindy Chaffee

Department of the Interior

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Western Washington Office

510 Desmond Drive SE, Suite 102

Lacey, WA 98503

Phone (360) 753-4324

Fax (360) 753-9008

Email Cindy_Chaffee@fws.gov

Administrative Record: The documents comprising the Administrative Record can be viewed

at the above public location.

Copies: Copies of the Final Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment for the Tenyo

Maru Oil Spill are available from the address listed above and are available for downloading at

the following web sites: http://www.r1.fws.gov and http://www.darcnw.noaa.gov/tenyo.htm.
i

Executive Summary

On July 22, 1991, the Japanese fishing vessel Tenyo Maru and Chinese freighter Tuo Hai

collided within Canadian Territorial waters approximately 20 miles northwest of Cape Flattery. 

The Tenyo Maru , which was reportedly carrying 354,800 gallons of intermediate fuel oil, 97,800

gallons of diesel fuel, and 22,500 gallons of fish oil, sank at collision. It initially leaked a large

amount of oil and undetermined amounts were reported leaking for more than a month after the

collision. Beaches were fouled with oil from Vancouver Island, British Columbia to northern

Oregon. While impacts were scattered along the entire Washington State shoreline and the

northern beaches of Oregon, the heaviest oiling occurred along the Makah Indian Reservation

and the Olympic National Park shoreline. The Natural Resource Trustees estimated that 3,740-

19,559 common murres (Uria aalge) and 161-273 (7-11 percent of the total outer coast

population) federally threatened marbled murrelets (Brachyramphus marmoratus) were killed, in

addition to substantial numbers of rhinoceros auklet (Cerorhinca moncerata), tufted puffin

(Fratercula cirrhata), Cassin’s Auklet (Ptychoramphus aleuticus) and pigeon guillemot

(Cepphus columba). Substantial amounts of oil were observed in many of the giant kelp

(Macrocystis) and bull kelp (Nereocystis) dominated kelp beds from Cape Alava north to

Tatoosh Island and from Tatoosh Island east to Waadah Island. Laboratory studies indicate that

oil from the Tenyo Maru may have injured the kelp. (Tenyo Maru Trustees 1993, Battelle

Marine Sciences Laboratory 1992) 

Claims for natural resource damages were settled by consent decree under the Oil Pollution Act

of 1990 (OPA), 33 U.S.C. 2701 et seq. Under the consent decree the defendants agreed to pay

approximately $5.2 million to restore, rehabilitate, replace or acquire the equivalent of natural

resources injured by the oil discharge. This Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment

(RP/EA) is presented to the public by the Natural Resource Trustees (Trustees) responsible for

restoration implementation under the consent decree. The RP/EA describes the affected

environment and illustrates potential restoration alternatives and their environmental

consequences. Following consideration of public comments the Trustees have selected an

integrative restoration approach as their preferred alternative to restore, rehabilitate, replace, or

acquire the equivalent of natural resources injured in the Tenyo Maru oil spill. 
ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i

TABLE OF CONTENTS ii

LIST OF ACRONYMS iv

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1

1.1 Purpose And Need For Restoration 1-1

1.2 Incident Background 1-1

1.3 Fish and Wildlife Resources and Natural Resource Injury 1-3

1.4 Public Involvement and Plan Implementation 1-6

2.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES

OF CONCERN 2-1

2.1 Affected Environment 2-1

2.1.1 Land Ownership 2-1

2.1.2 Species in the Affected Environment 2-3

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF RESTORATION ALTERNATIVES, PROPOSED PROJECTS,

AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 3-1

3.1 Development of Restoration Alternatives 3-1

3.2 Proposed Alternatives and Potential Projects 3-3

3.2.1 Alternative A: No-Action/Natural Recovery 3-3

3.2.2 Alternative B: Population-Focused Restoration 3-4

3.2.2.1 Restoration of Common Murre Colonies in Copalis

National Wildlife Refuge, Washington 3-4

3.2.2.2 Oiled Wildlife Rehabilitation Center 3-7

3.2.2.3 Public Education Signs and Brochures 3-10

3.2.3 Alternative C: Habitat-Focused Restoration 3-12

3.2.3.1 Marbled Murrelet Habitat Protection and River

Silt Reduction

3.2.3.2 Stationing an Emergency Towing Vessel at the 

Entrance to the Strait of Juan de Fuca 3-16

3.2.4 Alternative D: An Integrative Restoration Approach 3-20

4.0 SELECTION OF THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 4-1

4.1 Proposed Project Schedules and Estimated Budgets 4-4
iii

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 5-1

6.0 LIST OF REFERENCES 6-1

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1. Approximate Area Impacted by Tenyo Maru Oil Spill 1-2

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1-1. Bird Species with Mortalities Associated with the Tenyo Maru

 Oil Spill 1-4

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: Coordination With Other Programs, Plans, and Regulatory 

 Authorities. .

APPENDIX B: Responses to Public Comments on the Draft and Revised 

 Draft Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment. 

APPENDIX C: Department of the Interior Finding of No Significant 

 Impact under the National Environmental Policy Act for the Final 

 Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment for the Tenyo Maru 

 Oil Spill 

APPENDIX D: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Finding of No 

 Significant Impact under the National Environmental Policy Act 

 for the Final Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment of the 

 Tenyo Maru Oil Spill 

APPENDIX E: Washington State Environmental Policy Act Compliance
iv

LIST OF ACRONYMS

BIA - Bureau of Indian Affairs

CEQ - Council on Environmental Quality

CERCLA - Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

CFR- Code of Federal Regulations

DOC - Department of Commerce

DOI - Department of the Interior

DOM - dissolved organic matter

DRP - draft Restoration Plan

EA - Environmental Assessment

EIS - Environmental Impact Statement

ESA - Endangered Species Act

EFH - Essential Fish Habitat

FAA - Federal Aviation Administration

FWS- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

MOA - Memorandum of Agreement

MRI - magnetic resonance imaging

NPS - National Park Service

NEPA - National Environmental Policy Act

NMFS - National Marine Fisheries Service

NOAA- National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NRDA - Natural Resource Damage Assessment

NWR - National Wildlife Refuge

OCNMS - Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary 

ONP - Olympic National Park

OPA- Oil Pollution Act of 1990

Plan - Restoration Plan

RDRP/EA - Revised Draft Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment

RFP - Request for Proposals

RP - Restoration Plan

Sanctuary - Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary

SEPA - Washington State Environmental Policy Act

SOAL - State owned aquatic lands

WAC - Washington Administrative Code

WDFW - Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife

WDNR - Washington Department of Natural Resources

WDOE- Washington State Department of Ecology

WSP - Washington State Parks

UNESCO - United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization

YOY - young of year
1 United States et al. v. Maruha Corporation et al., Civil No. C94-1537 (W.D. Wash.,

Dec. 23, 1994).

1-1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose and Need for Proposed Action

The purpose of this Final Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment (RP/EA) is to design,

coordinate, and implement projects that restore, rehabilitate, replace and/or acquire the

equivalent of natural resources injured from the discharge of oil by the Tenyo Maru on July 22,

1991. This document has been prepared on behalf of the public by the Natural Resource Trustees

(Trustees) responsible for restoration implementation under a consent decree. The RP/EA

describes the affected environment and illustrates restoration alternatives and their environmental

consequences. This RP/EA was developed in accordance with the Oil Pollution Act of 1990

(OPA), 33 U.S.C. 2706(b), the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 USC 4321-

4370d, and its implementing regulations, 40 CFR Parts 1500-1508, and the Washington State

Environmental Policy Act (SEPA).

1.2 Incident Background

On July 22, 1991, the Japanese fishing vessel Tenyo Maru and Chinese freighter Tuo Hai

collided within Canadian Territorial waters in heavy fog approximately 20 miles northwest of

Cape Flattery. The Tenyo Maru sank at the point of collision in 90 fathoms of water. It was

reportedly carrying 354,800 gallons of intermediate fuel oil, 97,800 gallons of diesel fuel, and

22,500 gallons of fish oil. (Tenyo Maru Oil Spill Trustees 1993)

The vessel initially leaked a large amount of oil. For more than a month after the collision, an

undetermined quantity of oil leaked from the sunken vessel, and fouled beaches from Vancouver

Island, British Columbia to northern Oregon (Fig. 1-1). The heaviest oiling occurred along the

Makah Indian Reservation and the Olympic National Park shoreline. Impacts were scattered

along the entire Washington State shoreline and the northern beaches of Oregon. 

In December 1994, the Trustees and defendants for the 1991 Tenyo Maru oil spill entered into a

consent decree1. Under the consent decree, the defendants agreed to pay to a federal court-held

restoration fund approximately $5.2 million to restore, replace, rehabilitate, or acquire the

equivalent of natural resources injured as a result of the spill.

Restoration funds were recovered under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 USC 2701 et seq.) 

and the State’s Water Pollution Control Act (90.48-56 RCW). Guidance applicable to

restoration, replacement, or acquisition of equivalent resources and services is contained in 15

CFR Part 990, Department of Commerce natural resource damage assessment (NRDA) 
1-2
1-3

regulations. According to the consent decree, a restoration plan must be adopted and a

mechanism for its implementation must be in place before expenditure of funds. A Trustee

Committee was formed by a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), consisting of the Makah

Indian Tribe, the State of Washington (Department of Ecology, Department of Fish and Wildlife,

and Department of Natural Resources), the U.S. Department of Commerce (National Oceanic

and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA]) and, the U.S. Department of the Interior (Fish and

Wildlife Service, National Park Service, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs). The objective for the

Tenyo Maru Trustee Committee is to plan and design, coordinate and implement projects that

restore, rehabilitate, replace and/or acquire the equivalent of natural resources injured by the

Tenyo Maru oil spill.

1.3 Fish and Wildlife Resources and Natural Resource Injury

Spill-related natural resource injuries were documented primarily for marine birds, and

secondarily for kelp (Macrocystis and Nereocystis) (Tenyo Maru Oil Spill Trustees 1993). Of the

740 oiled birds rescued alive, 97 (13 percent) survived rehabilitation and were released. Their

ultimate fate is unknown. A total of 4,300 bird carcasses was recovered during search and rescue

efforts (Table 1-1). However, this number is a minimum estimate for total seabird mortality

because many carcasses may have sunk, been scavenged, or were not found by rescue workers. 

Thirty bird species were identified from birds recovered from the spill. Approximately 93

percent of the total number of birds recovered were from species known commonly to breed in

Washington State (15 species). However, not all of these birds necessarily were Washington

breeders or were hatched in Washington. For example, Warheit (1996) estimated that between

39 percent and 58 percent of the adult common murres (Uria aalge) killed by the spill in

Washington were from Washington, and the remaining adult common murres were from Oregon. 

Models have been developed to extrapolate total seabird mortality from carcass counts. These

models use the at-sea abundance and distribution of the seabirds; spill trajectories; and

probabilities that birds will become oiled, that a particular carcass will be scavenged after

reaching shore, and that an unscavenged carcass will be found by rescue workers (see Page et al.

1990, Ford et al. 1996). Because only at-sea seabird distribution information and spill trajectory 

data are available for the Tenyo Maru spill, there are no data to calculate the probabilities that a

carcass washed ashore, was scavenged, or was recovered. 
1-4

Table 1-1. Bird species with mortalities associated with the Tenyo Maru oil spill. 

# Oiled Birds Breeding Population Estimates 

Species Retrieved Statewide Outer coast Source1

Comm on Loon 1 rare

Red-throated Loon 1

Western Grebe 2 rare

Black-footed Albatross 11

Northern Fulmar 67

Sooty Shearwater 49

Short-tailed Shearwater 5

Unidentified Shearwater 1

Fork-tailed Storm-petrel 1 3,878 3,878 (a)

Leach’s Storm-petrel 1 35,700 35,700 (a)

Unidentified Storm-petrel 1

Double-crested Cormorant 5 6,4722

(b)

Brandt’s Cormorant 10 700 700 (b)

Pelagic Cormorant 18 6,134 4,800 (b)

Unidentified Cormorant 12

Surf Scoter 10

White-winged Scoter 41

Bufflehead 1 rare

Black Turnstone 1

Mew Gull 4

California Gull 87 >500

W este rn/Gl.-wing ed G ull 91 36,923 36,923 (a)

Unid entifie d Gu ll 39

Caspian Tern 25 7,918 ? (a)

Arctic Tern 1 rare

Comm on Murre 3,157 13,6003 13,6003

(e) (f)

Pigeon Guillemot 33 4,270 4,270 (a)

Marbled Murrelet 45 5,000 2,4004

(c) (d)

Cassin’s Auklet 116 45,3755 45,3755

(b)

Rhinoceros Auklet 281 55,662 27,872 (b)

Horned Puffin 1

Tuf ted Puffin 127 5,6125 5,5825

(b)

Crow spp. 1 common common

Unidentified bird 54

Total 4,300

1

 Source for population estimates: (a) Speich & Wahl (1989); (b) Ulrich W ilson, pers. comm (1996); (c) Speich et al. (1992); (d) Speich &

Wahl (1995); (e) Wilson (1995); (f) Parrish (1996a)

2

 Statewide estimate for marine population

3

 Population estimate ba sed on Wilson (1995) attendan ce data for murres nesting within FW S refuges (1995 m edian = 5,230 ) & Parrish

(1996a) attendance data for murres nesting on Tatoosh Island in 1995 (3,270). Attendance total was multiplied by 1.6 to estimate breeding

population.

4

 Speich et al (1992) estimated total population (adults, subad ults, and juveniles) for outer coast

5

 Population estimates based, in part, on burrow counts and percent occupancy for those burrows on Carroll and Alexander Islands, and Cake

Rock. D ata collected in 1980’s.
1-5

The Trustees identified and documented 3,157 common murres killed by the oil spill, which is a

minimum estimate of actual mortality. The median attendance at common murre breeding

colonies in Washington in 1991, 1995, 1996, and 1997 was roughly 7,700; 8,500; 6,738; 3,810

birds, respectively (Wilson 1995, Parrish 1996a, Wilson 1997). Therefore, a potentially sizable

proportion of the total Washington state common murre population (includes breeding and

nonbreeding adult, sub-adult, and juvenile birds) may have been killed by the Tenyo Maru oil

spill.

The federally threatened marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) population in

Washington was also impacted by the Tenyo Maru spill. Forty-five known murrelet mortalities

were observed and documented from the spill. Approximately 70 percent of birds of known age

were juveniles, and 62 percent of known sex were females (Warheit 1996). As with common

murres, this spill may have affected a sizable proportion of marbled murrelets nesting in

Washington. 

Similar to many other oil spills in the north temperate to subarctic waters the Alcidae (murres,

puffins, and their allies) comprised the highest percentage of known mortality (87 percent) from

the Tenyo Maru oil spill. Besides common murres and marbled murrelets, substantial numbers

of rhinoceros auklets (Cerorhinca moncerata), tufted puffins (Fratercula cirrhata), Cassin's

Auklet (Ptychoramphus aleuticus) and pigeon guillemots (Cepphus columba) carcasses were

recovered from the spill, with estimated total mortality for these species possibly ranging into

several hundred individual birds per species. 

Known mortality of rhinoceros auklets was second only to common murres; however, the

statewide breeding population for this species may be among the largest for all seabirds in

Washington, and the effects from the oil spill at the population level are unclear. The estimated

breeding population of rhinoceros auklets within the spill zone is about half its total statewide

population (27,872 and 55,662 birds, respectively), and if the Tenyo Maru oil spill affected only

this portion of the population, upwards of 2 percent of that portion may have been killed. Tufted

puffin mortality was nearly as high as or higher than that of rhinoceros auklets. However, this

mortality may have totaled 9 percent of the tufted puffin's statewide population (5,582 birds)

making the effects of this spill on this species considerably greater than the effects on the

rhinoceros auklet population.

Oil lingered in giant kelp (Macrocystis) and bull kelp (Nereocystis) dominated kelp beds from

Cape Alava north to Tatoosh Island and from Tatoosh Island east to Waadah Island, for up to two

weeks following the spill. During the natural resource damage assessment process, laboratory

and mesocosm studies conducted by Battelle's Pacific Northwest Marine Sciences Laboratory

showed that samples of weathered and unweathered Bunker C, diesel, and crude oils can be toxic

to Nereocyctis kelp by affecting blade growth and physiological functions. (Antrim et al. 1995)

Quantification of injuries to fish, shellfish, and the fisheries resources, including injury to fishery

associated habitats, were not pursued as part of the damage assessment process. Therefore, little
1-6

data were collected that would either defend or refute assertions of injury to fisheries. Injury to 

human scale organisms (those visible by unaided sight) inhabiting the intertidal zone were not 

observed to be sufficient to trigger efforts to quantify injuries. An oiled and dead harbor seal pup

and a sea otter were found. Woodbury and Deither (1991:7) stated that the oil that washed

ashore along Washington coastal beaches "affected only the high and very high intertidal or supra

littoral zone . . . . which is relatively depauperate. The areas of direct impact were patchy, and no

devastating destruction or mass mortality was observed . . . . [and] intertidal areas surveyed in

August [1991] and resurveyed September [1991] showed no gross community change." Again,

results from initial surveys did not indicate further studies were feasible.

1.4 Public Involvement and Plan Implementation

Public involvement is required in the development of a restoration plan. Toward this end, the

Trustee Committee has made, and will continue to make, opportunities available for the public to

participate in the restoration planning and implementation processes. 

As part of the development of the restoration plan, a scoping document was prepared and

released in November 1995. The scoping document contained information describing the

incident and injured natural resources, restoration criteria, and possible restoration actions. The

public was invited to review and provide recommendations to be considered during the

restoration planning process. Two public meetings were held to give the public an early

opportunity to engage in discussions regarding the preparation of the restoration plan. Meetings

were held in Port Angeles and Seattle, Washington in November 1995. 

A Draft Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment (DRP/EA) was provided to the public for

review and comment from February 1 through April 12, 1999. The Trustee Committee

considered the comments received on the DRP/EA and elected to make modifications to the

preferred alternative. Due to the substantial nature of the modification to the DRP/EA the

Trustees published a Revised DRP/EA (RDRP/EA) public for an additional 30 day comment

period. Notices regarding the availability of the draft documents were published locally and in

the Federal Register, and copies of the draft documents were sent to interested members of the

public, agencies, organizations and public representatives. All comments were reviewed and

considered in the development of the final RP/EA. Responses to comments on the DRP/EA and

RDRP/EA are provided in Appendix A of the final RP/EA and will be part of the Administrative

Record. Public review of the DRP/EA and RDRP/EA was consistent with all federal and state

laws and regulations that apply to the OPA, NEPA, and SEPA processes.

The Trustee Committee intends to review the restoration plan at least annually and evaluate the

success of the projects being carried out by comparing results with stated goals of each

restoration project and the baseline data collected before the spill and during the restoration

planning process. Reviews will focus on determining the efficacy of, and suggestions for,

improving the selected activities as well as determining that the restoration projects minimize,
2-1

avoid, or compensate for any potential environmental impacts which may arise during the project

implementation. Any major revisions to the RP/EA will be subject to public review. 

2. 0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES OF CONCERN

This section describes the restoration area and identifies natural resources of concern that could

be affected by the Plan. It provides a discussion of the current conditions that will be used as a

comparison with conditions after restoration activities have been implemented. The primary

restoration area refers to the geographic area primarily impacted by the spill (Fig. 1-1). The

expanded restoration area refers to a larger area that has a biological connection to the primary

area through an injured species or the food web to which it is a part. The primary and expanded

restoration area extends from Waadah Island in the Strait of Juan de Fuca, down the outer

Washington and Oregon coasts to the Winchuck River. Watersheds leading into the Washington

marine waters within the primary restoration area are included. Because of the biological link to

birds killed from the oil spill and the importance of seabird colonies, Protection Island National

Wildlife Refuge (NWR), Smith Island and San Juan Island areas have been included in the

expanded restoration area.

2.1 Affected Environment 

2.1.1 Land Ownership

Makah Indian Reservation

The Makah Indian reservation is located on the northwestern tip of the Olympic Peninsula in

Clallam County, Washington. The total land area of 47 square miles is bounded on the west by

the Pacific Ocean and on the north by the Strait of Juan de Fuca. The shoreline of the

Reservation is typically rocky headlands and sandy beaches. More than 1,000 acres of the land

bordering the Pacific Ocean have been reserved as a Wilderness Area. Other reserved areas are

Tatoosh and Waadah Islands. The Tatoosh Island complex supports the largest nesting colony of

common murres in Washington. Ten species of marine birds, representing 88 percent of the

birds known to be injured or killed from the Tenyo Maru oil spill, nest on Tatoosh Island (Parrish

1996a).

State Upland Properties

The terrestrial environment of the Olympic Peninsula encompasses diverse topography, geology,

and biology. The forest and stream ecosystems that are connected to the area affected by the

Tenyo Maru oil spill provide complex and numerous means of ecological support to various

primary injured species. These connections can be direct, such as providing habitat for certain

seabirds, or indirect, such as providing the sedimentation regime necessary to support kelp

communities. Upland areas also support numerous plant, mammal, fish, and bird communities. 

Management of upland area use is determined by its ownership. The following paragraphs

describe the Washington State management programs.
2-2

Upland Trust Lands. The WDNR manages substantial holdings of upland trust lands in the

watersheds that drain to the primary marine area. A Habitat Conservation Plan for Western

Washington has recently been adopted that will provide long-term protections for the northern

spotted owl and other species of concern, including salmonids (Washington Department of

Natural Resources 1997).

Washington Department of Natural Resources - Forest Practices Program. The WDNR, under

the direction of the Forest Practices Board, regulates forest practices on private forest lands. The

program evaluates forest practices and assesses environmental impacts. 

Washington Department of Natural Resources - Special Lands Program. The WDNR acquires

and manages special lands, of significance to unique or threatened plants or animals, as Natural

Area Preserves or Natural Resources Conservation Areas and cooperates with other authorities to

create parks or reserves as warranted. 

Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary

The northern Washington coast area also includes the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary

(OCNMS), covering an area of approximately 3,310 square miles. Seaward boundaries

approximate the 100 fathom isobath, extending offshore an average of 25 miles, with the

northern portion extending to 50 miles. The OCNMS is managed by the National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration. From Koitlah Point west of Neah Bay in the north to the mouth of

the Copalis River in the south, the shoreline boundary is mean higher high water where adjacent

to federally owned land (including Olympic National Park and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Refuges) and mean lower low water mark when adjacent to state owned land or tribal land. 

Seaward boundaries approximate the 100 fathom isobath, extending offshore 30-40 miles. The

Sanctuary supports one of the world's most diverse kelp communities and provides extensive

habitat for myriad seabird and marine mammal species. It complements the area's other

designations by providing protected status to marine waters that surround national wildlife refuge

islands and national park coastal lands, which are vital foraging habitats for seabirds and marine

mammals. 

Olympic National Park

A narrow, detached portion of the Olympic National Park extends south from the Makah Tribal

lands to Kalaloch. The Park is managed by the National Park Service. It is known as the coastal

strip and has 57 miles of the most primitive natural coastline in the lower 48 states. The dramatic

sea, cliffs, headlands, islands, and seastacks, coupled with the rich biological and archeological

resources, provide a unique recreational experience. Five major intertidal habitat types have

been described for this wilderness coast, making it one of the most complex and diverse

shoreline communities in the United States. The coastal strip varies between 0.5 and 3 miles in

width. The Park boundary extends seaward to the lowest low tide line and includes the intertidal

beaches, rocky headlands and tidepools. About 70 percent of the 43,000 acres is Congressionally

designated as wilderness. It has also been designated by the United Nations Educational

Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) as a Biosphere Reserve and a World Heritage

Site.
2-3

National Wildlife Refuges 

The National Wildlife Refuges are managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The outer

coast affected area in Washington includes five National Wildlife Refuges (NWR): Copalis

NWR, Flattery Rocks NWR, Quillayute Needles NWR, Willapa NWR, and Protection Island

NWR. Copalis, Flattery Rocks, and Quillayute Needles NWRs comprise approximately 870

islands and rocks strung along the coast. The Willapa Bay NWR provides feeding and resting

habitat for migratory shorebirds. Protection Island NWR is the most important seabird nesting

island in Washington’s inner marine waters. It hosts more than 70 percent of the areas breeding

seabirds. All the National Wildlife Refuge islands north of Grays Harbor, with the exception of

Destruction Island, have been designated as federal wilderness areas. The San Juan Island NWR

is made up of 83 rock islands and reefs scattered throughout the San Juan Island complex,

including Smith Island, most of which have been established as federal wilderness areas. Six

National Wildlife Refuges have been established along the Oregon coast. The Oregon Islands

National Wildlife Refuge includes the Oregon Islands which extend almost the entire length of

the Oregon Coast, Cape Meares NWR and Three Arch Rock NWR. The Refuge islands in

Washington and Oregon provide nesting, foraging, and resting habitat for seabirds. They are also

important as pupping, resting, and molting sites for marine mammals.

2.1.2 Species in the Affected Environment

Marine Birds

More than 72 percent of Washington's marine birds nest on the outer coast north from near Point

Grenville to Seal and Sail Rocks near Neah Bay (Speich and Wahl 1989). Sixteen species of

marine birds nest in this area with a total estimated population over 218,000 birds. The most

numerous species include Cassin's auklets, Leach’s storm-petrels (Oceanodroma leucorhoa),

common murres, rhinoceros auklets, glaucous-winged (Larus glaucescens) and western gulls

(Larus occidentalis), and tufted puffins (Speich and Wahl 1989).

Approximately 22 percent (over 66,000 birds) of Washington's marine birds nest within the inner

marine waters, with 16 percent found on Protection Island (Speich and Wahl 1989). Protection

Island is one of the three main rhinoceros auklet colonies in the state with over 55 percent of the

state's breeding population for this species. It supports 30 percent of the state's breeding

populations of glaucous-winged gulls and pigeon guillemots, and 18 percent of the state's total

number of pelagic cormorants (Phalacrocorax pelagicus) (Speich and Wahl 1989). Thirteen

pairs of tufted puffins nested on Protection Island in 1993 (Wilson, pers. comm., 1996), which is

the only puffin nesting colony currently in Washington's inner marine waters. Approximately 33

percent of Washington's double-crested cormorants (Phalacrocorax auritus ) nest in the inner

marine waters (Speich and Wahl 1989). 

More than a dozen species of seabirds nest on the rocks and islands of the 300-mile Oregon

Coast. The Oregon Islands and Three Arch Rocks NWRs provide critical nesting habitat for

more than one million seabirds. Common murres are the most numerous with an estimated mean

breeding population since 1988 of 722,500 birds (Lowe and Pitkin 1996). Other nesting seabirds
2-4

include rhinoceros auklets, pigeon guillemots, tufted puffins, cormorants, and western and

glaucous-winged gulls.

Common murres, marbled murrelets and rhinoceros auklets will likely benefit from many of the

restoration projects. The following species discussions provide information as to why their

populations are of particular interest in Washington.

Common Murres. Common murre populations in Washington are of concern for the following

reasons: 1) a precipitous decline in colony attendance throughout the state occurred during the

1983 El NiNo, principally at the southern colonies around Pt. Grenville, and at Split and

Willoughby Rocks, attendance has remained depressed through at least the 1996 breeding

season; 2) during the time period of little or no recovery since the 1983 El NiNo, two major oil

spills have occurred off the coast of Washington, the Nestucca and the Tenyo Maru, and common

murres were the principal seabird species killed in both spills; 3) common murres are the

principal seabird species killed in gillnets; oil spills and gillnet mortality may have contributed to

the lack of common murre recovery since the 1983 El NiNo (see Takekawa et al. [1990] for

effects of gillnet and oil spill mortalities on common murres nesting in California) and; 4)

common murres on Tatoosh Island, the only stable colony in Washington, have been seriously

disrupted by bald eagles and predation by gulls (Parrish 1995, 1996a).

Marbled Murrelets. The Washington, Oregon, and California populations of marbled murrelets

were listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) on September 28, 1992 (57

Fed. Reg. 45328). The Washington State Wildlife Commission (now Fish and Wildlife

Commission) classified the Washington population of marbled murrelets as threatened in

October 1993 (Protected Wildlife Classification, subcategory Threatened; WAC 232-12-011). 

The most recent estimate of the Washington breeding population of marbled murrelets was 5,000

birds (Speich and Wahl 1995). This estimate is based on surveys in the early 1980s. Using

current juvenile/adult ratios and a population model, Beissinger (1995) indicated that the marbled

murrelet population is declining 4 to 7 percent annually. This decline is primarily due to the loss

of old growth forests. Nest predation, mortality through net fisheries, and oil spills have also

contributed to this decline. 

Rhinoceros Auklets. Washington's population of rhinoceros auklets is estimated at less than

60,000 birds (Speich and Wahl 1989). Approximately 50 percent of the population is located on

the outer coast of the Olympic peninsula (primarily on Destruction Island) and the remainder are

located in the Straits of Juan de Fuca on Protection Island and the San Juan Islands (primarily on

Smith Island) (Speich and Wahl 1989). The population trend for rhinoceros auklets on the outer

coast is unknown. However, a decline in the number of rhinoceros auklets nesting in the inner

marine waters has been observed. Between 1976 and 1993, a 26 percent and 40 percent decline

of rhinoceros auklet nesting burrow densities was recorded on Kannen and Violet Points,

respectively, on Protection Island. A decline in the number of rhinoceros auklets nesting on

Smith Island, observed the past 6 to 7 years, has been attributed to disturbance by a doublecrested cormorant colony situated on top of the auklet colony. The number of rhinoceros auklets
2-5

drowned in gillnets is second only to common murres. The Nestucca and Tenyo Maru oil spills

also killed rhinoceros auklets in Washington State. 

Kelp Community

A number of species of considerable ecological, commercial, and recreational value are known to

rely on kelp beds for refuge and feeding, and potentially could benefit from kelp restoration

activities. The importance of kelp beds can be divided into three functions: productivity, habitat,

and hydrodynamics.

Productivity. Kelp plants provide input to the food web in four ways: (1) directly while the plant

material is still attached to a substrate, (2) directly while the plant material is detached but still

respiring (floating mats, etc.), (3) indirectly by providing detritus that fall to the bottom and is

eaten, and (4) by producing dissolved organic matter (DOM) that is food for many

microorganisms. Productivity of kelp beds is estimated at between 350-1500 g carbon/m2

 /yr,

making them one of the most productive systems on earth.

Kelp beds support a rich and diverse community of planktonic, epiphytic, and epibenthic

organisms that serve as prey for fish and invertebrates. Kelp is an important part of the diet of

herbivorous invertebrates such as purple urchins (Strongylocentrotus pupuratus), red sea urchins

(S. fanciscanus) and northern abalone (Haliotis kamtschatkana). Young- of-the-year, juvenile,

and adult forage fish species such as Pacific herring (Clupea pallasii), northern anchovy

(Engraulis mordax), and sand lance (Ammodytes hexapterus) are abundant in and around kelp

beds and feed extensively on planktonic invertebrates associated with these beds. These forage

fish also form an important component of the diet of piscivorous seabirds (e.g., common murre,

rhinoceros auklet) occurring in the northeastern Pacific Ocean (e.g., Vermeer et al. 1987). Adult

lingcod (Ophiodon elongatus), true cod (Gadus macrocephalus), cabezon (Scorpaenichthys

marmoratus), and large schools of black rockfish (Sebastes melanops) and yellowtail rockfish (S.

flavidus) aggregate in and along the periphery of kelp beds and forage to a large extent on other

fish using the kelp beds. 

Habitat. Bull whip kelp, Nereocystis luetkeana, and giant kelp, Macrocystis integrifolia, beds

provide significant habitat for a number of organisms. The beds provide a place of refuge, and a

substrate for reproduction. The canopy formed during the summer and fall shades the plants

below, thereby influencing the amounts and kinds of plants that co-exist in the kelp beds. 

"The Nereocystis luetkeana plants create a habitat wherein diversity and abundance of fish

species increases over non-kelp areas” (Leaman 1976). Wheeler (1990) states " larger pink

salmon, lingcod and Pacific cod were found more frequently in Macrocystis beds than in nonkelp areas. Large lingcod, large Pacific cod, small pink salmon and small chinooks are more

commonly found in Nereocystis beds over non-kelp areas."

Sea otters (Enhydra lutris), recently reintroduced to the Washington coast, have a close

association with kelp beds. They feed on many of the associated organisms, use kelp to rest in,

and their feeding activities profoundly change the kelp community (Bowlby et al. 1988). 
2-6

Some marine birds and shorebirds, such as marbled murrelets, have been demonstrated to be

closely associated with the kelp beds along the north coast and western Strait of Juan de Fuca

(Thompson 1996).

Hydrodynamics. Hydrodynamic effects can be divided into those with physical and biological

ramifications. Kelp beds absorb wave energy and dampen wave action shoreward of the bed. 

Wave action influences beach slope and stability, and beach material makeup and therefore loss

of kelp and the resultant wave dampening may change the beach makeup and the types or

numbers of organisms that use the beach material.

Kelp plants act as active transporters of rock material (Emery 1941). Young sporophytes begin

growth on any rock surface in size from sand grains up to boulders. When the plant reaches the

size at which the hydrodynamic drag of the plant can move the rock substrate, the plant/rock may

be moved into deeper water, onto the shore, or along the shore. Significant amounts and sizes

and rocks up to one foot in diameter can be moved in this manner. Reduction in the number of

plants or plant size will reduce this material transport. (Duggins 1988)

Marine Mammals

Several populations of pinnipeds are common to the Olympic Coast, including harbor seals

(Phoca vitulina), California sea lions (Zalophus californianus), and Stellar sea lions (Eumetopias

jubatus) (NOAA 1993). An important sea otter population numbering about 500 individuals, is

located along the Olympic Coast (Jameson 1997). The California gray whale (Eschrichtius

robustus) and harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) are also common to the area (NOAA 1993). 

Several marine mammals species in the Pacific are listed under the ESA as threatened and

endangered; others are being considered or proposed for listing.
3-1

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF RESTORATION ALTERNATIVES, PROPOSED

PROJECTS, AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

3.1 Development of Restoration Alternatives

The OPA regulations require trustees to develop a reasonable range of primary and compensatory

restoration alternatives and then identify the preferred alternatives based on criteria provided at

15 CFR Part 990.54(a). Primary restoration is action(s) taken to return injured natural resources

and services to baseline on an accelerated time frame. Compensatory restoration is action(s)

taken to compensate for the interim losses of natural resources and services pending recovery.

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) applies to restoration actions taken by federal

trustees. To reduce transaction costs and avoid delays in restoration, the OPA regulations

encourage the trustees to conduct the NEPA process concurrently with the development of the

draft restoration plan.

To comply with the requirements of NEPA, the Trustees analyzed the effects of each preferred

alternative on the quality of the human environment. NEPA's implementing regulations direct

federal agencies to evaluate the potential significance of proposed actions by considering both

context and intensity. For most of the actions considered in this RP/EA, the appropriate context

for considering potential significance of the action is regional, as opposed to national or

worldwide. 

Several restoration alternatives included in this section are based on conceptual designs rather

than detailed engineering design work or operational plans. Therefore, details of specific

projects may require additional refinements or adjustments to reflect site conditions or other

factors. The Trustees assume that implementation of restoration will begin during the summer of

2000. 

The primary goal of restoration is to meet the statutory objective to compensate the public for

injuries to natural resources from the Tenyo Maru oil spill. Injury was clearly documented for

seabirds and kelp from this incident. Therefore, the goals provided in this Plan are to restore,

rehabilitate, or replace specific populations of seabirds and kelp beds (including their associated

communities). This plan does not directly apply to fisheries because there was no documentation

of injury to fishery resources in the damage assessment. The primary objective is to provide a

functioning and sustainable ecosystem where specific populations of seabirds and kelp beds are

enhanced to provide a net gain of habitat function beyond existing conditions.

In accordance with the consent decree, the MOA, OPA and the Tenyo Maru Trustee Committee’s

Resolution 96-1, expenditures from the Tenyo Maru restoration fund are limited to implementing

restoration projects that meet the following minimum restoration criteria: 
3-2

1) Restoration projects must be directly linked to natural resources shown to be injured 

from the Tenyo Maru oil spill. Seabirds, and to a lesser extent, kelp habitats, are the only

resources for which there exists documented injury;

2) Restoration projects will be linked either geographically or biologically to the 

physical area where the impacts of the spill occurred;

3) Restoration projects will restore, rehabilitate, replace or acquire the equivalent of 

injured natural resources; and, 

4) Restoration projects will be consistent with relevant federal, state and tribal laws, 

regulations and policies. 

Pilot Projects Conducted to Assist with Restoration Planning

Some of the dollars generated as interest from the restoration fund were used to support pilot

projects necessary for restoration planning. These projects also helped establish the necessary

baseline from which the success of the restoration efforts can be measured. The Trustee

Committee determined that projects had to enable the preparation of the RP/EA and be limited to

the collection of data that would have been irretrievably lost if the project were not conducted,

and was beyond normal agency work. The projects funded for these reasons were:

1) FWS aerial surveys of common murre colonies in Washington and Oregon.

The FWS historically has conducted annual, single aerial surveys off the coast of

Washington and Oregon. During each of the 1995, 1996, and 1997 common murre

breeding seasons, three additional surveys were flown in Washington and two in Oregon. 

2) Tatoosh Island common murres. Common murre productivity and reproductive 

success on Tatoosh Island was evaluated in 1995-97. The studies were conducted by the 

University of Washington, and continued similar work initiated in 1991.

3) Seabird prey-base study. A seabird prey-base study was conducted in 1995 as a 

cooperative program between the University of Washington and WDFW.

4) At-sea distribution of common murres and marbled murrelets. An at-sea distribution 

study of common murres and marbled murrelets was conducted by WDFW in 1996 and 

1997. 

5) Kelp distribution. Aerial surveys of kelp distribution were conducted in 1996 and

data were analyzed from the 1994 survey. 

6) Common murre population genetics. A population genetics analysis of common

murre colonies in Washington and Oregon was conducted in 1996 and 1997 by WDFW

to determine the type of restoration (including natural recovery) that would be best

prescribed for specific localities.
3-3

3.2 Proposed Alternatives and Potential Projects

 

To restore natural resources lost as a result of the Tenyo Maru oil spill, the Tenyo Maru Trustee

Committee developed four Alternatives:

1) No action/ Natural Recovery (required by the OPA and NRDA regulations and the 

NEPA process) 

2) Population-Focused Restoration 

3) Habitat-focused Restoration 

4) An Integrative Approach 

The following sections describe the proposed restoration alternatives, their environmental

consequences, and specific projects. Work plans, detailed scopes, schedules, budgets,

appropriate environmental documents, and applicable permits will be prepared for review and

adoption by the Trustee Committee before implementation of any project. The project managers

will ensure that all monitoring reports and data will be shared among all the selected projects to

ensure a more comprehensive picture of the effects of those activities on the bird and kelp

species being restored under this restoration program. Public review and comment of the

alternatives was conducted for a minimum of 90 days. The alternatives are defined and a

selected alternative is named in Section 4. Project proposal schedules and estimated budgets are

provided in Section 4.1.

3.2.1 Alternative A: No-Action/Natural Recovery

NEPA requires the Trustees to consider a “no action” alternative, and the OPA regulations

require consideration of the equivalent, the natural recovery option. Under this alternative, the

Trustees would take no direct action to restore injured natural resources or compensate for lost

services pending environmental recovery. Instead, the Trustees would rely on natural processes

for recovery of the injured natural resources. While natural recovery would occur over varying

time scales for various injured resources, the interim losses suffered would not be compensated

under the no-action alternative. The no-action alternative has no direct environmental

consequences because, by definition, no manipulations to the environment would take place. 

Furthermore, natural recovery is threatened by the risk of further oil spills in the affected area.

3.2.2 Alternative B: Population-Focused Restoration

Projects conducted under this alternative will attempt to beneficially affect populations of injured

species by directly or indirectly manipulating one or more population demographic factors (e.g.,

survival, number of adults attempting to breed, age at first breeding attempt). A population’s

size may be increased, restored, or distribution may be altered by increasing immigration,
3-4

releasing rehabilitated injured individuals, enhancing natal recruitment, and improving

reproductive success at specific localities. 

The rate of seabird population growth is a function of net immigration-emigration, survival, and

productivity (i.e., reproductive success); restoration projects conducted under this alternative will

focus on these population parameters. As with seabirds, populations of kelp are also affected by

rates of survival, reproductive success and immigration-emigration. 

Specific project proposals consistent with the population-focused restoration alternative are

identified in Sections 3.2.2.1 through 3.2.2.3. Although any manipulation to a wild population

may have unforeseen consequences to that population or to the ecosystem to which that

population is a part, the environmental consequences of properly conceived, designed,

implemented, and monitored projects conducted under this alternative should be minimal. 

Under this alternative, no adverse impacts to threatened or endangered species are anticipated,

however, the appropriate consultations under the Endangered Species Act will be pursued for

projects that may affect federally listed species. 

3.2.2.1 Restoration of Common Murre Colonies in Copalis National Wildlife Refuge,

Washington

Purpose(s): The purpose of this project is to restore common murre colonies, using social

attraction techniques, to locations in the Copalis NWR that are not used now for breeding, but

traditionally were the locations of the largest breeding colonies in Washington State.

Project goals: The goals of this project are to increase the presence of murres at the site, elicit

breeding behavior, breeding activities, and breeding attempts. The long term goal is to

reestablish a self-sustainable breeding population within the Copalis NWR.

Potential project coordinators: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Washington Department of

Fish and Wildlife

Project description: This project assumes that the reason common murres are not attempting to

breed at the chosen site is the result of low population numbers and/or behavioral phenomena

associated with the social aspects of common murre colony dynamics. Social attraction is a

restoration technique that uses decoys, sound recording, and other devices to attract potential

recruits to a specific location or habitat. The technique works much the same way “traditional”

waterfowl decoys work in that decoys, sound recordings, and other devices (e.g., mirrors) are

placed in a way that mimics an active breeding colony, sub-colony, or social aggregation. 

Aerial surveys during 1997-1998 indicated larger numbers of murres attending some of the

colonies in the Point Grenville area of the Copalis NWR. Small numbers (5-10) of murre chicks

were observed. Phase I information will be used to intensively assess the status of these colonies

over a two-year period. The information gathered during Phase I will be used to determine

whether Phase II should be implemented. This project may be determined infeasible if
3-5

implementation would interfere with natural breeding efforts or if factors other than the lack of

social cohesion are resulting in a lack of breeding efforts at these sites. 

Phase II would involve the deployment of common murre social attraction devices at historical

breeding colonies within the Copalis NWR. 

Proposed activities: 

Phase I - Feasibility Study

The purpose of Phase I is to assess the potential effectiveness and feasibility of the project. This

would involve two years of data collection to determine if: (1) social attraction enhancement

activities are warranted, and (2) project implementation would be impeded by physical or natural

limitations. No decoys will be deployed during Phase I. Several observation points at Point

Grenville will be established. Sites will be monitored to determine if common murre breeding is

currently occurring at any of the potential sites or any other colony rock in the vicinity. 

Monitoring will also determine if disturbance (by eagles or any other natural or anthropogenic

activities), and not the lack of social attraction, is preventing breeding and whether the

disturbance can be managed. Because breeding activity may be occurring on sides of the rock

not visible from the shore, boat and aerial surveys of the areas will also be conducted to assess

attendance and breeding status. 

Project Criteria

Data will be gathered during Phase I to address the following criteria that would evaluatethe need

to proceed with Phase II. Phase II of the project will be implemented only if:

1) findings of Phase I indicate that common murres are not self sustaining within the

colony identified for restoration;

2) social attraction methods are deemed to have a reasonable likelihood of success based

on Phase I findings;

3) social attraction devices can be deployed in a manner safe for humans and all necessary

access permission is obtained;

4) rock(s) in which social attraction devices are to be deployed allows adequate

monitoring of common murres and other seabirds for attendance, breeding behavior, and

reproductive success, and;

5) it is compatible with Refuge purposes at Copalis NWR and surrounding Refuges, i.e.,

it will not materially impair the management of migratory birds, including common

murres and other migratory species.
3-6

* The Trustee Committee may have additional requirements in the work plans and detailed

scopes of work for this and other projects.

Phase II should be implemented if the results from Phase I suggest that: 

1) social attraction techniques are a viable option at these sites, 

2) the sites can be adequately monitored for behavioral interactions with the attraction

devices and, 

3) the sites can be adequately monitored for reproductive success. If carrying out Phase II

is not feasible or beneficial, the remaining funding will be redistributed to either the

Marbled Murrelet Habitat Protection and River Silt Reduction Project (Section 3.3.1) or

potentially a tufted puffin restoration project. If a tufted puffin restoration project

proposal is pursued, it will be provided to the public for review and comment prior to a

decision by the Trustee Committee to implement.

Phase II

Phase II would deploy the social attraction devices and monitor the results. Roughly 200-500

life-sized common murre decoys, in standing and incubation postures, would be placed at a

single site. Decoys will be arranged in clusters, with the size and spacing of each group

dependent on the topography of the site, and based on preliminary results from other similar

projects, such as the Apex Houston restoration project, managed by the FWS for the OPA

Trustees (USFWS 1995). In addition to decoys, mirrors and omnidirectional weather resistant

loudspeakers will be placed throughout the site. The loudspeakers will broadcast common murre

vocalizations typically heard at breeding colonies. 

Benefits: This specific project benefits common murre populations, injured by the Tenyo Maru

oil spill, by attempting to increase the number of birds breeding at a specific habitat. It alters

seabird behavior to entice the murres to resume breeding within the Copalis NWR where

historically large breeding colonies existed. Affecting immigration potentially may be the easiest

and fastest way of increasing a population if there are mechanisms by which individuals can be

brought or attracted to an area (social attraction). Facilitating relocation of otherwise nonbreeding murres to locations where large breeding colonies historically occurred is expected to

have a beneficial impact on the species’ population. 

Environmental consequences: The restoration of seabird populations will proceed by increasing

the number of individual seabirds that attempt to breed. The project actions taken under this

alternative are designed to increase the rate of immigration, decrease the age at which individuals

first attempt to breed, and increase the probability that an adult bird will attempt to breed during

any given year, at a particular site. As such, this project provides the mechanisms for relatively

rapid colonization and restoration at localities where breeding does not occur, or is severely

depressed. Project restoration goals are for nesting murres to increase to a level that would create

self-sustaining and viable colonies at target locations.
3-7

This project has little or no impact upon other injured resources or resources of concern. 

Adverse impacts to wildlife could occur as there is some potential for actions that benefit one

group of species to have short-term impacts on other species. For example, as the number of

individual murres in a specific colony expands, prey fish may be impacted short-term. Raptors

may be affected in the short term either negatively by reducing the potential prey base (breeding

colony murres) at the translocation site or positively by increasing the potential prey base at the

relocation site. A potential negative consequence of this action would be that birds are lured

from a more optimal breeding locality to breed at a potentially sub-optimal site. However, it is

very unlikely that an entire successful colony would move, so any negative impact would be

minimal. 

Any environmental consequences associated with population manipulation would be minimal

and short-term.

Project goal monitoring: This project includes intensive monitoring of attendance, breeding

productivity, and other bird activity at the site and sub-colonies in the vicinity. Intensive

monitoring of the restoration site, productivity monitoring compared between Pt. Grenville and

Tatoosh Island (reference site), and murre population monitoring (beyond what would normally

be conducted by the refuge) would be conducted.

3.2.2.2 Oiled Wildlife Rehabilitation Center

Purpose: The purpose of this project is to provide base funding so that additional funds can be

secured and used to improve the capability to rehabilitate oiled wildlife (primarily seabirds) in

western Washington. 

Project goal: The goal of this project is to improve the State of Washington’s ability to rescue,

rehabilitate, and release oiled wildlife. This project is premised on the State of Washington

securing the remaining funds from other sources to build a permanent rehabilitation facility in the

South Puget Sound area and to develop a primary care facility at Neah Bay. 

Potential project coordinator: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife

Project description and activities: Since the Tenyo Maru oil spill, Washington has become a

leader in the field of oiled wildlife rescue and rehabilitation. Unfortunately, the rehabilitation

center, a major component of the state’s wildlife rescue and rehabilitation program, has been

leased out by the owners for other purposes and will no longer be available for use as a

rehabilitation facility. The loss of the facility has suddenly nullified Washington’s ability to

rescue, rehabilitate, and release oiled wildlife.

This project proposes to provide some funding to the State to help build a rehabilitation center in

the South Puget Sound area. The center would operate under the protocols of the Washington

Wildlife Coalition. The Washington Wildlife Coalition was convened, and is chaired, by the

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife as required by Section 12 of the 1990 Washington
3-8

State Legislature House Bill 2494 to plan and coordinate the rescue and rehabilitation of wildlife

injured or endangered by spills of oil or other toxic substances. It comprises members and

advisors from state and federal agencies, environmental organizations, and industries that have

responsibilities, expertise, or interests in the protection of wildlife resources. The proposed

rehabilitation center could receive oiled birds from any primary care station in Washington or

Oregon and provide long-term care for oiled wildlife to prepare them for release back into their

natural environment. 

This center would also be used to research more effective techniques for cleaning oiled wildlife

to maximize the survival rate, especially when rehabilitating threatened and endangered species. 

When not working with oiled birds from a spill, the center may be used for informational and

educational outreach as well as a training facility for wildlife rehabilitators, researchers, and

veterinarians.

In addition to a long-term care facility, a 40-foot, primary care trailer, stocked with appropriate

primary bird care supplies would be provided at Neah Bay. This trailer would be permanently

positioned on the Makah Reservation at Neah Bay to provide immediate care for oiled birds in

case of another oil spill there. The primary care facility would give emergency care to oiled

animals and stabilize them for transport to the rehabilitation center. A pole-barn type roof would

be built over the trailer for long term protection from the elements. This primary care station

would operate under the direction of the Washington Wildlife Rescue Coalition during oil spills.

Members of the oil or shipping industry that contribute matching funds for building and

maintaining the center may be able to use the center at a reduced rate if they have a spill. Oil

spillers that did not contribute to the center will likely pay the standard daily rate. Monies

collected will be used for operations and maintenance. Any funds collected that exceed the

operations and maintenance costs will be placed in a Seabird Restoration/Research Account. The

funds from this account would be used to gain a better understanding of Washington’s seabirds

and to explore new techniques for assuring their survival.

Project Criteria

Minimum qualifications for the project to proceed involve the procurement of final project funds

within three years of the release of the final restoration plan. If matching funds are not secured

within this time, the funds will be redistributed to the Marbled Murrelet Habitat Protection and

River Silt Reduction project (Section 3.2.3.1).

Benefits: To increase the rate of population growth (or to stabilize or reverse a population

decline), immigration, survival at any or all age classes, reproductive success, and probability of

breeding must be increased. Successfully rehabilitating and releasing oiled seabirds may

contribute to population recruitment and stabilization.

Environmental consequences: The intent of this project is to provide a starting point to act as a

catalyst for the Washington Wildlife Coalition to secure funding for a wildlife rehabilitation

center and a primary care facility. The majority of the funding for this project is to come from
3-9

outside sources. The overall contribution ($500,000) to the development of the facilities from

Tenyo Maru funds is about one-fourth of the cost of the center (roughly estimated at $1.8 - $2.2

million). In addition, this project also provides for excess user fees to be returned to seabird

restoration/research projects.

The environmental consequences associated with providing a catalyst for the collection of

additional funds to support wildlife rehabilitation is expected to be minimal. A separate

environmental assessment or environmental impact statement (EIS) will be conducted by the

State for any rehabilitation facility construction activities. There is a slight possibility that

adverse impacts, such as disease, could occur to wildlife from the activities associated with

rehabilitation and release of wild animals. Rehabilitated animals may play a vital role in

maintaining and improving their species populations and in providing function to the ecosystem. 

Under this alternative, no adverse impacts to threatened or endangered species are anticipated. 

Restoring populations through rehabilitating individuals and returning them to the wild

population is expected to benefit the species directly.

Project goal monitoring: The Washington Wildlife Rescue Coalition will provide interim

reports to the Tenyo Maru Trustee Committee on the success of securing additional funds for the

rehabilitation facilities and on the process of improving Washington’s ability to rescue,

rehabilitate, and release oiled wildlife.

3.2.2.3 Public Education Signs and Brochures

Purpose: The purpose of this project is to inform boaters, kayakers, aircraft pilots, and other

visitors about disturbance impacts to nesting seabird colonies and Makah culturally sensitive

areas and educate them on how to avoid such disturbances.

Project goal: The public with access to seabird colonies will become informed about the

negative impacts of human disturbance on seabird productivity and survival. Through education,

individuals may modify their behavior that would cause a decrease in disturbance of seabirds.

Potential project coordinator: Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary

Project description: An education campaign using on-site interpretation and publications would

be developed to describe the wildlife using the coastal NWR islands in Oregon and Washington,

and the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary (OCNMS) in Washington (including NWRs

and Tatoosh Island). The campaign will focus on messages of the value of protected coastal

habitats, seabird colonies, why these islands and wildlife are protected, how to avoid human

disturbance, and tribal bird terms. The campaign will build on current education efforts in

OCNMS in areas of reducing impacts from aircraft overflights. It will build upon multi-agency

interpretation and education programs currently operated among FWS, Washington State Parks

(WSP), Olympic National Park (ONP), and OCNMS. The campaign will also complement and

enhance FWS education efforts underway with Nestucca oil spill restoration funds.

 
3-10

Proposed activities: 

1) Interpretive planning. Education program representatives from FWS, NPS, WSP,

OCNMS, coastal tribes and other potential partner agencies and organizations will identify

needs, opportunities and critical gaps in existing information and education programs. Some of

this assessment has already been conducted (OCNMS 1999). The group will also assist in the

development of strong marine resource protection and restoration messages that will be effective

with specific target audiences and assist in the design of methods to monitor the effectiveness of

the education campaign. 

2) Signs. Signs would be placed where boaters have access to marine waters near seabird

nesting colonies. Tenyo Maru oil spill restoration funding would be used at eleven ports along

the Oregon Coast from the Columbia River south to Brookings, Oregon and at Tatoosh Island, in

OCNMS. Signs will be posted at marinas and not on a NWR. This project will coordinate with

Nestucca oil spill restoration funding to address the remaining Washington Coast. 

3) Publications. Brochures and other printed material would be developed and distributed

to visitors and users of the marine environment, including recreational users (kayakers,

sportfishers, divers, private pilots etc.) and commercial users. 

Benefits: It has been documented that seabird reproductive success is reduced through

disturbance resulting from human intrusion into colonies (Anderson and Keith 1980; Anderson

1988; Hunt 1972; and Kury and Gochfield 1975). Boats, private and military aircraft, and people

have been observed near or on nesting islands. Birds and mammals have been observed leaving

the islands in panic flights as a direct result of these disturbances (Parrish 1998). The effects of

disturbance on seabirds has been documented and includes loss of eggs, loss of chicks,

abandonment of nesting sites by adults, and increased vulnerability to predation (Parrish 1996,

1998; Paine et al 1990; Dixon 1997). The frequency of disturbance is not well documented but is

expected to increase as coastal recreational opportunities increase. As the disturbance of

common murre colonies is reduced and/or prevented, common murre reproductive success may

increase. Reduction of disturbance may also benefit other species that use the islands.

Reducing human disturbance at seabird breeding colonies through educational efforts may

increase the number of breeding adults and is another example of how controlling human impacts

could complement a population-based approach.

 

Environmental consequences: This project is designed to ease the pressure applied to the

environment from human disturbance. Overall habitat quality, and subsequently habitat

functionality, may be improved and strengthened from this project. 

 

The indirect consequences of carrying out this project include a greater understanding of human

interaction with natural resources, and the consequences of our actions. It is hoped that the

educational efforts will result directly in a decrease in disturbance at breeding colonies that

should result in increased reproductive success of common murres at coastal Washington and
3-11

Oregon breeding colonies. An increase in reproductive success may lead to greater numbers of

breeding common murres in Washington and Oregon which will maintain species diversity and

aid in restoring common murre populations to their pre-spill levels. 

 

The proposed project includes interpretive signs that should make the public more aware of the

environment and the impacts they may unintentionally cause. Although not anticipated, there is a

slight potential that the interpretive signs could draw attention and more frequent visitors. The

signs will be designed to educate, to increase awareness of disturbance impacts, and not to attract

visitors. Any negative environmental impacts of the educational project are unlikely.

Project goal monitoring: Project monitoring would involve evaluating the effectiveness of the

education campaign through a variety of techniques, including measuring audience exposure to

project messages, changes in audience awareness and knowledge of seabirds and coastal habitat

and documenting changes in audience behavior regarding seabirds.

3.2.3 Alternative C: Habitat-Focused Restoration

Habitat is broadly defined as both the biological and physical environment in which kelp occur or

individual seabirds breed, roost, or forage. Under this alternative, projects would be designed to

restore, enhance, replace and/or acquire habitats that provide benefits to a range of natural

resources injured from the Tenyo Maru oil spill. In this sense, the goal of this alternative is

simply to provide quality habitat. It is assumed that the injured species and services would be

restored, over time, if such habitat is created, protected, or otherwise made available. For

example, the protection and/or manipulation of seabird habitats may positively affect seabird

population parameters by increasing the number of breeding adults, increasing reproductive

success, and/or increasing survival of individuals of all age classes. However, the goal of this

alternative would not be the manipulation of these seabird population parameters (see Alternative

B), but simply the manipulation and/or protection of the seabird habitats. 

Specific project proposals consistent with the habitat-focused restoration alternative are

identified in Sections 3.2.3.1 and 3.2.3.2. Although this project proposes to restore habitat, any

habitat manipulation may have unforeseen consequences. Since the objective of this alternative

is to provide quality habitats such that natural processes may result in the recovery of

populations, the environmental consequences of properly conceived, designed, implemented, and

monitored projects conducted under this alternative should be minimal. Under this alternative,

no adverse impacts to threatened or endangered species are anticipated, however, the appropriate

consultations under the Endangered Species Act will be pursued for projects that may affect

federally listed species. NEPA compliance and reviews will evaluate whether there may be

inadvertent environmental impacts affecting the quality of the human environment.
3-12

3.2.3.1 Marbled Murrelet Habitat Protection and River Silt Reduction

Purpose: The purpose of this project is twofold. One is to permanently protect marbled 

murrelet nesting habitats in Washington State and the second is to reduce silt deposits on kelp

ecosystems at the mouths of streams and rivers in or near the kelp ecosystems affected by the

Tenyo Maru oil spill. Projects could be combined marbled murrelet habitat protection and silt

reduction (preferred), marbled murrelet habitat only, or silt reduction projects only. Because

primary injury was documented for seabird injuries, the driver for selecting projects will be

protection of marbled murrelet nesting habitat and buffer areas. The secondary consideration

will be reducing siltation. 

Project goals: The goal of the marbled murrelet component is to permanently protect marbled

murrelet nesting habitat and/or forest stands next to marbled murrelet nesting habitats. This

permanent protection would occur at habitats not presently protected under other regulation and

are at risk of being logged or where permanent protection will significantly enhance the future

habitat availability for marbled murrelets. 

A second goal is to reduce the amount of silt being deposited on the kelp ecosystems off the

mouth of streams or rivers in or near the area impacted by the Tenyo Maru oil spill. Accepted

silt reduction projects would be above and beyond what is required by other regulations and

programs to reduce siltation into streams and rivers.

Potential project coordinators: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington Department of Fish

and Wildlife, and Washington Department of Natural Resources

Project description: Section 1.2 describes impacts of the Tenyo Maru spill on the federally

threatened marbled murrelet population in Washington. According to the Recovery Plan for the

Marbled Murrelet (USFWS 1997), the major factors contributing to their threatened status

include: 

1) loss of nesting habitats, and 

2) poor reproductive success in the habitat that does remain. In the Pacific Northwest,

marbled murrelets forage almost exclusively in the near shore marine environment, but fly inland

to nest in mature conifers. One component of this proposed restoration project is to permanently

protect and improve marbled murrelet nesting habitats. Besides protecting marbled murrelet

nesting habitats, nesting success can be improved by protecting forest stands adjacent to nesting

habitats. The marbled murrelet recovery plan (USFWS 1997) recommends decreasing habitat

fragmentation by increasing the size of suitable forest stands to provide a larger area of interior

forest conditions as a long-term strategy. It also recommends the protection of “recruitment

habitats” to enlarge existing stands and buffer occupied sites from predators and wind damage

that can gradually degrade the stand.
3-13

Kelp was also documented to be injured by the Tenyo Maru oil spill. Surveys by the Washington

Department of Natural Resources have shown losses of Macrocystis and Nereocystis beds off the

mouths of some northwest Olympic Peninsula rivers in recent years (Van Wagenen 1989-1997;

Van Wagenen 1995). Siltation can cause a decrease in kelp populations by: 

1) increasing turbidity, therefore decreasing the photic zone; 

2) covering otherwise suitable substrates with a layer of fine silt preventing recruitment of

microscopic phases of gametophytes or sporophytes; 

3) covering boulders or bedrock with finer substrates such as sand or gravel; or 

4) smothering of either gametophytes or sporophytes (Dean and Devsher 1983; Devinny

and Volse 1978; Schiel and Foster 1992; Shaffer and parks 1994). The second component of

this proposed restoration project involves sediment management projects for selected watersheds

to reduce undesired siltation flows through, and deposition in, potential kelp habitat sites in the

adjacent near shore areas. 

Proposed activities: Fee title acquisition, easements, and other available conservation measures

would be used to secure protection in perpetuity for known occupied marbled murrelet nesting

habitat and/or nesting habitat buffer areas. Marbled murrelet surveys may be conducted where

occupied habitat information is lacking. Priority would be given to property that maximizes the

acreage protected with available dollars. Stands of mature hemlock with mistletoe would

provide marbled murrelet nesting habitats, but would be of lower timber value, thereby reducing

the cost. Criteria to be used for the selection of buffer areas are:

1) the buffer area would be adjacent to a forest stand occupied by marbled murrelets; 

2) the occupied stand is in protected status from timber harvest; 

3) the land is available to be acquired through fee title purchase, an easement, or other

conservation measure. Buffer areas could be managed to enhance the expansion of nesting

habitats through forest manipulations. Even age stands could be manipulated to accelerate late

successional structures. It is possible that direct tree manipulations could be conducted to

increase nesting platforms. Protection of marbled murrelet habitats that reduces the impact of

siltation into river systems, as well as protecting nesting areas, will be prioritized. The Trustee

Committee has not selected marbled murrelet nesting habitat protection project sites at this time. 

They would be identified through working with agencies and organizations interested in

protecting nesting sites. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would be consulted regarding

activities underway with the Forest Recovery Plan.

The kelp component of this project is multi-phased. Phase I would identify and prioritize major

sources of erosion that produce excessive silt. Local government agencies, tribes, private

conservation organizations and landowners will be contacted for input. Phase II will involve
3-14

implementing projects. Only projects that are not already required by regulation or other

programs will be pursued. Projects may include, but are not limited to, repairing failing roads,

correcting small slides, placing large organic debris for bank protection, and buying or securing

conservation easements for riparian buffer zones. The project coordinator(s) will pursue

additional funds from other sources to complete any large projects that are approved. All funds

must be available before the project can begin. 

Habitats and projects where cost-sharing is available would have highest priority for both

marbled murrelet habitat and siltation reduction components of the project.

Project Criteria for Marbled Murrelet Protection

Marbled murrelet surveys must be completed within a two-year period. The purchase process

must begin within approximately one year of the survey results.

Project Criteria for River Silt Reduction

Phase I (feasibility) portion of the silt reduction component must be completed within six months

of the release of the final restoration plan. In addition, the following criteria must be met in

sequence according to criteria number, prior to the selection of a project.

1) If major erosion is found, is there another regulatory mandate that addresses the issue?

If no, then proceed to step 2.

2) Is there a kelp linkage? If yes, proceed to step 3.

3) Is habitat currently unprotected? If yes, proceed to 4.

4) Submit the project proposal for Trustee Committee consideration.

Benefits: The Trustee Committee emphasizes that habitat protection is one of the most

important activities that can be conducted under this alternative. Because land development or

certain management methods may alter habitats so injured resources are negatively affected, the

protection or enhancement of these habitats may reduce the potential for further injury, and by

that allow recovery to continue for marbled murrelet and kelp with little interference. 

Environmental consequences: The protection, acquisition, and enhancement of fish and

wildlife habitats have been relatively successful in restoring or maintaining fish and wildlife

populations. In fact, the enhancement of coastal habitats and the resulting improvement to

various ecosystem functions has been the primary method for conducting coastal aquatic

restoration over the past 15 years (Simenstad and Thom 1992). The protection of habitats also

would reduce the probability that these habitats would become fragmented. Fragmented forests

are cited as a major reason for the decline of the marbled murrelet (USFWS 1997). 
3-15

Decreasing siltation in rivers and streams could, in turn, decrease the sediment load into the

marine environment from the watersheds. Besides a possible increase of kelp beds near the

targeted watersheds, habitat for salmonid species and forage fish could be enhanced. An

enhanced kelp community offers more forage habitats for salmonids and other forage fish,

urchins, and subsequently sea otters and seabirds. Potentially negative impacts that may result

from kelp restoration conducted under this alternative would be the redistribution of sediment

and soil materials and a change in the processes that affect erosion and deposition. These would

be slight short-term impacts that include a temporary increase in sedimentation during

construction which would be mitigated with timing restrictions, silt fences, etc. The Trustee

Committee does not anticipate these potentially adverse effects to have long-term significance. 

However, project-specific impacts will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Finally, one

disadvantage of this alternative is that it may take many years before the injured populations

respond to the improvements to their habitats. 

The Trustee Committee assumes that this project will result in an overall benefit to the entire

suite of injured resources, with relatively few negative impacts.

Project goal monitoring: Marbled murrelet nesting habitat occupancy surveys would need to be

conducted minimally for two years at five year intervals to monitor site occupancy (4 years of

monitoring over a 10-year period). Buffer areas should, at the minimum, maintain occupied sites

where appropriate habitats would have diminished without the buffer protection, and may

improve conditions for occupied sites and serve as habitat expansion areas in the future. 

Monitoring will be included in the projects and an annual report will be provided to the Trustee

Committee for their review and approval.

3.2.3.2 Protection of Marine Environments By Stationing an Emergency Towing Vessels at 

the Entrance to the Strait of Juan de Fuca

Purpose: The purpose of this project is to help fund efforts to achieve two objectives. First, to

provide timely and effective protection of the Trustees’ efforts to restore coastal environments,

including the seabird populations and kelp beds affected by the Tenyo Maru oil spill at a time

when technological and climatic factors combine to create a high risk atmosphere. And second,

to collect data on the feasibility and effectiveness of permanently stationing an emergency

response vessel in the area during high-risk seasons to limit the pollution risks presented by highrisk vessels. Monies from the Tenyo Maru Restoration Fund would be added to any funds

secured by other agencies during 1999-2000. 

Project Goals: The project goals are to eliminate or mitigate the risk to restoration of affected sea

bird populations, kelp beds and other marine resources posed by a drifting and/or disabled vessel

from December 15, 1999, through at least April 30, 2000, to possibly conduct drills and exercises

to test coordination with existing governmental and voluntary vessel safety and response

measures; to develop protocols for permanently stationing and deployment of a multi-purpose

emergency response vessel; and to collect data on the operation, effectiveness, utility and cost of

such a permanent emergency response vessel for the Strait of Juan de Fuca. The data collected
3-16

will be used by the North Puget Sound Risk Assessment Panel as it considers improvements to

the safety of marine transportation in North Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca.

Project coordinators: Washington State Department of Ecology and Makah Indian Tribe.

Project Description: This project will contribute funds that will allow the establishment of an

emergency towing vessel in the Strait of Juan de Fuca during the 1999-2000 winter season. 

There are four necessary elements or roles involved in the emergency towing system: the

salvage/towing vessel, the operator, the dispatcher, and the “project” partners. 

Project Partners would include the state of Washington and the Makah Indian Tribe. The

partners will be responsible for obtaining use of the vessel and the cooperation of the U.S. Coast

Guard or other dispatching agency. The U.S. Navy has contracted with a towing company to have

a tug stationed at Neah Bay for the period of December 15, 1999 through at least April 30, 2000,

to be available for assisting public vessels in distress. Under the Navy contract, the tug could be

made available to assist other vessels using other sources of funding. Project Partners will be

responsible for working with the Navy to obtain the use of this vessel or another vessel as

needed. 

The partners in cooperation with the dispatching agency would develop protocols for dispatch,

data collection, and drills and exercises, as well as develop a comprehensive operations plan for

the vessel. Partners will function as an information source and liaison with the North Puget

Sound Risk Assessment Panel.

Concept of Operations The desired period of operation is December 15, 1999 through at least

April 30, 2000. The area of operation will be determined by the Partners in consultation with

other affected agencies. The determination will focus on the area affected by the Tenyo Maru oil

spill. It will encompass the start of the international traffic separation scheme as well as coastal

waters on both sides of the international boundary in the Western Strait of Juan de Fuca and the

Pacific Ocean. Weather and sea state conditions will be established to ensure the safety of the

vessel while maintaining a high degree of coverage and effectiveness. Responses beyond the

boundary of the area of operation may be allowed under specific conditions defined by the

Dispatch protocols.

The vessel will be on call 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, for emergency towing and salvage

response to vessels in distress or that pose a high risk as determined under the Partners protocols.

Dispatch will be by the U.S. Coast Guard Puget Sound Captain of the Port/ Vessel Traffic

Service or other similarly capable agency.

Proposed activities: Activities funded will fall into two categories: response and drills/exercises. 

Vessel activities may also include drills and exercises as needed to test and evaluate the system’s

efficacy.
3-17

Benefits: The specific benefit is increased protection of efforts to restore resources affected by

the Tenyo Maru oil spill including sea bird populations and kelp beds on the coast and in the

Strait of Juan de Fuca. The Olympic Coast and Strait of Juan de Fuca serve as an entry and exit

point for ships transiting to and from the ports of Puget Sound and British Columbia. In 1998,

12,376 vessel transits were observed at the entrance to the Strait of Juan de Fuca (Galasso, in

press). Marine traffic in the area is largely commercial in nature, the majority comprised of bulk

carriers and large tank vessels carrying significant amounts of bunker fuel or transporting

hazardous substances such as crude and refined oil. While improvements to marine safety have

been systematically phased in over the last ten years, his is an area identified as the most

vulnerable to an oil spill or threatened spill because of the difficulty of implementing current

response strategies and the area’s geographic remoteness (Department of Transportation 1997). 

In addition, the area is subject to violent winter storms and strong currents, increasing the

potential for human error and ship system failures. The Volpe study concluded that "spill

prevention must be the main focus of a risk management strategy. In spite of advances in

response technology, most spilled oil remains in the environment even under the best cleanup

conditions". The marine resources of the area, especially seabird populations and kelp bed, were

significant affected by the Tenyo Maru spill and are the focus of other restoration projects in the

plan. Prevention of future oil spills is clearly the most effective strategy to protect the Trustees'

efforts to restore the natural resources affected by the Tenyo Maru spill. The marine resources of

this area, especially seabird populations and kelp beds, were significantly affected by the Tenyo

Maru spill and are the focus of other restoration projects in this plan. In this area, prevention is

clearly the most effective strategy to protect the Trustees’ efforts to restore the natural resources

affected by the Tenyo Maru spill from future oil spills.

A secondary, yet important, benefit is the collection of data to be used in evaluating the

feasibility of a permanent dedicated multi-purpose emergency response vessel that includes spill

response, fire-fighting and salvage capability. Dedicated response vessels exist to protect waters

off the coast of Britain, in the Gulf of Alaska, and in other international waters. The information

collected here will assist the North Puget Sound Risk Assessment Panel in comparing and

identifying measures to enhance the protection of marine waters in the Strait.

Environmental consequences: This project will have little or no adverse impact on natural and

cultural resources at risk. Any adverse environmental impacts from vessel operations are likely

to be similar to those of other medium sized vessels operating in the area. However, the vessel

will protect other efforts to restore natural resources injured by the Tenyo Maru oil spill and has

the potential to prevent or substantially reduce the significant or catastrophic impacts of another

oil spill during the project period.

Project goal monitoring: The Washington State Department of Ecology will provide a

preliminary report to the Trustee Committee by April 30, 2000, with a final report due to the

Trustee Committee by June 1, 2000. The report should include information on the number of

responses during the stationing of the tug, effectiveness of tug operations, costs incurred

including operations, an evaluation of the strengths and limitations of the stationed tug, and drill

exercises.
3-18

3.2.4 Alternative D: An Integrative Restoration Approach

Alternatives A, B and C, can be integrated in a way that increases their effectiveness if they are

applied simultaneously. Furthermore, because each of these alternatives attempt to increase

populations by affecting specific population parameters, they are not independent.

Individuals within populations are affected by both the biological and physical environment. As

such, the recovery of a population following events such as oil spills depends on both physical

and biological factors. Because these factors operate at varying temporal and spatial scales, their

relative effects are often difficult to identify. Furthermore, human activities contribute to both

the physical and biological environment of populations further complicating our ability to

identify any single factor that regulates or affects, independent of other factors, the growth of a

population. The most effective restoration of populations affected by oil spills may require an

integrated approach. This integrated approach would use all available techniques that promise

predictable and testable results. Thus, this alternative proposes to combine actions described

under Alternatives A, B and C, and to implement an integrated approach to seabird and kelp

restoration. 

The environmental consequences of projects that may occur under this integrated approach

include the environmental consequences predicted under Alternatives A, B and C. No significant

impacts to threatened or endangered species are expected to result from the integrated approach. 

If actions under this alternative are determined to have an adverse effect on the quality of the

human environment, the project would be redesigned, relocated, or possibly abandoned. This

alternative could indirectly benefit a variety of federally threatened and endangered species and

state listed sensitive species by providing nesting, feeding, resting, rearing and other forms of

habitats used during the lives of these species.
4-19

4.0 SELECTION OF THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

The Trustee Committee has selected Alternative D-An Integrative Restoration Approach as the

preferred alternative for the Tenyo Maru restoration plan. The following section summarizes the

factors considered in this decision. 

Alternative A: No Action/Natural Recovery

Restoration of the injured resources under the no-action alternative would occur only through

natural processes and existing or future programs that are unrelated to this restoration plan. This

alternative is the baseline against which other alternatives are compared. In order for the noaction alternative to be selected as a preferred restoration alternative, it must be more efficient

and effective in restoring the environment than projects that would be conducted under other

alternatives. The no-action alternative would not increase the rate of restoration of the injured

natural resources and habitats beyond what will result from natural processes and existing or

future programs. 

This alternative recognizes the capacity of ecosystems to recover naturally and does not in any

way alter existing habitats. The principal advantages of this approach are that it permits the

natural recovery process to function uninhibited by human intervention and no monetary costs

are associated with it because natural processes determine the trajectory of the system. 

The no-action alternative could adversely affect wildlife over the long-term because no action

would be taken to enhance or restore sensitive injured resources. Furthermore, this alternative

does nothing to protect existing habitat that is essential for natural recovery processes to occur.

Without some type of additional protection or enhancements, these species, and their habitats,

may continue to decline. Threatened species, such as the marbled murrelet, may never reach

their pre-spill recovery potential without additional protection and enhancement restoration

activities. 

OPA clearly establishes trustee responsibility to seek compensation for interim losses pending

recovery of the natural resources. This responsibility cannot be addressed through a no-action

alternative. 

Although some natural recovery is expected, it is the Trustees’ opinion that direct intervention is

required to address potential acute and sub-lethal injuries to the natural resources resulting from

the spill. In addition, no benefits would be realized from the settlement to recover injured

resources and the obligations of the consent decree would not be met. For these reasons, the

Trustee Committee did not select the no-action alternative as an effective restoration option. 

Alternative B: Population-Focused Restoration

The goal of this restoration alternative is to increase populations of seabird and kelp through

direct manipulations to population parameters. Actions taken under this alternative are designed

to increase the rate of immigration and potential breeding, decrease the age at which individuals

first attempt to breed, decrease disturbance at nesting colonies to potentially increase nesting

success, and increase the probability that an adult bird will survive and successfully breed during
4-20

any given year. As such, this alternative provides the mechanisms to reduce the mortality of

adult seabirds and for rapid colonization and restoration at localities where breeding does not

occur, or is severely depressed. 

The environmental consequences associated with population manipulation restoration should be

minimal. Adverse impacts to wildlife could occur as there is some potential for actions that

benefit one group of species to have short-term impacts on other species. In addition, increased

interaction between predators and injured prey species may result. There would be no significant

effects on the quality of the human environment if these projects are implemented.

The Trustee Committee considers this a strong alternative for an effective restoration of injured

resources.

Alternative C: Habitat-Focused Restoration

The objective of this restoration alternative is to provide quality habitats such that natural

processes may result in the recovery of injured populations. Furthermore, quality habitats may

also provide the range of resources necessary to maintain food webs or other structural

components of ecosystems.

Interim and permanent protection of habitats is a viable restoration tool that clearly offers not

only the potential for restoration of the resources injured by the Tenyo Maru oil spill, but also the

potential for comprehensive rehabilitation and protection, in perpetuity, of the ecosystems in

which these injured species are a part. The proposed projects listed under this alternative will

potentially increase the amount of protected nesting habitats available to marbled murrelets and

improve conditions for nesting at existing occupied stands, and decrease sedimentation in

selected watersheds to enhance kelp beds at the mouth of rivers. The goals of the projects

include reducing the risk of spills associated with drift groundings in the affected area, providing

additional assurances that natural recovery of injured resources will occur.

Protection of nesting habitat and a decrease in nesting predation and occupied stand degradation

could help reduce the rate of decline of marbled murrelets in Washington. An enhanced kelp

community offers more forage habitats for salmonids, and other forage fish, urchins, and

subsequently sea otters and seabirds.

Permanent protection and alteration of existing habitats offer moderate to high potential for

benefitting injured resources. In addition, impacts from application are low to moderate. The

habitat-focused alternative has a high potential for reducing habitat fragmentation and would

directly benefit functions that support fish and wildlife resources. Improvement of habitat

functions has been the primary method of conducting coastal aquatic restoration over the past

fifteen years (Simenstand and Thom 1992). There is a relatively long history documenting the

success of this type of action that has shown that fisheries and wildlife resources can benefit from

constructing and rehabilitating natural habitats. This alternative offers a growing level of

confidence to restore functioning habitats for injured resources. 
4-21

In addition, prevention of future oil spills is necessary if efforts to restore resources injured by the

Tenyo Maru oil spill are to enjoy long-term success. The Trustees have proposed to fund an

effort to station an emergency towing system at the mouth of the Strait of Juan de Fuca during

the 1999-2000 winter season. This effort will help ensure that restoration of injured resources is

not disrupted by further oil spills during this period and will collect data that will be used to

evaluate the feasibility of more permanent measures to prevent oil spills in the affected area. 

This alternative offers additional confidence that long-term restoration of injured resource will

occur.

Alternative D: An Integrative Restoration Approach

The intent of the Trustee Committee is to provide a restoration plan that will restore populations

injured by the Tenyo Maru oil spill and balance activities so that the integrated structural

components of whole ecosystems (e.g., physical habitats, food webs) are preserved or enhanced. 

This integrative approach to restoration combines the positive aspects of Alternatives A, B, and

C, and maintains the low level of negative environmental consequences assumed to be

associated with these alternatives. This will provide not only the greatest array of potential

projects, but also the greatest opportunity to integrate projects into comprehensive ecosystemlevel restoration, benefitting the greatest number of species. 

This integrative approach to restoration is the only alternative in this restoration plan that fosters

comprehensive restoration of injured resources at both the population and ecosystem levels, and

by that, promotes the long-term sustainability of resources. It provides the greatest flexibility and

the most options for restoring, replacing, rehabilitating, and/or acquiring the equivalent of natural

resources injured as the result of the discharge of oil, and therefore, has been identified by the

Trustee Committee as the selected alternative. 

4.1 Proposed Project Schedules and Estimated Budgets

Restoration of Common Murre Colonies in Copalis National Wildlife Refuge, Washington

State

Schedule: Upon final approval of the project; a specific work plan for Phase I will be generated

by the project coordinator(s). Phase I will be completed within two years. If Phase II is

conducted, there will be an annual review of the project and the Trustee Committee will discuss

the progress and evaluate the relevance of continuing the project.

Estimated budget from Tenyo Maru Funds: $1,800,000 

*Any unused funding will be redistributed to either the Marbled Murrelet Habitat Protection and

River Silt Reduction Project (Section 3.3.1) or a tufted puffin restoration project.

Oiled Wildlife Rehabilitation Center

Schedule: Upon final approval of the project, the Washington Wildlife Rescue Coalition has

three years to secure outside funds for the project. 
4-22

Estimated budget from Tenyo Maru Funds: $500,000 

*If the State is unable to secure outside funding, the Tenyo Maru restoration contribution of

$500,000 will be redistributed to the Marbled Murrelet Habitat Protection and River Silt

Reduction Project (Section 3.2.3.1).

Public Education Signs and Brochures

Schedule: Upon final approval of the project proposal, implementation must begin within two

years.

Estimated budget from Tenyo Maru Funds: $100,000

Marbled Murrelet Habitat Protection and River Silt Reduction

Schedule: Suitable available marbled murrelet nesting habitat protection sites will be selected

within 2 years of the final approval of the project. In the interim, the Trustee Committee will

identify and consult with co-trustees and environmental organizations who would be willing to

assume title on any appropriate parcels or to guarantee their conservation status and restricted

uses. Permanent habitat protection (purchase, lease, conservation easement, etc.) will be secured

within 1 year of final approval of the site by the Trustee Committee. Because of extenuating

circumstances that may be associated with securing properties, the Trustee Committee may

choose to extend this schedule on a case-by-case basis. If the time limits are exceeded, the funds

earmarked for marbled murrelet nesting habitat protection will be reallocated to other Tenyo

Maru projects identified in the plan. 

Phase 1 (feasibility phase) of the river silt reduction component will be completed within 6

months of the notice of the availability of a final restoration plan. Selected and approved projects

will have the appropriate permits in place and be ready to be implemented under Phase II within

2 years of the completion of Phase I. If the time limits are expired, the remaining funds will be

reallocated to other Tenyo Maru projects identified in the plan.

Estimated budget from Tenyo Maru funds:

Habitat surveys, project development, implementation, and monitoring - $2,500,000

( Break out costs: 6 mo. feasibility study for the river silt reduction component =$ 60,000;

monitoring costs for marbled murrelet nesting habitat protection = $10,000)

Emergency Towing Vessel

Schedule: Upon final approval of the project, funds will be transferred to the WDOE to be held

and made available only to fund the stationing of a rescue tug in the area of operations. These

funds would be added to any funds secured by other agencies. By June 1, 2000, the WDOE shall

return to the Tenyo Maru restoration account any funds disbursed pursuant to this plan and not

expended or obligated for this purpose. In the event that the rescue tug assistance efforts funded

under this plan are subject to reimbursement from responsible parties, the Oil Spill Liability

Trust Fund (established by 26 U.S.C. § 9509) and/or other sources, the WDOE shall seek
4-23

reimbursement from those parties or sources. In the event the WDOE subsequently obtains such

reimbursement, the WDOE shall promptly return the reimbursed sums to the Tenyo Maru

restoration account. Any funds returned to the Tenyo Maru restoration account under these

provisions shall be distributed to the Marbled Murrelet Habitat Protection and River Silt

Reduction Project (Section 3.2.3.1).

Budget from Tenyo Maru Funds: $400,000 
5-24

5.0 Environmental Consequences

To restore resources lost as a result of the oil spill, the Trustees examined a variety of restoration

alternatives. These included alternatives: 

1) no action and natural recovery, 

2) population-focused restoration, 

3) habitat-focused restoration, and 

4) integrative restoration. 

The integrative restoration approach is the alternative selected by the Trustees. The Tenyo Maru

Trustees intend to avoid or reduce negative impacts to existing natural resources and services to

the greatest extent possible. However, the Trustees could undertake actions that may have short

or long term effects upon existing habitats or non-injured species. Project specific environmental

consequences for each alternative and associated projects are provided in Section 3. This section

addresses the potential overall cumulative, direct, and indirect impacts, and other factors to be

considered in both the OPA and the NEPA regulations.

The Tenyo Maru Trustees believe that the projects selected in this restoration program will not

cause significant negative impacts to natural resources or the services they provide. Further, the

Trustees do not believe the proposed projects will adversely affect the quality of the human

environment in ways deemed “significant.” 

Cumulative Impacts: Since the projects are primarily designed to restore degraded habitats and

improve recovery of injured natural resources, the cumulative environmental consequences will

primarily be beneficial. These cumulative impacts include long-term restoration of the condition

and functioning elements of the injured ecosystem by increasing the number of individual

seabirds that attempt to reproduce, the recruitment of seabird and kelp populations, and the

amount and condition of protected habitats. Both project and NEPA monitoring of projects

funded under the Tenyo Maru restoration fund will verify that cumulative impacts will be

beneficial rather than adverse. Any cumulative adverse effects on an area or other area program,

plan, or regulatory regime from a proposed project, will result in the project being redesigned or

abandoned.

Indirect Impacts: Environmental consequences would not be limited to the project location. 

Indirect beneficial impacts would also occur throughout populations and habitats in Western

Washington and Oregon. Cumulative impacts at the project locations, and in the surrounding

area, are expected to increase populations of seabirds and kelp, provide improved habitats for a

variety of fish and wildlife, and provide a greater understanding of human interaction with

natural resources. This alternative could indirectly benefit a variety of federally threatened and

endangered species and Washington State listed sensitive species by providing nesting, feeding,

resting, rearing and other forms of habitats utilized during the lives of these species. 

Direct Impacts: Providing improved habitats, improving the survivability of seabirds of all age

classes, preventing future oil spills, and enhancing natural seabird and kelp recruitment may aid

in replenishing the resources injured in the Tenyo Maru oil spill. The restoration projects may

increase the survivability of seabirds and kelp not killed in the oil spill, will help protect natural
5-25

recovery of affected resources, and will aid in replenishing the natural population by increasing

productivity levels. 

Overall, this alternative should enhance water and sediment quality and the functionality of

ecosystems. However, some brief impacts from the proposed actions may include short-term

disturbances from noise and air pollutants from construction activities and interim emergency

response vessel operations; short-term water and sediment quality impacts; temporary disruption

of animal migrations, breeding and nesting; short-term disturbances of existing plant

communities; and temporary disturbances of ecological processes while the restored system

reaches maturity. 

It is the Trustees’ intention to keep construction categorized as very “minor.” The term of any

construction projects (e.g., sediment control activity, forest manipulation, and the posting of

signs) is anticipated to be very short, generally from two to four weeks.

Projects that involve short-term construction activities and the operation of the interim

emergency response vessel could generate noise from machinery and equipment. If specific

construction projects are to be conducted in “noise sensitive” areas, project specific

environmental assessments will be conducted and include the extent of any impact. The

proposed restoration projects could cause an increase in noise from resident and migrating birds,

which would be a potential long-term impact. As habitat is restored or improved, birds and other

wildlife should become more plentiful in the project area. However, the areas surrounding the

proposed projects areas are primarily water or wilderness areas. It is not anticipated that any

significant noise impacts would result from the projects proposed by the Trustee Committee. 

Implementation of the proposed projects should result in no significant impact to water quality. 

Habitat modification activities in or next to streams or rivers, could have short-term water quality

impacts through temporary increases in sedimentation and turbidity. Any impacts resulting from

restoration construction activities will be mitigated by using techniques such as the use of

sediment curtains or other technologies designed to reduce sediment transport. Any construction

equipment would be monitored to ensure diesel, gas, or oils are not released into waters at or

next to the project site. The Committee believes that restoration activities would result in

insignificant effects to this resource.

No long-term adverse effects to sediment quality, soils, or geologic conditions are anticipated

under this restoration plan. The Trustee Committee does not anticipate any temporary or

permanent visual impacts from any of the projects and none of the proposed restoration actions

should have a significant impact on energy consumption, although minor increases in the

consumption of fuel will likely result from emergency response vessel operations. No projects

would directly or indirectly affect wetlands or flood plain areas. Furthermore, the Tenyo Maru

Trustees do not believe any of the proposed restoration projects would have a significant impact

on the coastal zone, but specific projects in the coastal zone will undergo the appropriate coastal

zone consistency review requirements. 
5-26

The project sites are wilderness areas, areas surrounded by water or areas under water. 

Restoration work should not have any social or economic impacts upon the neighborhoods or

community cohesion for various groups from proposed projects. Property values should not be

decreased, nor will there be any separation of the communities’ residents from community

facilities. Due to the nature and purpose of the Restoration Plan, there are no anticipated human

relocation issues. Stationing of the emergency response vessel at Neah Bay may result in an

short-term increase in economic activity in that community.

General land use patterns and aesthetic qualities should not be adversely affected under the

preferred alternative for the following reasons. Open space and recreational uses are scattered

throughout the study area and forested areas. Land ownership may be affected if direct land

purchase is required, however this should not affect the overall balance of ownership patterns 

within the study areas. Land management practices will not be affected since the pertinent local

plans and ordinances, and state planning regulations, encourage the preservation and restoration

of the area's vital natural resources.

Public access to natural resources could be affected. The proposed public education project

includes interpretive signs that should make the public more aware of the environment that they

are viewing. Subsequently, this could draw more frequent human visitors, however, the number

is anticipated to be insignificant. The signs are intended to educate those present, to increase

awareness, and not to attract. It is the intent of the Trustees to balance the goals of public access

and habitat restoration whenever possible. Recreation and tourism will not be negatively affected

by the proposed projects, however, the public may be more educated on how to avoid impacts to

seabirds while recreating or touring on or near islands that support seabird colonies.

Specific restoration sites and their perceived potential impact upon water-oriented commerce

would be addressed on a site-by-site basis, as would be their eligibility for the National Historic

Register of Historic Places. Since all site-specific projects would be designed to identify

historic properties, potential effects on tribal treaties and archaeological preservation and

mitigate for any potential impacts, it is not anticipated that historic properties would be affected

under any of the proposed actions. Information on prime and unique agricultural lands will be

solicited from the United States Department of Agriculture upon selection of specific Tenyo

Maru restoration sites. 

No significant negative impacts to threatened or endangered species are expected to result from

the integrated approach. Consultation under the Endangered Species Act would occur prior to

any on the ground activities that may affect listed species. If actions under this alternative are

determined to adversely affect federal or state-listed species, the project would be redesigned,

relocated or abandoned. The chance of any Tenyo Maru restoration project having a negative

impact on fish and wildlife is insignificant, limited only to the duration of construction and other

activities. The anticipated overall environmental effect on fish and wildlife is to restore and

maintain species diversity and abundance in Washington and Oregon. 
6-1

6.0 List of References

Antrim, L.D., R.M. Thom, W.W. Gardiner, V.I. Cullinan, D.K. Shreffler, and R.W. Bienert.

1995. Effects of petroleum, products on bull kelp (Nereocystis luetkeanna). Marine Biology

122:23-31. 

Battelle Marine Sciences Laboratory. 1992. Experimental evaluations of the effects of oil on 

benthic marine vegetation of Washington State.

Beissinger, S.R. 1995. Population trends of the marbled murrelet projected from demographic 

analyses. Pg. 385-394 in C.J. Ralph, G.L. Hunt, M.G. Raphael, and J.F. Piatt (ed). Ecology

and conservation of the Marbled Murrelet. Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest

Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Albany, CA. 

Bowlby, C. E., B. L. Troutman, et al. 1988. Sea otters in Washington: Distribution, 

abundance and activity patterns. National Coastal Research Institute, Newport Oregon.

Dean, T.A. and L.E. Devsher. 1983. The effects of suspended solids and thermal discharges on

kelp, pp.114-135. In W. Bascom (ed.), the effects of waste disposal on kelp communities. 

South. Calif. Coastal Water Res. Proj., Long Beach.

Department of Transportation Volpe National Transportation System Center. 1997. Scoping 

Risk Assessment: Protection Against Oil Spills in the Marine Waters of Northwest

Washington State.

Devinny, J.S. and L.A. Volse. 1978. Effects of sediments on the development of Macrocystis

pyrifera gametophytes. Marine Biology 48:343-348.

Dixon, E., 1997. The Effects of Overflights on the Biological Resources of the Olympic Coast 

National Marine Sanctuary. Prepared for the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary. 

Duggins, D. O. 1988. The effects of kelp forests on nearshore environments: biomass, 

detritus, and altered flow, in G.R. VanBlaricom and J.A. Estes (eds.) The community ecology

of sea otters. Berlin, Springer-Verlag.

Emery, K. O. and R. H. Tschudy. 1941. Transportation of rock by kelp. Bull. Geological 

Society of America 52: 855-862.

Ford, R.G., M.L. Bonnell, D.H. Varoujean, G.W. Page, H.R. Carter, B.E. Sharp, D. Heinemann, 

and J.L. Casey. 1996. Total direct mortality of seabirds from the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Pg.

684-711 in S.D. Rice, R.B. Spies, D.A. Wolfe, and B.A. Wright (ed). Proceedings of the

Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Symposium. Am. Fisheries Soc. No. 18.

Galasso, George. In press. Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary Area to Be Avoided 

(ATBA) Education and Monitoring Program. Marine Sanctuaries Conservation Series. 

MSD-99-Draft.

Jameson R.J. 1997. Unpublished data. Biological Resources Division, Corvallis, OR.

Leaman, B. M. 1976. The association between the black rockfish (Sebastes melanops Girard) 

and the beds of the giant kelp (Macrocystis integrifolia Bory) in Barkeley Sound, British

Columbia. The University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Lowe, R.W. and D.S. Pitkin. 1996. Replicate Aerial Photographic Censuses of Oregon Common 

Murre Colonies 1995. Final report submitted to the Tenyo Maru Trustee Committee.

Melvin, E.F., Conquest, L.L, and Parrish, J.K. 1997. Seabird Bycatch Reduction: New Tools for

Puget Sound Drift Gillnet Salmon Fisheries. Washington Sea Grant Program, University of

Washington, Seattle, WA.
6-2

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 1993. Olympic Coast National Marine

 Sanctuary. Final environmental impact statement/management plan. Vol. I & II.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. March 1999. Olympic Coast National 

Marine Sanctuary, Interpretation and Visitor Services: Capitol Facilities Plan. 

Page, G.W., H.R. Carter, and R.G. Ford. 1990. Numbers of seabirds killed or debilitated in the 

1986 Apex Houston oil spill in central California. Studies in Avian Biology 14:164-174.

Paine, R.T., J.T. Wooton and P.D. Boesrma. 1990. Direct and Indirect Effects of Peregrine 

Falcon Predation on Seabird Abundance. The Auk, 107.

Parrish, J.K. 1995. The influence of group size and habitat type on reproductive success in 

Common Murres (Uria aalge). Auk 112:390-401.

Parrish, J.K. 1996. Continued monitoring of Common Murres on Tatoosh Island. Final Report 

1995. Report submitted to the Tenyo Maru Trustee Committee.

Parrish, J.K. 1997. Attendance and Reproductive Success of Tatoosh Island Common Murres.

 Final Report 1996. Report submitted to the Tenyo Maru Trustee Committee.

Parrish, J. 1998. Memo to Roy Clark, United States Coast Guard.

Schiel, D.R. and M.S. Foster. 1992. Restsoring kelp forests. Pages 279-342 in G.W. Thayer

(ed.) Restoring the nation’s environment. Maryland Sea Grant.

Shaffer, J.A. and D.S. Parks. 1994. Seasonal variations in and observations of landslide impacts

on the algal composition of a Puget Sound nearshore kelp forest. Botanical Marina 37:315-

323.

Simenstad, C.A. and R.M. Thom. 1992. Restoring wetland habitats in urbanized Pacific 

Northwest estuaries. In: Restoring the Nation's Marine Environment (G. Thayer, ed.), pp.

423-472. Maryland Sea Grant College.

Speich, S.M. and T.R. Wahl. 1989. Catalog of Washington Seabird Colonies. US Fish Wildl. 

Serv. Biol. Rep. 88(6). 

Speich, S.M. and T.R. Wahl. 1995. Marbled murrelet populations of Washington -- marine 

habitat preferences and variability of occurrence. Pg. 313-326 in C.J. Ralph, G.L. Hunt,

M.G. Raphael, and J.F. Piatt (ed). Ecology and conservation of the Marbled Murrelet. Pacific

Southwest Research Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Albany, CA. 

Tenyo Maru Trustees. 1993. Tenyo Maru Oil spill habitat impacts, resource injuries, damage 

claims and restoration summaries. Lacey, WA.

Takekawa, J.E., H.R. Carter, and T.E. Harvey. 1990. Decline of the Common Murre in central 

California, 1980-1986. Studies Avian Biol. 14:149-163.

Thom, R. M. 1989. Plant standing stock and productivity on tidal flats in Padilla Bay, 

Washington: A temperate North Pacific estuarine embayment., FRI, University of

Washington.

Thompson, C.W. 1996. Distribution and abundance of marbled murrelets and common murres in

relation to marine habitat on the outer coast of Washington - An interim report to the Tenyo

Maru Trustee Council.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. Final Restoration Plan for Seabirds Injured by the Apex

 Houston Oil Spill. Portland, OR.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. Nestucca Oil Spill Restoration Plan. Lacey, WA.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1997. Recovery Plan for the Marbled Murrelet (Brachyramphus 

marmoratus) (Washington, Oregon and California Population). Portland, OR.
6-3

Van Wagenen, R.F. 1989-1992, 1994, 1996-1997. Washington coastal kelp resources. Annual

kelp inventory final reports to Washington Dept. Natural Resources, Aquatic Lands Division.

Van Wagenen, R.F. 1995. Washington coastal kelp resources, Port Townsend to the Columbia

River. Final report to Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary.

Vermeer, K., S.G. Sealy, and G.A. Sanger. 1987. Feeding ecology of the Alcidae in the eastern 

north Pacific Ocean. Pg. 189-227 in J.P. Croxall (ed). Seabirds: feeding ecology and role in

marine ecosystems. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK. 

Warheit, K. I. 1996. Assessment of the origin of and the demographic impact to Common 

Murres (Uria aalge) killed during the 1991 Tenyo Maru Oil Spill. Final Report submitted to

FWS. Document Control No. 98210-93-376. 

Wheeler, W. N. 1990. Kelp forests of British Columbia, a unique resource. Province of British 

Columbia, Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Aquaculture and Commercial Fisheries

Branch. 91 pp.

Wheeler, W. N. and L. D. Druehl. 1986. Seasonal growth and production of Macrocystis 

integrifolia on British Columbia, Canada. Mar. Biol. 90: 181-186.

Wheeler, W. N. (ed.) 1990. Federal-Provincial Marine Plant Working Group Workshop on Kelp

Biology and Kelp-Fish Interactions. Proceedings of a workshop. Victoria, B.C. February

15-16, 1990. 140 pp.

Wilson, K. And R. McPeak. 1983. Kelp restoration, pp.199-216. In W. Bascom (ed.), The 

effects of waste disposal on kelp communities. South. Calif. Coastal Water Res. Proj., Long

Beach.

Wilson, U.W. 1995. Washington Common Murre colony surveys 1995. Final report submitted 

to the Tenyo Maru Trustee Committee.

Wilson, U.W. 1996. Tenyo Maru Pilot Project Proposal. Proposal submitted to Tenyo Maru

Trustee Committee. 

Wilson, U.W. 1997. Washington Common Murre colony surveys 1995. Final report submitted

 to the Tenyo Maru Trustee Committee.

Wilson, U.W. 1998. Personal communication. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington 

Coastal Refuges. Sequim, WA.
Appendix A - 1

Appendix A: Coordination with Other Programs, Plans, and Regulatory Authorities

A.1 Overview

Two major federal laws guiding the restoration of the injured natural resources and services from

the Tenyo Maru oil spill are OPA and NEPA. OPA and its regulations provide the basic

framework for natural resource damage assessment and restoration. NEPA sets forth a specific

process of impact analysis and public review. In addition, the Trustees must comply with other

applicable laws, regulations and policies at the federal, state and local levels. The potentially

relevant laws, regulations and policies are set forth below.

In addition to laws and regulations, the Trustees must consider relevant environment or economic

programs or plans that are ongoing or planned in or near the affected environment. The Trustees

must ensure that their proposed restoration activities neither impede nor duplicate such programs

or plans. By coordinating restoration with other relevant programs and plans, the Trustees can

enhance the overall effort to improve the environment.

A.2 Key Statutes, Regulations and Policies

Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA), 33 U.S.C. 2701, et seq.; 15 CFR Part 990

OPA establishes a liability regime for oil spills which injure or are likely to injure natural

resources and/or the services that those resources provide to the ecosystem or humans. Federal

and state agencies and Indian tribes act as trustees on behalf of the public to assess the injuries,

scale restoration to compensate for those injuries and implement restoration. Section 1006(e)(1)

of OPA (33 U.S.C. 2706 (e)(1)) requires the President, acting through the Under Secretary of

Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere, (NOAA) to promulgate regulations for the assessment of

natural resource damages resulting from a discharge or substantial threat of a discharge of oil. 

Assessments are intended to provide the basis for restoring, replacing, rehabilitating, and

acquiring the equivalent of injured natural resources and services. 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq. 40 CFR Parts 1500-

1508

Congress enacted NEPA in 1969 to establish a national policy for the protection of the

environment. NEPA applies to federal agency actions that affect the human environment. NEPA

established the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) to advise the President and to carry out

certain other responsibilities relating to implementation of NEPA by federal agencies. Pursuant

to Presidential Executive Order, federal agencies are obligated to comply with the NEPA

regulations adopted by the CEQ. These regulations outline the responsibilities of federal

agencies under NEPA and provide specific procedures for preparing environmental

documentation to comply with NEPA. NEPA requires that an Environmental Assessment (EA)

be prepared in order to determine whether the proposed restoration actions will have a significant

effect on the quality of the human environment.

Generally, when it is uncertain whether an action will have a significant effect, federal agencies

will begin the NEPA planning process by preparing an EA. The EA may undergo a public

review and comment period. Federal agencies may then review the comments and make a
Appendix A - 2

determination. Depending on whether an impact is considered significant, an environmental

impact statement (EIS) or a finding of no significance (FONSI) will be issued.

The Trustees have integrated this restoration plan with the NEPA process to comply with those

requirements. This integrated process allows the Trustees to meet the public involvement

requirements of OPA and NEPA concurrently. This DRP/EA is intended to accomplish partial

NEPA compliance by:

summarizing the current environmental setting;

describing the purpose and need for restoration action;

identifying alternative actions;

assessing the preferred actions' environmental consequences; and,

summarizing opportunities for public participation in the decision process.

Project-specific NEPA documents will need to be prepared for those proposed restoration

projects not already analyzed in an environment assessment or environmental impact statement. 

Park System Resource Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. 19jj

Public Law 101-337, Park System Resource Protection Act (16 U.S.C.19jj), requires the

Secretary of the Interior to assess and monitor injuries to park system resources. The Act

specifically allows the Secretary of the Interior to recover response costs and damages from the

responsible party causing the destruction, loss of or injury to park system resources. This Act

provides that any monies recovered by the NPS may be used to reimburse the costs of response

and damage assessment and to restore, replace or acquire the equivalent of the injured resources.

Clean Water Act (CWA) (Federal Water Pollution Control Act), 33 U.S.C. 1251, et seq.

The CWA is the principal law governing pollution control and water quality of the nation's

waterways. Section 404 of the law authorizes a permit program for the disposal of dredged or fill

material into navigable waters. The Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) administers the program. 

In general, restoration projects which move significant amounts of material into or out of waters

or wetlands -- for example, hydrologic restoration of marshes -- require 404 permits.

Under section 401 of the CWA, restoration projects that involve discharge or fill to wetlands or

navigable waters must obtain certification of compliance with state water quality standards. 

Generally, restoration projects with minor wetlands impacts (i.e., a project covered by a Corps

general permit) do not require 401 certification, while projects with potentially large or

cumulative impacts do.

Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), 16 U.S.C. 1451, et seq. 15 CFR Part 923

The goal of the CZMA is to preserve, protect, develop and, where possible, restore and enhance

the nation's coastal resources. The federal government provides grants to states with federallyapproved coastal management programs. The State of Washington has a federally-approved

program. Section 1456 of the CZMA requires that any federal action inside or outside of the

coastal zone that affects any land or water use or natural resources of the coastal zone shall be

consistent, to the maximum extent practicable, with the enforceable policies of approved State

management programs. It states that no federal license or permit may be granted without giving

the State the opportunity to concur that the project is consistent with the State's coastal policies. 

The regulations outline the consistency procedures. 
Appendix A - 3

To comply with the CZMA, the Trustees intend to seek the concurrence of the State of

Washington that their preferred projects are consistent to the maximum extent practicable with

the enforceable policies of the state coastal program.

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42

U.S.C. §§ 9601, et seq.

CERCLA provides the basic legal framework for clean up and restoration of the nation's

hazardous substances sites. Generally, parties responsible for contamination of sites and the

current owners or operators of contaminated sites are liable for the cost of clean up and

restoration. CERCLA establishes a hazard ranking system for assessing the nation's

contaminated sites with the most contaminated sites being placed on the National Priorities List

(NPL). 

To the extent that restoration projects are proposed for areas containing hazardous substances,

the Trustees will avoid exacerbating any potential risk posed by such substances and will

undertake no actions which might constitute “arrangement for disposal of hazardous substances.” 

At this time, the Trustees are not aware of any potential hazardous substance problem associated

with the areas where proposed restoration projects will occur. 

Endangered Species Act (ESA), 16 U.S.C. 1531, et seq.

The ESA directs all federal agencies to conserve endangered and threatened species and their

habitats and encourages such agencies to utilize their authorities to further these purposes. Under

the Act, the DOC through NOAA and the DOI through the FWS publish lists of endangered and

threatened species. Section 7 of the Act requires that federal agencies consult with these

departments to minimize the effects of federal actions on endangered and threatened species. 

Prior to implementation of any project potentially affecting an endangered or threatened species,

the Trustees would conduct Section 7 consultations.

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 16 USC 1801 et seq.

The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act as amended and reauthorized

by the Sustainable Fisheries Act (Public Law 104-297) established a program to promote the

protection of essential fish habitat (EFH) in the review of projects conducted under federal

permits, licenses, or other authorities that affect or have the potential to affect such habitat. After

EFH has been described and identified in fishery management plans by the regional fishery

management councils, federal agencies are obligated to consult with the Secretary of Commerce

with respect to any action authorized, funded, or undertaken, or proposed to be authorized,

funded, or undertaken, by such agency that may adversely affect any EFH.

The Trustees believe that the proposed restoration projects will have no adverse effect on the

EFH units defined in the Pacific Groundfish Fishery Management Plan. The projects will

promote the protection of fish resources in EFH areas. Prior to implementation of any restoration

projects that may potentially create a potential adverse impact to EFH, the Trustees will consult

with the National Marine Fisheries Service.
Appendix A - 4

Endangered Species Act and Essential Fish Habitat

Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service

under the Endangered Species Act and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and

Management Act will occur prior to any on-the-ground projects that may adversely affect listed

species or habitats.

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA), 16 U.S.C. 661, et seq.

The FWCA requires that federal agencies consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the

National Marine Fisheries Service and State wildlife agencies for activities that affect, control or

modify waters of any stream or bodies of water, in order to minimize the adverse impacts of such

actions on fish and wildlife resources and habitat. This consultation is generally incorporated

into the process of complying with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, NEPA or other federal

permit, license or review requirements. 

Rivers and Harbors Act, 33 U.S.C. 401, et seq.

The Rivers and Harbors Act regulates development and use of the nation's navigable waterways. 

Section 10 of the Act prohibits unauthorized obstruction or alteration of navigable waters and

vests the Corps with authority to regulate discharges of fill and other materials into such waters. 

Restoration actions that require Section 404 Clean Water Act permits are likely also to require

permits under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. However, a single permit usually serves

for both. Therefore, the Trustees can ensure compliance with the Rivers and Harbors Act

through the same mechanism.

Executive Order 12898 - Environmental Justice

On February 11, 1994, President Clinton issued Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to

Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations. This

Executive Order requires each federal agency to identify and address, as appropriate,

disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs,

policies and activities on minority and low income populations. EPA and the Council on

Environmental Quality (CEQ) have emphasized the importance of incorporating environmental

justice review in the analyses conducted by federal agencies under NEPA and of developing

mitigation measures that avoid disproportionate environmental effects on minority and lowincome populations. The Trustees have concluded that there are no low income or ethnic

minority communities that would be adversely affected by the proposed restoration activities.

Executive Order 11988 -- Construction in Flood plains

This 1977 Executive Order directs federal agencies to avoid to the extent possible the long and

short term adverse impacts associated with the occupancy and modification of Flood plains and

to avoid direct or indirect support of development in Flood plains wherever there is a practicable

alternative. Each agency is responsible for evaluating the potential effects of any action it may

take in a flood plain. 

Before taking an action, the federal agency must determine whether the proposed action will

occur in a flood plain. For major federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human
Appendix A - 5

environment, the evaluation will be included in the agency’s NEPA compliance document(s). 

The agency must consider alternatives to avoid adverse effects and incompatible development in

Flood plains. If the only practicable alternative requires siting in a flood plain, the agency must:

1) design or modify the action to minimize potential harm; and, 2) prepare and circulate a notice

containing an explanation of why the action is proposed to be located in the flood plain. 

Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA), Ch. 70.105D RCW (1989) and Ch. 173-340 WAC

(1992)

MTCA, Washington’s toxic cleanup law, mandates that site cleanups protect the state’s citizens

and the environment. The regulations established cleanup standards, which provide a uniform,

statewide approach to cleanup that can be applied on a site-by-site basis; and requirements for

cleanup actions, which involve evaluating the best methodology to achieve cleanup standards at a

site.

State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Ch. 43 RCW

Adopted in 1971, and revised several times, SEPA requires state agencies and local governments

to analyze proposed projects and plans for potentially significant impacts to the environment. 

Regulations implementing SEPA and providing guidance for state and local governments have

been adopted (CH. 197-11 WAC). Specific resource areas which must be considered under

SEPA include earth, air, water, vegetation, wildlife, public health, and shorelines. The SEPA

review process may be initiated at the local government level through the development

application review procedures. Local regulations identifying and protecting critical or sensitive

environmental areas help ensure compliance with SEPA regulations. State agencies also prepare

documents in response to proposals for state agency action. 

A.3 Other Potentially Applicable Laws and Regulations

This section lists other laws that potentially affect any proposed restoration activities. The

statutes or their implementing regulations may require permits from federal or state permitting

authorities.

Archaeological Resources Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. 470, et seq.

Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.

Marine Mammal Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. 1361, et seq.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 16 U.S.C. 703, et seq.

National Historic Preservation Act, 16 U.S.C. 470, et seq.

National Park Act of August 19, 1916 (Organic Act), 16 U.S.C. 1, et seq.

Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary, 15 CFR Part 922
Appendix B - 1

Appendix B: Summary of public comments on the Draft and Revised Draft

Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment

The following issues, concerns, and suggestions were received during the public comment

periods of the Draft Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment (DRP/EA) from February 1,

1999 through April 12, 1999, and the Revised Draft Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment

(RDRP/EA) from January 7, 2000 through February 7, 2000. Comments are summarized below

and are categorized according to subject. The number following the comment corresponds to the

number of similar public comments received. A response to the comments is provided by the

Trustee Committee. 

General Comments of the overall Draft Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment

Comments:

Support for the DRP/EA as developed by the Trustee Committee. (2)

Urge support for the preferred Alternative D: An Integrative Approach to Restoration. (2)

Request that the Trustee Committee select Alternative C: Habitat Focused Restoration as

the preferred alternative. (1)

The restoration plan should include restoration efforts for other seabirds, such as Cassin’s

and rhinoceros auklets, and tufted puffins. (2)

Why wasn’t quantification of injuries to fish, shellfish, and fisheries resource, including

injury to fishery associated habitats pursued as part of the damage assessment? (1)

Make funds available for other types of studies that would improve damage assessment

for future spills. (1)

The public comment period for the RDRP/EA was insufficient and should be extended.

(4)

Extensive baseline data was lacking in the revised draft and should be included in the

final plan. This would generate more meaningful predictions for No Action/Natural

Recovery which should be more clearly documented in the plan. (1)

Quantifiable goals should be more clearly defined so alternatives can be reviewed in

terms of their effectiveness in meeting those goals. (1)

Siltation, and preventative measures, such as the towing vessel and the oiled wildlife

rehabilitation center, is a result of another influence and should be pursued under a

separate project. These projects are not part of the consent decree and would significantly

reduce the amount of funds available for the true purpose of the settlement. (1)

The final plan should include an ecosystem-based alternative to be compared with other

alternatives in terms of effectiveness toward meeting clearly stated goals. (1)

Specific budgetary information relevant to the proposed projects should be made

available to the public. (2)

Restoration efforts should be focused on common murres, tufted puffins, and marbled

murrelets. (1)

Failure to restore tufted puffins is negligent with respect to the criteria on page 3-2, as

well as on the part of the agencies. (1)

It is an apparent conflict of interest for all proposed projects to be accomplished in-house

by trustee agencies. (1)
Appendix B - 2

A scientific oversight committee should be formed to review all projects. At least half of

the members of the oversight committee should be from agencies, organizations, or

universities independent of the trustees. (1) 

Each funded project should be put out for a public request for proposal, with independent

review of all proposals by the aforementioned scientific committee. Criteria for

acceptance should include expertise, implementation feasibility, and budget. (1)

Return funds which would have been spent on declined projects to a central repository for

future use, including additional projects and/or projects elements, as determined by the

expert review committee in consultation with the trustees. (1)

Response:

The Trustees considered four alternatives in their selection of the preferred alternative. All of the

alternatives evaluated had ecosystem-level benefits. However, the preferred alternative, an

integrative restoration approach, was chosen after consideration of public comment, partly

because of its encompassing array of potential projects that offered the greatest opportunity to

integrate projects into a comprehensive ecosystem-level restoration, benefitting the greatest

number of species. The Tenyo Maru spill primarily affected the marine environment. The

integrative restoration approach allows for terrestrial habitat improvements for marbled murrelet

nesting and conservation of kelp as well as restoration of marine nesting seabirds, including

common murre, Cassin’s auklets, and tufted puffins.

The Trustee Committee has added language for the consideration of a tufted puffin project if

Phase II of the Restoration of Common Murre Colonies in Copalis National Wildlife Refuge

(NWR) (Section 3.2.2.1) is not pursued.

Fish surveys were conducted as part of the injury assessment for the Tenyo Maru oil spill. This

was primarily an offshore spill, and with the exception of kelp beds, there were negligible

impacts to other nearshore environments. No adverse effects to fishery resources were

documented. Thus, the final restoration plan addresses the restoration of seabirds and kelp (those

resources documented to have been injured by the oil spill). The fisheries resource, as part of the

kelp-associated ecosystem, may indirectly benefit from the conservation and recovery of kelp

beds.

The use of restoration funds is guided by Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) under

the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) of 1990. The Trustee Committee does not have the ability to

authorize expenditures on studies purely for future injury assessment. Restoration funds must be

used to restore, rehabilitate, replace and/or acquire the equivalent of natural resources injured by

the Tenyo Maru oil spill.

Public comment was solicited on the DRP/EA from February 1 through April 12, 1998. In

response to comments received on the DRP/EA, the document was modified slightly by adding a

project proposal to provide partial funding to station an emergency towing vessel at the entrance

to the Strait of Juan de Fuca and by deleting a project proposal to reduce seabird by-catch in

coastal set net fisheries. The Trustees felt that the Plan was revised significantly enough that an
Appendix B - 3

additional public comment period should be pursued. The Trustees resubmitted a RDRP/EA for

a 30-day public comment period from January 7 through February 7, 2000, consistent with the

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the OPA, and the NRDA regulations. 

Unfortunately, as is the case for many spill situations, extensive pre-spill baseline data were

lacking for the Tenyo Maru oil spill. The Trustees funded some pilot projects with interest funds

earned from the restoration fund to aid in the selection of a preferred restoration alternative, and

to help establish baseline that could be used to evaluate the progress of any potential restoration

efforts. Some of these projects included a survey of common murre colonies in Washington and

Oregon, evaluation of productivity and reproductive success on Tatoosh Island off the

Washington coast, a seabird prey-base study, and at-sea distribution of common murres and

marbled murrelets.. As a result of the pilot project data, the Trustees chose an integrative

restoration approach as the most efficient and effective alternative in restoring the environment

and reaching the primary goal of the restoration plan, which is to compensate the public for

injuries by restoring, rehabilitating, or replacing specific populations of seabirds and kelp beds

(including their associated communities). The primary objective is to provide a functioning and

sustainable ecosystem where specific populations of seabirds and kelp beds are enhanced to

provide a net gain of habitat function beyond existing conditions. 

In addition to primary goals and objectives, each project proposal has specific project goals that

will be used in monitoring and measuring the progress of the project. Estimated budget and

schedules are provided for each project proposal in Section 4 of the Plan. Several restoration

projects will be defined in greater detail through the development of scopes of work, work plans,

specific budgets, and time-lines to measure the success and progress of the project. These

projects will have work committees likely consisting of Trustee and non-Trustee expertise. 

Some of the actual work activities are expected to be contracted out by the work committee

through a proposal process. This process would include selection criteria, such as, expertise,

implementation feasibility, and budget. However, per NRDA under OPA, Trustees will have

oversight of project implementation and the overall restoration progress. 

Kelp was a natural resource with documented injury as a result of the spilled oil. Siltation has a

serious impact on the health and recruitment of kelp beds. The Trustees believe that restoration

projects that facilitate the growth of kelp, such as projects that would reduce the amount of

siltation load on kelp beds, will aid in the recovery of this ecosystem and the species associated

with it. Improving the success of rehabilitation and subsequent release of wildlife would likely

provide a positive effect on restoration through population stabilization and recruitment,

especially for rare and endangered species. 

Public comments received on the draft plans have revealed that the marbled murrelet habitat 

protection project is favored as a restoration tool to recover marbled murrelet populations and

benefit other species that interact with marbled murrelet habitat. The Trustee Committee has

dedicated any remaining funds from some of the projects to protecting marbled murrelet habitat.

Restoration of Common Murre Colonies in Copalis National Wildlife Refuge
Appendix B - 4

Comment

Allowing for the natural repopulation of this habitat is far superior and sustainable option

than is being proposed in the plan. (1)

Will reference sites be monitored during Phase I and II? (1)

• Will colonies be accessed to determine physical/habitat limitations to population growth

and recovery? (1)

• Define "adequately monitored" in "Phase II of this plan will be implemented if restoration

sites can be adequately monitored." (1)

• Demographic analyses is needed prior to this project. (1)

• Additional studies are needed on the possible benefit of decoys and sound playback

effect. (1)

• There needs to be specific criteria set for determining when and if the project will

advance from Phase I (feasibility) to Phase II. (1)

• The presence of a small group of breeders should not preclude Phase II of the project. (1)

• How will it be determined that there is a cause-effect relationship between eagle fly-overs

and other natural or anthropogenic activities and population declines of murres? Define

"other natural" problems more clearly. (1)

• The decision of logistical feasibility should be made by an inspection of the sites by

people who have previously installed such equipment and know when technical climbing

and boat accessibility are feasible. (1)

• Do not see the value of a second year feasibility study. (1)

• Appears to meet the criteria for inclusion. (1) Recommendations for restoration

implementation:

a) Inclusion of chick diet and/or forage rate sampling;

b) Coordination of ongoing PNCERS, GLOBEC, and BPA nearshore research

designed to address production changes in coastal Oregon and Washington;

c) Formation of a team of independent experts to review the causes of murre

population decline at the conclusion of Phase I. Experts should be appointed across

the trustee agencies, with at least half coming from agencies, organizations, or

universities independent of the trustees;

d) Additional reference sites in Oregon, or at the very least coordination with 

existing data collection efforts of the Oregon Coastal Refuges office in Newport,

OR;

e) There is evidence to suggest populations are decolonizing Copalis National

Wildlife Refuge; independent scientific review committee should evaluate criteria

for moving to Phase II of this plan. (1)

f) If Phase II is implemented, continued monitoring of both Copalis Rocks and the 

reference sites should be conducted to determine whether murres can successfully

breed and are not being drawn into a demographic sink and whether this immigration

is causing significant decline in other Washington murre colonies.

• Concern with human intervention in the restoration of common murres on the Copalis

National Wildlife Refuge. (1)

Response:
Appendix B - 5

Phase I of the project will include assessing the colony sites to determine whether the use of

social attraction methods are needed and appropriate. Adequate monitoring of the restoration

project is defined as the ability to determine an index or measurement that can be used to

assess the effectiveness of social attraction techniques. Please refer to Section 3.2.2.1 -

Proposed Activities - Phase I - Feasibility Study.

The monitoring of a reference site will be detailed further in scope of work documents and

project methodologies developed for this project. The Trustee Committee is limited as to

how much "investigation" i.e., demographic analyses, may be done that does not directly

restore the resources injured in the Tenyo Maru oil spill. The Trustee Committee is utilizing

current information and expertise gained in the similar restoration efforts on Devil’s Slide

Rock in California as part of the Restoration Plan for Seabirds Injured by the Apex Houston

Oil Spill (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1995) as an example of the potential success of

restoring common murres injured in an oil spill. As Phase I of the project develops, we will

continue to use the expertise gained in the Apex Houston project for implementation and

evaluation of Phase I..

The Trustee Committee added criteria to several of the projects in the RDRP/EA and this

project is one of them. Please refer to Section 3.2.2.1 - Proposed activities: Project Criteria

for specific criteria to aid the Committee in the evaluation of Phase I. 

This restoration plan provides the general concept of the projects. The project coordinators

for each project will provide the specific design of their project to the Trustee Committee for

evaluation, potential modification, and approval. The specific project designs will be

consistent with the restoration plan but provide more detail in methods, work plans and

detailed scopes, schedules, and budgets. The work committee charged with implementation

of this project will consider comments received regarding project implementation in the

development of the specific design of this project. The appropriate environmental documents

and applicable permits will be prepared for review and adoption by the Trustee Committee

before implementation of any project.

The Trustee Committee has allowed two years for Phase I of the project for flexibility in the

plan to allow for weather and other potential unforseen problems. The Trustee Committee

will have close oversight of all phases of the project and will closely monitor the funding

allocations for Phase I of the project. 

Oiled Wildlife Rehabilitation Center

Comment:

• Oppose restoration funds being spent on a wildlife rehabilitation center. (5) 

• Question the usefulness and the Puget Sound location of a wildlife rehabilitation center.

(2)

• Support funding a wildlife rehabilitation center with Tenyo Maru restoration monies. (41

- many of which appeared to be variations of a form letter)

Response:
Appendix B - 6

The Trustee Committee believes that improving rehabilitation techniques in the State of

Washington will aid in the recovery of injured species. Improving the ability to return injured

individuals back to their natural environment will supplement population recruitment and

recovery, especially for threatened and endangered species. Partial funding of the establishment

of a rehabilitation center in Washington may help to improve rehabilitation techniques that

would be especially valuable for endangered and rare species and may provide a public education

forum for seabird and kelp ecology. The Tenyo Maru restoration settlement provides a minor

portion of the overall cost of establishment of a rehabilitation center. The total cost associated

with the actual rehabilitation of wildlife as a result of a recognized incident would continue to be

the responsibility of the spiller. 

Per recommendations by experts in the field of wildlife rehabilitation, the Final Restoration

Plan/Environmental Assessment states that a primary care facility would be provided on the coast

to stabilize animals for transport to the South Puget Sound area where equipment, supplies, and

24-hour staffing are more readily available.

Public Education Signs and Brochures

Comments:

The education of the public regarding human disturbances of nesting seabirds should not

be funded by this restoration project, but by the NWR system, the Olympic National Park,

or the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary. (1)

It may be more cost productive to increase education for personnel operating freights, oil

tankers, and other large ships. (1)

• Support the use of $100,000 for education programs (2)

Response:

This education project will build upon existing multi-agency cooperation in current education

programs in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), Washington State Parks, Olympic

National Park, and the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary (OCNMS). It will

complement FWS education efforts underway with the Nestucca oil spill restoration funds and

other current education efforts to reduce impacts from aircraft overflights. This project will not

fund current education programs, rather, it is a cooperative venture to educate the recreational

users that access ports along the Oregon Coast, Tatoosh Island, and the OCNMS. Signs will be

posted at marinas and not on the National Wildlife Refuges. Brochures will be printed for

recreational users as well as commercial users of the nesting seabird areas. 

Marbled Murrelet Habitat Protection and River Silt Reduction

Comments:

• Support efforts to acquire habitat for affected resources. (3)

• Suggest purchasing commercial logging rights or acquiring holdings within the Lake

Ozette Watershed for marbled murrelet habitat and to reduce siltation and aid in the

recovery of Lake Ozette sockeye stocks. (2)
Appendix B - 7

• If Trustees are limited to only purchasing occupied marbled murrelet habitat, consider

purchasing development rights on the Makah’s primary reservation instead of around

Lake Ozette. (1)

Significantly increase the funding allocated to protection and recovery of marbled

murrelet nesting habitat. (4)

No Tenyo Maru funds should be spent on reduction of stream siltation. A huge amount

of resources is already available for the restoration of salmonid populations. (1)

Strongly consider the release of a portion of the Tenyo Maru oil spill restoration funds to

purchase Teal Slough property in Pacific County, Washington. (1)

Pleased that the largest sum of restoration funds is being allocated to habitat-focused

restoration. (2) However, there is concern with lack of effort to identify habitats for

purchase. 

Consider purchasing habitat, other than marbled murrelet habitat. (1)

Response:

Marbled murrelet surveys as well as Phase I of the river silt reduction component will identify

projects that comply with the criteria established by the Trustee Committee for protection and

recovery of marbled murrelet nesting habitat and river silt reduction. These surveys and

investigations will include the Lake Ozette Watershed and the Teal Slough property in Pacific

County, Washington. The DRP/EA and RDRP/EA provided general restoration project

suggestions to the public for consideration. Following consideration of public comments, the

Trustee Committee will make decisions regarding the final acceptance of projects. Specific

restoration implementation activities will be conducted on final accepted projects based on

criteria developed by the Trustee Committee, such as the selection of habitats for protection. 

Habitat selection must be based on the benefit to those species that were documented as injured

from the spill. 

Section 4 - Proposed Project Schedules and Estimated Budgets provides that any unused portions

of funding from several projects in the plan will increase allocations to marbled murrelet habitat

protection and river silt reduction, i.e., Restoration of Common Murre Colonies in Copalis NWR,

Oiled Wildlife Rehabilitation Center, and the Stationing of an Emergency Towing Vessel at the

Entrance to the Strait of Juan de Fuca.

Injury to kelp was documented as part of the natural resources injured in the Tenyo Maru oil

spill. The Trustee Committee has addressed this with the river silt reduction component of the

habitat focused restoration portion of the selected Integrated Restoration Approach Alternative. 

The feasibility portion of the river silt reduction project must be completed within six months of

the notice of availability of a final restoration plan. After consideration of public comment, the

Trustee Committee has developed strict criteria for the selection of river silt reduction projects. 

These criteria identify and preclude any projects that have current or potential protection through

regulation or other conservation activities. Please refer to Section 3.2.3.1 Marbled Murrelet

Habitat Protection and River Silt Reduction - Project Criteria for River Silt Reduction.
Appendix B - 8

Protection of Marine Environments by Stationing an Emergency Towing Vessel at the

Entrance to the Strait of Juan de Fuca

Comment:

Lease a rescue tug for Neah Bay during the year it takes the State and coast Guard to

complete their oil spill risk assessment. (9)

Strongly reject use of restoration funds to fund oil spill prevention measures, specifically

to station a stand-by rescue tug at Neah Bay, WA. (7)

The timing of the tug trial should not be limited to the deliberations of the North Sound

Risk Panel. (1)

• The June deadline for the rescue tug funds should be extended. (1)

• Correct the plan to note that the tug is not just for winter or high risk vessels. (1)

Response:

The Natural Resource Trustees for the Tenyo Maru oil spill are proposing to dedicate a portion

($400,000) of the recovered natural resource damages to contribute to the cost of stationing a

rescue tug at Neah Bay during the 1999-2000 storm season. Application of a portion of the

natural resource damage recoveries as seed money for the tug's deployment is an appropriate

expenditure as part of the restoration plan developed by the Trustees, and under the unique

circumstances presented. Partial funding for the tug represents a small but important component

of a more comprehensive plan aimed at benefitting the natural resources impacted by the oil spill.

The stationing of the tug during the period of greatest risk of a vessel grounding will help to

lessen the risk of further oil spills in the affected area, thereby increasing the likelihood of

success for the other measures in the restoration plan. While the direct benefits of a single storm

season's deployment of the tug will necessarily be of limited duration, the deployment will serve

as a stop-gap measure while other administrative processes regarding rescue tug stationing are

being completed, and will also provide important additional data for those processes to consider

in addressing the issue of long-term rescue tug deployment for response purposes.

The Tenyo Maru Consent Decree provides that the recovered damages are to be "used only for

restoring, rehabilitating, replacing or acquiring the equivalent of injured natural resources as

provided in 33 U.S.C. § 2706(f)." Consent Decree ¶ 23.f (The cited statutory section is the

source of the requirement that recovered damages may only be used to restore, rehabilitate,

replace or acquire the equivalent of affected natural resources.) The Tenyo Maru spill impacted

marine and avian natural resources along the outer coast of the Olympic Peninsula. The Trustees

have developed a proposed restoration plan involving actions that would benefit species of

seabirds and kelp communities harmed by the oil spill through habitat acquisition, preservation

and enhancement, seabird colony enhancement efforts, contribution to the funding of oiled

wildlife rehabilitation facilities, and public outreach and education. In response to public

comments received on the proposed restoration plan, the Trustees have proposed to include as a

plan element the partial funding for the rescue tug. The tug would be available to help prevent

vessel groundings and resulting oil spills associated with loss-of-power and loss-of-steering

events in the western Strait of Juan de Fuca and on the outer coast. Incidentally, it would also

help to mitigate the injuries to natural resources resulting from spills due to other events, by

serving as a oil spill response platform.
Appendix B - 9

In addition to public comments proposing and supporting funding for the tug deployment, the

Trustees also received comments opposed to the proposal and questioning the legality of

expending natural resource damages for this purpose. After evaluating the proposal and

supporting factual information, and taking into consideration information recently developed by

agencies evaluating marine safety issues in the area, the Trustees have concluded that the

proposed funding is consistent with legal requirements. By providing the funding in conjunction

with and in support of the overall plan for restoring the injured natural resources, the Trustees'

actions will restore, replace, rehabilitate and acquire the equivalent of the injured natural

resources as required by the Oil Pollution Act and the Consent Decree.

The aim of contributing to stationing the tug is to help increase the likelihood of success of the

restoration projects that are the primary focus of the restoration plan. The natural resources and

habitats impacted by the Tenyo Maru spill have likely experienced some level of natural recovery

in the years since the spill. That level of natural recovery presents a base upon which the other

projects in the plan will build in providing benefits to the target resources. Further spills will

erase or set back the natural recovery achieved to date and will diminish the beneficial effect of

the proposed restoration efforts. By helping to prevent or to lessen the effect of oil spill events,

the tug will help to increase the likelihood of success for the other projects and actions included

in the restoration plan. While the commitment of funds to the tug deployment is relatively small

(less than 7.5 percent of the recovered damages), by helping to provide an enhanced level of

protection for the natural resources of the outer Olympic Peninsula area impacted by the oil spill

the tug element serves as an important component of a comprehensive plan for restoring the

injured resources.

Currently available information indicates that the western Strait of Juan de Fuca and the outer

Olympic Peninsula coastline are at significant risk from future oil spills. A study conducted by

the John Volpe National Transportation Center for the U.S. Coast Guard, Scoping Risk

Assessment: Protection Against Oil Spills in the Marine Water of Northwest Washington State

(1997) (the "Volpe Study"), examined the likelihood of accidents and the environmental

consequences of a given spill. The Volpe Study judged the outer Olympic Peninsula coastline

among the study areas having the highest likelihood of accident involving an oil spill, a high

sensitivity to an oil spill, and a low capability for response to a spill. While a number of

initiatives have attempted to address these concerns, including an industry-led international tug

of opportunity system (ITOS), indications are that the risks remain high. A 1999 study by the

U.S. Coast Guard, Analysis of the Geographic Coverage Provided by the International Tug of

Opportunity System from November 1998 - May 1999, found that the ITOS provided only a 42

percent probability of coverage for the western half of the Strait of Juan de Fuca and offshore

areas. For the southern approaches to the Strait, the probability of coverage was only 14 percent.

These areas are among those most directly impacted by the Tenyo Maru spill and of greatest

concern to the Trustees, especially the Makah Tribe. A tug stationed at Neah Bay dedicated to

the rescue mission would increase the coverage for the affected areas to 100 percent. 

Permanent stationing of a rescue tug beyond this interim measure implemented in conjunction

with other restoration activities would not be an appropriate use of these restoration dollars. 
Appendix B - 10

Long-term decisions and commitments to a rescue tug, and the funding required, are the

responsibility of other agencies and response-related programs. The U.S. Coast Guard, in

communication with other agencies and parties, is continuing to examine the issue of the need for

further marine safety efforts in the area, and is in the process of conducting an analysis of

alternative approaches, including stationing a dedicated rescue tug such as the one proposed at

Neah Bay. Through implementation of this proposal, the Trustees would be providing interim

protection for the natural resources affected by the Tenyo Maru spill until the agencies with the

programmatic responsibility can complete their decision making processes. Incidentally,

deployment of the tug this season will also help to generate additional data on the need for and

effectiveness of a permanent dedicated rescue tug that those agencies can use in reaching their

decisions.

Seabird By-Catch Reduction in Coastal Set Net Fisheries

Comment:

• Skepticism of the benefit of the reduction of seabird by-catch in set net fisheries because

of reduced fishing vessels in coastal set-net fisheries. (1)

• There is little or no indication that auditory cues affect the foraging of seabirds. 

Therefore, the benefit of this restoration project is questionable. (1)

• It is impossible to select the best restoration option for common murres and other seabirds

in Washington State because appropriate analyses are lacking, such as demographic

analyses for Washington murres, auklets, and murrelets showing the relative effects of

oil-spill and gill-net mortality to the well-being of Washington’s seabird populations. If

gill net mortality is significant, then funds should be allocated for studies of the foraging

range and dispersion of birds using radio telemetry or aerial or shipboard surveys. (1)

• Monitoring the Tatoosh Island murre population as a means of determining the utility of

pingers in dissuading murres from foraging near nets does not seem well-founded in

logic. Too many factors affect the Tatoosh colony to make this aspect of the project a

sufficiently sensitive indicator of success of failure. Monitoring the Tatoosh Island murre

population should continue, and be paid for with Tenyo Maru restoration funds, but not

justified as a means of determining the success or failure for a pinger/gill-net by-catch

reduction project. (1)

• The estimated budget for the set-net fishery project seems high. (1)

• Disapprove of the deletion of the seabird by-catch reduction project in the RDRP/EA. (2)

Response: 

After consideration of public comments, the Trustees deleted the Seabird By-Catch

Reduction in Coastal Set-net Fisheries project from the RDRP/EA. No coastal set-net

fisheries are currently being conducted on the north Washington coast and such fisheries are

not likely to be resumed in the foreseeable future. The Trustees determined that the

feasibility and any restoration benefits associated with this project were questionable enough

for the project to be eliminated from the Final Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment.
APPENDIX C: Department of the Interior Finding of No Significant 

Impact under the National Environmental Policy Act for the Final

Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment for the Tenyo Maru Oil Spill 



APPENDIX D: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Finding of No Significant Impact under the National Environmental Policy

Act for the Final Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment of the Tenyo

Maru Oil Spill 

APPENDIX E: Washington State Environmental Policy Act Compliance