UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTE.CTION AGENCY REGION 10 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite HOO**S(~attle,** WA 98101·3140 

## OFC 1 4 ?009

CERTIFIED I\'IAII..•
- 

### RE'IlJRN RE(:ElPT REQlJES1'EO
.r..1r. 

### Ki III K

### ra11 A.cli.ng, ()regon Siale 

### I.labit.<lt 

### [)irectclr National**Marirh~Fish(~ries Servi('t~**  L!OI**N[.~** 

### IJc)yd Blvd.,**Suit(~** I IDC) 

### P()['lland, ()regon 

### 97232 

### Re:\Vilhdrawa! ofRequest for Forrna.! ('onsuitalioll;**r((~qUt~st** t<) C:tH1Stdl 

### inforrnally; and 

### Request for Concurrence I.hat Designation Ill'**Siwila~v** 

### River 

### Nllrth and South C.k'can 

### [)redged .Material Disposal Sit.es is "Not L.ikely 10 

### AdvC'rsely Affect" l..isted '['hrealellcd or Endangered Species


### Dear Mr. Kratz:

The tLS

.. Envirorllnent.ul 

### Proteetioll Agency O::l)A),**R\.~gion** 

### to,**appreciatt~s** 

### the work and 

### dTrlrt your staffhas**eXpt~IKk~d** 

### in assisting .EPA with**th~:** 

### consultation em EPA's pnJPosed action to designate 

### t.wo OCC,1Il**drt~dgt'd** 

### rnalcrial dispo.saJ sites 

### ncar the rnouth ofthe Siusbw 

### Rivt:r pursuant ICI 

### Section 102(c) 

### of the 

### Marine Protection, Research and 

### Sanctuaries Act,**a~, arnen(k~d**  

### (MPRSA). W'c 

### <lJe taking this opp()rtunity 10 

### w'ithdraw our**rt~que~t** j(lf 

### forrna! l'(Hlsuhali(1I1 

### nn Ii'll' 

### propnsed action and 10 request informal consultalion.
Based on our disl:lIssions 

### with 

### Yf)llr st.aff, and 

### based on our 

### assessrnenl. ofpotential impact.s 10 species from the proposed action If) design,,!(: two ()(:can dJt:dged rnatl:!rial disposal sites near the 

### rnollth ofthe Siusll1w**Rivt~r** 

### pursuant 

### to ScctiIHl 

### I02(d ofthe 1IrlPRSA, EPA has 

### ,kICnnin(:tl that. (.he proposed 

### action \0 

### designate the**~jlt:s** 

### is not 

### likely 1.0 

### adversely afft'ct 

### designated**spt'cie!~ oCl~urring**  

### in the <if!:!;] 

### or adversely 

### irnpacI designat.ed crll.ital habitat 

### fflr Ihclse species. EPA's

### l:\u!uar.icHl leading to**thl~** 

### conclusion that the actiC'IIl 

### is 

### niH likely tn adversely 

### "freet listed**sp('(.~ies** 

### or adversely 

### ilnpact critical 

### habitat f(If' 

### those**sIX~cks** 

### is enclos(:d. r;PA, 

### Region 10**n~qll,~st:.;** 

### your 

### ,,,riUen COII..:urrem:t.' that its**propclsl~d** 

### action to 

### (ksigllal.c'the Siuslaw North and South (kean Dredged 

### Material Disposal**Sitl'.~s** 

### is not 

### likely to adversely 

### aflec[ listed threatened or**endang\:.~rt.~d** 

### spet:ies ()I" 

### designat.ed crit.ical 

### habitllt.
'rhank you again for yOUI' 

### ass.istance during 

### this ciJnSUlialion. Wt: appreciate the 

### Iillle and effort 

### yClll!' office has put into the process to (/al(:. 

### II' Y()U stH.llIl.d 

### have 

### any questions. please do nOI 

### hesitate to call Jessica \-Vinkler 

### of

### Iny staffat. (206)**55~·** 

### 7369 orJustine 

### Barton at 

### (206) 553-6051.**SirKen~ly.**



### Richard B. Parkin, Director .' Office of

### Ecosysll~lns, 

### 'l'ribal and. 

### Publii0AJI'airs


### Enck.lslIre

cc w/encl.: 

### RClber! Andcl'S{)II, N.M.I.:'S

## SIUSLAWRIVER, OREGON, OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE DESIGNATION BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT ADDENDUM December 14, 2009


### This document references EPA's July 2009 Biological Assessment (BA). The following replaces applicable sections of the BA.
Determination for ESA-Listed Species and Designated Critical Habitat Coho Salmon
As described in EPA's assessment ofthe effects in theJuly 2009 Biological Assessment (BA). disposal ofmaterial at the sites could result in physiological effects to outmigratingjuvenile salmonids and therefore. could be an indirect effect ofsite designation. However. given that the peak for outmigration is typically from earlyMarch through early April and generally. disposal is expected to occur betweenJune 1and October31 ofeach yearand is not expected to exceed 20 , days annually, there is limited potential for overlap between the two seasons. Given that EPA expects primarily sand to be deposited at the sites. and that most likely a hopperdredge will be disposing ofmaterial gradually. wtJile underway, the potential for physiological effects to any nearbyjuvenile salmonids is low. Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed action mayaffect. but is not likely toadversely affectDC coho salmon, SONCC coho salmon, and Lower Columbia Rivercoho salmon. Critical habitat for OC coho salmon has been designated and the primary constituent elements (PCEs) include "offshore marine areas with water quality conditions and forage, includingaquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation." However, NMFS did not designate any specific areas based on these PCEs. Therefore, the proposed action would result in no effectto designated critical habitat for OC coho salmon. Critical habitat has been designated forSDNCC coho and "consists ofthe water, substrate, and adjacent riparian zone ofestuarine and riverine reaches" in specified hydrologic units ofriver reaches accessible tocoho salmon within the listed ESU (64 FR 24049). Designated critical habitat for SONCC does not include ocean waters and therefore. the proposed action would result in 110 effectto SONCC critical habitat. No critical habitat for Lower Columbia Rivercoho has been designated. 

### Chinook Salmon
Based on EPA's assessment ofeffects in the BA, it is concluded that the proposed action may affect. but is 1I0t likely to adverselyaffectLower Columbia River Chinook. Upper Willamette River spring-run Chinook, Upper Columbia River spring-run Chinook, Snake River spring/summerrun Chinook, orSnake River fall-run Chinook. Since none ofthese species spawn in the Siuslaw River and only the UpperWillamette River Chinook has designated critical habitat within the action area, the proposed action will have llO effecton designated critical habitat for any ofthese ESUs. 

### Green Sturgeon Accordingto the NMFS analysis supportingthe listing ofthe Southern DPS ofgreen sturgeon, "theprincipal factor for decline ofthe Southern DPS is the reduction ofthe spawning area to a limited area ofthe Sacramento River" (71 FR 17762). The proposed Siuslaw ocean disposal site designations would have no effect on the spawning area for the Southern DPS and is only expected to result in temporary and minor modifications to migratory pathways. Use oftheSiuslaw North and South ocean disposal sites for drsposal could result in temporary avoidance behaviorin migrating adult green sturgeon. It is possible that smaller subadultfish would 

### be less able to avoid the areadue to slower swimming speeds. However, given that EPAexpects primarily sand to be deposited at the sites and that most likely a hopper dredge will be disposing ofmaterial gradually, while underway. the potential for physiological effects to any nearby subadult green sturgeon is low. Therefore, it is concluded that the proposedaction mayaffect, but is not likely to adverselyaffect Southern OPS green sturgeon. Also based onthe above assessment, the proposed action todesignate two OOMO sites at the mouth ofthe Siuslaw River mayaffect, but is not likely to adverselyaffect designated critical habitat for Southern DPS green sturgeon. 

### Pacific Eulachon
Based on the above assessment ofthe effects, it is concluded that the proposed action is not likely tojeopardize the continuedexistence ofSouthern OPS pacific eulachon. Use ofthe Siuslaw North and South ocean disposal sites for disposal could result in temporary avoidance behavior in any nearby eulachon. According to the NMFS analysis supporting the proposed listing ofthe Southern DPS ofpacific eulachon, the most significant threat to eulachon and their habitats are changes in ocean conditionsdue to climatechange (see 74 FR 10870). The proposed Siuslaw ocean disposal site designations would have no effect on climate-related impacts or spawning
areas for the Southern DPS, and is only expected to result in temporary and minor modifications to migratory pathways. No long-term effects are expected to occurto pacific eulachon. 

### Marine Mammals
Based upon the above assessment ofthe effects, it is concluded that the proposed action may affect, butis not Ukely to adverselyaffect Steller sea lion. blue whale, fin whale. humpback whale, and southern resident killer whale. There is no designated critical habitat for the above listed species in the action area and therefore, the proposed action will have flO effect on designated critical habitat for Steller sea lion or southern resident killer whale. Steller sealions
are expected to avoid the sites during disposal activities. The whale species generally occur as migrants much farther from shore than the action area, and it is likely that they would avoid the
ocean disposal areas duringintermittent disposal activities. 

### Coastal Birds
Based on the above assessment, marbled murrelets, shorHailed albatross, and brown pelicans may temporarily avoid the disposal areas during active disposal activities. Therefore, the proposed action mayaffect, butis not likelyto adversely affect marbled murrelet. short-tailed albatross, and brown pelican. Since no marbled murrelet critical habitat is located within the action area, the proposed action will have flO effect on designated critical habitat for marbled murrelet. 

### Terrestrial Birds, Invertebrates. and Plants

None ofthe other listed bird, invertebrate, orplant species is likely to be present in the action
area. Therefore. the proposed action would have no effect on western snowy plover, northern spoued owl, Oregon silverspot butterfly, Fender's blue butterfly. Kincaid's lupine, Willamette daisy, and Bradshaw's desert parsley. The proposed action will also have no effect on any designated critical habitat for these species.