Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWhitman Lake Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11597 Scoping Document 1 December 1998WHITMAN LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC Project No. 11597 SCOPING DOCUMENT 1 Ketchikan Public Utilities December 1998 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 WHITMAN LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT SCOPING DOCUMENT 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION SCOPING 2.1 Purposes of Scoping 2.2 Scoping Meetings 2.3 — Site Visit REQUEST FOR INFORMATION PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 4.1 KPU’s Proposed Action 4.1.1 Project Description 4.1.2 Project Operation 4.1.3 Proposed Protection and Mitigation 4.2 Modifications to KPU’s Proposed Action 4.3 No Action Table of Contents 4.4 Alternatives Considered by KPU but Eliminated from Detailed Evaluation SCOPE OF CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS AND RESOURCE ISSUES 5.1 Cumulative Effects 5.1.1 Resources that Could be Cumulatively Affected 5.1.2. Geographic Scope 5.1.3 Temporal Scope 5.2 Resource Issues 5.2.1 Geological Resources 5.2.2 Water Resources 5.2.3 Fishery Resources 5.2.4 Terrestrial Resources 5.2.5 Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species 5.2.6 Aesthetic Resources 5.2.7 Cultural Resources 5.2.8 Recreation and Other Land Uses DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OUTLINE SCHEDULE FOR PREPARING DEA AND LICENSE APPLICATION December 1998 Scoping Document 1 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project Introduction 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Whitman Lake Project is located near the southeast end of Revillagigedo Island, approximately four miles east of the City of Ketchikan, Alaska. Whitman Lake is naturally formed, but the normal water surface elevation was raised about 18 feet in 1927 with the construction of a 46 -foot high concrete gravity arch dam at the lake outlet. The dam was originally part of a 1,500 kW hydroelectric project owned by New England Fish Company. The Ketchikan Utilities Board purchased the project in 1957 and the plant was retired from service shortly thereafter. The original penstock and powerhouse have, for the most part, been demolished and removed from the site, but the dam remains in service providing water supply to the Herring Cove Fish Hatchery. The Project is located on lands owned by the State of Alaska and United States Forest Service (USFS). The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or FERC) issued a three-year Preliminary Permit for the Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project on June 5, 1997. The permit gives Ketchikan Public Utility District (KPU) priority for filing a development application while conducting engineering and environmental feasibility studies. KPU intends to file an application for a “Major Project-Existing Dam” with a total installed capacity of 5 MW or less (18 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Subpart G, Section 4.60). KPU is utilizing the Applicant Prepared Environmental Assessment (APEA) process to prepare an application for an original license for the Project. A communications protocol has been distributed to interested entities. Under the APEA process a draft NEPA Environmental Assessment (DEA) will be prepared in lieu of Exhibit E of the License Application. The DEA will be prepared in conformance with the Commission’s regulations governing the APEA process (Order No. 596, issued October 29, 1997). The Commission, under the authority of the Federal Power Act (FPA), may issue original licenses for up to 50 years for the construction, operation and maintenance of nonfederal hydroelectric developments. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, issuing an original license for the Project requires preparation of either an environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). In accordance with Commission regulations that govern the procedures to be followed in the APEA process, KPU will prepare a Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment (PDEA) that analyzes the issues raised during pre-filing consultation and the scoping process. The PDEA will include descriptions and evaluations of KPU’s proposed action and action alternatives. The PDEA will be circulated to all participants for review. KPU will then file with the Commission a license application and a draft EA (DEA) that addresses the comments and recommendations received on the PDEA. The Commission will evaluate KPU’s DEA and, if it meets the commission’s criteria and standards, will issue is own DEA for comment followed by a final EA (FEA). December 1998 Scoping Document 1] Page 1 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project Scoping 2.0 SCOPING 2.1 PURPOSES OF SCOPING The purposes of this scoping document are to: e Invite participation of federal, state, and local agencies, any Native groups, and other interested parties to identify significant environmental and socioeconomic issues related to the proposed action. e Determine the depth of analysis and significance of issues to address in the DEA. e Identify how the Project would or would not contribute to cumulative effects in the Whitman Lake basin. e Identify reasonable alternatives that should be evaluated. e Eliminate from detailed study the issues and resources that do not require detailed analysis during review of the Project. e Solicit additional study requests. This Scoping Document is being made available to agencies, the public, and other interested participants. All issues raised during the scoping comment period will be reviewed and decisions made as to the level of analysis needed int he preparation of the DEA. If preliminary analysis indicates that any issues presented in this Scoping Document have little potential for causing impacts, the issue or issues will be identified, and the reasons for not providing a more detailed analysis will be given in the DEA. Any dispute over additional study requests that cannot be resolved between the Applicant and the requesting party will be referred to the Commission for resolution. 2.2. SCOPING MEETINGS In addition to written comments solicited by the Scoping Document, KPU will hold two scoping meeting to solicit any verbal comments and viewpoints that people may wish to offer about the Project. These scoping meetings are an important part of the NEPA review process. KPU invites your attendance at any of the meetings to help us identify the scope of issues that should be analyzed in the DEA. The times and location for the meetings are as follows: December 1998 Scoping Document 1 Page 2 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project Scoping Agency Meeting Public Meeting Date: February 2, 1999 Date: February 1, 1999 Time: 8:30am-11:30am Time: 7:00pm - 10:30pm Location: Ted Ferry Civic Center Location: Ted Ferry Civic Center 888 Venetia Avenue 888 Venetia Avenue Ketchikan, AK Ketchikan, AK The scoping meetings will be recorded, and all statements (verbal and written) will become part of the public record for the Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project. Individuals participating in the meetings will be asked to clearly identify themselves for the record. Interested parties who choose not to participate, or who are unable to attend either scoping meeting may submit written statements until April 3, 1998. These will become part of the official Project file (see Section 3.0). 2.3. SITE VISIT A visit to the proposed Project site is intended to give resource agencies, native group representatives and any other interested parties a first-hand observation of the Project site. The time and location of the site visit are as follows: Date: February 2, 1999 Meeting Place: Herring Cove Hatchery Time: 12:30 pm December 1998 Scoping Document I Page 3 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project Request for Information 3.0 REQUEST FOR INFORMATION This Scoping Document and the scoping meetings are designed to provide further understanding of the Project and to encourage all interested parties to participate and contribute input on important environmental issues and reasonable alternatives to be considered in the DEA. We request federal, state, and local resource agencies, native groups, other interest groups and individuals to forward, or present at the scoping meetings, information that they believe will assist the Commission in conducting an accurate and thorough analysis of the Project-specific effects, as well as cumulative effects, of the Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project. Types of information requested include, but are not limited to the following: ¢ Comments on the scope of issues presented in this scoping document, and whether any other issues need to be included. e Information, quantified data, or professional opinions that may contribute in identifying and defining the scope of important environmental issues. e Identification of, and information from, any other environmental document or similar analyses of studies (previous, on-going, or planned) relevant to the proposed Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project. e Information and quantified data that would help describe the existing resources of the Project area, including physical, chemical, biolobical, and socioeconomic resources. e Identification of any federal, state, or local resource plans, environmental impact statements, and future Project proposals in the affected resource area. e¢ Documentation to support a conclusion whether or not the proposed Project would contribute to adverse or beneficial effects on resources, including but not limited to a) how the Project interacts with other hydropower projects and other developmental activities within the affected area, b) results from studies, c) resource management policies, and d) reports from federal, state and local agencies. e Consideration of alternatives to the proposed action. e Documentation showing why any resources should be excluded from further study or consideration. December 1998 Scoping Document 1 Page 4 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project Request for Information You may submit the requested information at the scoping meetings, or in writing. Written material must be received no later than April 3, 1999. Send all written comments to: Mr. Don Thompson WESCORP 3035 Island Crest Way Suite 200 Mercer Island, WA 98040 All written filing must clearly identify the following on the first page: Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 11597) Any additional study requests must conform to the requirements of 18 CFR section 4.32(b)(7), which requires the requester to describe the study and the basis for the request in detail, including who should conduct and participate in the study, its methodology and objectives, whether the methodology is generally accepted in the scientific community, how the study results would be used by the requesting agency to assess resource issues under their jurisdiction, how long the study would take to complete, and why the study’s objectives cannot be achieved using data already available. Copies of the additional study requests should be received by April 3, 1999, by Mr. Don Thompson at the address above, and sent to: David P. Boergers, Acting Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Office of Hydropower Licensing 888 1" Street, NE Washington, DC 20426 December 1998 Scoping Document 1 Page 5 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project Proposed Action and Alternatives 4.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 4.1 KPU’s Proposed Action Whitman Lake is located near the southeast end of Revillagigedo Island, approximately four miles east of the City of Ketchikan, Alaska. The lake is naturally formed, but the normal water surface elevation was raised about 18 feet in 1927 with the construction of a 46-foot high concrete gravity arch dam at the lake outlet. The dam was originally part of a 1,500 kW hydroelectric project owned by New England Fish Company. The Ketchikan Utilities Board purchased the project in 1957 and the plant was retired from service shortly thereafter. The original penstock and powerhouse have, for the most part, been demolished and removed from the site, but the dam remains in service providing water supply to the Herring Cove Fish Hatchery, owned and operated by the Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association, Inc. (SSRAA), and to the Herring Cove Water User’s Association for domestic use. Existing facilities currently in operation include the dam and two parallel above-ground steel pipelines supplying water to the hatchery. Both pipelines are about 2,260 feet in length. The larger pipeline is 24 inches in diameter at the dam, and reduces to 18 inches diameter over the lower 900 feet. The smaller pipeline is 10 inches in diameter at the dam, and reduces to 8 inches over the lower 900 feet. In addition to these facilities, a small concrete diversion structure is located on Whitman Creek about 3,000 feet downstream of Whitman Dam to supply water for domestic use to 21 homeowners in the Herring Cove area. The Project involves constructing a new 45” steel penstock from Whitman Dam to a powerhouse at Herring Cove containing two turbine/generator units totaling 4.6 MW. The penstock will follow the same general alignment as the existing hatchery water supply pipelines. Dimensions and sizes of principal project features are presented in Table 1-1. 4.1.1 Project Description Specific features are described as follows: Existing Whitman Dam The existing 70-year old dam shows signs of deterioration, but with proper rehabilitation measures and maintenance, it can be made a reliable structure through one or several 30 year FERC license terms. Since the dam will become an important feature of the hydro project, dam repairs and maintenance items should include, at a minimum, grouting the joints, repairing rock pockets, painting exposed metalwork, and installing new safety grating and railings on the dam crest. December 1998 Scoping Document 1 Page 6 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project Table 1-1 Project Statistics Preferred Alternative Drainage Area Natural Drainage Area Diversion Area (2 sites) Average Annual Natural Outflow at Dam Combined Average Annual Flow at Diversion Sites Reservoir Normal Maximum Operating Elevation Normal Minimum Operating Elevation Active Storage at El. 380 Surface Area at El. 380 Surface Area at El. 362 Existing Dam Dam Type Maximum Structural Height Crest Length Dam Crest Elevation Spillway Type Spillway Crest Elevation Spillway Width Outlets Penstock Existing Pipelines New Penstock Diameter/Length Proposed Action and Alternatives 4.1 square miles 1.25 square miles 78 cfs 23 cfs 380 362 2,500 acre-feet 148 acres 129 acres Concrete Gravity Arch 46 feet 220 feet 385 Ogee Sill within Dam 380 40 feet 2-36” dia. and 1-42” dia. 18-inch / 2,260 feet 8-inch / 2,260 feet 45-inch / 2,220 feet Powerhouse Type Above Ground Concrete Size (footprint) 2,800 sq. ft. Unit 1: (Horizontal Francis) Rated Capacity 3,900 kW Rated Head 345 feet Maximum Discharge 150 cfs Unit 2: (Horizontal Francis) Rated Capacity 700 kW Rated Head 310 feet Maximum Discharge 30 cfs Transmission Line Voltage 34.5 kV Length 1,200 feet December 1998 Scoping Document 1 Page 7 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project Proposed Action and Alternatives Based on recent dam safety inspection reports, it appears that the structural stability of the dam has been analyzed, but possibly not to standards required by FERC for licensed hydroelectric projects. Development of a hydroelectric project utilizing Whitman Lake may require additional structural analysis of the dam under seismic and Probable Maximum Flood loading conditions in accordance with FERC’s Engineering Guidelines. If results from previous analyses do not meet FERC’s accepted methods and factors of safety, then such analyses will be required. Remove Timber Crib Dam When Whitman Dam was constructed in 1927 it inundated a timber crib dam located immediately upstream. Remnants of the timber crib dam are still visible below the water surface. Based on a 1926 sketch showing the location of both dams, the crest of the timber crib dam was set at about El. 370, or about 8 feet above the proposed minimum operating pool level. In order to ensure sufficient flow is made available to the Whitman Dam intake down to the proposed minimum operating pool level, El. 362, any flow restrictions caused by the timber crib dam, large trees, root balls or other material, will need to be removed. New Diversion Structures The natural drainage area into Whitman Lake is 4.1 square miles. A portion of flow from two creeks that do not naturally flow into the lake will be diverted to the lake via small diameter pipelines in order to increase the amount of flow available for power generation. The two diversions combined will augment the natural basin inflow by as much as 30 percent. One of the diversions will be located about 1,300 feet northeast of Whitman Dam ona tributary that feeds Whitman Creek below the dam. The diversion structure will be capable of diverting up to 35 cfs through a 1,600-foot long, 24-inch diameter, high density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe. The drainage area above the diversion site is 0.95 square miles. The second diversion site will be located about 4,800 feet southwest of the dam ona creek that flows to Herring Cove. The drainage area above this diversion is 0.3 square miles. Streamflow up to 10 cfs will be diverted to Whitman Lake via a 16-inch diameter, 1,760-foot long, HDPE pipe. Both diversions will be rockfill structures constructed from boulders, rock fragments and gravel that can be easily excavated nearby. The diversion structure will have a concrete or HDPE liner blanket on the upstream face to act as an impervious barrier. Future field studies should investigate the availability of sufficient clay as an alternative impervious barrier. At each diversion there will be a small gated intake structure, spillway slot with flashboards, and a gated sluice pipe. i December 1998 Scoping Document 1 Page 8 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project Proposed Action and Alternatives The diversion pipelines will be laid at a 1 to 2 percent slope generally following the contours of the land. The pipe will be buried or mounded where feasible to provide protection from falling trees or boulders. The pipe will be anchored to minimize displacement. New 45-inch Diameter Penstock A new 45-inch diameter, 2,220-foot long, steel penstock will be constructed from the dam to the powerhouse at Herring Cove. A plan and profile of the new penstock is shown on Fig. 1-3. The penstock will be supported above ground on piers founded on bedrock. Based on geotechnical evaluation of the penstock route, an above ground penstock is more suitable due to the presumed shallow depth to bedrock. It will generally parallel the same alignment of the two existing water supply pipelines from the dam to the existing vacuum valve house. At the valve house, about 200 feet of the new penstock will be buried up to a maximum depth of about 20 feet to ensure that the penstock has sufficient pressure head to convey the full design flow to the turbines. The buried section of penstock will likely require rock blasting. Existing Hatchery Pipelines The two existing pipelines serving the hatchery’s water supply and temperature requirements will continue to serve these functions. The existing valves at the dam used to control temperature and flow rate will be automated to make operations more convenient for the hatchery. Instead of delivering water to the hatchery at high pressure, a small turbine unit will be installed on the lower end of the existing pipelines to convert the high potential energy to useful kinetic energy. In order to optimize the amount of hydroelectric generation, the lower 890 feet of the existing 18-inch diameter pipeline will be replaced with 24-inch diameter pipe. Intake Connection There are three existing outlets through the dam. Two 36-inch diameter outlets have inverts at about El. 349, and a single 42-inch diameter outlet has an invert at about El. 354. The 42-inch outlet and one of the 36-inch outlets are currently being used to collectively supply up to 27 cfs to the hatchery. Flow through the outlets is manually regulated to control the temperature of water delivered to the hatchery. The 42-inch outlet draws from the top portion of the lake and the 36-inch outlet draws from deeper waters through an approximate 1,500-foot pipe connected to it on the upstream side. The unused 36-inch outlet will serve as the inlet to the new 45-inch diameter penstock. A trashrack will be installed on the upstream face of the dam to prevent large woody debris from entering the penstock and potentially damaging the turbine runner. December 1998 Scoping Document ] Page 9 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project Proposed Action and Alternatives Instream Flow Release Valve In order to maintain flow in the channel below the dam, a remote operated 8-inch diameter throttling valve will be tapped into the new penstock and the existing 24-inch pipeline at the dam to enable a continuous flow below the dam. An instream flow will satisfy fishery concerns and water rights held by the Herring Cove Water User’s Association. Powerhouse A 2,800 square foot composite concrete and steel-framed powerhouse will be located immediately uphill from the existing PRV building. The powerhouse will contain a 3.9 MW unit and a 0.7 MW unit for a total installed capacity of 4.6 MW. The larger unit will operate within a flow range between 50 and 150 cfs, and the small unit will operate between 12 and 30 cfs. Both turbines will be horizontal Francis type machines, which are the most appropriate type unit with the given head and flow conditions. In order to suppress the magnitude of hydraulic transient pressures in the penstocks when flow is abruptly changed, an 18-inch diameter synchronous bypass valve will be installed to automatically open if the turbine wicket gates suddenly close due to a line fault or other reasons. Tailwater level exiting the powerhouse will be controlled at about El. 40 for the small unit, and at El. 20 for the larger unit. Discharge from the small unit will be conveyed to the hatchery for its use, with any excess flow diverted to the lower tailrace. Discharge from the large unit will be conveyed in a buried concrete box culvert running from the powerhouse to a point immediately east of the existing fish ladder entrance. Discharging adjacent to the fish ladder will minimize any confusion to returning fish. Switchyard and Transmission Line The plant switchyard will be located adjacent to the powerhouse and will contain a power transformer, circuit breakers and disconnect switches. Transmission line work will involve reconductoring approximately 1,200 feet of the existing distribution line serving the hatchery and several residences along Powerhouse Road. The 34.5 kV transmission line will be constructed from the switchyard to an intertie with the 34.5 kV Beaver Falls line along Tongass Highway. 4.1.2 Project Operation A main premise of this alternative is that plant operation, in response to reservoir inflow, takes precedence over the operation of all other KPU-owned generating resources. KPU would still purchase power from the Swan Lake Project in accordance with terms under the Four-Dam Pool Agreement. Adopting this operating philosophy will maximize December 1998 Scoping Document 1 Page 10 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project Proposed Action and Alternatives energy generation and minimize spill. Because of the relative lack of storage with this project alternative, the project will operate similar to a run-of-river project, which more or less respond to inflow rather than load. A reservoir level sensing device, installed at the dam and hard-wired to the powerhouse, will periodically transmit water surface elevation and rate of change in elevation to a programmable logic controller (PLC) in the powerhouse. The PLC will transmit a signal to gradually open or close the turbine wicket gates based on a series of pre-programmed logical arguments that take into account variables such as current rate of reservoir inflow, current reservoir level, target reservoir level, hatchery flow demand, and optimum turbine efficiency. Programming the units to respond to reservoir inflow will make more efficient use of inflow and reduce spill. For example, if an inflow of 400 cfs to the reservoir (not an unusual event) were sustained for 4 hours, the reservoir would rise about 1 foot in that time period assuming there were no releases from the dam. If sustained over 24 hours, then the rise would be 6 feet. With reservoir level sensing, wicket gates on the two units would automatically open in an effort to maintain the targeted reservoir level until the full combined maximum turbine discharge of 180 cfs is attained. The reservoir level would still rise because inflow (400 cfs) exceeds outflow (180 cfs), but the rise over 24 hours would be only about 3 feet versus 6 feet. This type of operation will reduce overall spill. The hydroelectric project will be hydraulically integrated with the hatchery’s water supply needs. Water for the hatchery will continue to be taken from the two existing pipelines, however the larger (18” diameter) pipeline will be connected to the 700 kW turbine unit. Water from the small (8-inch diameter) pipeline will not be used for hydropower generation, but will continue to feed the hatchery. 4.1.3. Proposed Protection and Mitigation KPU proposes to construct and operate the project as described in the above sections and will provide the following measures to protect the environment: e During construction, provide erosion and sediment control measures e Remove the minimal amount of vegetation during construction of the penstock, powerhouse, switchyard, and transmission line e Coordinate construction activities with the resource agencies to avoid disturbing major wildlife species known to frequent the project area e Design the powerhouse and tailrace to blend with the surrounding terrain December 1998 Scoping Document 1 Page 11 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project Proposed Action and Alternatives 4.2 MODIFICATIONS TO KPU’S PROPOSED ACTION Protection, mitigation and enhancement measures not proposed by KPU will be considered. Alternative measures could include recommendations by resource agencies, other organizations, the general public, or the Commission. 43 NOACTION Under the no-action alternative, the Project would not be constructed. No changes in the existing environment would take place. The no-action alternative is the baseline from which the proposed action and any action alternatives are compared. 4.4 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BY KPU BUT ELIMINATED FROM DETAILED EVALUATION During the feasibility study, three additional project configurations were evaluated and eliminated from consideration. In addition, one additional source of water for the project was also considered. A detailed description of each of these alternatives was presented in the feasibility study and are summarized below: Initial Surface Penstock Alternative This is a variation to the preferred alternative that was initially evaluated. It is similar to the alternative presented with the major difference being the location of the powerhouse. In this alternative, the powerhouse would be located near the existing hatchery, about 150 feet north of the furthest western raceway. This alternative is still a viable concept for the proposed development. Lake Tap Alternative This is an alternative that has been considered since it was first introduced in the 1950’s. Water to supply the powerhouse would be removed from Whitman Lake via an underground tunnel and penstock to a powerhouse in the vicinity of the hatchery. This project can generate approximately the same energy level as the preferred alternative even though there is a greater volume of reservoir storage available. However, this operation results in a lower average head with the result that energy production is essentially the same as the preferred alternative. The cost of this alternative is greater than the other alternatives and hence results in higher power costs. Least Cost Alternative This alternative assumes that KPU enforces its 1978 agreement with SSRAA to the full extent, which would disregard the water supply needs of the existing hatchery. If KPU elected to pursue this course of action, the three main features of the preferred alternative December 1998 Scoping Document ] Page 12 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project Proposed Action and Alternatives (turbine capacity, powerhouse location, and reservoir operating criteria) would be modified. A single generator, rated at 3,900 kW would be more economical than installing an additional smaller unit as proposed. Reservoir operating criteria could be modified if the hatchery water supply demands were not considered. And, the powerhouse would be constructed at the location of the existing pressure reducing valve building. December 1998 Scoping Document I Page 13 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project Scope of Cumulative Analysis and Resource Issues 5.0 SCOPE OF CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS AND RESOURCE ISSUES 5.1 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS According to the council on Environmental Quality’s regulations for implementing NEPA (50 CFR 1508.7), an action may cause cumulative impacts on the environment if its impacts overlap in space and/or time with the impacts of other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of what agency or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative effects can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time, including hydropower and other land and water development activities. Considering the initial consultation document, agency and public comments, and our review of studies and reports to date, we have outlined below our proposed geographic and temporal scope of analysis for cumulative effects in the DEA. 5.1.1 Resources that Could be Cumulatively Affected At this time, we have tentatively identified the following resources that could be cumulatively affected by the Whitman Lake Project: other land uses including hatchery operations and residential development in the vicinity, and recreational opportunities. 5.1.2 Geographic Scope The geographic scope of analysis for cumulatively affected resources is defined by the physical limits or boundaries of (1) the proposed action’s effect on the resource, and (2) contributing effects from other hydropower and non-hydropower activities. The geographic scope of our cumulative analysis will include the Whitman Creek/Whitman Lake drainage basin, and herring cove and adjacent lands including the area surrounding the hatchery. . 5.1.3. Temporal Scope The temporal scope of our cumulative analysis in the DEA will include past, present, and future actions and their effects on each resource that could be cumulatively affected. Based on the potential 50-year license term for the Whitman Lake Project, the temporal scope will look 50 years into the future, concentrating on the effect on the resources from reasonably foreseeable future actions. The historical discussion will, by necessity, be limited to the amount of available information for each resource. We will document the present resource conditions and the results of our studies in the DEA. December 1998 Scoping Document 1 Page 14 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project Scope of Cumulative Analysis and Resource Issues 5.2 RESOURCE ISSUES A list of resource issues and concerns that have been identified for analysis in the DEA is presented below. Those issues identified by an asterick (*) will be analyzed for cumulative, as well as site-specific, effects. This list is not intended to be exhaustive or final, but is an initial listing of potential issues that have been identified. For convenience, the issues have been listed in categories related to technical disciplines. 5.2.1 Geological Resources e Whether construction activities and long-term operation, including excavation and foundation building would cause or increase slope instability at the various project features. 5.2.2 Water Resources e Are the existing estimates of water availability accurate and will estimates based upon a newly installed stream gauge negative impact energy production estimates and project economics? 5.2.3. Fishery Resources e Will the operation of the Project affect existing fishery resources in Whitman Lake and tributaries thereof? © lake level drawdown and shoreline dewatering © water quality modifications © disconnection of tributaries from the lake system (prevent upstream spawning migrations of adfluvial salmonids from the lake to the stream) e Will the operation of the Project affect existing resident fishery resources in Whitman Creek and selected tributaries? © streamflow reductions below Whitman Dam - fishery habitat - fish passage - food/invertebrate production ® water quality modifications - water temperature - dissolved oxygen - turbidity, etc. e Will the operation of the Project affect hatchery operations in Herring Cove — Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (SSRAA)? © water quantity © water quality © powerhouse tailrace discharge - false attraction flows December 1998 Scoping Document | Page 15 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project Scope of Cumulative Analysis and Resource Issues - straying/migration delays e Will project construction activities affect lake (Whitman Lake) and stream (Whitman Creek) aquatic habitats and water quality? e Will proposed protection and mitigation measures be sufficient to prevent or mitigate any adverse impacts to fishery and aquatic resources affected by project construction and operation? 5.2.4 Terrestrial Resources e Will construction or operation result in adverse impacts to plant communities or critical habitat of sensitive plant or animal species? e Will proposed protection and mitigation measures be sufficient to prevent or mitigate any adverse impacts to plant communities or sensitive species habitat? 5.2.5 Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species e Will construction or operation result in adverse impacts to populations of federally listed candidate threatened, endangered, or sensitive species? 5.2.6 Aesthetic Resources e Whether the penstock and powerhouse would impact he visual quality of the area. e The degree that construction and operation of project facilities would adversely impact the visual quality of the area. 5.2.7 Cultural Resources e Whether project construction would adversely impact cultural resources that may exist in the area. 5.2.8 Recreation and Other Land Uses* e Whether project construction and operation would affect recreation opportunities. e Whether project construction and operation would affect other land uses in the Project area. December 1998 Scoping Document 1 Page 16 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project 6.0 Draft Environmental Assessment Outline DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OUTLINE The tentative outline for the Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project is as follows: IE SUMMARY Il. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR POWER III. | PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES A. B: Cc: Applicant’s Proposal iG Project Facilities and Operations 2. Proposed Environmental Measures 35 Mandatory Requirements No-Action Alternative Other Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Further Analysis IV. AGENCIES AND ENTITIES CONTACTED V. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS A. B. Cc: December 1998 General Description of the Basin Cumulative Effects Analysis Proposed Action and Other Recommended Environmental Measures ie Geological Resources a) Affected Environment b) Environmental Impacts and Recommendations c) Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Water Resources a) Affected Environment b) Environmental Impacts and Recommendations c) Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Fishery Resources a) Affected Environment b) Environmental Impacts and Recommendations c) Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Terrestrial Resources a) Wildlife Resources (1) Affected Environment (2) Environmental Impacts and Recommendations (3) Unavoidable Adverse Impacts b) Botanical Resources (1) Affected Environment (2) Environmental Impacts and Recommendations Scoping Document 1 Page 17 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project Draft Environmental Assessment Outline (3) Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 5. Threatened and Endangered Species a) Affected Environment b) Environmental Impacts and Recommendations c) Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 6. Aesthetic Resources a) Affected Environment b) Environmental Impacts and Recommendations c) Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 7. Cultural Resources a) Affected Environment b) Environmental Impacts and Recommendations c) Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 8. Recreation and Other Land Uses a) Affected Environment . b) Environmental Impacts and Recommendations c) Unavoidable Adverse Impacts December 1998 Scoping Document 1 Page 18 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project Schedule 7.0 SCHEDULE FOR PREPARING DEA AND LICENSE APPLICATION The approximate schedule for completing licensing activities in the alternative licensing/APEA process for the proposed Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project follows: Licensing Activities Draft Communications Protocol circulated to agencies and interested parties Date 9/30/98 Request to Approve Use of Alternative Licensing Procedures filed 11/13/98 Notice of Request to Approve Use of Alternative Licensing Procedures published in Federal Register with the Commission (with Communications Protocol) | 12/4/98 Comments due on Request to follow APEA process (30 days following Notice) 1/3/99 FERC Order approving Request to follow APEA process Six-month progress report due to the Commission Initial Consultation Package and Scoping Document 1 (SD1) sent to Agencies, Native Organizations and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) - 30 days prior to meeting Public Notice of Scoping/ Joint Meeting (15 days prior to meeting) First Stage Consultation/Public Scoping Meeting held in Ketchikan 1/10/99 12/31/98 12/30/98 1/14/99 2/1/99-2/2/99 Comments on ICD and SD1 due (60 days after meeting) Applicant issues Scoping Document 2 (SD2) and files it with Commission Six-month progress report due to the Commission PDEA and Draft Application issued and circulated to agencies and interested parties (including environmental study results) Notice of PDEA and Draft Application published in Ketchikan Daily News, Anchorage Daily News, and Federal Register 4/3/99 4/99 6/31/99 10/99 10/99 Six-month progress report due to the Commission Comments, Recommendations and Conditions due (90 days after PDEA and Draft Application issued) 11/30/99 License Application and DEA filed at the Commission and sent to agencies and interested parties December 1998 Scoping Document 1 Page 19 Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project