HomeMy WebLinkAboutG9a-150202-ELV_PAD
PRE‐APPLICATION DOCUMENT
CROOKED CREEK AND JIM'S LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
FERC No. P ‐14514
FEBRUARY 2, 2015
Prepared for
ELFIN COVE UTILITY COMMISSION
PO BOX 2
ELFIN COVE, ALASKA 99825
Prepared by
POLARCONSULT ALASKA, INC.
1503 W. 33RD AVENUE, SUITE 310
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA, 99503
Prepared for
PEDRO BAY VILLAGE COUNCIL
This page intentionally blank.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Community of Elfin Cove doing business as Elfin Cove Utility Commission (ECUC), serving
the small community of Elfin Cove in southeast Alaska, is developing a small hydroelectric
project at Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake to meet the community’s electrical needs. Because the
project site is located on federal lands within the Tongass National Forest (TNF), the project will
require a license from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) authorizing
construction and operation of the project.
This Pre‐Application Document (PAD) describes the proposed project, known information
regarding the existing environment in the project area, expected effects of the project on the
existing environment, and proposed avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures for such
effects. This PAD is provided to FERC, applicable state and federal resource agencies, and the
interested public (collectively, the stakeholders) to help develop study requests and study plans
that will provide information necessary to complete project development plans and help
resource agencies and the FERC evaluate the project and develop appropriate license
conditions.
Issuance of this PAD is the first step in a multi‐stage consultation process between the
stakeholders regarding the proposed project. The successful outcome of these consultations
will be an application for a FERC license authorizing construction and operation of the proposed
project for a defined period of time, typically 30 to 50 years. The FERC license will include
construction and operating terms and conditions, defined in the course of this consultation
process, intended to protect the affected environment in the project vicinity as consistent with
the public interest.
ECUC has requested use of the FERC’s Traditional Licensing Process (TLP) to conduct the
consultations required for preparing the license application. ECUC believes that the TLP will be
a faster, less costly means of fulfilling the consultation requirements for project licensing. A
formal request for use of the TLP and a Notice of Intent to file a license application have been
filed with the FERC concurrent with this PAD, and are available on the FERC eLibrary at
www.ferc.gov by searching for project number P‐14514. The proposed schedule for the
consultation process is set forth in Section 1.0 of this document.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 ii
This page intentionally blank.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..............................................................................................................I
ACRONYMS AND TERMINOLOGY............................................................................................VI
INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................1
1.0 PROCESS PLAN AND SCHEDULE [§5.6(d)(1)] .................................................................3
2.0 PROJECT LOCATION, FACILITIES, AND OPERATIONS [§5.6(d)(2)]...................................4
2.I CONTACT INFORMATION....................................................................................................4
2.II DETAILED PROJECT MAP.....................................................................................................4
2.III DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION.......................................................................................7
2.iii.A PROJECT STRUCTURES..................................................................................................8
2.iii.B PROJECT IMPOUNDMENTS ...........................................................................................10
2.iii.C PROJECT TURBINES ......................................................................................................10
2.iii.D PROJECT TRANSMISSION LINES..................................................................................10
2.iii.E PROJECT ELECTRICAL OUTPUT...................................................................................12
2.IV PROPOSED PROJECT OPERATION......................................................................................13
2.V EXISTING LICENSED PROJECT INFORMATION ...................................................................13
2.VI NEW FACILITIES OR COMPONENTS TO BE CONSTRUCTED................................................13
3.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCE IMPACTS [§5.6(d)(3)]................................ 14
3.I GENERAL REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................14
3.II GEOLOGY AND SOILS.........................................................................................................14
3.ii.A Geologic Features .............................................................................................................14
3.ii.B Soils ..................................................................................................................................16
3.ii.C Reservoir Shorelines and Stream banks ...........................................................................18
3.ii.D Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures ..........................................................................................................18
3.III WATER RESOURCES ..........................................................................................................20
3.iii.A Drainage Area...................................................................................................................20
3.iii.B Monthly Flow Statistics......................................................................................................20
3.iii.C Flow Duration Curve..........................................................................................................21
3.iii.D Existing and Proposed Uses of Project Water...................................................................23
3.iii.E Existing In-stream Flow Uses of Project Water .................................................................23
3.iii.F Federally-Approved Water Quality Standards Applicable to Project Waters.....................23
3.iii.G Seasonal Variation of Existing Water Quality Data ...........................................................23
3.iii.H Impoundment information..................................................................................................25
3.iii.I Gradient of Affected Downstream Reaches ......................................................................26
3.iii.J Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures ..........................................................................................................27
3.IV FISH AND AQUATIC RESOURCES........................................................................................31
3.iv.A Existing Fish and Aquatic Communities ............................................................................31
3.iv.B Essential Fish Habitat........................................................................................................31
3.iv.C Temporal and Spatial Distribution of Fish and Aquatic Communities................................32
3.iv.D Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures ..........................................................................................................32
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 iv
3.V WILDLIFE AND BOTANICAL RESOURCES............................................................................33
3.v.A Vegetation / Habitat Types................................................................................................33
3.v.B Temporal or Spatial Distribution of Important Species ......................................................36
3.v.C Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures ..........................................................................................................40
3.VI WETLANDS, RIPARIAN, AND LITTORAL HABITAT...............................................................41
3.vi.A Plant and Animal Species List...........................................................................................41
3.vi.B Habitat Map.......................................................................................................................41
3.vi.C Acreage Estimates ............................................................................................................41
3.vi.D Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures ..........................................................................................................42
3.VII RARE, THREATENED, AND ENDANGERED SPECIES............................................................43
3.vii.A Federal and State-Listed Species in Project Vicinity.........................................................43
3.vii.B Habitat Requirements for Listed Species ..........................................................................43
3.vii.C Biological Opinions, Status Reports, or Recovery Plans for Listed Species......................43
3.vii.D Extent and Location of Federally-Designated or Other Critical Habitat .............................44
3.vii.E Temporal and Spatial Distribution of Listed Species in Project Area.................................44
3.vii.F Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures ..........................................................................................................44
3.VIII RECREATION AND LAND USE.............................................................................................45
3.viii.A Existing Recreational Facilities..........................................................................................45
3.viii.B Current Recreational Use..................................................................................................45
3.viii.C Existing Shoreline Buffer Zones........................................................................................45
3.viii.D Current and Future Recreation Needs ..............................................................................45
3.viii.E Current Shoreline Management Plan ................................................................................45
3.viii.F Project Proximity to Protected Areas .................................................................................46
3.viii.G National Trails System or Wilderness Area.......................................................................46
3.viii.H Important Recreation Areas ..............................................................................................46
3.viii.I Non-Recreational Land Use within Project Boundary .......................................................46
3.viii.J Land Uses Adjacent to Project Boundary ..........................................................................46
3.viii.K Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures ..........................................................................................................46
3.IX AESTHETIC RESOURCES.....................................................................................................47
3.ix.A USFS Visual Resource Priorities and Conditions in Project Area .....................................47
3.ix.B Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures ..........................................................................................................48
3.X CULTURAL RESOURCES .....................................................................................................50
3.x.A Known Cultural Sites.........................................................................................................50
3.x.B Existing Discovery Measures ............................................................................................50
3.x.C Identification of Potentially Affected Indian Tribes .............................................................50
3.x.D Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures ..........................................................................................................50
3.XI SOCIO‐ECONOMIC RESOURCES ........................................................................................51
3.xi.A Environmental Setting in Project Area ...............................................................................51
3.xi.B Expected Project Impacts..................................................................................................52
3.XII TRIBAL RESOURCES...........................................................................................................53
3.xii.A Project Affect on Tribal Resources Included in (d)(3)(ii) to (xi)..........................................53
3.xii.B Project Affect on Tribal Resources not Included in (d)(3)(ii) to (xi)....................................53
3.XIII RIVER BASIN DESCRIPTION................................................................................................53
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 v
3.xiii.A Basin Area and Length of Stream Reaches ......................................................................53
3.xiii.B Major Land and Water Uses..............................................................................................53
3.xiii.C Existing Dams and Diversions...........................................................................................54
3.xiii.D Tributary Rivers and Streams............................................................................................54
3.xiii.E Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures ..........................................................................................................54
4.0 PRELIMINARY ISSUES AND STUDIES LIST [§5.6(d)(4)].................................................. 55
4.I ISSUES PERTAINING TO IDENTIFIED RESOURCES ..............................................................55
4.i.A Geology and Soils .............................................................................................................55
4.i.B Water Resources...............................................................................................................55
4.i.C Fish and Aquatic Resources .............................................................................................55
4.i.D Wildlife and Botanical Resources......................................................................................55
4.i.E Wetlands, Riparian, and Littoral Habitats ..........................................................................56
4.i.F Rare and Threatened Species ..........................................................................................56
4.i.G Recreation and Land Use..................................................................................................56
4.i.H Aesthetic Resources .........................................................................................................56
4.i.I Cultural Resources............................................................................................................56
4.i.J Socio-Economic Resources..............................................................................................56
4.i.K Tribal Resources...............................................................................................................56
4.i.L River Basin Resources......................................................................................................56
4.II POTENTIAL STUDIES OR INFORMATION GATHERING REQUIREMENTS.............................56
4.III RELEVENT QUALIFYING FEDERAL, STATE, TRIBAL COMPREHENSIVE WATERWAY PLANS.57
4.IV RELEVANT RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLANS...................................................................57
5.0 SUMMARY OF CONTACTS [§5.6(d)(5)]........................................................................ 58
6.0 STATEMENT ON PURPA BENEFITS [§5.6(e)]................................................................ 58
7.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 59
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A – SUMMARY OF CONSULTATIONS
APPENDIX B – SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
APPENDIX C – EXISTING TECHNICAL STUDIES, RESOURCE STUDIES, AND DETERMINATIONS
Attachment C‐1: Fisheries Survey
Attachment C‐2: Bald Eagle Survey
Attachment C‐3: Interim Hydrology Report
Attachment C‐4: Conceptual Design and Development Plan
Attachment C‐5: ADFG Determination that Fish Habitat Permit is not Required
Attachment C‐6: Geomorphology Report
Attachment C‐7: Project Conceptual Design Prints
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.2‐1: Project Vicinity Map.................................................................................................. 5
Figure 2.2‐2: Project Map .............................................................................................................. 6
Figure 2.3‐1: Preliminary System One‐Line Diagram...................................................................11
Figure 2.3‐1: Typical Seasonal ECUC Load and Hydro Project Energy Usage..............................12
Figure 3.2‐1: Geology of Project Area..........................................................................................15
Figure 3.2‐2: Soils Map of Project Area .......................................................................................17
Figure 3.3‐1: Flow Duration Curve, Crooked Creek at Diversion Site ..........................................22
Figure 3.3‐2: Flow Duration Curve, Jim’s Creek at Lake Outlet...................................................22
Figure 3.3‐3: Available Water Temperature Data at Project Gauging Stations...........................24
Figure 3.3‐4: Annual Water Temperature Graph for Project Gauging Stations..........................24
Figure 3.3‐5: Flow Duration Curves at Crooked Creek Fish Habitat – Existing and With
Project...................................................................................................................28
Figure 3.3‐6: Flow Duration Curves at Jim’s Creek at Lake Outlet – Existing and With
Project...................................................................................................................28
Figure 3.5‐1: Vegetation within Project Study Area....................................................................35
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.0‐1: Proposed Process Plan and Schedule......................................................................... 3
Table 2.3‐1: Technical Summary of Recommended Project.......................................................... 8
Table 2.3‐2: Estimated Monthly Project Energy Production and Usage .....................................12
Table 3.2‐1: Summary of NRCS Soil Survey Data in Project Area.................................................16
Table 3.3‐1: Monthly Flow Statistics for Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake.....................................21
Table 3.3‐2: Other Physical and Chemical Water Quality Data...................................................25
Table 3.3‐3: Gradient of Affected Downstream Reaches Below Project.....................................27
Table 3.5‐1: Summary of Vegetation in the Project Area............................................................34
Table 3.5‐3: Sensitive / Special Management Bird Species that May Occur in the Project
Area.......................................................................................................................38
Table 3.5‐4: Native Plant Species that May Occur in the Project Area .......................................39
Table 3.5‐5: USFS‐Designated Sensitive Plant Species that May Occur in the Project Area.......40
Table 3.6‐1: Estimated Acreage of Littoral, Riparian, and Wetland Habitats in Project
Area.......................................................................................................................42
Table 3.7‐1: Summary of Endangered and Threatened Species Occurring in Project
Vicinity...................................................................................................................43
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 vii
Table 3‐9‐1: USFS‐Designated Visual Priority Routes and Use Areas Proximate to Project
Area.......................................................................................................................48
Table 4.2‐1: Proposed Studies and Information Gathering Activities.........................................57
Table 4.4‐1: Relevant Resource Management Plans....................................................................58
Table A‐1: Permit Applications Submitted for Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydro
Project..................................................................................................................A ‐2
Table A‐2: Summary List of Stakeholder Contacts for PAD Preparation....................................A‐3
Table C‐1: Existing Project Technical Studies, Resource Studies, and Determinations..............C‐2
LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS
Photograph B‐1 Typical Meadow (above Small Sandy Beach, July 8, 2009)......................B‐2
Photograph B‐2 Typical Meadow / Forest Complex (near Jim’s Lake, July 17, 2013) .......B‐2
Photograph B‐3 Typical Conifer Forest (south of Elfin Cove, July 18, 2013)......................B‐3
Photograph B‐4 Typical Conifer Forest (near Jim’s Lake, August 10, 2010)......................B‐3
Photograph B‐5 Typical Barren Rock Outcrops (east of Crooked Creek, August 12,
2010)........................................................................................................B ‐4
Photograph B‐6 Typical Beach Vegetation (Little Sandy Beach, August 12, 2010)............B‐4
Photograph B‐7 View of Project Area from ¼ Mile Offshore in Port Althorp
(8/11/2010)..............................................................................................B ‐5
Photograph B‐8 Oblique Aerial View of Project Site (7/6/2009).......................................B‐5
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 viii
This page intentionally blank.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 vi
ACRONYMS AND TERMINOLOGY
˚F degrees Fahrenheit
ABC Alaska Biological Consulting
ac‐ft acre‐foot, acre‐feet. A volume of water equal to one acre (43,560 sq.ft.) covered
to a depth of one foot.
ADCCED Alaska Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development
ADFG Alaska Department of Fish and Game
ADNR Alaska Department of Natural Resources
AEA Alaska Energy Authority
AEE Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc.
AEIC Alaska Earthquake Information Center
ANHP Alaska Natural Heritage Program
ASL above sea level
AWAP Alaska Wildlife Action Plan
BCC birds of conservation concern
BCR bird conservation region
CECNPC Community of Elfin Cove Non‐Profit Corporation
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
cfs cubic feet per second
dba doing business as
DC Denali Commission
DCRA Department of Community and Regional Affairs (organized under ADCCED).
discharge A synonym for stream flow. Flow and discharge are used interchangeably in this
report.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 vii
DLA Draft License Application
D.O. dissolved oxygen
DPS distinct population segment
E.C. actual electrical conductivity in uS/cm
ECUC Community of Elfin Cove dba Elfin Cove Utility Commission
EFH essential fish habitat
ESI existing scenic integrity
FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
FMP fishery management plan
ft foot, feet
GCN greatest conservation need
GPO Government Printing Office
ILP integrated licensing process
in. inch, inches
kV kilovolt, or 1,000 volts
kVA kilovolt‐ampere
kW kilowatt, or 1,000 watts. One kW is the power consumed by ten 100‐watt
incandescent light bulbs.
kWh kilowatt‐hour. The quantity of energy equal to one kilowatt (kW) expended for
one hour.
LUD land use designation
mi mile, miles
MSL mean sea level
NA not applicable
n.d. no date
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 viii
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NOI Notice of Intent
NPS National Park Service
NRCS National Resources Conservation Service
NWSRS National Wild and Scenic River System
Polarconsult Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
PAD Pre‐Application Document
PCE Power Cost Equalization Program
RM river mile
SHPO State Historical Preservation Office
SIO scenic integrity objective
SOA State of Alaska
spp. species
SS sensitive species
ssp. subspecies
sq.mi. square mile(s)
SWPPP stormwater pollution prevention plan
T transformer
TB tap box
temp. temperature
TLP traditional licensing process
TNF Tongass National Forest
uS/cm micro‐Siemens per centimeter
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 ix
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USFS U.S. Forest Service
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
V volt
VAC visual absorption capacity
VPR visual priority route and use area
WDFW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 1
INTRODUCTION
The Elfin Cove Utility Commission (ECUC), serving the small community of Elfin Cove in
southeast Alaska, is developing a small hydroelectric project at Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake to
meet the community’s electrical needs. Because the project site is located on federal lands
within the Tongass National Forest (TNF), the project will require a license from the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) authorizing construction and operation of the project.
This Pre‐Application Document (PAD) is the first step in a multi‐stage consultation process
between ECUC, FERC, applicable state and federal resource agencies, and the interested public
regarding the proposed project. The successful result of these consultations will be a FERC
license authorizing construction and operation of the proposed project for a defined period of
time, typically 30 to 50 years. The FERC license will include construction and operating terms
and conditions, defined in the course of this consultation process, intended to protect the
affected environment in the project vicinity as consistent with the public interest.
This PAD has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Title 18, Sections 5.6(d) and (e) of
the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). This PAD forms the basis of consultations with
applicable resource agencies and the interested public regarding the proposed project. It
contains the following information:
‐ A description of the project's facilities and operation;
‐ A description of the existing environment and any known and potential project effects
on specific resources including: geology and soils; water resources; fish and aquatic
resources; wildlife and botanical resources; wetlands, riparian, and littoral habitats;
rare, threatened, and endangered species; recreation and land use; aesthetic resources;
cultural resources; socioeconomic resources; tribal resources; and a description of the
river basin;
‐ A list of preliminary issues and studies that may be needed at the project;
‐ An appendix summarizing contacts with stakeholders sufficient to enable the
Commission to determine if due diligence has been exercised in obtaining relevant
information;
‐ A process plan and schedule for consulting stakeholders, gathering information,
developing and conducting studies, obtaining permits and completing all pre‐filing
licensing activities; and
‐ A statement that ECUC will not seek benefits under section 210 of the Public Utility
Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA).
This PAD presents known available information regarding the existing environment in the
vicinity of the proposed project. This information includes a combination of existing
information obtained through exercise of due diligence and new information obtained through
field investigations at the project site.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 2
The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) maintains a comprehensive management plan and framework for
the TNF, set forth in the 2008 Tongass National Forest, Land and Resource Management Plan
(Forest Plan).1 Where appropriate, this document draws from the Forest Plan for information
about assessment methodologies, existing conditions, management goals, and other matters.
1 USFS, 2008a.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 3
1.0 PROCESS PLAN AND SCHEDULE [§5.6(d)(1)]
This Section presents ECUC’s proposed process plan and schedule for completing pre‐
application consultations and studies. It includes proposed time frames for pre‐filing
consultation, information gathering, and studies, including proposed date and time for scoping
meetings and site visit as required by 18 CFR §5.8(b)(3)(viii).
This proposed process plan and schedule conforms to the FERC Traditional Licensing Process
(TLP), which ECUC is requesting concurrent with filing of this PAD and associated Notice of
Intent. In the event FERC does not allow use of the TLP, a revised process plan and schedule
will be developed that complies with the Integrated Licensing Process (ILP).
Table 1.0‐1: Proposed Process Plan and Schedule
Event 18 CFR section End Date Acting Party(ies)
File NOI, PAD, request use of TLP §5.3(b) 2/2/2015 ECUC
Publish notice of above filing §5.3(d)(2) 2/2/2015 ECUC
Comments due to FERC on use of TLP §5.3(b) 3/5/2015 Stakeholders
START STAGE 1 CONSULTATION
Issue Notice of Commencement of
Proceeding, Decision on use of TLP §5.8(a) 4/6/2015 FERC
Provide FERC with notice of meeting date
and agenda §4.38(b)(3)(i) 4/29/2015 ECUC
Publish public notice of meetings §4.38(b)(4), (g) 4/30/2015 ECUC
Joint Meeting – Elfin Cove §4.38(b)(3)(ii) 5/14/2015 ECUC, FERC,
Stakeholders
Site Visit – Elfin Cove §4.38(b)(3)(i) 5/14/2015 ECUC, FERC,
Stakeholders
Joint Meeting – Juneau 1 §4.38(b)(3)(ii) 5/15/2015 ECUC, FERC,
Stakeholders
Provide study requests, comments to ECUC §4.38(b)(5) 7/14/2015 Stakeholders
END STAGE 1 CONSULTATION 2
START STAGE 2 CONSULTATION
Conduct Resource Studies §4.38(c) 10/12/2015 ECUC
File Draft License Application (DLA) 3 §4.38(c)(4) 12/21/2015 ECUC
Comments due on DLA 3 §4.38(c)(5) 3/21/2016 Stakeholders
END STAGE 2 CONSULTATION
START STAGE 3 CONSULTATION
File License Application §4.38(d)(1) 5/2/2016 3 ECUC
END PRE‐APPLICATION SCHEDULE
Notes:
1. If a significant number of stakeholders are unable to travel to Elfin Cove, an additional meeting will
be held in Juneau to facilitate consultations.
2. §4.38(b)(6) provides a process and schedule to address disputes over study requests.
3. ECUC may request that FERC waive the DLA if such a waiver is supported by stakeholders.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 4
2.0 PROJECT LOCATION, FACILITIES, AND OPERATIONS [§5.6(d)(2)]
2.i CONTACT INFORMATION
The exact name and business address of each person authorized to act as agent for the
applicant is:
Primary Contact
Name of Agent: Joel Groves, PE (engineering consultant)
Address: Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310
Anchorage, AK 99503
Contact Number: (907) 258‐2420 x204
Alternate Contact
Name of Agent: Jane Button (ECUC project manager)
Address: PO Box 2
Elfin Cove, AK 99825
Contact Number: (907) 723‐8514
2.ii DETAILED PROJECT MAP
The project is located on the Inian Peninsula along the northwest coast of Chichagof Island, in
the northern part of the Alexander Archipelago in southeast Alaska (Figure 2.2‐1). Part of the
project (approximately ¼ mile of the access trail and utility corridor) is located within the Elfin
Cove town site, and the rest of the project is located in the TNF.
Figure 2.2‐1 is a vicinity map showing the general location of Elfin Cove and the project. Figure
2.2‐2 is a more detailed map showing lands and waters within the project boundary and the
location of proposed project facilities. There are no tribal lands in the project vicinity.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 5
Figure 2.2‐1: Project Vicinity Map
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 6
Figure 2.2‐2: Project Map
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 7
2.iii DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project is a hydroelectric project located on Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake,
approximately one mile south of Elfin Cove, Alaska.
The project consists of two hydroelectric systems in series with a total capacity of
approximately 140 kilowatts (kW). The “upper system” diverts up to five cubic feet per second
(cfs) of water from Crooked Creek to Jim’s Lake where it is run through a 35 kW power recovery
turbine. The “lower system” draws up to 6.5 cfs of water from Jim’s Lake to a 105‐kW turbine
located at tidewater.
Project features are summarized in Table 2.3‐1, and described in the remainder of this Section.
Two configurations for the reservoir at Jim’s Lake are under consideration, a siphon intake and
a gravity intake and dam. The final configuration used will be decided based upon technical,
economic, environmental, and other pertinent factors as ascertained through the consultation
and design processes. Descriptions of project features in this section and throughout the PAD
are based on the siphon intake configuration unless specifically stated otherwise. Use of a dam
instead of a siphon would increase the normal operating pool elevation of Jim’s Lake, resulting
in slight changes to the technical parameters of both the upper and lower systems.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 8
Table 2.3‐1: Technical Summary of Recommended Project
COMMON PROJECT FEATURES VALUE
Access Trails 12,200 feet
Power Lines 11,500 feet
Communications Lines 14,000 feet
INDIVIDUAL HYDRO SYSTEM FEATURES VALUES
Individual System Parameters Upper System Lower System Total
Basin Area (square miles) 0.56 sq.mi.0.10 sq.mi. 0.66 sq.mi.
Median Flow (cfs) 2.5 cfs 0.4 NA
Minimum Flow (cfs) 0.2 cfs ~0.04 NA
Plant Design Flow (cfs) 5.0 cfs 6.5 cfs NA
Intake Elevation (ft, MSL) 479 ft 329 ‐ 337 ft NA
Powerhouse Elevation (ft, MSL) 342 ft 24 ft NA
Gross Head (ft) 137 ft 305 ‐ 313 ft NA
Pipeline Length (ft) / Diameter (in) 1,250 ft of 12 in pipe 2,050 ft of 14 in pipe NA
Net Head at Design Flow (ft) 124 ft 286 ft NA
Turbine Type Cross‐Flow Pelton or Turgo
Minimum Power Generation (kW) 7 kW 11 kW 7 kW
Installed Capacity (kW) 35 kW 105 kW 140 kW
Dam/Diversion Height (ft) none none NA
Available Storage Volume (ac‐ft) none 43 ac‐ft 43 ac‐ft
Estimated Annual Energy Generation
Total Annual Hydro Energy Generation (kWh)153,400 460,400 613,800
Gross Excess Energy Available from Hydro (kWh) 347,500
Hydro Output used to Supply ECUC Load (kWh)
(percent of total ECUC load supplied by hydro)
266,300
(89%)
ECUC Load Met by Diesel Powerplant (kWh) 33,700
Total ECUC Load (kWh) 300,000
ac‐ft: acre‐feet in: inches NA: Not Applicable
cfs: cubic feet per second kW: kilowatt sq.mi.: square mile(s)
ECUC: Elfin Cove Utility Commission kWh: kilowatt‐hour
ft: feet MSL: Mean sea level
Data reproduced from Polarconsult, 2014a, Table 3.
2.iii.A PROJECT STRUCTURES
Upper System Features
The upper system is a run‐of‐river hydroelectric project between Crooked Creek and Jim’s
Lake that would include the following major components:
● A water diversion on Crooked Creek at an elevation of 479 feet above sea level
(ASL) (See sheet U1.1, Attachment C‐7). The diversion would consist of an
approximately 20 feet long by 4 feet tall by 4 feet wide diversion structure built
into a natural cascade and fitted with an inclined plate (coanda‐type) screen to
divert up to five cfs from the creek. The diversion structure would be constructed
of concrete, treated timber, metal, and/or other suitable materials.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 9
● An approximately 1,250 foot long 12‐inch diameter penstock to convey water
from the diversion to a powerhouse located on the shore of Jim’s Lake at an
elevation of 342 feet ASL (See sheet U2.1, Attachment C‐7). The penstock would
be constructed of high‐density polyethylene, steel, and/or other suitable
materials.
● An approximately 14‐foot by 14‐foot powerhouse containing the turbine and
generating equipment, controls, switchgear, and appurtenant items (See sheet
U3.1, Attachment C‐7). The powerhouse building would be constructed of wood,
steel, concrete block, and/or other suitable materials.
● A cobble‐lined tailrace discharging water to Jim’s Lake. The tailrace will
measure approximately 3 feet deep by 8 feet wide by 50 feet long.
● Access trails, temporary construction roads, and other appurtenant features
necessary to provide a complete and functional system (See sheets C1.1 – C1.6,
Attachment C‐7).
Lower System Features
The lower system is a storage hydroelectric project between Jim’s Lake and tidewater at
Small Sandy Beach that would include the following major components:
● A dam may be built at the natural outlet of Jim’s Lake to Jim’s Creek. The dam is
expected to be a rock fill or earthen structure with an armored spillway capable of
raising the lake elevation approximately eight feet. An alternate configuration is to
use a siphon intake without a dam.
● An intake at Jim’s Lake (See sheet L1.1, Attachment C‐7). The intake may consist of a
siphon intake in the lake without a dam, or a gravity intake if a dam is constructed.
● An approximately 2,050 foot long 14‐inch diameter penstock to convey up to 6.5
cfs of water from Jim’s Lake to a powerhouse located at tidewater on Small Sandy
Beach at an elevation of 20 feet ASL (See sheet L2.1, Attachment C‐7). The
penstock would be constructed of high‐density polyethylene, steel, and/or other
suitable materials.
● An approximately 24‐foot by 24‐foot powerhouse containing the turbine and
generating equipment, controls, switchgear, and appurtenant items (See sheet
L3.1, Attachment C‐7). The powerhouse building would be constructed of wood,
steel, concrete block, and/or other suitable materials.
● A cobble‐lined tailrace discharging water into Port Althorp. The tailrace will
measure approximately 3 feet deep by 8 feet wide by 150 feet long.
● Access trails, temporary construction roads, and other appurtenant features
necessary to provide a complete and functional system (See sheets C1.1 – C1.6,
Attachment C‐7).
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 10
2.iii.B PROJECT IMPOUNDMENTS
The upper system diversion structure will not impound a significant volume of water. Normal
maximum water surface behind the diversion structure will be approximately 486 feet above
mean sea level (MSL) with an impoundment area of less than 300 square feet (0.007 acres).
Gross storage capacity of this impoundment is estimated to be less than 150 cubic feet or 0.003
acre‐feet.
The lower system will either use the natural impoundment of Jim’s Lake for storage or increase
the natural surface water elevation approximately eight feet with a gravity dam. The normal
maximum water surface elevation of Jim’s Lake is 337 feet above MSL with a surface area of
five acres. If a siphon is constructed, the project would draw down the lake using a siphon
system to a minimum pool elevation of 329 feet MSL. The net storage capacity is
approximately 43 acre‐feet. Gross storage capacity, which includes lake volume below the
minimum pool elevation of 329 feet, is approximately 67 acre‐feet.
If a dam is constructed, the normal maximum water surface elevation of Jim’s Lake would be
345 feet above MSL with a surface area of 6.2 acres. The project would draw the lake down to
a minimum pool elevation of 337 feet above MSL. The net storage capacity would be
approximately 67 acre‐feet. Gross storage capacity, which includes lake volume below the
minimum pool /natural lake elevation of 329 feet, would be approximately 133 acre‐feet.
2.iii.C PROJECT TURBINES
The upper system would have one generating unit, consisting of a cross‐flow turbine and
three‐phase synchronous generator with installed capacity of 35 kilowatts (kW).
The lower system would have one generating unit, consisting of an impulse turbine (2‐jet
Pelton or Turgo) and thee‐phase synchronous generator with installed capacity of 105 kW.
2.iii.D PROJECT TRANSMISSION LINES
The project does not include any electrical lines operating at standard transmission voltages
(greater than 69 kilovolts (kV)).
The project does include extending ECUC’s existing three phase 7.2 / 12.47 kV distribution
system from Elfin Cove to the two project powerhouses. The power line would be co‐located
with the access trail from Elfin Cove, and where feasible would be underground. Total length of
this power line is approximately 11,500 feet. The only interconnections on this line would be
the interconnection with the existing ECUC distribution system, and the two hydro
powerhouses. (See sheets C1.1 – C1.6 and Detail 3, Sheet C1.1, Attachment C‐7). Figure 2.3‐1
shows the conceptual one‐line diagram for the ECUC distribution system with the project.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 11
Figure 2.3‐1: Preliminary System One‐Line Diagram
Existing system configuration from as‐built drawings (AEE, 2010).
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 12
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
9/15/089/15/099/15/109/15/119/15/129/15/13Daily Utility Demand and Supply (kW)Excess Hydro Available (kW)
Demand Supplied from Diesel (kW)
Demand Supplied from Hydro (kW)
Total System Demand (kW)
Energy Supplied by Hydro
Energy Supplied by Diesels
Current Utility Demand
Excess Energy available from Hydro
Energy Supplied by Diesels
2.iii.E PROJECT ELECTRICAL OUTPUT
The project is estimated to generate 613,800 kWh annually. Of this, 266,300 kWh will meet
existing ECUC demand, and 347,500 kWh will be available for future load growth or beneficial
use on an interruptible basis. Estimated monthly energy production is provided in Table 2.3‐2.
Typical seasonal load and project output is depicted graphically in Figure 2.3‐1.
Table 2.3‐2: Estimated Monthly Project Energy Production and Usage
Month Project Energy Used (kWh) Excess Production (kWh) Total Production (kWh)
January 14,500 31,600 46,100
February 14,100 28,800 42,900
March 15,000 18,200 33,200
April 14,200 50,300 64,500
May 36,700 43,200 79,900
June 35,800 12,000 47,800
July 27,900 6,100 34,000
August 38,900 10,500 49,400
September 27,100 28,500 55,600
October 14,000 54,800 68,800
November 13,300 37,100 50,400
December 14,800 26,400 41,200
Annual Total 266,300 347,500 613,800
Figure 2.3‐1: Typical Seasonal ECUC Load and Hydro Project Energy Usage
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 13
2.iv PROPOSED PROJECT OPERATION
The project will have a control system that controls both hydro systems and interfaces with the
existing diesel powerhouse control system to coordinate economic dispatch of all generator
assets on the ECUC system.
The ECUC system will normally operate with the upper hydro system generator as the prime
generator (isochronous mode). The lower system generator, and then diesel generators, will be
activated as needed in droop mode to meet total system demand. When insufficient water is
available at the upper and/or lower systems, the next tier generation asset(s) in this dispatch
hierarchy will be promoted to regulate the system and meet demand.
When excess water is available in Crooked Creek and/or Jim's Lake, unused hydro generating
capacity may be used to serve interruptible loads (such as heating loads) in Elfin Cove.
Because there are no fish resources in Crooked Creek, Jim’s Lake, or Jim’s Creek that will be
significantly affected by the project, no ramping rates are proposed for water intake or
discharge at the upper or lower projects.
The diversion structure at Crooked Creek will not significantly impede transport of debris or bed
load in Crooked Creek. Normal high flow events in Crooked Creek, less project flow, are
considered sufficient for recruitment and transfer of sediment and debris in the reach below
the project (see Figure 3.3‐5). Accordingly, no artificial flushing flows or releases are proposed.
2.v EXISTING LICENSED PROJECT INFORMATION
This is a proposed new project. This section is not applicable.
2.vi NEW FACILITIES OR COMPONENTS TO BE CONSTRUCTED
This is a proposed new project. All infrastructure discussed in Section 2.iii of this PAD is
proposed new construction. No future development of the project beyond what is discussed in
Section 2.iii is anticipated at this time. Proposed project operation is discussed in Section 2.iv of
this PAD.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 14
3.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCE IMPACTS [§5.6(d)(3)]
3.i GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
For each environmental system listed in 18 CFR §5.6(d)(3)(ii) through (xiii), this Section
provides:
A. Descriptions of the existing environment in the project vicinity,
B. Summaries of and source references for existing data or studies pertinent to the project
area,
C. Descriptions of any known or potential adverse impacts associated with the
construction, operation or maintenance of the proposed project (including continuing
and cumulative impacts), and
D. Descriptions of proposed project facilities, operations, and management activities
undertaken to protect, avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse impacts, or enhance
affected resources.
3.ii GEOLOGY AND SOILS
3.ii.A Geologic Features
Elfin Cove and the project area are located within rugged and mountainous terrain, with
bedrock occurring in many areas at or near the surface. The geology of the project area has
been investigated by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).2 The description in this Section is
condensed from USGS reports and site observations. A detail of the USGS geological map for
the area is provided in Figure 3.2‐1.
The geology to the south of Elfin Cove in the project area is underlain by highly recrystallized
bedded schists. Beds in this area are overturned, strike in a general northwest‐southeast
orientation, and dip from 35 to 50. The steep mountains and cliffs just east of Elfin Cove and
the project area are diorite. Foliations in the diorite are inferred along a northwest‐
southeasterly strike and at a dip of 70. Glaciation has eroded the softer schists in the area,
resulting in the diorite mountains and cliffs that overlook Elfin Cove and the project area. Debris
fields from avalanches, alluvial cones, and mass wasting events are common along the base of
these cliffs.
In Elfin Cove, the contact zone between the schist and diorite formations is located along the
east side of the cove. This contact zone continues to the south, passing approximately 600 feet
west of Jim’s Lake, and then leaves the project area to the south‐southwest. Surface
presentations of this contact zone are not obvious in the immediate project area. Jim’s Lake
and the Crooked Creek intake site are thus underlain by diorite, while most of the Jim’s Lake
penstock route and the tidewater powerhouse site are expected to be underlain by schist.
2 USGS, 1959.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 15
A fault runs through Elfin Cove south‐southeast to the Crooked Creek valley and up the valley
into the high country to the southeast. Accelerated erosion of the fractured rock associated
with this fault is likely responsible for the formation of Elfin Cove and the Crooked Creek Valley.
The fault running through the Crooked Creek valley suggests that bedrock may be at significant
depth at the Crooked Creek intake site.
Three relatively recent bedrock mass wasting events are apparent in the project area, as
identified by aerial imagery and field investigations. One occurred in Elfin Cove in 1996, another
occurred approximately ½ mile south of Elfin Cove between 2002 and 2009, and a third older
event is evident near the proposed intake site on Crooked Creek.3 These events are
characterized by the release of large slabs of rock from exposed bedrock cliffs along the eastern
fringe of the project area onto terrain several hundred feet below, and are a normal and
ongoing part of the geomorphological processes at work in the area. In each case, the
estimated volume of the event is on the order of 1,000s of cubic yards of rock and debris.
Figure 3.2‐1: Geology of Project Area
Detail from Plate 1 of USGS Bulletin 1058‐E. USGS, 1959.
3 CECNPC, 2007. Page 11. The most recent of these mass wasting events is visible in Appendix B, Photograph B‐8.
Project Area
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 16
3.ii.B Soils
Soils in the project area have been characterized by the National Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS) at the 1:31,680 scale.4 This scale of mapping provides useful planning‐level
information about general locations and types of soil likely present in the project footprint, but
is not sufficiently accurate for detailed engineering or design. NRCS soil mapping units present
in the project footprint are listed in Table 3.2‐1, and shown in Figure 3.2‐2.
Table 3.2‐1: Summary of NRCS Soil Survey Data in Project Area
Code Map Unit Description Hydrologic Group 1 /
Runoff Class
Component Soil Hydric
Rating 2 Project Area
3002E
Entic Cryumbrepts‐
Tolstoi‐Kupreanof
association, 76 to
140% slopes
Entic Cryumbrepts:
A/medium
Tolstoi: D/high
Kupreanof: C/high
Entic Cryumbrepts: 45% / No
Tolstoi: 25% / No
Kupreanof: 20% / No
Mosman: 10% / No
Steep terrain
east of project
area
3551D
Tolstoi‐Mosman
complex, smooth, 56
to 75% slopes
Tolstoi: D/high
Mosman: D/very high
Tolstoi: 35% / No
Mosman: 30% / No
McGilvery: 20% / No
Annahootz: 10% / No
Kupreanof: 5% / No
Steep terrain
east of project
area
3662D
Mitkof‐Tolstoi‐Kaikli
complex, broken, 56
to 75% slopes
Mitkof: C/very high
Tolstoi: D/very high
Kaikli: D/very high
Mitkof: 30% / No
Tolstoi: 30% / No
Kaikli: 25% / Yes
Kasiana: 5% / Yes
McGilvery: 5% / No
Peril: 5% / No
Crooked Creek
intake, upper
penstock / trail
route to Jim’s
Lake
4243B
Nakwasina muck,
rolling hills, 6 to 35%
slopes
Nakwasina: D/very
high
Nakwasina: 85% / Yes
Yakobi: 10% / No
Kina: 5% / Yes
Trail from Elfin
Cove to Project
4243C
Nakwasina muck,
rolling hills, 36 to 55%
slopes
Nakwasina: D/very
high
Nakwasina: 85% / Yes
Yakobi: 10% / No
Kina: 5% / Yes
Trail from Elfin
Cove to Project
4277B
Kina‐ Nakwasina
association, rolling
hills, 6 to 35% slopes
Kina: D/very high
Kina: 50% / Yes
Nakwasina: 40% / Yes
Yakobi: 10% / No
Trail/penstock
route from Jim’s
Lake to
Tidewater
6190B
Kina peat, sloping
lowlands, 6 to 35%
slopes
Kina: D/very high Kina: 90% / Yes
Cryosaprists: 10% / Yes
Trail from Elfin
Cove to Project
(minor)
1. Hydrologic groups A through D denote runoff potential, with A having least runoff potential (highest
infiltration rates) and D having greatest runoff potential.
2. Percentage indicates portion of map unit represented by component soil. Yes / No indicates NRCS’
soil hydric rating.
4 NRCS, 2013.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 17
Figure 3.2‐2: Soils Map of Project Area
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 18
The area surrounding Jim’s Lake and extending to tidewater lies within NRCS map unit 4277B.
Mucky and peaty hydric soils are prevalent in this map unit. Bedrock is exposed near the
shoreline in this area, and is likely near the surface on steep slopes and in other isolated
locations throughout the map unit. About half of this area, generally the wetland meadows, is
peat to 5+ feet depth. Much of the remaining area, generally the transitional and forested
areas, has a typical soil profile consisting of 8 inches of peat underlain by silt loam transitioning
with depth to very gravelly loam from 1.5 to 5 feet.
The upper trail and penstock route between Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake lies within NRCS map
unit 3662D. This map unit has a mix of soil types, with moderate prevalence of hydric soils.
Bedrock is not generally exposed in this area. Typical soil profile in this unit consists of 4 inches
of decomposed plant matter underlain by silt loam transitioning with depth to gravelly loam
with bedrock at 2 to 3 feet.
Most of the access trail between Elfin Cove and the project site traverses NRCS map units
4243B/C. These map units also have a high prevalence of hydric soils. Typical soil profile in this
unit consists of 8 inches of organic peat, underlain by silt loam transitioning with depth to very
gravelly loam from 1.5 to 5 feet. Bedrock is generally not exposed along this trail route.
3.ii.C Reservoir Shorelines and Stream banks
Steepness, Composition, and Vegetative Cover
The shoreline of Jim’s Lake and stream banks of Crooked Creek and Jim’s Creek are all described
in the geomorphology report included as Attachment C‐6.
Existing Erosion, Mass Soil Movement, Slumping or Instability
There are no indications of erosion or instability along the shores of Jim’s Lake. Lake
bathymetry (Figure 6 of Attachment C‐6) and apparent lakebed composition at the southern
and northeastern portions of the lake indicate that the lakebed may exhibit instability or be
susceptible to erosion under drawn down conditions (Section 3 of Attachment C‐6).
3.ii.D Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures
Project construction will disturb vegetation layers and soils within the project footprint in order
to shape trail benches and related project earth works. Mass soil movement is possible on
steeper slopes, although there is little evidence of naturally occurring mass soil movements in
the project area. Exposed cuts and fills will be stabilized by constructing to appropriate slopes
for the types of soils encountered, controlling surface runoff by appropriate ditching and
channelization, and revegetating slopes with approved seed mixes and/or armoring with rock
as appropriate.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 19
Stabilization measures will be described in greater detail in designs and approved Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plans developed for the construction phase of the project.
The shoreline of Jim’s Lake will be affected by fluctuating water levels as the lake is used for a
reservoir. These fluctuating water levels will impact three areas of macro aquatic vegetation
(yellow pond lily) that combined cover approximately 0.8 acres (16%) of the lake. Upland
vegetation around the lake perimeter may also be affected by fluctuating water levels. Stability
of the lakebed and shore is expected to be a factor in the decision to regulate the lake with a
siphon or dam and gravity intake.
Project operations will reduce water flow in Crooked Creek below the project diversion
structure and in Jim’s Creek. The decreased flow regime in these creeks is not expected to have
an adverse impact on their stream banks.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 20
3.iii WATER RESOURCES
ECUC has maintained stream gauges at the diversion site on Crooked Creek and at the outlet of
Jim’s Lake since 2008 to collect hydrology data for this project. Hydrology data for both
gauging stations is presented in an interim hydrology report dated December 2013, included as
Attachment C‐3. Geomorphology of Crooked Creek, Jim’s Lake, and Jim’s Creek are described in
Attachment C‐6.
3.iii.A Drainage Area
Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake drain two adjacent basins. The Crooked Creek basin above the
diversion site is a northwest‐facing alpine basin 0.56 square miles in area, and the Jim’s Lake
basin is a west‐facing forested basin 0.09 square miles in area.
3.iii.B Monthly Flow Statistics
Monthly flow statistics at both gauging stations are presented in Table 3.3‐1.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 21
Table 3.3‐1: Monthly Flow Statistics for Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake
Crooked Creek Gauging Station Flow
Statistics (cfs)
Jim’s Lake Outlet Gauging Station Flow
Statistics (cfs) Month
Minimum Average Maximum Minimum Average Maximum
January 0.83 3.50 13.44 0.24 0.60 1.45
February 0.80 3.24 11.32 0.21 0.53 1.24
March 0.67 2.20 6.70 0.22 0.38 0.81
April 0.97 4.72 12.41 0.44 0.57 0.69
May 3.06 4.86 6.38 0.12 0.33 0.75
June 0.94 2.14 5.65 0.12 0.16 0.33
July 0.89 1.79 3.70 0.13 0.20 0.35
August 1.35 3.82 11.16 0.19 0.41 0.99
September 1.75 4.42 8.49 0.36 0.70 1.20
October 2.60 5.22 8.38 0.47 0.82 1.39
November 0.69 4.02 7.76 0.34 0.80 2.07
December 0.61 2.15 7.78 0.25 0.59 1.44
Based on available flow data at each gauging station. Polarconsult, 2013.
3.iii.C Flow Duration Curve
Flow duration curves for Crooked Creek at the proposed diversion site and at Jim’s Lake outlet
are presented in Figures 3.3‐1 and 3.3‐2, respectively. Proposed project design flows are 5.0 cfs
at Crooked Creek, and 6.5 cfs from Jim’s Lake. Note that diverted Crooked Creek flow will
discharge to Jim’s Lake, increasing available flow from that basin.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 22
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Percent of Time Flow is Equalled or ExceededCrooked Creek Flow at Diversion Site (cfs)8/22/2008 ‐ 10/17/2013 Gauged Flow
8/22/2008 ‐ 10/17/2013 Extended Record
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Percent of Time Flow is Equalled or ExceededJim's Creek Flow at Lake Outlet (cfs)8/22/2008 ‐ 10/17/2013 Gauged Flow
8/22/2008 ‐ 10/17/2013 Extended Record
Figure 3.3‐1: Flow Duration Curve, Crooked Creek at Diversion Site
Figure 3.3‐2: Flow Duration Curve, Jim’s Creek at Lake Outlet
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 23
3.iii.D Existing and Proposed Uses of Project Water
There are no other existing or proposed dams, diversion structures, or water works on the
project waters.
3.iii.E Existing In‐stream Flow Uses of Project Water
There are no known existing in‐stream uses of or in‐stream flow reservations on the waters of
Crooked Creek, Jim’s Lake, or Jim’s Creek.
3.iii.F Federally‐Approved Water Quality Standards Applicable to Project Waters
There are no known federally‐approved water quality standards applicable to the waters of
Crooked Creek, Jim’s Lake, or Jim’s Creek.
3.iii.G Seasonal Variation of Existing Water Quality Data
Available water quality data for Crooked Creek, Jim’s Lake, and Jim’s Creek consists of partial
water temperature records at the gauging stations established for this project and a few
dissolved oxygen, pH and conductivity measurements collected at both gauging stations. No
other water quality data is known to exist for the project waters. During project site visits, the
creeks and minor drainages in the project area have always been observed to run clear with
minimal suspended solids or turbidity. Jim’s Lake typically has somewhat higher turbidity, with
typical water clarity to approximately five feet.
Water Temperature
A partial temperature record has been collected at the Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake gauging
stations since installation in 2008. Figure 3.3‐3 summarizes the period of record for water
temperature data at each station. The Jim’s Lake record is more complete, with 1,577 days of
water temperature data compared with 462 days of data for the Crooked Creek station.5
Figure 3.3‐4 presents average daily water temperature for both stations. The multiple years of
available data have been plotted over a single year to illustrate typical seasonal trends and
year‐to‐year variations. Vertical water temperature profiles have not been measured at Jim’s
Lake.
5 Record counts reflect data through the most recent download and processing of data: 10/17/2013 at Jim’s
Lake; and 12/18/2013 at Crooked Creek. See Polarconsult, 2013a.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 24
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
Jan 01 Jan 29 Feb 26 Mar 25 Apr 22 May 20 Jun 17 Jul 15 Aug 12 Sep 09 Oct 07 Nov 04 Dec 02 Dec 30
Day of YearWater Temperature (F)Average Daily Jim's Lake Water Temperature
Average Daily Crooked Creek Water Temperature
Crooked Creek
Jim's Lake
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Crooked Creek Water Temperature
Jim's Lake Water Temperature
Figure 3.3‐3: Available Water Temperature Data at Project Gauging Stations
Figure 3.3‐4: Annual Water Temperature Graph for Project Gauging Stations
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 25
Dissolved Oxygen and Other Physical or Chemical Water Quality Parameter Data
Some of the stream flow measurements taken at Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake have used
equipment that also measures dissolved oxygen, pH, and conductivity. Available data for these
analytes is presented in Table 3.3‐2.
Table 3.3‐2: Other Physical and Chemical Water Quality Data
Crooked Creek Gauging Station Jim’s Lake Outlet Gauging Station Date
pH 2 D.O.
(%) 2
E.C.
(uS/cm)
Temp.
(˚F) pH 2 D.O.
(%) 2
E.C.
(uS/cm)
Temp.
(˚F)
7/9/2009 8.6 81 35 47.7 7.5 70 30 64.9
9/4/2009 8.2 ‐ 34 48.4 7.3 ‐ 19 52.7
10/9/2009 8.0 ‐ 22 44.4 7.3 ‐ 16 46.8
12/9/2009 9.5 ‐ 37 34.9 7.5 ‐ 17 33.6
8/10/2010 ‐ ‐ 32 48.4 ‐ ‐ 28 56.9
9/27/2011 ‐ ‐ 39 45.0 ‐ ‐ 19 49.3
6/8/2013 ‐ ‐ 14 41.7 ‐ ‐ 30 56.7
7/15/2013 ‐ 35 32 48.4 ‐ 20 21 62.8
10/17/2013 ‐ ‐ 34 43.2 ‐ ‐ 23 46.6
10/17/2013 1 ‐ ‐ 48 43.2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
D.O.: Dissolved oxygen, reported in percent of saturation concentration.
E.C.: Actual electrical conductivity in uS/cm, unadjusted for temperature.
1. Data from mouth of Crooked Creek.
2. Data is from a multi‐parameter instrument primarily used to measure conductivity. Calibration status of D.O.
and pH channels at time of measurements is unknown.
3.iii.H Impoundment information
The upper system is a run‐of‐river configuration. The diversion at Crooked Creek does not have
a significant impoundment volume or area.
The lower system will use Jim’s Lake as a storage reservoir. Two configurations are under
consideration, either a dam and gravity intake, or no dam with a siphon intake.
With the siphon intake configuration, the lake’s natural surface elevation would be the
maximum pool elevation, and the siphon would draw the lake down a maximum of eight feet.
This reservoir configuration would have a maximum surface area of 5 acres, total volume of 67
acre‐feet, maximum depth of 26 feet, mean depth of approximately 15 feet, hydraulic
residence time of 2 to 7 days at project design flow, and shoreline length at maximum pool of
2,580 feet.
With the dam and gravity intake configuration, the dam would raise the lake eight feet, and the
gravity intake would draw the lake down a maximum of eight feet. This reservoir configuration
would have a maximum surface area of 6.2 acres, total volume of 133 acre‐feet, maximum
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 26
depth of 34 feet, mean depth of approximately 19 feet, hydraulic residence time of 7 to 13 days
at project design flow, and shoreline length at maximum pool of 3,320 feet.
The lake’s natural average hydraulic residence time is approximately 84 days.
3.iii.I Gradient of Affected Downstream Reaches
The gradient of affected downstream reaches of Crooked Creek and Jim’s Creek are
summarized in Table 3.3‐3. Affected reaches downstream of the project are also described in
the geomorphology report included as Attachment C‐6.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 27
Table 3.3‐3: Gradient of Affected Downstream Reaches Below Project
Crooked Creek below Diversion Site Jim’s Creek
Reach station
(river miles) Gradient Comment Reach station
(river miles) Gradient Comment
Above 29+00
(RM 0.55) 5.6% Diversion site 19+00 to 19+16
(RM 0.36) 8% 19+16 is lake
outlet
23+50 to 29+00
(RM 0.45 – 0.55) 36% 14+00 to 19+00
(RM 0.27 ‐ 0.36)
16 to
26%
20+00 to 23+50
(RM 0.38 – 0.45) 6% 11+00 to 14+00
(RM 0.21 – 0.27) 7.5%
10+00 to 20+00
(RM 0.19 – 0.38) 3.5% 8+50 to 11+00
(RM 0.16 – 0.21) 53%
3+00 to 10+00
(RM 0.06 – 0.19)
30 to
50+% 3+50 to 8+50
(RM 0.07 – 0.16)
4.5 to
11%
1+00 to 3+00
(RM 0.02 – 0.06) 18% 1+50 to 3+50
(RM 0.03 – 0.07)
22 to
38%
Mouth to 1+00
(RM 0.00 – 0.02) 8% Gradient through
intertidal
Mouth to 1+50
(RM 0.00 – 0.03) 2 to 8% ~8% gradient
through intertidal
Note: This information is summarized from Polarconsult, 2014b.
RM: river mile
3.iii.J Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures
Downstream Hydrology
The project’s diversion at Crooked Creek will decrease flow in Crooked Creek from tidewater up
to river mile (RM) 0.55. Existing and proposed hydrograph at the upper end of the fish habitat
reach on Crooked Creek is presented in Figure 3.3‐5.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 28
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Percent of Time Flow is Equalled or ExceededJim's Creek Flow at Lake Outlet (cfs)Existing Flow Duration Curve
Estimated Flow Duration Curve with Project
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Percent of Time Flow is Equalled or ExceededCrooked Creek Flow at Top of Habitat Reach (cfs)Existing Flow Duration Curve
Estimated Flow Duration Curve With Project
Figure 3.3‐5: Flow Duration Curves at Crooked Creek Fish Habitat – Existing and With Project
The project will decrease flow in Jim’s Creek from tidewater up to Jim’s Lake (RM 0.36). The
expected hydrograph for Jim’s Creek at the lake outlet with the project in operation is
presented in Figure 3.3‐6.
Figure 3.3‐6: Flow Duration Curves at Jim’s Creek at Lake Outlet – Existing and With Project
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 29
Because Crooked Creek and Jim’s Creek are minor drainages with no or very little fish habitat,
no avoidance, minimization, or mitigation measures are proposed for the changed flow regimes
downstream of the project.6
Existing Water Uses
There are no existing uses of the project waters, so no impacts will occur.
Water Quality
Construction activity and project operations will result in increased stormwater discharge into
surface waters in the project area. Such discharges would be avoided, minimized and/or
controlled with stormwater pollution prevention best management practices in accordance
with a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) prepared and implemented
consistent with state and federal regulations. The SWPPP would be developed prior to the
construction phase of the project.
These stormwater discharges are not expected to result in any adverse environmental impacts
to the project area or surrounding areas.
Diverting Crooked Creek flow into Jim’s Lake will alter the temperature of Jim’s Lake and Jim’s
Creek. During the fall and winter months, from about October through May, available data
indicate Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake are similar in temperature and no significant thermal
changes are expected. During the summer months, from about June through September, Jim’s
Lake discharge is 5 to 20 F warmer than Crooked Creek, so the inflow of cooler water from
Crooked Creek will tend to decrease ambient temperatures in Jim’s Lake.
The limited available data (see Table 3.3‐2) indicates Crooked Creek has a higher dissolved
oxygen content and higher pH than Jim’s Lake. Diverting some flow from Crooked Creek into
Jim’s Lake is expected to increase the lake’s dissolved oxygen levels and pH.
Because Crooked Creek, Jim’s Lake, and Jim’s Creek are minor water bodies with no or limited
fish habitat, no avoidance, minimization, or mitigation measures are proposed for the changed
water quality parameters in Jim’s Lake or the changed flow regimes downstream of the project.
Downstream Reaches
Based on the size of the predominate stream channel substrate in Crooked Creek below the
diversion site, flood flows necessary to mobilize sediment in Crooked Creek are significantly
higher than the five cfs capacity of the diversion structure. Accordingly, the project is not
expected to significantly affect downstream sediment transport in Crooked Creek.
6 See Alaska Department of Fish and Game determination on project affect on fish habitat, PAD Attachment C‐5.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 30
There is no significant sediment transport into Jim’s Creek from Jim’s Lake. There is very limited
sediment in the upper channel of Jim’s Creek, so sediment transport in this reach will not be
significantly affected by the project.7 Flood flows from tributaries downstream of Jim’s Lake are
expected to be sufficient to maintain adequate sediment transport in the lower reaches of Jim’s
Creek. Accordingly, the project is not expected to significantly affect downstream sediment
transport in Jim’s Creek.
Marine Water Quality
The project will have a positive environmental impact by reducing the amount of diesel fuel
transported to, stored in, and consumed by Elfin Cove. Reducing the community’s fuel usage
incrementally reduces the risk of oil spills that could occur on sea during barge transport to Elfin
Cove, as well as potential spills on land and/or sea from marine transfer to the bulk fuel storage
facility or pipeline transfer to the diesel power plant. Such spills could have an adverse impact
on marine wildlife (mammals, birds, fish, etc.) in the vicinity of a spill.
Air Quality
The project will have a positive environmental impact by reducing stack emissions at the
community’s diesel power plant, improving local air quality and reducing ambient noise levels
in the vicinity of the diesel power plant.
7 See Geomorphology Report, Polarconsult 2014b. PAD Attachment C‐6.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 31
3.iv FISH AND AQUATIC RESOURCES
3.iv.A Existing Fish and Aquatic Communities
Aquatic resources in the project area include Crooked Creek, Jim’s Lake, Jim’s Creek, and a
number of unnamed minor drainages. Crooked Creek is one of many minor creeks on the Inian
Peninsula that drains less than one square mile of land. Jim’s Creek is smaller, draining a basin
of under 100 acres, including Jim’s Lake which has a surface area of five acres.
Using the fish stream classification criteria set forth in the Forest Plan, Crooked Creek is a Class
II stream to approximately 450 feet above tidewater, then a Class III stream upstream to
beyond the project area. Jim’s Creek and Jim’s Lake are both Class IV water bodies.8
Summary characteristics of these stream classifications follow.
Class I: Streams or lakes with anadromous or adfluvial fish or fish habitat.
Class II: Streams or lakes with resident fish or fish habitat.
Class III: Perennial and intermittent streams with no fish populations but which have
sufficient flow to have an immediate influence on downstream water quality or fish habitat
capability.
Class IV: Other intermittent, ephemeral, and small perennial channels with insufficient flow
to directly influence downstream water quality of fish habitat capability.
A fisheries surveys of the project waters was conducted in July 2013 to determine the absence
or presence of fish within the project waters. The survey was conducted under Alaska
Department of Fish and Game (ADFG) permit SF‐2013‐231. A small population of 8+ fish (Dolly
Varden, Salvelinus malma) was found in Crooked Creek within approximately 150 yards of
tidewater. A series of falls blocks fish passage upstream. The remainder of Crooked Creek,
Jim’s Lake, and Jim’s Creek were all found to have no fish. The fisheries report documenting
the survey efforts and results is included with this PAD as Attachment C‐1.
3.iv.B Essential Fish Habitat
Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) is identified for only those species managed under a federal Fishery
Management Plan (FMP). Dolly Varden, the only fish occurring in Crooked Creek, Jim’s Lake, or
Jim’s Creek, are not covered by a FMP. Accordingly, the project waters are not EFH.9
8 USFS, 2008a. Page 4‐9.
9 NMFS, 2015b.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 32
3.iv.C Temporal and Spatial Distribution of Fish and Aquatic Communities
A small population of resident Dolly Varden (8+ fish) is present in the lower reaches of Crooked
Creek within approximately 150 yards of tidewater. No fish are present in the remainder of
Crooked Creek, Jim’s Lake, or Jim’s Creek. More detailed information regarding the Dolly
Varden present in the lower reaches of Crooked Creek is available in the fisheries survey report
in Attachment C‐1.
3.iv.D Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures
The Habitat Division of ADFG was contacted regarding the project and fisheries resources in
March 2014, and was provided with the project conceptual development plans and fisheries
survey report. ADFG concluded that the project would not affect fisheries resources and that a
fish habitat permit would not be required for the project (see ADFG letter, Attachment C‐5).
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 33
3.v WILDLIFE AND BOTANICAL RESOURCES
The project is located in undeveloped coastal conifer rainforest habitat, predominately within
the TNF but also on adjacent state land within the Elfin Cove town site. Vegetative cover in the
project vicinity is characterized and summarized in Table 3.5‐1. Acreage tallies in Table
3.5‐1 are based on the study boundary limits shown in Figure 3.5‐1. General descriptions of
each major category of vegetation are provided in this Section.
Vegetation types within the project area occur in a complex mosaic that varies locally based on
topography, soil type, soil hydrology, slope aspect, and similar local criteria. Categories and
spatial extents were developed based on review of canopy and vegetation types depicted in
aerial imagery, detailed topography derived from LiDAR surveys of the project area, and ground
based observations made during field reconnaissance activities.
3.v.A Vegetation / Habitat Types
Vegetation types in the project area were mapped, and descriptions of each major type follow.
These descriptions correspond to plant community classes defined by the Alaska Natural
Heritage Program (ANHP).10
Wetland Meadow. These areas are predominately devoid of trees or shrubs, and are
vegetated by sedges and grasses. Surficial soils are organic peat. These areas are 95‐100%
vegetated. Exposed soils occur infrequently in the bed of small ponds or due to animal activity
or water erosion on steep slopes (Photograph B‐1). Corresponds to ANHP plant community
class ‘Needleleaf Forest (Woodland‐Open)(Peatland)’.
Open Conifer Forest / Meadow Complex. These areas are typically transitional between
conifer forest and meadow areas. They are comprised of both plant communities and occur in
a mosaic pattern that is locally determined by topography, soil, and hydrology conditions.
Trees growing in these areas tend to be stunted or shrubs due to the marginal habitat for these
species (Photograph B‐2). Corresponds to ANHP plant community classes ‘Needleleaf Forest
(Woodland‐Open)(Peatland)’ and ‘Needleleaf Forest (Open‐Closed)(Seasonally Flooded)’.
Closed Conifer Forest. These areas are vegetated by mature conifer forest, dominated by Sitka
spruce, yellow cedar, and western hemlock. Understory bushes and shrubs, when present,
typically include various blueberry, cranberry, and salmonberry species. Deciduous trees and
brush such as red alder occur in canopy openings and margins, such as along beaches or the
perimeter of rock slides. Ground cover varies from grasses to moss. The prevalence and
density of understory shrubs and ground cover varies from very dense in areas with a more
open upper canopy to very sparse in areas with a closed upper canopy. Specific trees and plant
communities vary with location based on local topography, soils, and hydrology conditions. A
representative range of forest vegetation is shown in Photographs B‐3 (closed upper canopy)
10 ANHP, 2015.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 34
and B‐4 (open upper canopy). Most of the forest in the project area is old growth, but little if
any is productive old growth as defined by the USFS.11 Corresponds to ANHP plant community
classes ‘Needleleaf Forest (Open‐Closed)(Seasonally Flooded)’, ‘Sitka Spruce (Woodland‐
Closed)’ and ‘Hemlock (Woodland‐Closed)’.
Open Water. Open water includes the near‐shore marine waters in Elfin Cove and at Little
Sandy Beach (Attachment C‐6, Photographs 10, 15, and 16). Both marine sites are generally
free of macro‐aquatic vegetation. Open water also includes Jim’s Lake, which is 5 acres in area
(Attachment C‐6, Photographs 11 and 17), and the normally‐wetted perimeter of creeks and
minor drainages throughout the project area (Attachment C‐6, Photographs 2 through 9 and 12
through 16). Yellow pond lily is present in near‐shore areas of Jim’s Lake.
Barren Ground. Barren ground includes rock outcrops (Photograph B‐5) and intertidal areas
between mean high water and the vegetation line (Photograph B‐6). The intertidal area at
Little Sandy Beach is a high‐energy boulder and cobble beach.12 The vegetation line above
extreme high water is initially populated by beach grasses, then transitions to a fringe of alder
and then typical conifer forest (Photograph B‐6). The intertidal area in Elfin Cove is a narrow
cobble beach with bedrock uplands. Mature conifer trees occupy the uplands
Table 3.5‐1: Summary of Vegetation in the Project Area
Type of
Vegetation Description 1
Acreage
Within
Project Area
Percentage
of Study
Area
Wetland
Meadow
Wetland meadow with perennially saturated soil,
populated by grasses, sedges, other non‐woody plants.
0% conifer tree canopy.
0‐10% conifer/deciduous shrub canopy.
95‐100% ground cover.
39.7 22.0%
Open Conifer
Forest /
Meadow
Complex
Transitional area between conifer forest and meadow.
0‐15% conifer tree canopy.
0‐25% conifer/deciduous shrub canopy.
95‐100% ground cover.
56.7 31.4%
Closed Conifer
Forest
Closed conifer tree canopy.
90‐100% conifer tree canopy
25‐75% conifer/deciduous shrub canopy.
25‐75% ground cover.
67.8 37.5%
Open Water Marine waters, Jim’s Lake, other creeks and minor
drainages in study area. 13.8 7.6%
Barren Ground Beaches, rock cliffs, boulder fields 2.7 1.5%
TOTAL 180.7 100%
Acreage and percentage tallies based on project area delineation shown on Figure 3.5‐1.
11 Page 7‐29, USFS, 2008a.
12 There is no sand at little sandy beach. This local name is sardonic commentary on the local terrain.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 35
Figure 3.5‐1: Vegetation within Project Study Area
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 36
3.v.B Temporal or Spatial Distribution of Important Species
Wildlife
The project area is part of a large and contiguous undeveloped habitat within the TNF and
adjoining lands on northern Chichagof Island. Wildlife species potentially occurring in the
project area are listed in Table 3.5‐2. The USFS, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and
ADFG each maintain a list of wildlife species that each agency believes to warrant heightened
management awareness. Each agency’s listing objectives and listed species are addressed
below, and wildlife species with heightened management status are listed in Table 3.5‐3 and
Table 3.7‐1.
USFS Sensitive Species List
Species on the current USFS sensitive species list and likely to occur within the project area are
included in Table 3.5‐3. All USFS‐designated sensitive species occurring in the TNF are birds.
USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern
The 1988 amendment to the federal Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act mandated that the
USFWS “identify species, subspecies, and populations of all migratory nongame birds that,
without additional conservation actions, are likely to become candidates for listing under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973.”13 The USFWS fulfills this mandate by maintaining a list of
Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC).
The most recent USFWS BCC list provides lists by USFWS management region and by bird
conservation region (BCR).14 The union of the BCC lists for Management Region 7 (Alaska
Region) and BCR 5 (Northern Pacific Forest) is used as the BCC listing for the project area.
These bird species are listed on Table 3.5‐3.
ADFG Alaska Wildlife Action Plan, List of Species of Greatest Conservation Need
ADFG’s Alaska Wildlife Action Plan (AWAP) presents a comprehensive wildlife conservation
strategy to conserve the diversity of Alaska’s wildlife resources. One aspect of the AWAP is to
identify those species with the greatest conservation need (GCN).15 The criteria for GCN listing
is broad, including species with known threats but also species that may have healthy
populations and secure habitats but that are poorly studied or understood. All of the bird
species included on Table 3.5‐3 are also designated GCN species by ADFG. Other GCN bird
species may occur in the project area, but are not listed on Table 3.5‐3. Several fish, amphibian,
reptile, mammal, and invertebrate species are also included on the GCN list.
13 USFWS, 2008b.
14 USFWS, 2008b.
15 ADFG, 2006.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 37
Table 3.5‐2: List of Wildlife Potentially Occurring in Project Area
Marine Mammals Birds –Waterbirds and Shorebirds (con’t.)
Steller sea lion Eumetopias jubatus Red‐breasted merganser Mergus serrator
Humpback whale Megaptera novaeangliae Sandhill crane Grus canadensis
Sea otter Enhydra lutris Spotted sandpiper Actitis macularia
Large Mammals Short‐billed dowitcher Limnodromus griseus
Brown bear Ursus arctos Trumpeter swan Cygnus buccinator
Vancouver Canada goose Branta canadensis fulva Sitka black‐tailed deer Odocoileus heminonus
sitkensis Wilson’s snipe Gallinago delicata
Birds –Songbirds and Gamebirds Santos reindeer Rangifer tarandus ssp.
saintnicolas magicalus American dipper Cinclus mexicanus
Small Mammals American robin Turdus migratorius
Long‐tailed vole Microtus longicaudus Belted kingfisher Ceryle alcyon
Tundra vole Microtus oeconomus Brown creeper Certhia americana
Cinereus shrew Sorex cinereus Chestnut‐backed chickadee Poecile rufescens
Northwestern deermouse Peromyscus oeconomus Dark‐eyed junco Junco hyemalis
Little brown bat Myotis licufugus Fox sparrow Passerella iliaca
Red squirrel Tamiasciurus hudsonicus Golden‐crowned kinglet Regulus satrapa
River otter Lontra canadensis Hermit thrush Catharus guttatus
American marten Martes americana Hairy woodpecker Picoides villosus
Ermine Mustela erminea Lincoln’s sparrow Melospiza lincolnii
Mink Neovison vison Northwestern crow Corvus caurinus
Beaver Castor canadensis Orange‐crowned warbler Vermivora celata
Birds ‐ Raptors Olive‐sided flycatcher Contopus cooperi
Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Pacific‐slope flycatcher Empidonax difficilis
Northern goshawk Accipiter gentiles Pine siskin Spinus pinus
Red‐tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis Red crossbill Loxia curvirostra
Sharp shinned hawk Accipiter striatus Ruby‐crowned kinglet Regulus calendula
Merlin Falco columbarius Red‐breasted nuthatch Sitta canadensis
Western Screech owl Otus kennicottii Rufous hummingbird Selasphorus rufus
Great horned owl Bubo virginianus Red‐breasted sapsucker Sphyrapicus rubber
Birds – Waterbirds and Shorebirds Steller's jay Cyanocitta stelleri
American wigeon Anas americana Swainson’s thrush Catharus ustulatus
Canada goose Branta canadensis Townsend’s warbler Dendroica townsendi
Common merganser Mergus merganser Tennessee warbler Vermivora peregrina
Great blue heron Ardea herodias Varied thrush Ixoreus naevius
Green‐winged teal Anas crecca Winter wren Troglodytes troglodytes
Greater yellowlegs Tringa melanoleuca Yellow warbler Dendroica petechia
Glaucous‐winged gull Larus glaucescens Amphibians
Harlequin duck Histrionicus histrionicus Northern red‐legged frog Rana aurora
Lesser yellowlegs Tringa flavipes Western toad Bufo boreas
Mallard Anas platyrhynchos Northwestern salamander Ambystome gracile
Marbled murrelet Brachyramphus marmoratus Roughskin newt Taricha granulose
Mew gull Larus canus Wood frog Rana sylvatica
List condensed from USFS 2008a, ADFG 2006a, ADFG 2014, and USFWS 2008a.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 38
Other Protected Birds
Migratory birds are protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and eagles are
protected under the federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. Bald eagles are common
throughout the project area and southeast Alaska generally. A bald eagle survey was
completed in July 2013 (see Attachment C‐2), and did not identify any active or abandoned
eagle nests in the project area. Several bald eagles were observed transiting the project area
over the course of the survey.
Table 3.5‐3: Sensitive / Special Management Bird Species that May Occur in the Project Area
Common Name Scientific Name USFWS
BCC 1
ADFG
GCN 2
USFS
SS 3
Yellow‐billed Loon (Gavia adamsii) Y Y
Laysan Albatross (Phoebastria immutabilis) Y Y
Black‐footed Albatross (Phoebastria nigripes) Y Y
Red‐faced Cormorant (Phalacrocorax urile) Y Y
Pelagic Cormorant (Phalacrocorax pelagicus ssp. pelagicus) Y Y
Northern / Queen Charlotte
Goshawk
(Accipiter gentiles ssp. laingi) Y Y Y
Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus) Y Y
Black Oystercatcher (Haematopus bachmani) Y Y Y
Solitary Sandpiper (Tringa solitaria) Y Y
Lesser Yellowlegs Sandpiper (Tringa flavipes) Y Y
Whimbrel sandpiper (Numenius phaeopus) Y Y
Hudsonian Godwit sandpiper (Limosa haemastica) Y Y
Marbled Godwit (Limosa fedoa) Y Y
Red Knot Calidris canutus ssp. roselaari) Y Y
Aleutian Tern (Sterna aleutica) Y Y Y
Arctic Tern (Sterna paradisaea) Y Y
Marbled Murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) Y Y
Kittlitz's Murrelet (Brachyramphus brevirostris) Y Y Y 4
ADFG: Alaska Department of Fish and Game ssp. Subspecies
BCC: Bird species of conservation concern USFS: U.S. Forest Service
GCN: greatest conservation need USFWS: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
SS: sensitive species Y: Species is listed under this agency’s criteria.
Notes:
1. Species included in Birds of Conservation Concern (USFWS, 2008b).
2. Partial list of bird species included in Appendix 7 of ADFG Alaska Wildlife Action Plan (ADFG, 2006).
3. As listed by USFS in 2009 (USFS, 2009).
4. Kittlitz’s Murrelet is listed as a USFS sensitive species because it was a candidate species for protection
under the Endangered Species Act when the USFS list was updated in 2009 (USFS, 2009). The USFWS
removed the Kittlitz’s Murrelet from candidate status on October 3, 2013 (GPO, 2013).
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 39
Plants
Plants occurring in the project area are described by the plant community classes developed by
the ANHP. The following classes occur in the project area, and generally correspond to the
vegetation types mapped in Figure 3.5‐1.
‐ Needleleaf Forest (Woodland‐Open)(Peatland) – Wetland Meadows Map Unit
‐ Needleleaf Forest (Open‐Closed) (Seasonally Flooded) – Open Conifer Forest / Meadow Complex
Map Unit
‐ Sitka Spruce (Woodland‐Closed) and Hemlock (Woodland‐Closed) – Closed Conifer Forest Map
Unit
Plants that may occur in the project area are listed in Tables 3.5‐4 and 3.5‐5. Table 3.5‐5 lists
USFS‐designated sensitive plant species, and Table 3.5‐4 lists other plant species that may occur
in the project area.
Table 3.5‐4: Native Plant Species that May Occur in the Project Area
Common Name Scientific Name Common Name Scientific Name
Trees Floor Plants
Western hemlock Tsuga hetrophylla False lily‐of‐the‐valley Maianthenim dilitatum
Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis Bunchberry Cornus canadensis
mountain hemlock Tsuga mertensiana five‐leaf bramble Rubus pedatus
Alaska yellow cedar Chamaecyparis
nootkatensis
skunk cabbage Lysichiton americanum
Red Alder Alnus rubra Rattlesnake fern 1 Botrychium virginianum
Shrubs and Brush Giant moonwort 1 Botrychium yaaxudakeit
blueberry Vaccinium Soft shield fern 1 Polystichum setigerum
huckleberry Muskegs
Sitka alder Alnus viridis shore pine Pinus contorta var.
contorta
Devil’s club Oplopanax horridus peat moss Spaghnum spp.
salal Gaultheria shallon sedges Carex spp.
willows Salix spp.
Species list compiled from following sources:
Not annotated: USFS, 2008a;
1. Included in Alaska Natural Heritage Program rare plant data portal near project area (ANHP, 2015).
The USFS maintains a list of plant species that the agency believes warrant heightened
management awareness. USFS sensitive species are defined as “[t]hose plant and animal
species identified by a Regional Forester for which population viability is a concern, as
evidenced by:
1. Significant current or predicted downward trends in population numbers or density.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 40
2. Significant current or predicted downward trends in habitat capability that would reduce
a species existing distribution.16
Species that may occur within the project area and that are on the most current USFS sensitive
species list are included in Table 3.5‐5. Actual presence of these species within the project area
is unknown.
The presence of invasive plant species in the project area is unknown. Except immediately
around Elfin Cove, the presence of invasive species is considered unlikely in the project area
due to limited human traffic and intact natural vegetation. Two species are listed in the ANHP
invasive species database in the project vicinity: the oxeye daisy (Leucanthemum vulgare) and
the common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale).17
Table 3.5‐5: USFS‐Designated Sensitive Plant Species that May Occur in the Project Area
Common Name Scientific Name
Eschscholtz’s little nightmare (Aphragmus escholtzianus)
Moosewort fern (Botrychium tunux)
Moonwort fern (Botrychium yaaxudakeit)
Edible thistle (Cirsium edule var. macounii)
Calder’s loveage (Ligusticum calderi)
Pale poppy (Papaver alboroseum)
Unalaska mist‐maid (Romanzoffia unakaschcensis)
Spatulate moonwort (Botrychium spathulatum)
Mountain lady’s slipper (Cypripedium montanum)
Large yellow lady’s slipper (Cypripedium parviflorum var. pubescens)
Lichen (Lobaria amplissima)
Alaska rein orchid (Piperia unalascensis)
Lesser round‐leaved orchid (Platanthera orbiculata)
Kruckeberg’s swordfern (Polystichum kruckebergii)
Henderson’s checkermallow (Sidalcea hendersonii)
Dune tansy (Tanacetum bipinnatum ssp. huronense)
Sensitive species list compiled from USFS, 2009.
3.v.C Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures
Water intakes for both the upper and lower hydroelectric systems will utilize screened intakes
to prevent the admittance of animals to the project works. Both intakes will also be designed
with low water velocities and low pressure differentials to prevent animals from becoming
impinged on the intake screens.
16 Forest Service Manual 2670.5.19.
17 ANHP, 2015.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 41
Bald eagles occur in the project area, but no eagle nests were found in the project area. The
project is not expected to have a significant impact on bald eagles.
Project construction and operations have the potential to introduce invasive plant species to
the project area. Revegetation seed mixes will be sourced from approved suppliers and
certified to be free of invasive species. Construction plans will include wheel washing and
similar measures to deter introduction of invasive species. Project operations will normally be
based out of Elfin Cove, and pose limited risk for introduction of invasive species.
The project will have a positive environmental impact by reducing the amount of diesel fuel
transported to, stored in, and consumed by Elfin Cove. Reducing the community’s fuel usage
incrementally reduces the risk of oil spills that could occur on sea during barge transport to Elfin
Cove, as well as potential spills on land and/or sea from bulk fuel storage or pipeline transfer to
the diesel power plant. Such spills could have an adverse impact on marine wildlife (mammals,
birds, fish) in the vicinity of a spill. The project will also reduce stack emissions by the diesel
power plant, improving local air quality and reducing ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the
diesel power plant.
The project is not expected to have a significant adverse impact on bird or wildlife resources
occurring in the project area.
3.vi WETLANDS, RIPARIAN, AND LITTORAL HABITAT
3.vi.A Plant and Animal Species List
Plant and animal species that may occur in wetland, riparian, and littoral habitat in the project
area are listed in Tables 3.5‐2, 3.5‐3, 3.5‐4, and 3.5‐5 of the previous Section.
3.vi.B Habitat Map
Figure 3.5‐1 indicates the location of wetlands, riparian, and littoral habitats in the project area.
3.vi.C Acreage Estimates
Table 3.6‐1 lists total estimated acreage of wetland, riparian, and littoral habitat within the
project study area. Table 3.6‐1 is based on the same vegetation classes described in Table 3.5‐1
and shown on Figure 3.5‐1 of the previous Section.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 42
Table 3.6‐1: Estimated Acreage of Littoral, Riparian, and Wetland Habitats in Project Area
Vegetation Unit Description
Acreage
in Study
Area
Percentage
of Study
Area
Wetlands within
Map Unit
Wetlands
Acreage
Impacted
Acreage1
Marine Waters (Littoral Areas) 6.3 3.5% Waters of U.S. 0 0.1
Streams and Lakes (Riparian Areas) 7.5 4.1% Waters of U.S. 0 1.6
Riverine Wetland Mosaic 1.2 0.7% 50% wetland
mosaic 0.6 0.1
Barren Land ‐ Beach Headlands 1.9 1.1% 100% upland 0 0.0
Barren Land ‐ Cliffs 0.8 0.4% 100% upland 0 0.0
Wetland Meadows 39.7 22.0% 100% wetland 39.7 1.2
Open Forest / Meadow
Complex 56.7 31.3% 75% wetland
mosaic 42.5 2.6
Conifer Forest, Steep Slopes
(75% and over) 36.3 20.1% 10% wetland
mosaic 3.6 0.2
Conifer Forest, Moderate Slopes
(under 75%) 30.3 16.8% 50% wetland
mosaic 15.1 0.6
TOTALS 180.7 100% 101.5 6.4
1. Estimated acreage of impacts based on conceptual design drawings.
3.vi.D Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures
The project will require fill in or disturbance to approximately 6.4 acres of waters of the U.S.
and wetlands. Most of this impacted area is associated with the project access trails. Final
acreage will depend on the final project alignments. Wetland impacts will be avoided and
minimized by refining the project trail alignments based on geotechnical, environmental, and
economic criteria obtained during the course of the consultation and study process. Mitigation,
as required, will be implemented in accordance with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit
requirements.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 43
3.vii RARE, THREATENED, AND ENDANGERED SPECIES
3.vii.A Federal and State‐Listed Species in Project Vicinity
No plants or terrestrial wildlife listed, candidates for listing, or under review for listing under
the federal Endangered Species Act are known or expected to occur in the project area.
Several listed marine animals occur in marine waters near the project.18
The USFWS and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) on‐line information systems were
used to identify listed species that may occur in the project area. Listed species are given in
Table 3.7‐1. Any species that are under consideration for listing as endangered or threatened
species are also included in Table 3.7‐1. A brief discussion of each species typical habitat in
relation to the project site is provided in Section 3.vii.B.
Table 3.7‐1: Summary of Endangered and Threatened Species Occurring in Project Vicinity
Species 1 Status Information
Steller sea lion, western DPS (Eumetopias jubatus) Endangered NMFS, 2008; NOAA, 2010;
WDFW 2015; NMFS 2015
Fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) Endangered NMFS, 2010a;
NMFS, 2015a
Humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) Endangered NMFS, 1991; NOAA, 2013;
NMFS 2015
Sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus) Endangered NMFS, 2010b;
NMFS, 2015a
Sources: (USFWS 2013), (USFWS, 2014a), (NMFS 2014).
DPS: distinct population segment
NMFS: National Marine Fisheries Service
USFWS: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Notes:
Notes:
1. Several listed species of sea turtle that only occur rarely in the gulf waters off the coast of southeast Alaska
are not listed in this table.
3.vii.B Habitat Requirements for Listed Species
Habitat for all of the listed species potentially occurring in the vicinity of the project is marine
waters adjacent to the project site. Because the project will not directly impact these marine
waters, habitat requirements are not described in detail.
3.vii.C Biological Opinions, Status Reports, or Recovery Plans for Listed Species
Citations for Biological Opinions, Status Reports, and/or Recovery Plans for listed species are
listed in Table 3.7‐1 under the ‘Information’ column.
18 USFWS, 2013. USFWS, 2014a. NMFS, 2014.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 44
3.vii.D Extent and Location of Federally‐Designated or Other Critical Habitat
The project area is not listed as critical habitat for any endangered or threatened species.19
3.vii.E Temporal and Spatial Distribution of Listed Species in Project Area
The humpback whale and western population segment of the steller sea lion regularly occur in
the marine waters offshore of the project area.
The fin whale and sperm whale both regularly occur in the Gulf of Alaska off southeast Alaska,
but are not common in the inland waters of southeast that are adjacent to the project area.
3.vii.F Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures
Project operations will not have a significant impact on marine waters in the project area.
Project construction and operations will increase marine traffic off‐shore of the project area
and beach landings on Little Sandy Beach. The landing area is a cobble/ boulder field devoid of
macro‐aquatic vegetation and subject to periodic high energy surf and storm events.
Water intakes for both the upper and lower hydroelectric systems will utilize screened intakes
to prevent the admittance of animals to the project works. Both intakes will also be designed
with low water velocities and low pressure differentials to prevent animals from becoming
impinged on the intake screens.
The project will have a positive environmental impact by reducing the amount of diesel fuel
transported to, stored in, and consumed by Elfin Cove. Reducing the community’s fuel usage
incrementally reduces the risk of oil spills that could occur at sea during barge transport to Elfin
Cove, as well as potential spills on land and/or sea from bulk fuel storage or pipeline transfer to
the diesel power plant. Such spills could have an adverse impact on marine wildlife (mammals,
birds, fish, etc.) in the vicinity of a spill. The project will also reduce stack emissions by the
diesel power plant, improving local air quality and reducing ambient noise levels in the vicinity
of the diesel power plant.
The project is not expected to have any adverse impacts to listed species that may occur in the
project vicinity. No special mitigation measures are proposed.
19 NMFS, 2014. USFWS, 2014c.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 45
3.viii RECREATION AND LAND USE
Non‐USFS land in the project area includes an undeveloped right‐of‐way within the Elfin Cove
town site and an adjoining undeveloped U.S. Survey, both owned and managed by the Alaska
Department of Natural Resources (ADNR). Both properties are undeveloped and receive
limited use.
TNF land in the project area is undeveloped and receives sparse recreational use. The project
area is located within USFS Inventoried Roadless Area #311.20
3.viii.A Existing Recreational Facilities
There are no existing recreational facilities within the project area.
3.viii.B Current Recreational Use
There is very limited recreational use of the project area. Existing recreational uses include
sporadic hunting, gathering, and hiking, and passive use as part of the viewshed.
3.viii.C Existing Shoreline Buffer Zones
Appendix D of the Forest Plan specifies general buffer requirements along the creeks and lakes
within the project area.21 Buffer criteria along the marine shoreline are not addressed.
3.viii.D Current and Future Recreation Needs
The Forest Plan designates TNF land in the project area for “Semi‐Remote Recreation”. Current
and future recreational needs in the project area are consistent with this use designation.
Nearly all recreation around Elfin Cove is marine‐based. Only limited land‐based recreation
occurs in the project area due to the rugged terrain and lack of improved trails.
3.viii.E Current Shoreline Management Plan
This is a proposed new project. Not applicable.
20 USFS, 2008a.
21 USFS, 2008a. Pages D‐13 to D‐15 on creek buffers and pages D‐16 to D‐18 on lake buffers.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 46
3.viii.F Project Proximity to Protected Areas
National Wild and Scenic River System
None of the project waters are part of the National Wild and Scenic River System. None of the
project waters are under study for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic River System under
Section 5(a) or Section 5(d)(1) of the Wild and Scenic River Act.22
State‐Protected Rivers
None of the project waters are located in a state‐designated game refuge, wildlife sanctuary,
park, critical habitat area, or anadromous waters.23
3.viii.G National Trails System or Wilderness Area
The project area is not part of the national trails system.24 The project area is not designated
as a wilderness area by the USFS.25
3.viii.H Important Recreation Areas
ECUC is not aware of any regionally or nationally important recreation areas in the project area.
3.viii.I Non‐Recreational Land Use within Project Boundary
ECUC is not aware of any non‐recreational land use in the project area.
3.viii.J Land Uses Adjacent to Project Boundary
The only land uses occurring in proximity to the project area are on private land within Elfin
Cove. Parcels adjoining the project area in Elfin Cove are either undeveloped or occupied by
residential structures. No formal land management policies exist for Elfin Cove.
3.viii.K Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures
The project trails will improve pedestrian access to the project area, and may result in increased
recreational use of the project area. Because there is no trail system in or around Elfin Cove,
there are few if any motorized land vehicles (all‐terrain vehicles, motor bikes, etc) in the
community. Accordingly, the limited trail system associated with this project is not expected to
receive a significant volume of public motorized vehicle traffic. No specific avoidance,
minimization, or mitigation measures are proposed.
22 NWSRS, 2015.
23 ADFG, 2015a, ADFG, 2015b.
24 NPS, 2010.
25 USFS, 2003a.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 47
3.ix AESTHETIC RESOURCES
The project area is part of a large undeveloped expanse of coastal rainforest landscape typical
of southeast Alaska, which is generally considered to have high aesthetic value (Appendix B,
Photographs B‐7, B‐8). The landscape vistas offered by the project area are not unique in
southeast Alaska, but are important within the context of providing an uninterrupted natural
landscape vista.
Vantage points looking onto the project area include foreground vantages from terrestrial
public ways and private property within Elfin Cove, middleground terrestrial vantages from
remote locations on Three Hill Island and the George Islands, middleground/background marine
vantages from the waters of Port Althorp and Cross Sound, and aerial vantage points. See
Figures 2.2‐1 and 2.2‐2 for maps showing these geographic features. See Photograph B‐7 for
typical near‐shore marine vista of project site, and Photograph B‐8 for typical aerial vista of
project site.
3.ix.A USFS Visual Resource Priorities and Conditions in Project Area
The Forest Plan identifies specific visual resources within the TNF, and provides Scenic Integrity
Objectives (SIOs) for the general project vicinity based on the land use designation (LUD). The
LUD for the project area and applicable surrounding area is Semi‐remote Recreation.26 Table
3.9‐1 lists visual priority routes and use areas (VPRs) that may include the project area within
their viewshed. The SIO for the Semi‐remote Recreation LUD is “Moderate” for all viewing
distance zones.27
The landscape’s Existing Scenic Integrity (ESI) rating is considered high – there are no existing
changes from natural conditions in the project area.28
26 Forest Plan Land Use Designation Map.
27 Forest Plan, page 4‐57.
28 ESI rating based on SCENE2.I.A criteria, Forest Plan page 4‐56.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 48
Table 3‐9‐1: USFS‐Designated Visual Priority Routes and Use Areas Proximate to Project Area
USFS Designated Visual Priority
Travel Route / Use Area (VPR) (1,2) VPR Location Relative to Project Area Applicable Distance
Zone(s) (2)
MARINE ROUTES
Juneau to Sitka via Cross Sound and
Pelican for Following Traffic:
‐ Alaska Marine Highway
‐ Small Boat and Mid‐Size Tour
Boats
Corridor passes 3 to 6 miles west of
project area. Partially occluded by
George Islands and Three Hill Island, and
on‐shore topography.
Middleground to
Background.
SALTWATER USE AREAS
Cross Sound Area off Inian Islands
Area located 3 to 6 miles west‐northwest
of project area. Significantly occluded by
George Islands, Three Hill Island, and
Chichagof Island terrain.
Middleground to
Background.
DISPERSED RECREATION AREAS
Inian Islands
4 to 7 miles north of project area.
Completed occluded by Chichagof Island
terrain.
Not visible.
Three Hill Island 3 miles west‐southwest of project area. Middleground.
COMMUNITIES
Elfin Cove Project access trail starts in Elfin Cove. Foreground.
BOAT ANCHORAGES
Salt Chuck Bay
2 to 3 miles south‐southeast of project
area. Completely occluded by Chichagof
Island terrain.
Not visible.
VPR: Visual Priority Travel Route and Use Area
Note 1: VPRs are taken from Forest Plan, Appendix F for the project area. USFS, 2008a.
Note 2: terminology and methodology is consistent with Forest Plan, Appendix F and Chapter 4. USFS, 2008a.
3.ix.B Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures
Known or Potential Impacts
This section provides an initial analysis of the project impacts and potential impact‐mitigation
strategies consistent with the management goals and analytical framework set forth in the
Forest Plan.29
The project area’s visual absorption capacity (VAC) rating varies with location. Low VACs
indicate potential for high visual impact or greater effort needed to mitigate a visual impact.
High VACs indicate low visual impact and little if any effort needed to mitigate a visual impact.
Initial VAC ratings follow for specific portions of the project.
29 Management criteria at Forest Plan, pages 3‐64 and 4‐56. USFS, 2008a.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 49
Access trail in Elfin Cove: The first approximately 900 feet of the proposed access trail in Elfin
Cove is assigned a low VAC. This area has steep slopes directly facing foreground vantage
points on the other side of the cove.
Developments at Little Sandy Beach: The lower powerhouse site and first approximately 600
feet of the proposed access trail from tidewater to Jim’s Lake is assigned an intermediate VAC.
The powerhouse site is located at the head of a beach and is not screened by existing
vegetation. If practical, a vegetated landscaping berm may be constructed on the ocean side of
the powerhouse. The trail route is through an area with steep slopes facing the water. These
settings would warrant a low VAC, but both features are located at the head of a small cove,
the upland topography of which shields the area from most of the marine VPRs in the area.
Marine traffic traveling Port Althorp at one mile offshore from the lower powerhouse site on
Little Sandy Beach would be able to see the project for about ½ mile along their course. At a
cruising speed of 10 knots, the project would be in view for about three minutes.
Remainder of Project: The remainder of the project is assigned a high VAC. The project is
located in an area of undulating terrain between approximately 150 to 480 feet in elevation
that is generally shielded from important viewsheds by coastal cliffs and forests. Most aspects
of the project will either not be visible from VPRs or only visible at highly oblique angles.
The project area is visible in the middleground from Three Hill Island and the George Islands.
The amount of the project that is visible and the project’s prominence within the vista will
depend on the viewer’s location on the islands. Higher‐elevation vantage points will tend to
provide a more prominent view of the project. These islands are undeveloped and receive very
limited foot traffic.
The project area is generally visible from the outer waters of Port Althorp, and is visible at a
distance from portions of Cross Sound. Three Hill Island and the George Islands will block views
of the project from large portions of the Cross Sound viewshed. The project area presents
vantages that are characteristic of the landscapes common in this part of southeast Alaska
(Photograph B‐7).
The project area is generally visible from typical routes for local seaplane traffic to Elfin Cove
and Pelican. The vantages in the project area are characteristic of the landscapes common in
this part of southeast Alaska (Photograph A‐8).
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 50
Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures
Final design of the project may use the following strategies as appropriate to avoid or minimize
terrestrial and marine impacts, allowing the project to achieve the moderate SIO for the project
area.30
1. Route project features when practical such that they are blocked from key viewsheds by
surrounding terrain or vegetation.
2. Minimize the width/size of the trail/development footprint where feasible.
3. Use a sinuous trail route to reduce the visual impact of straight trail sections where feasible.
4. Select building materials and colors that blend with natural settings.
5. Design material sources for trail construction to be minimally apparent as seen from VPRs.
6. Preserve key trees where practical to maintain visual screening.
7. Construct and vegetate berms where practical to screen project features from key
viewsheds.
3.x CULTURAL RESOURCES
3.x.A Known Cultural Sites
ECUC is not aware of any cultural resources in the project area.
3.x.B Existing Discovery Measures
Existing discovery measures have included a limited survey of public information and informal
local knowledge. ECUC has not yet contacted Alaska’s State Historical Preservation Office
(SHPO) regarding this project.
ECUC expects to consult with Alaska SHPO with regard to potential historical or archeological
resources in the project area.
3.x.C Identification of Potentially Affected Indian Tribes
The nearest potentially affected Indian tribe is the Hoonah Indian Association of Hoonah,
Alaska, approximately 30 miles east of the project site. ECUC is not aware of any historic or
culturally significant properties or sites within the project area.
3.x.D Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures
The project is not known to have any adverse impacts to cultural resources. Adverse impacts
could occur if cultural resources are present within the project’s development footprint. ECUC
30 Adapted from SCENE2 II.B. guidelines at Forest Plan page 4‐58 (USFS, 2008a).
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 51
intends to consult with SHPO and potentially affected native organizations during the FERC
licensing process.
3.xi SOCIO‐ECONOMIC RESOURCES
Elfin Cove is an isolated small community, and is the only socio‐economic unit relevant to this
project. Elfin Cove’s economy is dominated by commercial and sport fishing activity which
predominately occurs during the summer months.
The cost of electricity is a major factor in the commercial viability of local commercial and sport
fishing operations, as well as the viability of seasonal and year‐round households and
businesses in Elfin Cove. Electricity is currently generated with diesel generators burning fuel
shipped to the community by marine barge. Electricity is thus expensive ($0.80 per kWh in
2013), and the price fluctuates with the price of oil, introducing further uncertainty into local
business and household budgets.31
3.xi.A Environmental Setting in Project Area
Land Use Patterns
The total upland area of the Elfin Cove town site is approximately 120 acres. Land use
regulations have not been adopted in Elfin Cove. Most institutional, industrial, and commercial
land uses are concentrated in the northwest half of the town site. Residential uses occur
throughout the town site, with the southeast half of the town site predominately residential or
undeveloped in character. The project access trail will start from within the southeastern,
predominately residential portion of the town site.
TNF land in the project area is all undeveloped.
Population
Elfin Cove's population varies seasonally. The population in the summer months (mid‐May
through mid‐September) is approximately 100 to 200. Commercial and sport fishing activity
contributes significantly to the summer population and local economy. The year‐round
population is currently approximately 39 and has fluctuated over the past 20 years between 20
(in 2010) and 57 (in 1990). Elfin Cove’s resident population has historically ranged from
approximately 20 to 60 people since the community was established in the 1930s.32
31 Electricity cost from AEA, 2014.
32 See Section 2.2.7 of Project Feasibility Study Report for historic population data. Polarconsult, 2011. Current
population from ADCCED, 2015.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 52
Economy
Elfin Cove’s economy is largely dependent on commercial and recreational fishing, with
government services and tourism acting as secondary economic bases. The cost of living and
doing business in the community is very high, largely due to the high cost of fuel, energy, and
transportation, which results in high costs for food, goods, and services. These high costs
significantly dampen economic activity. The community was classified as ‘distressed’ by the
Denali Commission (DC) in 2013. The DC designates communities as distressed using a
combination of income and permanent employment levels within the community.33
3.xi.B Expected Project Impacts
Population
Elfin Cove is bounded on all sides by the TNF, so there is limited land available for substantial
population growth. The future population is expected to stay within the historical range of
approximately 20 to 60 people. Future population trends will likely be determined by local
economic opportunities. This hydroelectric project will lower and stabilize the local cost of
energy, which will help to improve the local economy and encourage population growth and
local prosperity.
Economy
The project is expected to lower the cost of electricity for the community, as well as stabilize
the cost of electricity over the long term. Both impacts are expected to be positive to the local
community, increasing the viability of local commercial and sport fishing operations, and also
lowering the cost of living for seasonal and year‐round residents. Non‐residential and
non‐community electricity consumers will see the greatest economic impact of the project due
to the manner in which the State of Alaska’s Power Cost Equalization (PCE) Program is
structured.34
By lowering the cost of electricity, the project will improve the feasibility of providing local ice
making capacity in Elfin Cove. Local availability of ice will offer greater value‐added
opportunities to local commercial fisheries, enhancing their economic viability.
Project generating capacity in excess of utility demand can be used for domestic space or water
heating applications, reducing the demand for heating fuel and providing additional economic
benefits to the community.
33 DC, 2013.
34 The PCE program provides subsidies to eligible rural Alaska electric utilities for a portion of the energy
consumption of eligible residential and community accounts. Subsidies are passed on by the utility to eligible
accounts in the form of lower electricity rates.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 53
The project will have a positive environmental impact by reducing the amount of diesel fuel
transported to, stored in, and consumed by Elfin Cove. Reducing the community’s fuel usage
incrementally reduces the risk of oil spills that could occur on sea during barge transport to Elfin
Cove, as well as potential spills on land and/or sea from bulk fuel storage or pipeline transfer to
the diesel power plant. Such spills could have an adverse impact on marine wildlife (mammals,
birds, fish, etc.) in the vicinity of a spill. The project will also reduce stack emissions by the
diesel power plant, improving local air quality and reducing ambient noise levels in the vicinity
of the diesel power plant.
3.xii TRIBAL RESOURCES
3.xii.A Project Affect on Tribal Resources Included in (d)(3)(ii) to (xi)
None of the resources described in Sections 3.ii through 3.xi are known by ECUC to be tribal
resources. Accordingly, ECUC does not believe that the proposed project would affect tribal
resources.
3.xii.B Project Affect on Tribal Resources not Included in (d)(3)(ii) to (xi)
Marine fisheries resources associated with the Hoonah Native Association of Hoonah, Alaska
may occur along the marine shipping routes used to haul diesel fuel to Elfin Cove. By reducing
the volume of diesel fuel barged to Elfin Cove along these routes, the project will reduce the
probability of a fuel spill, and thereby will have a beneficial impact on such marine fisheries
resources.
3.xiii RIVER BASIN DESCRIPTION
The project is located on two adjacent minor drainage basins that discharge into the marine
waters of Port Althorp, tributary to Cross Sound, the Gulf of Alaska, and the Pacific Ocean.
3.xiii.A Basin Area and Length of Stream Reaches
The total basin area of the project waters is 0.66 square miles (see Table 2.3‐1). The total
length of Crooked Creek downstream of the diversion site is 0.55 miles, and of Jim’s Creek
downstream of Jim’s Lake is 0.36 miles (see Table 3.3‐3). Geomorphology of Crooked Creek,
Jim’s Lake, and Jim’s Creek is discussed in Attachment C‐6.
3.xiii.B Major Land and Water Uses
All of the land within the project basins is undeveloped. There are no existing uses of the
waters that would be affected by the project. The only known existing uses of the land in the
project area is passive use for remote recreation and for hunting / gathering activities by
residents of Elfin Cove.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 54
3.xiii.C Existing Dams and Diversions
There are no existing dams or diversions on the waters that would be affected by the project.
3.xiii.D Tributary Rivers and Streams
There are no significant tributary rivers or streams on the project waters that would be affected
by the project.
3.xiii.E Known or Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed Avoidance, Minimization, and
Mitigation Measures
Known or potential adverse impacts to the project drainage basins and proposed avoidance,
minimization, and mitigation measures are described in Sections 3.ii.D, 3.iii.J, 3.v.C, 3.vi.F, and
3.viii.K of this report.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 55
4.0 PRELIMINARY ISSUES AND STUDIES LIST [§5.6(d)(4)]
4.i ISSUES PERTAINING TO IDENTIFIED RESOURCES
4.i.A Geology and Soils
‐ Tsunami inundation estimates for the lower powerhouse site should be obtained to
guide final siting and design of the lower powerhouse.
‐ Soils investigations are recommended to develop designs and finalize alignments for
project access trails and associated project works.
‐ If a dam is used to raise Jim’s Lake 8 feet above its natural elevation, analysis of the lake
basin is recommended to assess stability and leakage potential.
‐ If a siphon is used to draw Jim’s Lake down 8 feet below its natural elevation, analysis of
lake bed deposits located along the east shore, in the northeast bay, and the south end
of the lake is recommended to assess stability during drawdown and erosion potential
under drawn down conditions.
4.i.B Water Resources
Existing hydrology surveys have sufficiently characterized the timing and quantity of flow in the
project streams.
4.i.C Fish and Aquatic Resources
The only fisheries resource impacted by the project is a small population of 8+ resident Dolly
Varden present in the first ~450 feet of Crooked Creek above tidewater. Drainage into Crooked
Creek below the project diversion site is expected to maintain at least 24% of natural flow to
the top of this habitat reach. ADFG has determined that the project does not present a threat
to the fish occupying this habitat reach (see Attachment C‐5).
Other project waters were found to have no fish.
4.i.D Wildlife and Botanical Resources
Bald eagle surveys conducted in July 2013 did not identify any bald eagle nests in the project
area.
No issues are known to pertain to wildlife or botanical resources in the project area.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 56
4.i.E Wetlands, Riparian, and Littoral Habitats
- The project will impact an estimated 6.5 acres of wetlands, riparian, and littoral areas
within the project area.
4.i.F Rare and Threatened Species
No issues are known to pertain to rare or threatened species in the project area.
4.i.G Recreation and Land Use
No issues are known to pertain to recreation and land use in the project area.
4.i.H Aesthetic Resources
The project will impact the existing viewsheds in and around Elfin Cove. Available mitigation
measures are believed to be adequate to meet USFS view shed management goals for the
project area.
4.i.I Cultural Resources
No issues are known to pertain to cultural resources in the project area. SHPO needs to be
consulted to identify known or potential cultural resources in the project area.
4.i.J Socio‐Economic Resources
No issues are known to pertain to socio‐economic resources in the project area.
4.i.K Tribal Resources
No issues are known to pertain to tribal resources in the project area.
4.i.L River Basin Resources
No issues are known to pertain to river basin resources in the project area.
4.ii POTENTIAL STUDIES OR INFORMATION GATHERING REQUIREMENTS
Studies or information gathering activities are listed in Table 4.2‐1.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 57
Table 4.2‐1: Proposed Studies and Information Gathering Activities
Study Status
Hydrology Study 2008 to Current
Topographic Survey Completed April 2010
Fisheries Survey Completed July 2013
Wildlife and Bald Eagle Nest Survey Completed July 2013
Geomorphology Study Completed July 2014
Wetlands Delineation Preliminary Completed
Geology and Soils Investigation Summer – Fall 2015
Cultural Resources Survey Summer – Fall 2015
4.iii RELEVENT QUALIFYING FEDERAL, STATE, TRIBAL COMPREHENSIVE WATERWAY
PLANS
ECUC is not aware of any federal, state, or tribal comprehensive waterway plans that apply to
the project area.
4.iv RELEVANT RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLANS
Resource management plans relevant to the project area are listed in Table 4.4‐1.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 58
Table 4.4‐1: Relevant Resource Management Plans
Plan Authoring Agency Reference
Northern Southeast Area Plan ADNR ADNR, 2002
Alaska’s Outdoor Legacy: Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor
Recreation Plan ADNR ADNR, 2014
Tongass National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan USFS USFS, 2008a
Policy for the Management of Sustainable Wild Trout Fisheries SOA SOA, 2003
Recovery Plan for the Steller Sea Lion. Eastern and Western
Distinct Population Segments NMFS NMFS, 2008
Nationwide Rivers Inventory NPS NPS, 1993.
Alaska Shorebird Conservation Plan. Version II. USFWS USFWS, 2008a.
Alaska Seabird Conservation Plan. USFWS USFWS, 2009.
Fisheries USA: The Recreational Fisheries Policy of the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service. USFWS USFWS, nd.
Sources: FERC, 2014.
5.0 SUMMARY OF CONTACTS [§5.6(d)(5)]
A list of contacts made in preparation of this PAD and resource studies described in this PAD is
provided in Appendix A.
6.0 STATEMENT ON PURPA BENEFITS [§5.6(e)]
ECUC will not seek benefits under Section 210 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of
1978 (PURPA).
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 59
7.0 REFERENCES
ADCCED, 2015. Alaska Department of Commerce, Community and Economic
Development, Accessed January 2015. Community profile for Elfin Cove.
http://commerce.state.ak.us/cra/DCRAExternal/community
ADFG, 2006. Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG). April 2006. Our Wealth
Maintained: A Strategy for Conserving Alaska’s Diverse Wildlife and Fish
Resources: A Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy Emphasizing
Alaska’s Nongame Species.
ADFG, 2014. ADFG, Species profile website accessed August 4, 2014. Website:
http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=santasreindeer.main
ADFG, 2015a. ADFG. Accessed Jan. 2015. State Designated Conservation Areas Website.
http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=conservationareas.main
ADFG, 2015b. Catalog and Atlas of Waters Important for the Spawning, Rearing or
Migration of Anadromous Fishes. ADFG, Accessed Jan. 2015.
http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/sf/SARR/AWC/
ADNR, 2002. Alaska Department of Natural Resources, 2002. Northern Southeast Area
Plan. Anchorage, Alaska. October 2002.
ADNR, 2014. Alaska Department of Natural Resources, 2014. Alaska’s Outdoor Legacy:
Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP): 2009 –
2014. Anchorage, Alaska.
AEA, 2014. Alaska Energy Authority, February 2014. Power Cost Equalization
Program Statistical Data by Community. Reporting Period July 1, 2012 to
June 30, 2013.
AEE, 2010. Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. Elfin Cove Distribution Upgrade.
Record Drawings, Sheets E‐1 to E‐10. Stamped May 19, 2010.
AEIC, 2011. Alaska Earthquake Information Center. June 2011. Personal
communications with Elena Suleimani.
AEIC, 2015. AEIC community tsunami inundation mapping program status summary.
http://www.aeic.alaska.edu/tsunami/index.html
ANHP, 2015. Alaska Natural Heritage Program, Online information databases and GIS
platforms accessed January 2015. http://aknhp.uaa.alaska.edu/
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 60
CECNPC, 2007. Community of Elfin Cove Non‐Profit Corporation. Elfin Cove Community
Plan. CECNPC, Southeast Strategies, and Glenn Gray Associates. 2007.
DC, 2013. Denali Commission (DC). June 2013. Distressed Community Criteria 2013
Update.
DCRA, 2014. Alaska Department of Commerce, Division of Community and Regional
Affairs, Community Profiles Website (accessed December 12, 2014):
http://commerce.state.ak.us/cra/DCRAExternal/community/Details/95e65a3f‐
7d2b‐468f‐9750‐94e0c5c647b8
FERC, 2014. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects.
December 2014. List of Comprehensive Plans.
GPO, 2013. Government Printing Office (GPO), October 3, 2013. Federal Register, Vol.
78, No. 192, pp 61764.
NMFS, 1991. Final Recovery Plan for the Humpback Whale (Megaptera novaeangliae).
Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, NOAA. November 1991.
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/recovery/whale_humpback.pdf
NMFS, 2008. Recovery Plan for the Steller Sea Lion. Eastern and Western Distinct
Population Segments (Eumetopias jubatus). Revision. NOAA NMFS,
March 2008.
http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/protectedresources/stellers/recovery/sslrpfinalr
ev030408.pdf
NMFS, 2010a. Final Recovery Plan for the Fin Whale (Balaenoptera physalus). Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, NOAA. July 2010.
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/recovery/finwhale.pdf
NMFS, 2010b. Final Recovery Plan for the Sperm Whale (Physeter macrocephalus).
Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, NOAA. December 2010.
NMFS, 2014. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). ESA Critical Habitat website
accessed July 29, 2014. Website:
http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/mapping/esa/
NMFS, 2015a. NOAA Fisheries, Office of Protected Resources, Marine Mammals Web
Portal. Accessed January 2015.
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/ and
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/species.htm#largewhales
NMFS, 2015b. NOAA Fisheries, Frequently Asked Questions about Essential Fish Habitat
website. Accessed January 2015.
http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/habitat/efh/faq.htm#species
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 61
NOAA, 2010. Alaska Marine Mammal Stock Assessments, 2010. Steller Sea Lion
(Eumetopias jubatus): Western U.S. Stock. NOAA‐TM‐AFSC‐223. Allen, B.
M., and R.P. Angliss.
NOAA, 2013. Alaska Marine Mammal Stock Assessments, 2013. Humpback Whale
(Megaptera novaeangliae): Western North Pacific Stock. NOAA‐TM‐
AFSC‐277. Allen, B. M., and R.P. Angliss.
NPS, 1993. National Park Service. The Nationwide Rivers Inventory. Department of
the Interior, Washington, D.C. 1993.
NPS, 2010. National Trails Map. National Park Service, April 2010.
http://www.nps.gov/nts/maps/National%20Trails%20map.pdf
NRCS, 2013. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database for Chatham Area, Alaska.
NRCS, December 2013.
NWSRS, 2015. National Wild and Scenic River System website, accessed January 2015.
http://www.rivers.gov/alaska.php
Polarconsult, 2011. Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. June 2011. Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake
Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study Final Report.
Polarconsult, 2013. Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project, Interim Hydrology Report. Polarconsult
Alaska, Inc. December 20, 2013.
Polarconsult, 2014a. Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project, Conceptual Design Report and
Development Plan, Letter Report. Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. January 20,
2014.
Polarconsult, 2014b. Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project, Geomorphology of Crooked Creek, Jim’s
Creek, and Jim’s Lake, Letter Report. Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. July 28,
2014.
SOA, 2003. State of Alaska, Alaska Administrative Code. 2003. 5 AAC § 75.222 Policy
for the management of sustainable wild trout fisheries. Juneau, Alaska.
USFS, 2003a. U.S. Forest Service (USFS). January 21, 2003. Roadless Area Inventory,
Tongass National Forest, Land Management Plan Revision 2003. Map.
USFS, 2003b. USFS. February 2003. Tongass Land Management Plan Revision, Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Roadless Area
Evaluation for Wilderness Recommendations. Volume III. (R10‐MB‐481c).
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 62
USFS, 2005. USFS. September 23, 2005. Forest Service Manual 2600, Chapter 2670.
Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Plants and Animals. Amendment
#2600‐2305‐1.
USFS, 2008a. USFS. January 2008. Tongass National Forest, Land and Resource
Management Plan (R10‐MB‐603b).
USFS, 2008b. USFS. January 2008. Tongass Land and Resource Management Plan, Final
Environmental Impact Statement, Plan Amendment. Volume I.
(R10‐MB‐603c).
USFS, 2008c. USFS. January 2008. Tongass Land and Resource Management Plan, Final
Environmental Impact Statement, Appendices. Volume II.
(R10‐MB‐603d).
USFS, 2009. Forest Service Alaska Region Sensitive Species List, Assessment and
Proposed Revisions to the 2002 List.
USFWS, n.d. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Fisheries USA: The Recreational
Fisheries Policy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, D.C.
Undated.
USFWS, 2008a. USFWS, et al. 2008. Alaska Shorebird Conservation Plan. Version II.
Anchorage, Alaska. November 2008.
USFWS, 2008b. USFWS, 2008. Division of Migratory Bird Management. December 2008.
Birds of Conservation Concern.
USFWS, 2009. USFWS, 2009. Alaska Seabird Conservation Plan. Anchorage, Alaska.
2009.
USFWS, 2011. Wetlands and Deepwater Classification Chart. February 2011.
USFWS, 2013. USFWS, May 24, 2013. Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, Candidate,
and Delisted Species in Alaska. Website accessed August 1, 2014:
http://www.fws.gov/alaska/fisheries/endangered/pdf/es_alaska_species_list_2
013.pdf
USFWS, 2014a. USFWS endangered species website accessed August 1, 2014. Website:
http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac (8/1/2014).
USFWS, 2014b. USFWS website accessed August 1, 2014. Website:
http://www.fws.gov/alaska/fisheries/endangered/species/aa_wolf.htm
USFWS, 2014c. USFWS critical habitat maps accessed July 29, 2014. Website:
http://ecos.fws.gov/crithab/flex/crithabMapper.jsp?
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 63
USGS, 1959. Geology and Ore Deposits of Northwestern Chichagof Island, Alaska. A
study of a region of highly recrystallized rocks and its ore deposits, chiefly
gold. Geological Survey Bulletin 1058‐E., Darwin L. Rossman. U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington D.C. 1959.
WDFW, 2015. Periodic Status Review for the Steller Sea Lion, January 2015.
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Wildlife Program. Gary J.
Wiles.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 64
This page intentionally blank.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0
APPENDIX A – STAKEHOLDER CONTACTS
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 A‐1
This page intentionally blank.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 A‐2
Permit applications that have been filed for the project are summarized in Table A‐1.
Table A‐2 summarizes the stakeholder contacts and consultations that have been made in
preparation of this PAD and generally regarding this project. Many of the consultations made
for preparation of the PAD were completed using the respective agency’s on‐line consultation
resources. Citations for these information sources are listed in Section 7 of the PAD.
Table A‐1: Permit Applications Submitted for Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydro Project
Agency Submittal
Date
Tracking
Number Description
ADFG 5/21/2014 ‐ Finding of No Fish Habitat Permit Required
USFS 6/26/2014 Special Use Permit, Hydro Project
ADNR 6/27/2014 LAS 29817 Water Rights, Jim’s Lake and Jim’s Creek
ADNR 6/27/2014 LAS 29818 Water Rights, Crooked Creek
USACE Pending ‐ Wetlands Permit
ADNR Pending ‐ Access and utility easement
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 A‐3
Table A‐2: Summary List of Stakeholder Contacts for PAD Preparation
Person(s) Agency Date Subject / Summary
Scott Ayers ADFG 4/29/2013 Coordination for fish resource permit for site fisheries
surveys
Brian Glynn,
Dan Teske ADFG 4/30/2013 Fish resource permit application submittal.
Barbary Stanley,
Jon Hyde,
Arthur Burbank
USFS 5/2/2013 Initial contact regarding project, coordination on
fisheries surveys.
Scott Ayers ADFG 5/23/2013 Issue Fish resource permit SF2013‐231, and Amend. 1.
Phil Shempf USFWS 7/23/2013 Consultation on documented bald eagle nests in project
area.
Steve Brockmann,
Steve Lewis USFWS 7/30/2013 Consultation on documented bald eagle nests in project
area.
Scott Ayers ADFG 7/31/2013 Submit fisheries survey report.
Melissa Dinsmore USFS 2/18/2014,
2/27/2014 Initial contact regarding project.
Greg Albrecht ADFG 3/25/2014 Project introduction, submittal of fisheries survey report,
inquiry on need for fish habitat permit
Greg Albrecht ADFG 4/11/2014 Clarification of findings from fisheries survey report.
Greg Albrecht ADFG 5/21/2014 ADFG determination no fish habitat permit required.
Marlene Duvall,
Art Burbank USFS May 2014 Coordination for district ranger site visit for hydro
project.
Marlene Duvall,
Art Burbank USFS June 2014 Coordination on special use permits for stream gauges,
hydro project.
Marlene Duvall,
Art Burbank USFS 6/26/2014 Submit special use permit for hydro project.
Carl Reese,
Michael Walton ADNR 3/27/2014 Coordination on water rights application for hydro
project.
Carl Reese,
Clint Gundelfinger ADNR 6/27/2014 Submit water rights applications for hydro project.
Steve Winker,
David Gann ADNR June 2014 Coordination on property easements for state land
traversed by project access roads.
Stakeholder List 8/7/2014 Notice of FERC filing for License Exemption
Stakeholder List 8/15/2014 Notice of delay in FERC process due to ineligibility for
License Exemption
Stakeholder List 9/3/2014 Project update
David Gann ADNR 1/2/2015 Project status update
ADFG Alaska Department of Fish and Game
ADNR Alaska Department of Natural Resources
USFS U.S. Forest Service
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0
APPENDIX B – SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 B‐1
This page intentionally blank.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 B‐2
Photograph B‐1 Typical Meadow (above Small Sandy Beach, July 8, 2009)
Photograph B‐2 Typical Meadow / Forest Complex (near Jim’s Lake, July 17, 2013)
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 B‐3
Photograph B‐3 Typical Conifer Forest (south of Elfin Cove, July 18, 2013)
Photograph B‐4 Typical Conifer Forest (near Jim’s Lake, August 10, 2010)
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 B‐4
Photograph B‐5 Typical Barren Rock Outcrops (east of Crooked Creek, August 12, 2010)
Photograph B‐6 Typical Beach Vegetation (Little Sandy Beach, August 12, 2010)
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 B‐5
Photograph B‐7 View of Project Area from ¼ Mile Offshore in Port Althorp (8/11/2010)
Photograph B‐8 Oblique Aerial View of Project Site (7/6/2009)
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0
APPENDIX C – EXISTING RESOURCE STUDIES AND PROJECT INFORMATION
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 C‐1
This page intentionally blank.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 C‐2
Table C‐1 lists the project technical and resource studies that ECUC has already completed for
this project. As noted in Table C‐1, studies are included as attachments to the PAD. Studies not
included in the PAD are available upon request.
Table C‐1: Existing Project Technical Studies, Resource Studies, and Determinations
Study / Report Date Author Location
Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study, Elfin Cove,
Alaska June 2010 Polarconsult Available upon request.
Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake Hydroelectric
Feasibility Study Final Report June 2011 Polarconsult Available upon request.
Independent Engineer’s Evaluation.
Hydropower Feasibility Development for the
Community of Elfin Cove, Alaska
Oct. 2012 Mead & Hunt Available upon request.
A Fisheries Survey of Crooked and Jim’s Creeks
and Jim’s Lake on Chichagof Island near Elfin
Cove, Alaska. Technical Report 13‐08.
July 2013 ABC PAD, Attachment C‐1.
A July 2013 Bald Eagle Survey of Crooked and
Jim’s Creeks, Jim’s Lake, Little Sandy Beach, and
a proposed Utility and Access Corridor between
Crooked Creek and Elfin Cove, Alaska.
Technical Report 13‐09.
July 2013 ABC PAD, Attachment C‐2.
Interim Hydrology Report, Crooked Creek and
Jim's Lake Hydro Project Dec. 2013 Polarconsult PAD, Attachment C‐3.
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project Conceptual
Design and Development Plan Jan. 2014 Polarconsult PAD, Attachment C‐4.
ADFG Determination that Fish Habitat Permit is
not Required May 2014 ADFG PAD, Attachment C‐5.
Geomorphology of Crooked Creek, Jim’s Creek,
and Jim's Lake near Elfin Cove, Alaska July 2014 Polarconsult PAD, Attachment C‐6.
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric
Project, Progress Design Prints Jan. 2014 Polarconsult PAD, Attachment C‐7.
ABC: Alaska Biological Consulting
PAD: Pre‐Application Document
Polarconsult: Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0 C‐3
This page intentionally blank.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0
ATTACHMENT C‐1
A Fisheries Survey of Crooked and Jim’s Creeks and Jim’s Lake on Chichagof Island near Elfin
Cove, Alaska. Technical Report 13‐08.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0
This page intentionally blank.
Technical Report No. 13-08
_________________________________________________________________________________________
A Fisheries Survey of Crooked and Jim’s Creeks and Jim’s Lake on Chichagof Island
near Elfin Cove, Alaska
by
Bruce M Barrett
July 2013
______________________________________________________________________
Alaska Biological Consulting
PO Box 322
Lakeside, MT 59922-0322
Tel: 406-844-3453
E-mail: alaskabiol@yahoo.com
1
INTRODUCTION
In June 2009, Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. was authorized by the Non-Profit Community of Elfin Cove to
complete a reconnaissance and feasibility analysis of potential hydropower resources for Elfin Cove. The
study, completed in 2011, identified Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake and Roy’s Creek as potentially suitable
project sites (Polarconsult 2011). The community has since chosen Crooked and Jim’s creeks and in
accordance has employed Polarconsult to conduct further analyses and design work in addition to permitting
the project which necessitates cataloging the environmental resources that may be impacted.
The hydropower development being considered would entail diverting up to 5 cfs of flow from Crooked
Creek at approximately mile 0.55 (Figure 1) into Jim's Lake, and developing a hydropower project between
Jim's Lake and Little Sandy Beach, utilizing Jim's Lake as a storage reservoir and an access and power line
corridor to Elfin Cove.
The purpose of this report is to define the fisheries resources that occur within the project area which
includes Jim’s Lake and Jim’s and Crooked creeks located on the west side of Chichagof Island about two
miles south of Elfin Cove (Figure 1). Also addressed is the fisheries impact that can be expected with stream
flow and diversion and lake level and volume changes from the proposed hydroelectric project.
OBJECTIVES
1. Determine fish distribution and relative abundance by species in Jim’s Lake and Crooked and Jim’s
creeks by species.
2. Determine average fish size by species in the study area.
3. Describe the general habitat characteristics of Jim’s Lake, and Crooked and Jim’s creeks.
4. Define the expected impact to area fisheries resources should the proposed hydro project be built,
and recommend mitigation options to the extent necessary to ensure no net loss of area fisheries
production/resources.
METHODS
The study area was Jim’s Lake and Jim’s and Crooked creeks (Figure 1). Jim’s Creek in its entirety was
sampled along with Jim’s Lake, while Crooked Creek was sampled from intertidal to a gauging station located
0.55 miles upstream.
Four standard minnow traps were fished in Jim’s Lake, five in Jim’s Creek, and seven in Crooked Creek (Figure
2). Soak time ranged from 15 to 25 hrs. For Jim’s Lake, the average was 19 hrs., Jim’s Creek 21 hrs., and
Crooked Creek 20 hrs. The traps were baited with disinfected sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) roe
treated by a 10-m soak time in 1/100 Betadyne. One cut section of roe (20-25 g) wrapped in cheesecloth
was used in each trap. In streams the traps were fished in pools with the axis parallel to the current, and
each trap was anchored by one or two cobbles placed inside the trap. At Jim’s Lake each minnow trap was
weighted by a single cobble and fished off shore at an average 5 ft. depth. All traps were securely tied to
substrate by line and the line marked with survey tape to prevent loss.
Additionally at Jim’s Lake, two seine hauls were made using a hand seine measuring 20 ft. x 4 ft. with ¼ mesh
web. The sets were made off the western end of the lake with each haul covering about 800 square feet of
surface area. At Jim’s Lake a gill net was also deployed and fished for 5 ¼ hrs. nearly midway off the lake’s
west side. The net was set perpendicular from the shore to beyond the lake’s midpoint and anchored in 20+
ft. of water (Figure 3). The gill net measured 100 ft. by 8 ft., and mesh size was 1 inch.
2
Originally, hand seining was also intended for Jim’s and Crooked creeks, however the relatively narrow width
and shallowness of the streams coupled with small pool sizes and in-stream materials (logs) precluded
effective seining.
All fish sampling efforts in the two streams and the lake using minnow traps, seine gear, and a gill net were
authorized by Fish Resource Permit # SF 2013-231 as issued by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game
(ADFG).
Hook and line sampling was also conducted at Jim’s Lake. Slightly more than one hour was fished using
spinning gear and small lures (Mepps # 1’s and 2’s) and effected under ADF&G SF license 3770183 2013
AAO1.
All stream and lake minnow trap sites and the lake gillnetting location were identified by GPS, and
photographs were taken of representative fishing gear locations and catch.
Pursuant to the terms of the ADFG fish sampling permit, 8 hrs. of minnow trapping coupled with one hour of
hook and line sampling were required prior to the use of the gill net in Jim’s Lake. Further encumbering was
the provision that the gill net could not be used if the other gear produced any game fish other than Dolly
Varden (Salvelinus malma) or cutthroat trout (Salmo clarki clarki). These terms were met along with the
restriction that the net be constantly monitored to minimize incidental fish, bird, and mammal mortalities
and not soaked for more than 12 hrs.
All fish captured were identified by species in accordance with Pacific Fishes of Canada (1973), measured (tip-
of-snout to fork-of-tail, mm), and released alive. The exception was that the largest fish captured was
necropsied for sexual maturity.
Opportunistically throughout the course of the field work, visual inspections were conducted in the study
waters for fish presence with special attention given to stream slack water areas and pools and to lake
shallow areas.
RESULTS
The fish sampling findings are presented in Tables 1-4. Photographs not referenced in text of Jim’s Lake and
several of the minnow trapping locations in Crooked and Jim’s creeks and of the fish migration barrier 50 yds.
above MHHW on Jim’s Creek are provided in Appendices A-1 through A-7.
At Jim’s Lake, gillnetting, hook and line, seining, and minnow trapping efforts produced no fish (Table 1,
Figure 2). The same was the finding in visual monitoring of the lake’s shallows and of fish potentially rising
and/or jumping at the lake’s surface.
In Jim’s Creek which was minnow trapped from the intertidal to within about 100 yd. of the lake outlet with
five traps, no fish were caught nor were any visually observed during the four days of study (Table 2, Figure
2). In the lower stream reach immediately above the intertidal, there were but two pools both relatively
small averaging each about 8 inches deep. The first pool was about 30 yds. above the intertidal zone, while
the second was another 20 yds. upstream. At the head of the second pool which was about 50 yds.
upstream of MHHW a series of 3-4 ft. high waterfalls and a stream slope of about 30-35% began posing a
formable barrier to upstream fish passage.
At Crooked Creek, Dolly Varden (DV) were caught at two locations in the stream’s lower reach within 150
yds. of the intertidal zone. In the lower reach three relatively small pools were considered suitable for
3
minnow trap deployment. The first and the third were fished, and a total of 8 DV were captured, three in the
pool closest to tidewater and five upstream in a pool at the base of an 8 ft. high waterfall and the beginning
of a fish impassible gorge with about a 40% slope and a series of nearly continuous waterfalls. The DV
caught in the upper trap averaged significantly larger than those taken in the lower trap. (t stat. 4.54, P
0.0019, df=6). In the former DV averaged 12.9 cm FL and in the latter 11.0 cm (Table 4). The largest DV
(13.7cm FL) in the second trap catch was a sexually mature male (Figure 6).
In the upper reach of Crooked Creek, above the gorge which started about 150 yds. above the intertidal
zone, five minnow traps were set (Figure 2). The first was deployed in the first fishable pool above the gorge
and the last at the gauging station approximately 0.3 miles upstream (Figure 2). None of the five traps
produced any catch (Table 3). Above the gorge no fish were seen in the pools and relatively slack water
areas examined.
From the gorge in Crooked Creek to about 60 yds. upstream of trap site C-6, the streambed gradient ranges
from 0.5 to 1% and the streambed is mostly cobble followed by gravel. In this reach the stream channel is
well shaded by canopy cover and blow down, and relatively heavily seeded with large woody in-stream
material (logs) (Table 3). Between trap sites C-6 and C-7, encompassing about a 500 ft. stream reach,
average gradient is approximately 30%. From below trap site C-6 to above C-7 Crooked Creek flows through
a rubble field formed from past mass-wasting events spawned from the cliffs to the immediate east, and the
stream bed varies from sands and gravels to house-sized boulders.
In the intertidal for both Jim’s Creek and Crooked Creek there were no areas found suitable for hand seining
or minnow trapping (Figures 7-8). In the intertidal areas of both, the beach had about 15 degree slope, and
the dominant substrates at Jim’s were cobble at 75% and boulders 25%, while at Crooked Creek boulders
were about 80% and cobble 20%. Gravel represented less than 1% at both. Average water depth was about
one inch on Jim’s Creek and 3-4 inches for Crooked Creek in the intertidal. Neither stream had a defined
channel as their flows tended to spread laterally across the intertidal through relatively loose materials
(cobbles and boulders). Both streams were moderately exposed to open ocean sea/weather conditions.
Although some locals from Elfin Cove refer to the area as “Little Sandy Beach,” no sand was visible during the
survey period (7/15-18/2013). There was no recognizable fin fish habitat found within the intertidal of Jim’s
Creek or Crooked Creek.
DISCUSSION
Jim’s Lake and Jim’s Creek were found to be void of all fish life based on the assessment methods employed
from July 15-18, 2013. Likewise Crooked Creek was determined to support no fish with exception of the
stream’s lower reach immediately above MHHW, in the first 150 yds.
The relatively small number of DV found to occupy lower Crooked Creek were likely non-anadromous,
resident fish based on the lengths of the eight caught and the finding that one was sexually mature at 13.7
cm (5.4 inches). This aligns with the finding of Hart (1973) that anadromous DV maturation occurs in the
ocean and return migrations take place in the fall after spending 2 or more years at sea.
Given the limited habitat in the lower reach of Crooked Creek and general trap effectiveness, it is probable
that not many more DV occupied the 150 yd. reach from intertidal to the gorge than the eight taken in the
combined 38.2 trap hrs. fished. Further, given the fish length differences measured between the two trap
catches, it would appear that segregation may be occurring with the smallest DV occupying the lower pool
and the largest the upper pool at the start of a fish-impassable gorge (Figure 9). This could be indicative of
poor recruitment success and limited rearing and/or spawning habitat.
4
While not occupied by fish, Jim’s Creek would likely support small resident DV if access were not limited just
above intertidal by a 100 ft. steep reach of stream channel containing a series of waterfalls and about a 40%
grade. In Jim’s Creek’s upper reach, the several minnow trap sites fished had relatively low gradient (<1%),
good cover, stability, and insect life for feed. Jim’s Lake which has 20+ ft. depths, macro aquatic vegetation
(lily pads), and supports terrestrial and aquatic insect life offers fisheries habitat, but it too is not colonized by
fish as determined from the July 15-16, 2013 sampling efforts there. Although also found not to be occupied
by any fish life, the upper reach of Crooked Creek above the gorge which begins just above intertidal appears
to be better fisheries habitat than upper Jim’s Creek due to lower gradient and greater stream length and
width as well as ample cover, spawning gravel, and macro invertebrate production.
From the observation of the intertidal areas of Crooked and Jim’s creeks coupled with their lower reaches it
is apparent that neither offer habitat for salmon or other anadromous fish. This aligns with ADFG’s omission
of both streams from their Catalog of Waters important for Spawning, Rearing, and Migration of
Anadromous Fishes (2012).
Relative to the proposed hydro project, calling for diversion of Crooked Creek through a pipeline into Jim’s
Lake and a penstock from Jim’s Lake to a powerhouse sited within a 100 yds. of Little Sandy Beach, little to no
adverse impact to area fisheries can be expected. The few DV that occupy Crooked Creek just above the
intertidal zone should not be displaced. This is because stream flow, albeit reduced, will be maintained by a
lateral right-side tributary entering Crooked Creek approximately ¼ mile below the proposed diversion
structure to Jim’s Lake and by main stem watershed contribution below the proposed hydro diversion site
(Figure 10). The tributary should maintain about 11% of the current main stem flow in Crooked Creek (Joel
Groves P.E., pers.com., 7/7/13). This coupled with flow off the 65 acres of watershed downstream of the
diversion point, adding an estimated 13%, should ensure that about 24% of the current flow regime is
maintained. Some benefit may be derived from reduced flows if it lessens flood damages to fish spawning
habitat and permits more accumulation of stream bed gravels for spawning area where currently bedrock,
boulders, and large cobble only show. Expectedly, the power house discharge will offer some fisheries
habitat at least sufficient to compensate for any losses that may occur in lower Crooked Creek due to flow
reduction.
LITERATURE CITED
Alaska Department of Fish and Game. 2008, updated 2012. Catalog of waters important for spawning,
rearing, and migration of anadromous fishes, ADF&G, Sport Fish Div., Juneau, AK.
Hart, J.L. 1973. Pacific Fishes of Canada. Bull. 180; Fish. Res. Bd. Canada.
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 2011. Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake Hydroelectric Feasibility Study Final Report.
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. Anchorage, AK.
5
Table 1. Fish catch by gear type and location at Jim's Lake near Elfin Cove, AK, July 15-16, 2013.
Method LOCATION DATE TIME CATCH (fish #'s)
MISC. NOTES
Dolly Varden other
Minnow N 58° 10.585 7/15/2013 1604 hrs.Trap set 20 ft. offshore at 3 ft. depth.
Trap W 136° 19.561 Air: 68 F; water 62 F; lilly pads in western end of lake.
L-1 7/16/2013 1124 hrs. 0 0 1- one inch water beetle in trap
Minnow N 58° 10.582 7/15/2013 1635 hrs.Trap set 15 yds. offshore at 6 ft. depth.
Trap W 136° 19.522 West wind: <5mph; light overcast
L-2 7/16/2013 1158 hrs. 0 0 South shore set; I dragon fly larvae in trap
Minnow N 58° 10.558 7/15/2013 1725 hrs.Trap set 3yds. offshore at 8 ft. depth.
Trap W 136° 19.517 Air 64 F, water 62 F; steep drop-off from shore.
L-3 7/16/2013 1235 hrs. 0 0 Southside shore set; insect hatch moderate
Minnow N 58° 10.499 7/15/2013 1747 hrs.Trap set 3yds. offshore at 3 ft. depth.
Trap W 136° 19.486 Site approx. 150yds from east end of lake off south shore.
L-4 7/16/2013 1310 hrs. 0 0 Dense shoreline growth: alder, cedar & spruce trees, and blue berry bushes
Hook & Line L-1 thru L-3 7/15/2013 1615 hrs.South shore spin casting using #1 and #2 Mepps spinners, silver & gold
Trap sites 1720 hrs.Casts were 45+ yds.; 2/3 south shoreline fished.
Hand Seine Trap L-2 to 7/16/2013 1130 hrs.-Seine 25 ft. X 4 ft., 1/4" mesh
lake's west end 1147hrs. 0 0 2 hauls made; no catch other than 1 water beetle
beyond L-1
Gill Net N 58° 10.558 7/16/2013
1235 hrs.-Net set off minnow trap site L-3; extending perpendicular to shoreline
W 136° 19.517 1750 hrs. 0 0 Net extended beyond 1/2 lake width; offshore end at 20+ ft. lake depth
No waterfowl or water-use mammals observed
Gill net: 100ft X 8 ft. 1 inch mesh; total time fished: 5 h 10 min.
Lakeshore veg.: cedar, alder, willow, blue berry & spruce
Table 2. Fish catch by species with a standard minnow trap by location in Jim's Creek near Elfin Cove, AK, July 16-18, 2013.
TRAP LOCATION DATE TIME CATCH ( fish #'s)
NOTES
#Dolly Varden OTHER
J-1 N 58° 10.637 7/17/2013 1540 hrs.Air: 61F; water 55F; elev. 20 ft. above MHHW;1st fishable pool above MHHW;
W 136° 20.025 35-40% gravel; fractured bed rock & boulders (60%); 3-4 ft. high series of
7/18/2013 0950 hrs. 0 0 waterfalls; pool 30 yds. above MHHW.
J-2 N 58° 10.577 7/17/2013 1505 hrs.Avg. pool depth 16"; stream width 4.5 ft.; stream under cut bank; pool
W 136 19.880 7/18/2013
0955 hrs. 0 0 immediately below 5 ft. waterfall; pool 3.5 x 5 ft.
J-3 N 58 10.586 7/17/2013 1445 hrs.1/2% grade; gravel bed.
W 136° 19.771 7/18/2013
1005 hrs. 0 0
J-4 N 58° 10.574 7/16/2013 1435 hrs.Stream width 4 ft. avg.; slope approx. 15%; macro-invertebrates <1/2
W 135° 19.685 7/17/2013
1415 hrs. 0 0 per cobble(n=10); 60% angular gravel (1") & 40% cobble (angular)
J-5 N 58° 10.562 7/16/2013 1308 hrs.Stream width 4 ft. avg.; pool depth max. 16"; 10% grade downstream
W 136° 19.610 Bed sharp angular cobble and gravel at approx. 50% each;
7/17/2013 1402 hrs. 0 0 20% grade above trap site& 10% below trap; air 58 F & water 61F.
6
Table 3. Fish catch by species with a standard minnow trap by location in Crooked Creek near Elfin Cove, AK, July 15-18, 2013.
TRAP LOCATION DATE TIME CATCH ( fish #'s)
MISC. NOTES
#Dolly Varden OTHER
C-1 N 58° 10.719 7/15/2013 1906 hrs.1st pool immediately above intertidal; at base of several waterfalls
W 136° 20.143 approx. 8ft. above MHHW; trap depth 18"; 20% slope upstream;
7/16/2013 0955 hrs. 3 0 air 62F & water 44.5F (7/16/2013).
C-2 N 58° 10.733 7/16/2013 1024 hrs.Approx. 2.25 macro. Invertebrates on 5-6" cobbles (n=20); boulders
W 136° 19.989 and bed rock dominate bed composition; no gravel; 20% slope
downstream; approx. 150 yds. above MHHW; 3ft avg. pool depth; pool
at base of 8ft. high waterfall w/ waterfalls continuing upstream thru gorge;
7/17/2013 0950 hrs. 5 0 slope upstream approx. 40%; largest DV (5.4" FL) sexually mature male.
C-3 N 58° 10.780 7/17/2013 1040 hrs.2nd pool immediately above gorge; approx. 25yds from top of gorge;
W 136° 19.820 slight 2-3% slope; stream width avg. 6ft. ; 85% cobble, 10% boulder, 5%
7/18/2013 1110 hrs. 0 0 gravel; air 52F & water 44.5F (7/17/2013)
C-4 N 58° 10.784 7/17/2013 1111 hrs.bed: 35% cobble, 65% gravel; 16" avg. pool depth; pool 20 ft. X 12 ft. Stream
W 136° 19.788 7/18/2013 1104 hrs. 0 0 slope 1/2%; pool shaded by fallen timber; approx. 50 yds. above site C-3.
C-5 N 58° 10.792 7/16/2013 1711 hrs.1% stream grade; riffle below pool 85% cobble & 15% gravel; pool 18'x 5'.
W 136° 19.652 7/17/2013 1135 hrs. 0 0 80% canopy cover; pool depth avg. 18"; under-cut stream bank
C-6 N 58° 10.759 7/16/2013 1647 hrs.1% stream grade; pool 6 x4 ft.;13" avg. pool depth; 85% cobble & 15% gravel.
W 136° 19.519 7/17/2013 1252 hrs. 0 0 stream width 5 ft.
C-7 N 58° 10.741 7/16/2013 1602 hrs.Trap at gauging station; streambed: 50% cobble, 50% gravel; 1/2% slope.
W 136° 19.323 7/17/2013 1235 hrs. 0 0 Air: 58 F, water 47 F (7/16/13).
Table 4. Fork lenghts (mm) of Dolly Varden sampled
by minnow trap # and catch date in Crooked
Creek near Elfin Cove.
Trap # C-1 Trap # C-2
Specimen 7/16/2013 7/17/2013
#
1 109 122
2 107 130
3 114 119
4 135
5 137
Mean 110 124
Median 109 130
7
Figure 1. Aerial map showing the location of Jim’s Lake, and Crooked and Jim’s creeks, and other features
relative to the community of Elfin Cove, Alaska. (Map courtesy of Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.)
8
Figure 2. Aerial map identifying the approximate minnow trapping locations at Jim’s Lake, Jim’s Creek, and
Crooked Creek. (Map courtesy of Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.)
9
Figure 3. Gill net deployed in Jim’s Lake on the west side at the trap site L-3, July 16, 2013.
Figure 4. One of three Dolly Varden caught by minnow trap at Crooked Creek site C-1 just above MHHW.
10
Figure 5. Dolly Varden catch at Crooked Creek trap site # C-2 showing the five fish captured. The white
material in the minnow trap is the salmon roe wrapped in cheese cloth.
Figure 6. Sexually mature male Dolly Varden (13.7 cm FL) from Crooked Creek trap site # C-2
11
Figure 7. Jim’s Creek in the upper and mid intertidal area with the stream shallowness, and the
preponderance of cobble and boulders, July 15, 2013.
12
Figure 8. Crooked Creek from mid to lower intertidal showing the preponderance of boulders and
cobble in the streambed, July 15, 2013.
13
Figure 9. The falls in the background is the beginning of a fish-impassable gorge on Crooked Creek
which starts about 150 yards above MHHW. The pool in the foreground is trap site C-2
that produced a five Dolly Varden catch, July 16-17, 2013.
14
.
Figure 10. Tributary of Crooked Creek located between trap sites C-4 and C-5 on the north side, July 18,
2013.
15
APPENDIX A
16
Appendix A-1. Northern end of Jim’s Lake from the lake’s west side where two seine hauls were conducted
on July 16, and minnow trapping occurred at site L-1, July 15-16, 2013.
Appendix A-2. Jim’s Lake looking southeast toward trap site L-2, July 15, 2013.
17
Appendix A-3. Jim’s Creek looking dowstream from trap site J-5, 7/16/2013.
Appendix A-4. Jim’s Creek looking down stream at trap site J-4, July 16, 2013.
18
Appendix A-5. Crooked Creek at gauging station and trap site site C-5. Trap is dark cylinder object mid-
frame, July 16, 2013.
Appendix A-6. Jim’s Creek at trap site J-2 looking downstream, July 17, 2013.
19
Appendix A-7. Jim’s Creek in lower reach about 50 yds. above MHHW; showing start of a series of 3-4 ft.
waterfalls, stream slope of 30-35% grade, and fish impasse.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0
ATTACHMENT C‐2
A July 2013 Bald Eagle Survey of Crooked and Jim’s Creeks, Jim’s Lake, Little Sandy Beach, and a
proposed Utility and Access Corridor between Crooked Creek and Elfin Cove, Alaska. Technical
Report 13‐09.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0
This page intentionally blank.
Technical Report No. 13-09
_________________________________________________________________________________________
A July 2013 Bald Eagle Survey of Crooked and Jim’s Creeks, Jim’s Lake, Little Sandy
Beach, and a proposed Utility and Access Corridor between Crooked Creek and Elfin
Cove, Alaska
by
Bruce M Barrett
July 2013
______________________________________________________________________
Alaska Biological Consulting
PO Box 322
Lakeside, MT 59922-0322
Tel: 406-844-3453
E-mail: alaskabiol@yahoo.com
1
INTRODUCTION
In June 2009, Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. was authorized by the Non-Profit Community of Elfin Cove to
complete a reconnaissance and feasibility analysis of potential hydropower resources for Elfin Cove. The
study, completed in 2011, identified Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake and Roy’s Creek as potentially suitable
project sites (Polarconsult 2011). The community has since chosen Crooked and Jim’s creeks and in
accordance has employed Polarconsult to conduct further analyses and design work in addition to permitting
the project which necessitates cataloging the environmental resources that may be impacted.
The report herein defines the number and location of bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) nests occurring
in the vicinity of the proposed hydro-project area of Crooked Creek, Jim’s Lake, and Jim’s Creek and also in
the area of the proposed transmission and access trail corridor from Crooked Creek to Elfin Cove, as surveyed
from July 15 through July 18, 2013. The impetus is anchored in the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
(BGEPA) of 1940 as amended in 1962 and the Migratory Bird Act of 1918 (16 U.S.C. 668(a); 50 CFR 22)(USFWS
2007). The BGEPA prohibits the taking of bald eagles, their eggs, nests, or any part of the birds. And it
defines “taking” as “to pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, trap, collect, molest, or disturb (16 U.S.C.
668c; 50 CFR 22.3).”
To avoid disturbing bald eagles, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has prepared National Bald Eagle
Management Guidelines (USFWS 2007) that recommend:
1. Avoid clear cutting or removal of overstory trees within 330 ft. of bald eagle nests.
2. Avoid timber harvesting, road and trail building, and other construction activities within 660 ft. of a
bald eagle nest tree if the work or activity would be visible from the nest or 330 ft. should it not be
visible.
3. Non-operation of off-road vehicles within 330 ft. of a nest during the breeding season (March-
August, generally).
4. No clearing, external construction and landscaping between 330 ft. and 660 ft. of a nest during the
breeding season.
Additionally, this report cites the eagle sightings made in the process of surveying for bald eagle nests from
July 15 through July 18, 2013.
OBJECTIVES
1. Define the number and location of any bald eagle nests in proximity of the project area to include the
access corridor, stream diversion areas, penstock route, powerhouse site, power line route, and
equipment staging areas.
2. Determine the relative degree of bald eagle presence and their activities to include soaring, perching,
foraging, and over flights of the proposed project area in combination with other field studies
conducted in the July 15-18, 2013 period.
3. Identify any attractive features or food resources that may encourage use of the area by bald eagles.
2
METHODS
The study area as shown in Figure 1 encompasses the Little Sandy Beach and its capes and Jim’s and Crooked
creeks and Jim’s Lake along with the proposed utility corridor and access route between Elfin Cove and
Crooked Creek.
Eagle monitoring was performed by three methods: aerial, marine, and terrestrial surveys. On all surveys,
the forest canopy and rock outcroppings were visually scanned for perched eagles and nests. Likewise the
observers listened for eagles vocalizations and visually scanned the horizon for birds in flight. All eagle
observations were recorded.
Aerial Survey
On 15 July, two observers in a chartered DeHavilland DH C-2 Beaver (#N777DH) piloted by Ben Shipps made
three relatively low level passes over Little Sandy Beach including its capes and two over flights of the valley
floor encompassing Jim’s Lake and Crooked and Jim’s creeks. One observer occupied the co-pilot seat on the
right side of the aircraft, while the second was seated behind the pilot on the left side of the plane. Both
observers wore polaroid sun glasses. Visibility was good with only a high overcast, and winds were calm. The
three coastal flights were made at the 300-400 ft. elevation, while the inland monitoring was performed at
400-600 feet. Airspeed ranged from 70-90 mph for both. Total survey time was about 15 minutes (1135-
1150hrs.).
Marine Survey
A total of 7 trips between Elfin Cove and Little Sandy Beach were made on a 22 ft. outboard powered skiff
provided by Eagle Charters. These were conducted in the July 15-18 period. The first on July 15 was at 1400
hrs. and the second at about 1900 hrs. On July 16, 17, and 18th travel occurred in the mornings at about
0930 hrs. and in the evenings between 1900 and 1930 hrs. The exception was no evening trip made on the
18th. During the boat trips from and to Elfin Cove, the two observers were vigilant for the presence of eagle
activity including eagle nests, perched eagles, and eagle over flights in the area of Little Sandy Beach and its
adjacent capes.
Survey conditions were good on all four days for ascertaining whether there were any eagle nests in the
forest canopy along Little Sandy Beach and its adjoining capes.
Terrestrial Survey
Beginning on the afternoon of July 15, 2013 and continuing through July 18, two observers conducted foot
surveys daily between Little Sandy Beach and Jim’s Lake and likewise daily, but starting one day later on July
16th, between Little Sandy Beach and the Crooked Creek gauging station located about 0.4 miles upstream.
The observers operated independently about 50% of the time and visually scanned for bald eagle nests and
over flights and listened for vocalizations while performing routine mapping details, water flow
measurements, and fish sampling. The daily surveys began at about 1000 hrs. and ended at approximately
1900 hrs. except on July 18th when the observers departed the Crooked Creek drainage en route for Elfin
Cove at about 1100 hrs. On July 16, Jim’s Lake was surveyed for bald eagle nests using a single person
inflatable raft while conducting bathymetric and fish survey details.
On July 18th, two observers trekked from Crooked Creek to Elfin Cove following the general route of the
proposed transmission corridor and ATV trail staying vigilant for eagle sightings, nests, and calls. The survey
extended from 1100 to 1500 hrs. approximately.
3
Survey conditions on the uplands ranged from good to excellent on all four survey days with exception of the
morning of July 18th wherein low clouds and fog were prevalent prior until about 1100hrs. This limited mid-
morning observation to the forest canopy and above to the 400-500 ft. elevation.
Figure 1. Map detailing the approximate boundary limits of the eagle survey conducted on July 15-
18, 2013 relative to the location of Little Sandy Beach, Jim’s Lake, Jim’s Creek, Crooked
Creek, and the proposed transmission line and access corridor to Elfin Cove. (Map
courtesy of Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.).
4
RESULTS
The results are defined in Table 1.
Table 1. Bald eagle sightings/observations in the associated uplands of Jim’s and Crooked creeks and
Jim’s Lake, and the proposed transmission corridor and ATV route from Crooked Creek
north to Elfin Cove, AK July 15-18, 2013. Included in the listing are results of an aerial
survey of Little Sandy Beach and its capes and watershed of Crooked and Jim’s creeks from
the intertidal inland approximately 1/3 mile on July 15, 2013 for eagle nests and presence.
Location Date Method Time Sighting Observation
Little Sandy
Beach and
capes
7/15/2013 Air 1135-
1150
hrs.
No Three 300-400 ft. elev. over flights; no
eagles or nests spotted.
Little Sandy
Beach and
capes
7/15-
18/2013
Boat 0900 &
1900 hr.
approx.
No Two surveys daily except morning only
on 7/18. No nests or eagles observed.
Crooked and
Jim's creeks
7/15/2013 Air 1145-
1150
hrs.
No Two 300-600 ft. elev. over flights; no
eagles or nests seen.
Jim's Lake &
vicinity
7/15/2013 Foot 1140
hrs.
Yes One adult soaring 700- 800 ft. 1/3 mile
north of Jim's Lake.
Jim's Lake 7/16/2013 Foot/raft 1100-
1800
hrs.
No Lake perimeter and surrounding area
survey via raft and foot. No nest(s),
sightings or vocalizations heard.
Jim's Lake 7/16/2013 Foot 1400
hrs.
Yes One adult pair at southern end of lake
soaring at approx. 750 ft.
Jim's Lake 7/16/2013 Foot 1730
hrs.
Yes One adult soaring 400 ft. high
immediately south of lake by approx.
1,000 ft.
Jim's Lake 7/17/2013 Foot 1300
hrs.
Yes One adult 50-75 ft. flying north to south
crossing mid-lake.
Jim's Creek 7/15-
18/2013
Foot Daily No No nest (s) or eagles observed or
vocalizations heard in transit from
MHHW to lake.
Crooked
Creek
7/
16-18/2013
Foot Daily No No nest (s) or eagles observed or
vocalizations heard between MHHW and
gauging station.
Crooked
Creek-Elfin
Cove
7/18/2013 Foot 1100-
1500
hrs.
No No nests, vocalizations, perching or over
flights of eagles observed.
5
DISCUSSION
Survey findings denote that there are no eagle nests within the project area including the terrain adjoining
Little Sandy Beach, Jim’s Lake, and Jim’s and Crooked creeks, and the proposed utility and access corridor
extending to Elfin Cove. Further, the July 15-18, 2013 survey results establish that bald eagles transit the
area but not to an appreciable extent, and it would appear that there is an absence of pattern in their
movements. Also, the lack of any bald eagle vocalizations heard further suggests that the project area is
relatively infrequently occupied and void of any active nest sites. This aligns with information from the
USFWS that there are no mapped or reported active or inactive bald eagle nests south of Elfin Cove in the
area surveyed in this study (Steve Brockman, USFWS Juneau, pers.com., 7/30/2013). Evidence from the
USFWS is that the nearest known bald eagle nest is about two miles northeast of the study area on the
opposite side of Chichagof Island near Fox Creek, a salmon stream.
The attractiveness of the study area as a forage area for bald eagles seems to be limited. The nearest salmon
stream (Fox Cr.) is two miles northeast on the east side of Chichagof Island, while the second closest is about
three miles south southwest on the island’s west side (Margret Cr., ADFG 2012). Further, Jim’s Creek and
Jim’s Lake are non-fish waters, and Crooked Creek has only a trace number of fish limited to a few resident
Dolly Varden (Salvelinus malma) within the first 140 yards above the intertidal zone (Barrett 2013). During
the July 15-18 survey period, the only appreciable bald eagle food source appeared to be limited to milling
pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha) off Little Sandy Beach evident by occasional jumpers seen daily 50-
150 ft. offshore. As for upland food sources for bald eagles, none was seen other than a total of two red
squirrels (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus). Deer sign (tracks; Odocoileus hemionus sitkensis) was evident that
included doe and fawn tracks; due to the relatively dense forest cover, it would be rather unlikely for deer
fawns to be targeted even in early spring.
Based on a combination of aerial, marine, and terrestrial surveys conducted from July 15 through the 18th, no
areas or features including nests exist within or surrounding the project area which would necessitate special
protection for bald eagles under the U.S. Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
LITERATURE CITED
Alaska Department of Fish and Game. 2008, updated 2012. Catalog of waters important for spawning,
rearing, and migration of anadromous fishes, ADF&G, Sport Fish Div., Juneau, AK.
Barrett, B.M. 2013. A Fisheries Survey of Crooked and Jim’s Creeks and Jim’s Lake on Chichagof Island near
Elfin Cove, Alaska. AKBIOL tech. report no. 13-08. Lakeside, MT.
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 2011. Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake Hydroelectric Feasibility Study Final Report.
Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. Anchorage, AK.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 2007. National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines. Arlington, VA.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0
ATTACHMENT C‐3
Interim Hydrology Report, Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydro Project
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0
This page intentionally blank.
polarconsult alaska, inc.
1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310
Anchorage, Alaska 99503-3638
Phone: (907) 258-2420
FAX: (907) 258-2419
I NTERIM H YDROLOGY R EPORT
131220-INTERIMHYDROLOGYREPORT.DOC
DATE: December 20, 2013
TO: Jane Button, ECUC Project Manager
FROM: Joel Groves, PE Polarconsult Project Manager
SUBJECT: Interim Hydrology Report, Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake Hydro Project
CC:
1. Background
From 1984 to 1985, the Alaska Department of Natural Resources (ADNR) maintained stream
gauges at the proposed Crooked Creek diversion site and Jim’s Lake outlet. Since 2008, Elfin
Cove Utility Commission (ECUC) has maintained stream gauges at these same two locations.
Additionally, ECUC maintained a stream gauge at Roy’s Creek from October 2009 through June
2012.1 The installations and station histories through June 2011 are described in detail in
Appendix C of the Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake Hydroelectric Feasibility Study Final Report
(Polarconsult, June 2011). More recent station histories are provided in this interim report.
The Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake gauging stations are both still maintained and operating as of
the most recent data download. This interim report provides up‐to‐date information on the
stations and collected hydrology information, and provides an interim analysis of the collected
hydrology data. The findings presented in this interim report are used to update the project
analysis completed in the 2011 Feasibility Study in order to recommend a project configuration
for final design and permitting.
2. Summary of Findings
The on‐going hydrology study has produced 2.56 years of flow data at Crooked Creek and 4.24
years of data at Jim’s Lake. Correlations between these sites and the discontinued Roy’s Creek
gauge are used to produce an extended hydrology record for both sites of 5.32 years.
Analysis of the current data indicate lower flows at both Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake than
indicated by the analysis completed for the 2011 Feasibility Study. Current estimates for the
median flow2 at both sites are approximately 80 to 85% of the estimates in the 2011 Feasibility
Study.
Analysis of these data indicate that the resource capacity factor of Crooked Creek, the major
water supply for the proposed development, is between 52 and 55% at a design flow of 5 cubic
feet per second (cfs). The hydrology analysis in the 2011 Feasibility Study estimated the
resource capacity factor for this design flow at between 50 and 61%. Resource capacity factor
for Jim’s Lake is not meaningful because the storage capacity of the lake can capture
substantially all of the flow for power generation.
1 Roy’s Creek is not currently under consideration for hydroelectric development, but was evaluated in the 2010
Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study for Elfin Cove. Roy’s Creek data is included in this interim report because it
is used to extend the record for the Crooked Creek gauging station.
2 Median flow is the 50% exceedance flow in Figures 6 and 7.
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
I NTERIM H YDROLOGY R EPORT P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, INC.
DECEMBER 20, 2013 PAGE 2 OF 10
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Crooked Creek Gauged Flow
Jim's Lake Gauged Flow
Roy's Creek Gauged Flow
3. Available Hydrology Data
From the start of stream gauging efforts in June 2008 to June 2009, and again from June 2011
to April 2013, ECUC led stream gauging efforts. From June 2009 through June 2011, and April
2013 to the present time, Polarconsult has been under contract to ECUC to conduct stream
gauging. ECUC has provided all available hydrology records and field data to Polarconsult.
Polarconsult has consolidated all available records and data for analysis. Currently available
hydrology data is summarized in Table 1 and Figure 1. Currently, 2.56 years of data have been
collected at Crooked Creek, 4.24 years of data at Jim’s Lake, and 2.42 years at Roy’s Creek.
Figure 1 presents the stage record collected at both stations. Gaps in Figure 1 reflect stage data
that was not recorded either due to failure of the logger hardware or insufficient memory
capacity. All flow measurements completed at these stations are summarized in Table 2.
Table 1: Summary of Hydrology Data for Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Resources
Location Basin Size
(sq.mi.) (1)
Site Elevation
(ft)(1) Latitude (1)Longitude (1)Begin Date End Date Number of
Records (days)(3)
7/6/84(2) 2/13/85(2) 202 Crooked Creek
at diversion site 0.56 478.0 5810'40" 13619'16" 8/22/08 Current(3) 933
7/6/84(2) 2/11/85(2) 202 Jim's Lake Creek
at lake outlet 0.10 333.2 5810'34" 13619'32" 8/22/08 Current(3) 1,547
Roy’s Creek
above Falls 0.42 470 5811'29" 13620'09" 10/8/09 7/8/12 885
(1) Data from June 2011 Feasibility Study, Appendix C.
(2) Count of available daily records. Gauges may have been in service for a longer period.
(3) The record count for current gauging stations reflects data through the most recent download on December
17, 2013 at Crooked Creek and October 17, 2013 at Jim’s Lake. The Roy’s Creek gauge has been discontinued.
Figure 1: Summary of Data Available from Gauging Stations
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
I NTERIM H YDROLOGY R EPORT P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, INC.
DECEMBER 20, 2013 PAGE 3 OF 10
Table 2: Flow Measurements at Jim’s Lake, Crooked Creek, and Roy’s Creek Gauging Stations
Local Date/Time Party Flow (cfs) Stage (ft) Method / Equipment
Crooked Creek at Diversion Site
7/26/2008 15:15 Button/ Christensen 2.33 7.7 Pygmy Meter(2)
7/27/2008 16:20 Button/ Christensen 4.35 7.76 Pygmy Meter
8/22/2008 14:30 Button/ Christensen 5.38 7.92 Pygmy Meter
6/1/2009 11:39 Button/ Christensen 4.17 7.73 Pygmy Meter
6/28/2009 16:40 Button/ Christensen 1.3 7.6 Pygmy Meter
7/9/2009 10:55, 11:20 Groves/ Hertrich 0.98 / 0.94 7.54 Hanna Meter(3)
9/4/2009 11:15, 11:40 Groves/ Glendoing 0.84 / 0.93 7.54 Hanna Meter
10/9/2009 12:50 Groves/ Christensen 3.71 7.68 Hanna Meter
12/9/2009 13:45 Button/ Christensen 1.07 7.52 Hanna Meter
8/10/2010 11:40, 12:15 Groves/ Button 2.41 / 2.25 7.62 Hanna Meter
9/27/2011 17:00 Christensen 1.42 7.55 HOBO Meter(4)
6/8/2013 13:20, 13:50 Christensen 7.36 / 7.48 7.81 HOBO Meter
7/15/2013 17:30, 17:45 Groves 0.69 / 0.88 7.48 Hanna Meter
10/17/2013 10:00, 10:40 Groves 1.42 / 1.38 7.52 Hanna Meter
Crooked Creek at Mouth
10/17/2013 15:00 Groves 1.96 NA Hanna Meter
Jim’s Creek at Lake Outlet (5)
7/25/2008 12:30 Button/ Christensen 3.42 4.18 Pygmy Meter
7/26/2008 10:45 Button/ Christensen 1.3 3.82 Pygmy Meter
8/22/2008 12:45 Button/ Christensen 0.11 3.7 Pygmy Meter
6/1/2009 10:00 Button/ Christensen 0.54 3.73 Pygmy Meter
6/28/2009 18:00 Button/ Christensen 0.04 3.61 Pygmy Meter
7/9/2009 12:15, 12:30 Groves/ Hertrich 0.091 / 0.091 3.56 Hanna Meter
9/4/2009 10:00, 10:15 Groves/ Glendoing 0.219 / 0.217 3.52 Hanna Meter
10/9/2009 13:45 Groves/ Christensen 0.44 3.62 Hanna Meter
10/9/2009 14:05 Groves/ Christensen 0.44 3.69 Hanna Meter
12/9/2009 14:15 Button/ Christensen 0.219 3.68 Hanna Meter
8/10/2010 10:30, 10:45 Groves/ Button 0.421 / 0.422 3.72 Hanna Meter
9/27/2011 16:15 Christensen 0.34 3.69 HOBO Meter
6/8/2013 14:45 Christensen 0.33 3.67 HOBO Meter
7/15/2013 16:30 Groves 0.17 / 0.20 3.48 Hanna Meter
10/17/2013 13:30 Groves 0.25 / 0.26 3.69 Hanna Meter
Roy’s Creek Above Falls
9/3/2009 Groves 1.10 NA Hanna Meter
10/8/2009 16:51 Groves 3.26 1.27 Hanna Meter
12/9/2009 11:45 Button/ Christensen 0.68 1.09 Hanna Meter
8/13/2010 11:30 Groves/Button 1.29 1.17 Hanna Meter
7/18/2013 17:20 Groves 0.59 1.12 Hanna Meter
(1) Current velocity stream flow method with March McBirney current velocity meter (model unknown).
(2) Current velocity stream flow method with Pygmy current velocity meter.
(3) Sudden dose salt integration stream flow method with Hanna HI 9828 conductivity meter.
(4) Sudden dose salt integration stream flow method with Hobo U24‐001 conductivity logger.
(5) A small weir was installed on October 9, 2009, to stabilize and improve the section at the gauge.
‘‐‘ Indicates data are not available.
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
I NTERIM H YDROLOGY R EPORT P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, INC.
DECEMBER 20, 2013 PAGE 4 OF 10
4. Recent Gauging Station Histories 3
Crooked Creek Diversion Site Gauging Station
September 27, 2011. The gauging station was downloaded and stage and flow were
measured. The on‐board temperature sensor was found to be malfunctioning.
July 10, 2012. The data logger was found submerged in the creek downstream of the
gauging station, apparently ripped off the tree by a bear. The logger was not recovered at
this time.
June 8, 2013. The destroyed data logger was recovered from Crooked Creek and stored in
Elfin Cove. Stage and flow were measured. A new data logger and pressure transducer (PT)
was installed at the same gauging station. The new data logger is a cellular‐enabled GSM‐2
manufactured by Keller America, Inc. It transmits site telemetry to Polarconsult every four
hours via cellular GSM network. The new PT is a Keller Acculevel vented transducer.
July 15, 2013. Stage and flow were measured.
October 17, 2013. Anomalies in programming of the GSM‐2 were corrected by direct cable
interface in the field. The PT installed in June was determined to be providing spurious
stage data, and was replaced with a new PT of the same make and model. Stage and flow
were measured.
October 29, 2013. Polarconsult extracted the main board from the data logger found
destroyed in July 2012 and returned it to the manufacturer to attempt to recover the data.
The manufacturer found no valid data on the memory chip and the main board was not
salvageable.
Jim’s Lake Outlet Gauging Station
Sept. 27, 2011. The gauging station was downloaded and stage and flow were measured.
July 10, 2012. The gauging station was downloaded and stage was measured.
June 8, 2013. The gauging station was downloaded and stage and flow were measured.
July 15, 2013. The gauging station was downloaded and stage and flow were measured.
Oct. 17, 2013. The gauging station was downloaded and stage and flow were measured.
Roy’s Creek Gauging Station
July 10, 2012. Station hardware was removed. Stage was measured.
July 18, 2013. Stage and flow were measured.
3 For earlier station history, see June 2011 Feasibility Study, Appendix C.
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
I NTERIM H YDROLOGY R EPORT P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, INC.
DECEMBER 20, 2013 PAGE 5 OF 10
7.30
7.40
7.50
7.60
7.70
7.80
7.90
8.00
024681012
Flow (cfs)Stage (ft)Accepted Measurements, 2008‐11
Accepted Measurements, 2013
S‐D Curve (2011 Feas. Study)
S‐D Curve, 2013 (Current)
S‐D Curve, 2008‐2012 (Current)
5. Hydrology Analysis
Station Rating Curves
All available flow and stage measurements were reviewed and used to develop updated
stage‐discharge curves for each gauging station. Rating curves developed in the 2011
Feasibility Study are also shown for comparison.
Data, rating curves, and equations for the Crooked Creek station are presented in Figure 2.
Data for the Crooked Creek gauging station indicate the creek section was stable from 2008
to 2012. It appears that a flood event prior to June 2013 may have changed the section
slightly, based on field conditions and 2013 flow measurements. The 2013 curve was
shifted to the right to reflect these data.
Figure 2: Stage‐Discharge Curves for Crooked Creek Gauging Station
Data, rating curves, and equations for the Jim’s Lake station are presented in Figure 3. The
outlet section at Jim’s Lake is generally stable, however the stage‐discharge relationship
appears to be more variable than at Crooked Creek. This greater variability is attributed to
the very low flows being gauged at Jim’s Lake. These low flows, often just a few tenths of a
cfs, introduce two challenges for a natural‐channel gauging station: accurately measuring
such low flows taxes the capabilities of most flow measurement techniques; and the stage‐
discharge relationship at such low flows can be significantly perturbed by transient events
such as leaves sticking to rocks in the creek bed near the gauge. Errors in measuring the
small flows at Jim’s Lake are not expected to adversely affect project development
decisions.
2008 ‐ 2012: Q = 28.0 (S ‐ 7.40)1.6
2013: Q = 26.5 (S ‐ 7.36)1.6
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
I NTERIM H YDROLOGY R EPORT P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, INC.
DECEMBER 20, 2013 PAGE 6 OF 10
Figure 3: Stage‐Discharge Curves for Jim’s Lake Outlet Gauging Station
Data, rating curve, and equations for the Roy’s Creek station are presented in Figure 4. The
creek section at Roy’s Creek appears to have been stable over the 2.8‐year period when the
gauge was installed.
Figure 4: Stage‐Discharge Curves for Roy’s Creek Gauging Station
3.40
3.50
3.60
3.70
3.80
3.90
4.00
4.10
4.20
4.30
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Flow (cfs)Stage (ft)All Measurements, 2008‐13
S‐D Curve, Current, +0.07' Stage Shift
S‐D Curve, Current
S‐D Curve, Current, ‐0.07' Stage Shift
S‐D Curve (2011 Feas. Study, 10/9/09 ‐ 5/9/11)
S‐D Curve (2011 Feas. Study, 2008 ‐ 10/9/09)
8/22/08 to 8/16/09: Q = 3.6 (S ‐3.27)3.0
8/16/09 to 8/29/09; 10/9/09 to current: Q = 3.6 (S ‐ 3.20)3.0
8/29/09 to 10/9/09: Q = 3.6 (S ‐ 3.13)3.0
0.80
0.90
1.00
1.10
1.20
1.30
1.40
1.50
1.60
1.70
1.80
012345678910Flow (cfs)Stage (Site Datum, ft)All Measurements, 2009‐2013
S‐D Curve (2011 Feas. Study)
S‐D Curve (Current Analysis)
Full Record: Q = 35.1 (S –0.93)2.29
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
I NTERIM H YDROLOGY R EPORT P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, INC.
DECEMBER 20, 2013 PAGE 7 OF 10
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Sep Oct Nov DecCrooked Creek Flow (cfs)2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
2013
Station Hydrographs
Recorded stage data and manual stage readings for all three stations were reviewed.
Apparent errors due to sensor anomalies and gross errors due to ice effects were corrected.
Further revisions to the stage record to reflect more subtle ice effects on the stage record
during the winter season (generally November – March) at all stations may be warranted.
The resulting hydrographs for the three gauging stations are presented in Figures 3, 4 and 5.
Figure 3: Crooked Creek Hydrograph, 2008 – 2013
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
I NTERIM H YDROLOGY R EPORT P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, INC.
DECEMBER 20, 2013 PAGE 8 OF 10
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Sep Oct Nov DecRoy's Creek Flow (cfs)2009
2010
2011
2012
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecJim's Lake Outlet Flow (cfs)2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
2011
2012
2013
Figure 4: Jim’s Lake Outlet Hydrograph, 2008 – 2013
Figure 5: Roy’s Creek Hydrograph, 2009 – 2012
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
I NTERIM H YDROLOGY R EPORT P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, INC.
DECEMBER 20, 2013 PAGE 9 OF 10
Record Extensions
As shown in Figure 1, there are significant gaps in the record set for all three gauging
stations. The two‐year long gap at Crooked Creek from September 2011 to October 2013 is
of particular significance as Crooked Creek is the prime water supply for the proposed
hydroelectric project.
Correlations between the three gauges were analyzed and used to fill in gaps in the Crooked
Creek and Jim’s Lake records. Table 3 summarizes the coefficients of determination and
correlation equations used for the record extensions.4 The coefficient of determination
between Crooked Creek and Roy’s Creek (R2 = 0.83) is high, which is expected given the
proximity and similar basins of these two creeks. The coefficient of determination between
the Jim’s Lake outlet site and the two creeks is significantly lower (R2 = 0.31), which is also
expected because the lake moderates flows from this basin.
Missing records for Crooked Creek are supplemented first by Roy’s Creek data, second by
Jim’s Lake data, and lastly by the average daily flow for the missing data at Crooked Creek.
Missing records for Jim’s Lake are supplemented first by Roy’s Creek data, second by
Crooked Creek data, and lastly by the average daily flow for the missing data at Jim’s Lake.
Table 3: Correlation Equations for Crooked Creek and Jim’s lake Record Extensions
Site Correlation Source Days of Common
Record
Coefficient of
Determination Correlation Equation
Roy’s Creek Gauge 600 0.83 QCC = 0.822 QRC
1.40 Crooked Creek Jim’s Lake Gauge 871 0.31 QCC = 3.26 QJL + 1.63
Roy’s Creek Gauge 827 0.46 QJL = 0.0414 QRC +0.324 Jim’s Lake Crooked Creek Gauge 871 0.31 QJL = 0.0947 QCC +0.255
QCC: Flow at Crooked Creek gauging station, cfs
QRC: Flow at Roy’s Creek gauging station, cfs
QJL: Flow at Jim’s Lake gauging station, cfs
Table 4 summarizes the data sources used to compile the extended records for the Crooked
Creek and Jim’s Lake sites.
Table 4: Data Sources for Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake Extended Records
Data Source Crooked Creek Site Data Source Jim’s Lake Site
Crooked Creek Gauge 2.56 years Jim’s Lake Gauge 4.24 years
Roy’s Creek Gauge 0.78 years Roy’s Creek Gauge 0.16 years
Jim’s Lake Gauge 1.23 years Crooked Creek Gauge 0.17 years
Average Daily Data for Site 0.75 years Average Daily Data for Site 0.75 years
Total Extended Record 5.32 years (August 22, 2008 to December 17, 2013)
4 The coefficient of determination is a statistical measure of how related two data sets are. The coefficient’s value ranges from
zero to one, with zero representing no relationship between the two data sets, and one representing a perfect correlation.
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
I NTERIM H YDROLOGY R EPORT P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, INC.
DECEMBER 20, 2013 PAGE 10 OF 10
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Percent of Time Flow is Equalled or ExceededCrooked Creek Flow at Diversion Site8/22/2008 ‐ 10/17/2013 Gauged Flow (Current Analysis)
8/22/2008 ‐ 10/17/2013 Extended Record (Current Analysis)
8/22/2008 ‐ 5/9/2011 Data (2011 Feas. Study Analysis)
1984 ‐ 85 Data (2011 Feas. Study Analysis)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Percent of Time Flow is Equalled or ExceededJim's Lake Flow at Outlet8/22/2008 ‐ 10/17/2013 Gauged Flow (Current Analysis)
8/22/2008 ‐ 10/17/2013 Extended Record (Current Analysis)
8/22/2008 ‐ 5/9/2011 Data (2011 Feas. Study Analysis)
1984‐1985 Data (2011 Feas. Study Analysis)
Flow Duration Curves
Figures 6 and 7 present flow duration curves for the Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake sites.
The figures also show the 2011 Feasibility Study curves for comparison.
The current flow duration curves for Crooked Creek calculated from gauged flow and the
extended record are similar. Both current curves are lower than the estimated curve from
the 2011 Feasibility Study, and higher than the estimated curve from the 1984‐85 data.
Figure 6: Crooked Creek Flow Duration Curve, 2008 – 2013
The current flow duration curves for Jim’s Lake calculated from gauged flow and the
extended record are very similar, and also fall between the previous curves.
Figure 7: Jim’s Lake Outlet Flow Duration Curve, 2008 – 2013
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0
ATTACHMENT C‐4
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design and Development Plan
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0
This page intentionally blank.
polarconsult alaska, inc.
1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310
Anchorage, Alaska 99503-3638
Phone: (907) 258-2420
FAX: (907) 258-2419
L ETTER R EPORT
140120-ELFINHYDROCONCEPTUALDESIGNREPORT.DOC
DATE: January 20, 2014
TO: Jane Button, ECUC Project Manager
FROM: Joel Groves, PE Polarconsult Manager
SUBJECT: Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design and Development Plan
ATTACHMENTS: Interim Hydrology Report, Polarconsult, December 20, 2013
1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
As a precursor to commencing design and permitting of the Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake
Hydroelectric Project, the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) has requested that the Elfin Cove
Utility Commission (ECUC) complete an updated sizing analysis to determine the size and final
configuration of the proposed project. The AEA specifically requested that the sizing analysis
consider recommendations of previous completed engineering reports and current hydrology
information. In addition to these reference materials, Polarconsult has also analyzed current
utility load data for this analysis. AEA also requested preliminary cost estimates, economic
analysis, conceptual design, and development plan for the recommended project configuration.
This letter report presents the updated sizing analysis, conceptual design narrative, cost
estimate, economic analysis, and development plan for ECUC and AEA’s review. Applicable
supporting information and documentation is included with or attached to this report.
Conceptual design drawings for the recommended project will be provided to ECUC separately.
Based on the analysis summarized in this letter report, the recommended project configuration
is very similar to previously proposed configurations. The recommended installed capacity is
140 kW, consisting of a 35 kW run‐of‐river upper system between Crooked Creek and Jim’s
Lake, and a 105 kW storage lower system between Jim’s Lake and tidewater at Little Sandy
Beach. Current utility load and hydrology data both support a smaller project capacity than
recommended by the 2011 Feasibility Study. The recommended project configuration is
estimated to displace 89% of the diesel fuel consumed by the electric utility annually.
A siphon intake at Jim’s Lake will allow the lower system to regulate flows from Jim’s Lake,
drawing the lake down a maximum of eight feet below its natural level. No dam at the lake
outlet is proposed. This project configuration is understood to be eligible for an exemption
from FERC licensing requirements.1
2. BACKGROUND
Polarconsult completed reconnaissance and feasibility studies for the hydro project in June
2010 and June 2011, respectively. Mead & Hunt completed an independent engineer’s
evaluation of the project configuration recommended in the 2011 feasibility study in October
2012.2 The general project configurations are summarized in Table 1.
1 See FERC DI 11‐11‐000, Issued July 11, 2011.
2 Hydroelectric Reconnaissance Study Final Report; Elfin Cove, Alaska. Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. June 2010.
Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake Hydroelectric Feasibility Study Final Report. Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. June 2011.
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design and Development Plan
Letter Report Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
January 20, 2014 Page 2 of 11
Table 1: Previously and Currently Proposed Hydro Project Configurations
Source Installed
Capacity
Total Annual
Hydro Generation
Estimated
Installed Cost
Percent of ECUC
Load Met by Hydro
2010 Recon. Study 200 kW 716,000 kWh $2.5 – 3.6M 97%
2011 Feas. Study 160 kW 672,700 kWh $1.85M 99%
2012 Independent
Evaluation 125‐150 kW ‐ ‐ ‐
2014 Recommended
Configuration 140 kW 613,800 kWh $3.38M 89%
3. METHODOLOGY
Determining the ‘optimal’ installed capacity is one of the most subjective and challenging
engineering tasks associated with developing a hydroelectric project for a micro‐grid such as
ECUC. The hydro project will be a 50+ year asset. Undersizing the project sacrifices an
opportunity to support future growth of the community at very modest incremental capital
expense. Likewise, oversizing the project results in unnecessary capital expense with no benefit
to the community, and can also burden the community with increased operation and
maintenance (O&M) expenses over the life of the project.
For this updated analysis, Polarconsult analyzed several project alternatives using similar
methodology to that used for the 2011 Feasibility Study. Updated utility load data and
hydrology information, described in this letter report and attachments, was used for the
current analysis.
4. UPDATED PROJECT DATA
4.1 Hydrology
Stream gauging stations are maintained at the Crooked Creek diversion site and Jim’s Lake
outlet. These gauging stations are described in Appendix C of the 2011 Feasibility Study.
Polarconsult has reviewed additional hydrology data collected since 2011.3 Analysis of all
available hydrology data indicate flows in Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake are approximately 80%
of the flows that were estimated in 2011. The analysis presented in this memo is based on
current hydrology data.
4.2 ECUC System Electric Load
The 2011 Feasibility Study was based on annual utility load of 359,000 kWh.4 Subsequent utility
load has trended lower. Utility load was approximately 8% lower (~330,000 kWh) in 2009 and
2010, and approximately 16% lower (~300,000 kWh) in 2011 and 2012. 2013 load is estimated
to be approximately 25% lower, at 275,000 kWh. Table 2 and Figure 1 summarize recent
information for the electric utility.
Independent Engineer’s Evaluation Final Report. Hydropower Feasibility Development for the Community of Elfin
Cove, Alaska. Mead & Hunt. October 2012.
3 Interim Hydrology Report, Polarconsult Alaska, Inc., December 20, 2013 (attached).
4 Feasibility Study Final Report, Table 4‐1.
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design and Development Plan
Letter Report Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
January 20, 2014 Page 3 of 11
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Jan‐03 Jan‐04 Jan‐05 Jan‐06 Jan‐07 Jan‐08 Jan‐09 Jan‐10 Jan‐11 Jan‐12 Jan‐13Average kWAverage Monthly Power Generation
ECUC load varies seasonally, with low demand in the winter months (October to April) and high
demand in the summer months (May to September). Both winter and summer loads have
decreased since the 2011 study. Average winter load was 20 – 30 kW from 2005 through 2009,
but decreased to 15 – 20 kW from 2010 to 2012. Average summer load has seen a similar
decrease, from 70 – 90 kW from 2005 through 2009, 70 – 80 kW from 2010 to 2012, and 60 –
70 kW in 2013.
These decreasing load trends are attributed to the increasing cost of electricity in Elfin Cove and
resulting ratepayer efforts to increase efficiency and control their utility expenses. Electricity
rates over this same time period have nearly doubled from $0.42 per kWh in 2005 to $0.80 per
kWh in 2012. Even though utility load and fuel use have decreased over time, total fuel costs
have remained constant at approximately $120,000 per year since 2008.
This analysis uses an annual utility load of 300,000 kWh, with 110,000 occurring during the
winter season (September 15 through May 15), and 190,000 kWh during the summer season
(May 15 through September 15).
Figure 1: Average Monthly ECUC System Load 5
5 2003 to 2011 data are from 2011 Feasibility Study. 2011 to 2013 data are provided by ECUC.
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design and Development Plan Letter Report Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. January 20, 2014 Page 4 of 11 Table 2: Recent ECUC Electric Utility Data Data from 2003 to 2010 is compiled from monthly Power Cost Equalization (PCE) program records provided by the AEA. Data from 2011 to 2013 are provided by ECUC. (1) Data for 2003 include July through December. (2) Records from 2007 are incomplete due to power plant replacement project. (3) No station service data are available for March 2006 and April 2007 through November 2008. (4) Records from February 2011 to October 2013 only include total kWh generated, total kWh sales, total fuel consumption, and fuel price. (5) Data for 2013 include January through October. (6) Rates are for “average residential rate for 500 kWh/month consumption”, compiled from annual Statistical Report of the PCE Program, published by the AEA. Each report covers the state fiscal year (July 1 of the preceding year to June 30 of the calendar year). All other data in this table is based on calendar years. ‘–’ denotes data that are not available or not meaningful due to incomplete records. NA Not available. Parameter 2003 (1) 2004 2005 2006 2007 (2) 2008 2009 2010 2011(4) 2012(4) 2013 (4,5) kWh Generated 215,404 387,727 344,557 342,883 235,574 (2) 377,150 339,609 325,810 297,578 301,721 251,134 kWh for Station Service (% of total generation) 12,809 (5.9%) 24,785 (6.4%) 28,421 (8.2%) 24,147 (3) (7.0%) 1,734 (2,3) (‐‐%) 1,544 (3) (‐‐%) 25,045 (7.4%) 32,615 (10.0%) NA NA NA kWh Sold 200,865 318,937 301,614 302,051 295,567 334,177 291,866 259,139 240,990 245,865 206,675 Fuel Price (annual average) $1.84 $2.21 $2.94 $3.64 $3.56 $5.14 $4.62 $3.98 $4.78 $5.02 $5.12 Fuel Used (gallons) 17,583 32,938 31,778 31,161 31,727 30,678 26,413 26,539 25,096 24,685 20,927 Total Fuel Expense $32,380 $72,831 $93,414 $113,477 $112,806 $157,599 $122,068 $105,662 $120,043 $123,990 $107,244 Total Non‐Fuel Expense $24,796 $58,949 $55,867 $28,702 $41,078 $35,406 $32,739 $43,80 NA NA NA Total Utility Expense $57,177 $131,780 $149,281 $142,178 $153,884 $193,005 $154,807 $149,471 NA NA NA Power Cost per kWh $0.28 $0.41 $0.49 $0.47 $0.52 $0.58 $0.53 $0.58 NA NA NA Unsubsidized Electric Rate per kWh (6) $0.25 $0.25 $0.42 $0.51 $0.427 $0.56 $0.523 $0.523 $0.694 $0.80 NA Generation Efficiency (kWh/gal) 12.3 11.8 10.8 11.0 7.4 (2) 12.3 12.9 12.3 11.9 12.2 12.0
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design and Development Plan
Letter Report Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
January 20, 2014 Page 5 of 11
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
9/15/089/15/099/15/109/15/119/15/129/15/13Daily Utility Demand and Supply (kW)Excess Hydro Available (kW)
Demand Supplied from Diesel (kW)
Demand Supplied from Hydro (kW)
Total System Demand (kW)
Energy Supplied by Hydro
Energy Supplied by Diesels
Current Utility Demand
Excess Energy available from Hydro
Energy Supplied by Diesels
5.0 RECOMMENDED PROJECT CONFIGURATION AND ALTERNATES CONSIDERED
Conceptual design drawings for the recommended project will be provided to ECUC separately.
These conceptual design drawings are based on LiDAR of the project site, field reconnaissance
completed in July 2013, and the conceptual project configuration described in this section.
5.1 Recommended Project Configuration
The recommended hydro project configuration has an upper system between Crooked Creek
and Jim’s Lake with a 5 cfs design flow and estimated 35 kW generating capacity, and a lower
system between Jim’s Lake and tidewater with a 6.5 cfs design flow and estimated 105 kW
generating capacity. The total capacity of this configuration is 140 kW.
ECUC demand and supply with the recommended project, based on 300,000 kWh annual utility
demand and site hydrology data collected from 2008 throgh 2013, is presented in Figure 2.
Generally, the diesel plant operates during longer dry spells in the summer months, when there
is insufficient flow in Crooked Creek to meet utility demand and Jim’s Lake is drawn down. In
years with prolonged snow melt or wetter summers (2010, 2012) the hydro is able to supply
over 98% of annual demand. In drier years, (2009, 2011, 2013) the hydro is able to supply 77 to
82% of annual demand.
Figure 2: ECUC Demand and Supply with Recommended Hydro Project
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design and Development Plan
Letter Report Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
January 20, 2014 Page 6 of 11
The final installed capacity, which will depend on the water‐to‐wire efficiency of the turbines
and generators that are used, is expected to be in the range of 130 to 150 kW. Technical
aspects of the recommended project are summarized in Table 3, and a more detailed
description of the recommended project configuration follows.
Table 3: Technical Summary of Recommended Project
COMMON PROJECT FEATURES VALUE
Access Trails 12,200 feet
Power Lines 11,500 feet
Communications Lines 14,000 feet
INDIVIDUAL HYDRO SYSTEM FEATURES VALUES
Individual System Parameters Upper System Lower System Total
Basin Area (square miles) 0.56 sq.mi. 0.10 sq.mi. 0.66 sq.mi.
Median Flow (cfs) 2.5 cfs 0.4 NA
Minimum Flow (cfs) 0.2 cfs ~0.04 NA
Plant Design Flow (cfs) 5.0 cfs 6.5 cfs NA
Intake Elevation (ft, MSL) 479 ft 329 ‐ 337 ft NA
Powerhouse Elevation (ft, MSL) 342 ft 24 ft NA
Gross Head (ft) 137 ft 305 ‐ 313 ft NA
Pipeline Length (ft) / Diameter (in) 1,250’ of 12” pipe 2,030’ of 14” pipe NA
Net Head (ft) 124 ft 286 ft NA
Minimum Power Generation (kW) 7 kW 11 kW 7 kW
Installed Capacity (kW) 35 kW 105 kW 140 kW
Dam/Diversion Height (ft) none none NA
Available Storage Volume (ac‐ft) none 32 ac‐ft 32 ac‐ft
Estimated Annual Energy Generation
Total Annual Hydro Energy Generation (kWh) 153,400 460,400 613,800
Gross Excess Energy Available from Hydro (kWh) 347,500
Hydro Output used to Supply ECUC Load (kWh)
(percent of total ECUC load supplied by hydro)
266,300
(89%)
ECUC Load Met by Diesel Powerplant (kWh) 33,700
Total ECUC Load (kWh) 300,000
MSL: Mean sea level NA: Not Applicable.
Access Trails
With the exception of state land within the Elfin Cove town site, all of the project land is within
inventoried roadless areas of the Tongass National Forest. Accordingly, project access will
utilize trails rather than roads, with trail widths minimized to the extent practical.
Primary access for construction and heavy maintenance will be from Small Sandy Beach. A
permanent access trail will be built from the beach up to Jim’s Lake, continuing up to the
Crooked Creek intake site. A short spur trail will lead to the upper powerhouse site on the
shore of Jim’s Lake. This trail network will total approximately 4,200 linear feet. The initial
climb up from the beach will be a bench blasted in rock to an elevation of approximately 100
feet. The remainder of these trails will be at grades of up to 20%, either sidehilling through
mixed forest or traversing peat meadows. Some additional blasting may be required for these
trails depending on depth to rock along the trail route.
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design and Development Plan
Letter Report Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
January 20, 2014 Page 7 of 11
Routine access for O&M will utilize an ATV trail from Elfin Cove. This trail will start at tidewater
on the west side of the cove and continue approximately 8,100 linear feet to intersect with the
project trail system. Approximately 1,000 linear feet of this trail is on state‐owned land within
the Elfin Cove town site, and the balance crosses National Forest land. There is no developed
trail system at the starting point for this access trail in Elfin Cove. Because Elfin Cove’s existing
trails are not suitable for ATV traffic, it is recommended that an ATV shed be installed above
tidewater at this trail head. Utility personnel would walk or skiff to the trail head, and then
take an ATV to the project site to perform O&M duties.
Based on review of site topography, alternate trail alignments near Elfin Cove that cross private
lands may be less costly to build than the proposed route. These land owners will be consulted
during the permitting process to see if they are amenable to granting easements for an access
trail.
Power, Communications, and Controls
Power generated at the two hydro powerhouses will be stepped up to 7.2 / 14.4 kV and
transmitted to Elfin Cove via a buried armored cable. The cable will be installed along the
access trail route. The power cable will connect to the existing utility distribution system near
the start of the access trail in Elfin Cove.
A dedicated communications cable will also be buried in the access trail to connect the two
hydro powerhouses to the diesel powerhouse. The final communications connection within
Elfin Cove can be made by either leasing capacity on the local communication network (if
available) or installing a submarine cable under the Cove from the trailhead to the diesel
powerhouse.
Controls for the coordination of the two hydro powerhouses and the diesel powerhouse will be
located in the diesel powerhouse. These controls will support interrogation of the two hydro
powerhouses from the diesel powerhouse to facilitate operations.
Upper System
The upper system intake will consist of an inclined plate screen located at a natural cascade on
Crooked Creek at an elevation of 479 feet. Water will flow over the screen, with up to five cfs
flowing through the screen and into a collection gallery. Water will flow from the gallery into
the penstock.
The penstock will be a 12‐inch diameter SDR 26 HDPE pipe approximately 1,250 feet long. The
pipe will be buried in the access trail from the intake to the powerhouse. Control wiring will be
buried parallel to the penstock to a head level probe at the intake.
The upper powerhouse will be an approximately 12 foot by 12 foot building located on the
shore of Jim’s Lake. It will house the crossflow turbine, generator, controls, and switchgear for
the upper system. After passing through the turbine, water will be discharged via an enclosed
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design and Development Plan
Letter Report Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
January 20, 2014 Page 8 of 11
pipe into Jim’s Lake. The pipe tailrace will extend below the minimum drawdown elevation of
the lake (330 feet) to reduce erosion of the lakebed.
Lower System
The lower system intake will consist of a screened siphon intake positioned at approximately
322‐foot elevation in Jim’s Lake. At the proposed intake site, this will provide approximately 8
feet of cover at maximum lake drawdown and 5 feet of vertical separation to the lake bed to
minimize uptake of bottom sediments. The intake screen will be fitted with an anchor and float
assembly to facilitate manual hoisting to the surface for cleaning or maintenance when
necessary. The intake will be designed to minimize the need for manual cleaning.
The maximum suction head on the intake will be approximately 13 feet. During normal
operation, the intake will function as a passive siphon. At system startup, the penstock will
need to be primed to start the siphon. A small building (approximately eight foot by 10 foot)
located near the lake outlet and high point of the penstock will house a vacuum pump system
that will prime the penstock when needed. This vacuum system will pull air out of the
penstock, drawing water up from the lake and into the penstock until the penstock is filled.
The intake / penstock will be a 14‐inch diameter pipe approximately 2,030 feet long. Pipe
pressure ratings will vary from SDR 26 to SDR 15.5, depending on vacuum and pressure loadings
on the pipe.
Approximately 1,050 feet of the lower penstock will be buried under the access trail.
Approximately 550 feet of the lower penstock will be installed overland, either above grade or
shallow burial, in between trail switchbacks. The remaining approximately 430 feet of the
penstock is located in Jim’s Lake.
The lower powerhouse will be located at the head of Little Sandy Beach with a finished floor
elevation of 24 feet. It will house the turbine (Pelton or Turgo), generator, switchgear, and
controls for the lower system. After passing through the turbine, water will exit the
powerhouse via a concrete tailrace, transitioning to a cobble tailrace. Water will flow down the
cobble beach through the intertidal zone and into Port Althorp.
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design and Development Plan
Letter Report Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
January 20, 2014 Page 9 of 11
5.2 Alternate Project Configurations Considered
Several alternatives to the recommended project configuration were analyzed to determine the
optimal project configuration given existing hydrology and utility load information. These
alternatives are described below.
Alternate 1: No Power Recovery Turbine on Upper System.6
This alternative is the same as the base configuration only without the power recovery turbine
on the upper system between Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake. This results in the following major
changes from the base configuration:
● Eliminate control wire up to Crooked Creek diversion site.
● Replace upper powerhouse with a simple energy dissipation structure at the pipe outlet.
● Eliminate approximately 350’ of communications and power to the upper powerhouse
site on the shore of Jim’s Lake.
The upper system power recovery turbine provides approximately 20% of the total project
output. Without this power recovery turbine, the volume of electric utility diesel fuel displaced
by the project is reduced approximately 10% to 79% total. In all scenarios analyzed, the power
recovery turbine on the upper system is cost effective.
Alternate 2: Alter Upper System Design Flow (3.25 to 6.5 cfs considered)
Several alternate upper system design flows were analyzed to determine the optimal design
flow of the project. Design flows corresponding to pipe diameters of 10” (3.25 cfs), 12” (5 cfs),
and 14” (6.5 cfs) were analyzed. A project using 12” pipe and 5 cfs design flow was found to
have the highest benefit‐cost ratio, although the difference across the range of pipes and flows
analyzed was very small. The incremental cost of the pipe is essentially the same as the
incremental value of the additional energy generated by the project over the range of piping
considered.
Alternate 3: Alter Lower System Design Flow (3.25 to 6.5 cfs considered)
Several alternate lower system configurations were analyzed to determine the optimal design
flow of the project. Design flows corresponding to pipe diameters of 10” (3.25 cfs), 12” (5 cfs),
and 14” (6.5 cfs) were analyzed. A project using 14” pipe and 6.5 cfs design flow was found to
have the highest benefit‐cost ratio, although the difference across the range of pipes and flows
analyzed was very small. The incremental cost of the pipe is essentially the same as the
incremental value of the additional energy generated by the project over the range of piping
considered.
6 Polarconsult also analyzed a ‘non‐upgradeable’ version of this alternative, with a smaller and shorter pipeline
that would not be suitable for future installation of a power recovery turbine. Both of these alternate
configurations offer significantly reduced energy output and significantly lower benefit cost ratio compared to
the recommended project configuration.
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design and Development Plan
Letter Report Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
January 20, 2014 Page 10 of 11
6.0 COST ESTIMATE AND PROJECT ECONOMIC EVALUATION
The estimated cost for the recommended project configuration is presented in Table 4. Project
economics are summarized in Table 5.
Table 4: Project Cost Estimate
Cost Item Cost Estimate
PRE‐CONSTRUCTION COSTS (DESIGN & PERMITTING) $380,000
DIRECT CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Access Trails $680,000
Transmission Line $340,000
Upper System
Diversion Structure $74,000
Penstock $55,000
Powerhouse $203,000
Upper System Subtotal $332,000
Lower System
Diversion Structure $65,000
Penstock $145,000
Powerhouse $413,000
Lower System Subtotal $623,000
Shipping $93,000
Equipment / Mobilization $252,000
TOTAL DIRECT CONSTRUCTION COSTS $2,320,000
Construction Management / Administration $120,000
Construction Inspection / Engineering $120,000
Construction Contingency (15%) $440,000
ESTIMATED TOTAL INSTALLED COSTS $3,380,000
Project economics are evaluated using AEA’s renewable energy project economic model
developed by ISER.7 Two economic scenarios are considered: (1), that excess energy generated
by the hydro project is not used, aside from heating the community building and shop to
replace waste heat from the diesel power plant, and (2) that excess energy generated by the
hydro project is used via a dispatchable energy system to heat other buildings in the
community when this energy is available. A dispatchable energy system associated with this
project would produce significant value because the utility load is relatively low during the
winter heating season, so a significant fraction of the hydro project’s output would be available
during the winter months to displace heating fuel.
7 Renewable Energy Project Economic Model, Developed for Alaska Energy Authority by UAA Institute for Social
and Economic Research (ISER). Renewable Energy Grant Program Round 7 Version, Published July 2013.
Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project Conceptual Design and Development Plan
Letter Report Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
January 20, 2014 Page 11 of 11
Table 5: Project Economic Summary
1. present value calculated using a 50‐year life and 3% discount rate.
2. Calculated as the sum of nominal annual fuel expenses over 50 years as projected by ISER divided by 50.
3. Assumes 75,000 kWh are dispatched to the community building and shop to replace heat from the diesel
power plant. No benefit is calculated from this energy. 75% of the remaining net excess energy is assumed to
be dispatched to other interruptible loads in the community to displace the indicated quantity of heating oil.
7.0 DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Once the project configuration described in this letter report has been approved by ECUC and
AEA, Polarconsult can proceed with project permitting under the following schedule.
February – May 2014: Agency consultations, permit applications, finalize study plans
June – September 2014: Conduct field studies, agency site visit and public meetings
August – December 2014: Prepare Draft FERC License Exemption Application (DLEA)
January 2015: Circulate DLEA for Agency and FERC Review and Comment
April 2015: Receive comments on DLEA
April – May 2015: Finalize FERC License Exemption Application, file with FERC
June – November 2015: FERC processes application
December 2015: FERC issue License Exemption
Because the permitting process is agency driven, the milestone dates should be viewed as
targets rather than firm deadlines – significant additional information requests, or protracted
negotiations over permit terms can slow down progress. Conversely, close coordination with
and consensus between agencies and the applicant can result in faster progress than outlined
in the attached schedule.
Parameter Value
HYDRO PROJECT COSTS
Project Installed Cost $3.38M
Average Annual Hydro Operations, Maintenance, Repair & Replacement Costs (50 years) $21,000
Salvage Value (at year 50) $0
PRESENT VALUE OF PROJECT COSTS (1) $3.03M
HYDRO PROJECT BENEFITS (UTILITY FUEL SAVINGS ONLY)
Displacement of Energy Generated by Diesel Power Plant (kWh) 266,300
Displaced Diesel Fuel for Power plant (gallons) 21,300
Average Annual Value of Displaced Fuel (50 years) (2) $190,800
PRESENT VALUE OF PROJECT BENEFITS (UTILITY FUEL SAVINGS ONLY) (1) $3.67M
BENEFIT‐COST RATIO (UTILITY FUEL SAVINGS ONLY) 1.21
HYDRO PROJECT BENEFITS (UTILITY FUEL SAVINGS + EXCESS ENERGY USAGE)
Net Excess Hydro Energy Dispatched to Interruptible Loads (kWh per yr) (3) 180,000
Displaced Heating Fuel (gallons per year) (3) 5,300
Average Annual Value of Displaced Heating Fuel (50 years) (2) $52,950
PRESENT VALUE OF PROJECT BENEFITS (INCLUDING EXCESS ENERGY) $4.79M
BENEFIT‐COST RATIO (COUNTING EXCESS ENERGY BENEFIT) 1.58
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0
This page intentionally blank.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0
ATTACHMENT C‐5
ADFG Determination that Fish Habitat Permit is not Required for Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake
Hydro Project.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0
This page intentionally blank.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0
This page intentionally blank.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0
ATTACHMENT C‐6
Geomorphology of Crooked Creek, Jim’s Creek, and Jim's Lake near Elfin Cove, Alaska.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0
This page intentionally blank.
polarconsult alaska, inc.
1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310
Anchorage, Alaska 99503-3638
Phone: (907) 258-2420
FAX: (907) 258-2419
L ETTER R EPORT
140728-GEOMORPHREPORT.DOC
DATE: July 28, 2014
TO: Project File
FROM: Joel Groves, PE
SUBJECT: Geomorphology of Crooked Creek, Jim’s Creek, and Jim’s Lake near Elfin Cove, Alaska
CC:
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This letter report describes the geomorphology of Crooked Creek, Jim’s Creek, and Jim’s Lake
near Elfin Cove, Alaska. This report has been prepared in support of a proposed micro
hydroelectric development on Crooked Creek and Jim’s Lake to provide renewable electricity to
the community of Elfin Cove.
Crooked Creek, Jim’s Creek, and Jim’s Lake are located approximately one mile south of Elfin
Cove on the Inian Peninsula, part of the northwest coast of Chichagof Island in southeast
Alaska. Elfin Cove is located 70 air‐miles west of Juneau and 90 air‐miles north‐northwest of
Sitka at approximately 58.19° north latitude and 136.35° west longitude (Figure 1 and
Photograph 1). The project is located within the Tongass National Forest (TNF), which is
managed by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) Hoonah Ranger District.
Using the fish stream classification criteria set forth in the TNF Land and Resource Management
Plan, Crooked Creek is a Class II stream to approximately 450 feet above tidewater, then a Class
III stream through the remainder of the project area. Jim’s Creek is a Class IV stream for its
entire length.1
2.0 DATA SOURCES AND METHODS
Geomorphology for the project area is derived from the following data sources:
1. Stream plan, profiles and area topography are based on LiDAR survey of the project area
performed by Aerometric, Inc. in May 2010.
2. Stream bed sections, composition, and site photographs were measured, assessed, and
collected during multiple site visits conducted by Polarconsult and subconsultants
between 2009 and 2013 for this project.
3. Hydrology of Crooked Creek and Jim’s Creek is based on stream gauges maintained by
the Elfin Cove Utility Commission at the diversion site on Crooked Creek and at the
outlet of Jim’s Lake since 2008 to collect hydrology data for this project.
4. Bathymetry of Jim’s Lake is based on bathymetric surveys completed by Polarconsult in
July 2013. Bottom characterizations and vegetation extents are based on field
observations made in July 2009 and July 2013.
1 Tongass National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. U.S. Forest Service, January 2008. Page 4‐9.
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S C REEK G EOMORPHOLOGY L ETTER R EPORT
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
E LFIN C OVE U TILITY C OMMISSION P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, I NC.
JULY 28, 2014 PAGE 2 OF 18
3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Crooked Creek and Jim’s Creek drain two adjacent northwest‐facing drainages. Jim’s Lake is
located within the Jim’s Creek basin (Figure 1). The Crooked Creek basin is 0.74 square miles in
area, and the Jim’s Creek basin is 0.12 square miles in area. Table 1 summarizes the area of
each basin and significant subbasins.
Table 1: Crooked Creek and Jim’s Creek Basin and Subbasin Areas
CROOKED CREEK
Subbasin Description Corresponding
Creek Reach
Subbasin Area
(Square Miles)
Subbasin
Area
(Acres)
Percentage of
Basin Above
Fish Habitat
Subbasin Above Hydro Diversion Site 29+50 to headwater 0.56 360 76.4%
Mouth of Right Lateral Tributary to Hydro
Diversion Site 12+85 to 29+50 0.08 53 11.2%
Right Lateral Tributary Subbasin 12+85 0.08 49 10.5%
Limit of Fish Habitat to Right Lateral
Tributary Mouth 2+50 to 12+85 0.01 9.2 1.9%
Tidewater to Limit of Fish Habitat 0+00 to 2+50 0.00 1.7 ‐
TOTAL BASIN AREA 0.74 474 ‐
JIM’S CREEK
Subbasin Description Corresponding
Creek Reach
Subbasin Area
(Square Miles)
Subbasin
Area
(Acres)
Percentage of
Total Basin
Subbasin Tributary to Lake NA 0.09 57 74.4%
Lake NA 0.008 5.0 6.5%
Mouth of Right Lateral Tributary to Lake
Outlet 11+65 to 19+16 0.009 5.5 7.2%
Right Lateral Tributary Subbasin 11+65 0.005 3.3 4.4%
Tidewater to Right Lateral Tributary
Mouth 0+00 to 11+65 0.009 5.7 7.5%
TOTAL BASIN AREA 0.12 76 ‐
Drainage basins for both creeks are completely undeveloped and in natural condition. Only
primitive foot trails (game trails) occur within the project area. Both basins are predominately
vegetated by a mosaic of coastal temperate rainforest and wetland meadows. Exceptions are
the alpine headwaters of the Crooked Creek basin upstream of the proposed hydro diversion
site, which include approximately 131 acres of alpine tundra and barren rock, totaling
approximately 28% of the total Crooked Creek basin by area, and Jim’s Lake, which covers 6.5%
of the total Jim’s Creek basin by area.
3.1 Crooked Creek Geomorphology
Crooked Creek through the study reach is a perennial stream that in most areas flows in a well‐
defined channel. The minimum, median, and maximum discharge measured at the diversion
site gauging station are 0.1 cubic feet per second (cfs), 2.1 cfs, and 60 cfs respectively over a
2.6‐year period of record. Channel structure in many areas is strongly constrained by
topography and substrate. Large woody debris is abundant in the creek channel throughout
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S C REEK G EOMORPHOLOGY L ETTER R EPORT
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
E LFIN C OVE U TILITY C OMMISSION P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, I NC.
JULY 28, 2014 PAGE 3 OF 18
the study reach. Crooked Creek geomorphology is described in sequence progressing from
upstream of the proposed diversion site downstream to the mouth at tidewater. The creek has
been divided into reaches of similar geomorphology. Creek stationing is approximate to the
nearest 50 feet. See Figure 2 for a plan and profile of the creek showing general creek
gradients and stationing.
Above Station 29+00
The proposed hydro diversion site on Crooked Creek will be at station 29+50, and the upstream
limit of foot surveys on Crooked Creek is approximately station 33+00. The creek in this reach
flows through a gorge several hundred feet deep with a floor roughly 80 feet wide. The floor is
roughly flat in section, with rugged topography characterized by very large boulders (to 20+
feet in size) partially buried in fluvial sediment (predominately boulders, cobbles and gravels).
Above 29+50, the creek flows down the gorge floor at an average 5.6% grade over a mixed
substrate of gravels and cobbles interspersed with boulders. A waterfall 3 to 5 feet high with a
plunge pool 3 feet deep occurs at approximately 32+00, where the creek flows over, through,
and under a jumble of boulders. Where the creek channel is not confined by large boulders,
the creek forms a riffle‐pool‐riffle sequence over a gravel/cobble substrate with the main
channel typically 5 to 15 feet wide and creek banks 6 to 12 inches deep (see Figure 3). Flood
events likely overflow these banks and spread across the valley floor. The creek channel
location in this reach appears to be stable, apparently confined to its current location by
boulders. Large woody debris (fallen tree trunks) creates occasional weirs that support
formation of downstream plunge pools 1 to 3 feet deep. See Photographs 2, 3 and 4.
Station 29+00 to 23+50
Starting at station 29+00, the creek exits this gorge and begins a cascade down a boulder field
at an average grade of 36%. This reach extends downstream to station 23+50. Boulders occur
to 10+ feet in size. Plunge pools and interstitial areas likely contain cobble and gravel
aggregates. The creek is not very incised, and the creek channel is poorly defined. Creek banks
are almost entirely defined by the flanks of slightly to partially buried boulders. The creek
channel may locally shift around boulders, but its general course is constrained by site
topography. See Photograph 5.
Station 23+50 to 20+00
At station 23+50, Crooked Creek enters a valley 20 to 40 feet deep with side slopes of 2:1 to 4:1
(horizontal to vertical ratio), and the creek grade decreases to 6%. Surficial geology in this
valley is characterized by an abundance of very large boulders (to 20+ feet in size), resulting in a
very porous forest floor with the organic mat often bridging over large voids and boulder
interstices. The creek flows through and under this boulder field, and the creek channel in this
reach is almost completely defined by flanks of boulders and interstitial voids between
boulders. Pools and interstitial areas between boulders contain cobbles and gravels. Stream
bed sections are highly variable due to the constraining geometry of the boulder field. The
creek bed is typically 5 to 10 feet wide, with pools to 4 feet deep.
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S C REEK G EOMORPHOLOGY L ETTER R EPORT
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
E LFIN C OVE U TILITY C OMMISSION P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, I NC.
JULY 28, 2014 PAGE 4 OF 18
Station 20+00 to 10+00
At station 20+00, Crooked Creek’s grade decreases from 6% to 3.5% as the creek exits from the
boulder field and starts to flow across relatively level terrain with fewer large boulders. The
creek channel through this reach exhibits increasing sinuosity as it flows downstream, with a
maximum sinuosity of 1.4 from station 10+00 to 16+00. The typical channel section through
this reach is approximately 10 to 15 feet wide, and incised into the forest floor 2 to 5 feet (see
Figure 4). Banks are steeper than 1:1 at most locations, and at bends are typically undercut
with pools 2 to 3 feet deep. Bed substrate is predominately gravel, with occurrences of sand,
silt, or organic muck in backwater areas. See Photograph 6.
Station 10+00 to 3+00
The creek enters a bedrock gorge at 10+00 and begins a descent with an average grade of 30 to
50+%. The gorge is approximately 70 feet deep, with walls steeper than 100% (1:1). Some
vertical cliff faces occur along the gorge, predominately on the right (south) bank. The creek
channel along the floor of the gorge is constrained by bedrock outcrops and boulders, and
varies from 3 to 20 feet wide. The upper limit of fish habitat occurs at a waterfall along the
lower end of this reach at approximately 4+50. See Photograph 7.
Station 3+00 to 1+00
At 3+00, Crooked Creek is still within the gorge, but the floor of the gorge transitions from
predominately bedrock to predominately boulders and cobbles. The grade decreases to
approximately 18%, and the floor of the gorge widens to 20 to 40 feet. The height of typical
cascades and waterfalls decreases to 2 to 3 feet, and pools become more abundant. The creek
channel is typically braided in cascade sequences, exiting from a pool at multiple locations
before reconverging at the next large pool downstream.
Station 1+00 to mouth at tidewater
Crooked Creek emerges from the gorge just above the start of the intertidal zone. Beach
substrate is boulders with some cobbles. The creek flows through the boulders and cobbles of
the intertidal zone at an 8% grade. There is no defined channel in this reach. See Photographs
8, 9 and 10.
3.2 Jim’s Creek Geomorphology
Jim’s Creek is a perennial stream that flows in a well‐defined channel. The minimum, median,
and maximum discharge measured at the lake outlet gauging station are 0.0 cfs, 0.4 cfs, and
17.4 cfs respectively over a 4.2‐year period of record. Channel structure in many areas is
strongly constrained by topography and substrate. Large woody debris is abundant throughout
the study reach. Jim’s Creek geomorphology is described in sequence, progressing from the
outlet of Jim’s Lake downstream to the mouth at tidewater. The creek has been divided into
reaches of similar geomorphology. Creek stationing is approximate to the nearest 50 feet. See
Figure 2 for a plan and profile of the creek showing general creek gradients and stationing.
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S C REEK G EOMORPHOLOGY L ETTER R EPORT
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
E LFIN C OVE U TILITY C OMMISSION P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, I NC.
JULY 28, 2014 PAGE 5 OF 18
Station 19+16 to 19+00
The creek exits from Jim’s Lake at station 19+16. The creek bed in this reach is at a grade of 8%,
consisting of a riffle‐pool‐riffle sequence. The creek bed is isolated cobbles and gravels resting
on weathered bedrock, and is incised approximately 3 or 4 feet into the surrounding forest
floor. The creek channel is approximately 5 feet wide with vegetated sideslopes of 2:1 to 1:1.
The high water mark is located on the lower portion of these sideslopes. See Photograph 11.
Station 19+00 to 14+00
At 19+00, Jim’s Creek enters a gorge with a grade of 16 to 26%. The gorge is approximately 30
feet deep with typical sideslopes of 0.6:1. Few bedrock outcrops occur on the sidewalls, which
are mostly vegetated with brush and non‐woody plants. The floor of the gorge is 5 to 15 feet
wide. The creek flows down a series of waterfalls, cascades, and pools over weathered bedrock
with some woody debris, cobble, and boulders. See Photographs 12 and 13.
Station 14+00 to 11+00
At 14+00, Jim’s Creek exits this gorge onto relatively level terrain, flowing at a grade of 7.5%.
The creek channel through this reach exhibits increasing sinuosity as it flows downstream, with
a maximum sinuosity of 1.2 from station 11+00 to 12+00. The typical channel section through
this reach is approximately 5 to 10 feet wide, and is incised 1 to 3 feet into the forest floor (see
Figure 5). Some creek banks are steepened by vegetation growth overhanging pools 1 to 2 feet
deep. Bed substrate is predominately gravel, with occurrences of sand, silt, or organic muck in
backwater areas.
Station 11+00 to 8+50
At 11+00, Jim’s Creek leaves level terrain and drops down a bedrock chute at a grade of 53% for
approximately 50 feet. The creek continues at a grade of 20+% until 9+00. The creek bed
through this reach is a combination of bedrock chutes, waterfalls, cascades, and plunge pools.
See Photograph 14.
Station 8+50 to 3+50
At 8+50, Jim’s Creek emerges onto another area of relatively level terrain with channel grades
of 4.5 to 11%. The channel through this reach is typically 5 to 10 feet wide, and is incised
approximately 4 to 6 feet into the surrounding terrain. The creek substrate is a combination of
bedrock, boulders, cobbles and gravels. There are a few bedrock locations that result in short
rock chutes or cascades 4 to 8 feet tall. Channel structure is cascade‐pool‐cascade through
most of this reach, with a few pool‐riffle‐pool structures present in low‐gradient reaches.
Station 3+50 to 1+50
At 3+50, Jim’s Creek enters another steep reach. The creek descends at grades of 22 to 38%
with a channel structure of cascades, pools, and rock chutes. The channel is incised
approximately 15 feet into the surrounding terrain, and is 1 to 5 feet wide through this reach.
Substrate is mostly bedrock, with cobbles, gravels and woody debris present in pools and other
areas.
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S C REEK G EOMORPHOLOGY L ETTER R EPORT
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
E LFIN C OVE U TILITY C OMMISSION P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, I NC.
JULY 28, 2014 PAGE 6 OF 18
Station 1+50 to mouth at tidewater
At 1+50, Jim’s Creek emerges onto the head of the beach. The beach in this area is mostly
cobbles with some boulders/bedrock and some gravels. Grade is 2 to 8%, increasing as the
creek travels down the beach into the intertidal zone. The creek does not have a defined
channel in this area, and flows over/through the beach substrate. See Photographs 15 and 16.
3.3 Jim’s Lake Geomorphology
Jim’s Lake has a surface area of 5 acres, normal surface elevation of 337 feet above mean sea
level (MSL), and maximum depth of approximately 26 feet at the northern end of the main
body of the lake (see Figure 6). The lake is approximately 750 feet long in the north‐south
direction, and 250 feet wide in the east‐west direction, with an arm extending approximately
250 feet to the northwest that ends at the outlet to Jim’s Creek. Three apparently perennial
minor drainages discharge into the lake: one at the north end, one at the south end, and one
about midway along the east shore.
3.3.1 Lake Bed
The lake bed was assessed visually and with a 12‐foot metal tape measure used as a probe
during bathymetric surveys.
The lake occupies a single basin. The north half of the basin is 15 to 20 feet deep generally and
26 feet deep at its deepest point. The south half of the basin is shallower, generally 12 feet
deep, with a fairly sharp and steep transition between the two halves. The northwest arm is 4
to 8 feet deep, dropping off to the main basin floor where it joins the main body of the lake.
The small northeast bay is nearly filled with fine alluvial sediment from the northern tributary.
The south end of the main basin is partially filled with fine sediment from the southern
tributary. Where probed, the bottom of the main basin was found to have a very soft sediment
layer typically about one foot thick.
‐ Lake bed in the northwest arm was visually determined to be angular cobbles, likely
overlying bedrock at shallow depth.
‐ Near‐shore lake bed along the north shore was visually determined to be rock (at the
cliffs) and angular cobbles elsewhere.
‐ Lake bed in the northeast bay was visually determined to be fine alluvial deposits.
‐ Near‐shore lake bed along the east shore was visually determined to be angular cobbles.
‐ Lake bed along the south shore was visually determined to be fine alluvial deposits.
‐ Lake bottom in the south half of the lake was generally soft, with the probe advancing
approximately 1 foot to refusal.
‐ Near‐shore lake bed along the west shore was visually determined to be angular
cobbles.
‐ Lake bottom in the north half of the lake away from shore was not assessed.
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S C REEK G EOMORPHOLOGY L ETTER R EPORT
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
E LFIN C OVE U TILITY C OMMISSION P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, I NC.
JULY 28, 2014 PAGE 7 OF 18
3.3.2 Shoreline
The existing shoreline is described starting at the outlet to Jim’s Creek and proceeding in a
clock‐wise direction around the lake. Total shoreline length is approximately 2,575 feet
(Photograph 17).
North Shore of Northwest Arm of Lake (Jim’s Creek to Cliffs)
Substrate along this approximately 250‐foot long reach of shore is very angular cobbles and
large woody debris. Weathered bedrock is visible in the bed of Jim’s Creek approximately ten
feet downstream of the lake outlet, and may be present at shallow depths along the lake shore
as well. Upland slope is approximately 2:1. Upland slopes are vegetated by deciduous shrubs
and non‐woody plants immediately proximate to the lake shore, transitioning to conifers
farther inland. The lake is less than 8 feet deep in this area and is colonized by yellow pond
lilies.
North Lake Shore (Cliffs)
Cliffs are present for approximately 100 feet along the north end of the lake. The cliffs are 10
to 20 feet tall above the lake surface, at an overall 0.5:1 slope with local vertical and
overhanging faces that are mostly unvegetated. Bathymetric surveys indicate the cliffs
continue below the lake surface for approximately 8 feet, and then the lake bottom levels out
at a depth of 7 to 8 feet. There is little aquatic or upland vegetation along the shoreline in this
area. The colony of yellow pond lilies present in the northwest arm ends near the western end
of these cliffs.
North Lake Shore (Cliffs to Start of North Tributary Alluvial Fan)
Substrate along this approximately 150‐foot long reach of shore is very angular cobbles or rock
and large woody debris. Upland slope is approximately 2.5:1. Upland slopes are vegetated by
deciduous shrubs immediately proximate to the lake shore, transitioning to conifers farther
inland.
North Lake Shore (North Tributary Alluvial Fan)
This approximately 250‐foot long reach of shore traces a small bay inset approximately 80 feet
into the northeast shore of the lake. Substrate along this approximately 250‐foot long reach of
shore is fine sediment likely deposited by the lake’s north tributary. Upland slope ranges from
1 to 15% depending on location on the alluvial fan and proximity to lateral terrain. Vegetation
along the shoreline at the head of this bay is grasses and sedges, transitioning to brush and
shrubs farther from shore. Lake depth within the bay is approximately 2 feet, and the bay is
occupied by yellow pond lilies.
East Lake Shore
This approximately 350‐foot long reach of shore is very angular cobbles and large woody debris.
Typical upland slope is approximately 2:1, steepening to 1.2:1 about 20 feet from the shoreline
and beyond. This slope continues to a 600+‐foot elevation ridge that divides the Jim’s Creek
and Crooked Creek basins. Upland slopes are vegetated by deciduous shrubs immediately
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S C REEK G EOMORPHOLOGY L ETTER R EPORT
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
E LFIN C OVE U TILITY C OMMISSION P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, I NC.
JULY 28, 2014 PAGE 8 OF 18
proximate to the lake shore, transitioning to conifers farther inland. Near‐shore bathymetry
indicates the upland slope continues into the lake and down to the main basin of the lake. The
grade decreases with depth, transitioning from 2:1 near‐shore to 10:1 along the basin floor.
The east tributary enters the lake midway along the east shore. This tributary has not
developed a significant alluvial fan at the lake shore. A significant portion of the tributary’s
sediment load is probably deposited onto the main basin of the lake bed below the water
surface.
South Lake Shore (South Tributary Alluvial Fan)
This approximately 450‐foot long reach of shore traces the south approximately 100 feet of the
lake. Substrate along this shore transitions from angular cobbles along the adjacent east and
west shores to fine sediment in the alluvial fan of the lake’s south tributary. Upland slope on
the alluvial fan ranges from 1 to 15% depending on location on the fan and proximity to lateral
terrain. Upland vegetation is grasses and sedges transitioning to brush and shrubs farther from
shore. Lake depth within this area transitions from 8 feet at the north end to 2 feet near the
south shore. Much of this area is 3‐4 feet deep. The south end of the lake is occupied by
yellow pond lilies.
West Lake Shore
Substrate along this approximately 750‐foot long reach of shore is very angular cobbles with
some large woody debris. Typical upland slope is approximately 1:1, continuing 15 to 40 feet
above the lake to a local ridge within the Jim’s Creek basin. No established drainages occur
along this shore. Upland slopes are vegetated by a mix of deciduous brush and conifer
trees/shrubs immediately proximate to the lake shore, transitioning to predominantly conifers
farther inland. There is a narrow shelf that runs along the shoreline at a depth of 1 to 2 feet
and that is typically 2 to 10 feet wide. Beyond this shelf, the lake bed drops off at 1:1 down to
the main basin of the lake at 12+ feet deep.
South Shore of Northwest Arm of Lake
Substrate along this approximately 275‐foot long reach of shore is very angular cobbles with
some large woody debris. Weathered bedrock is visible in the bed of Jim’s Creek within
approximately 10 feet of the lake shore, and may be present at shallow depths along the lake
shore in this area as well. Upland slope is approximately 2:1. Upland slopes are vegetated by
deciduous shrubs immediately proximate to the lake shore, transitioning to conifers farther
inland. Wetland bogs also occur within 20 feet of the shore in some areas. These bogs appear
to drain away from the lake. The lake is less than 8 feet deep in this area and is colonized by
yellow pond lilies.
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S C REEK G EOMORPHOLOGY L ETTER R EPORT
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
E LFIN C OVE U TILITY C OMMISSION P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, I NC.
JULY 28, 2014 PAGE 9 OF 18
Figure 1: Project Location Map and Drainage Basins / Sub‐basins
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S C REEK G EOMORPHOLOGY L ETTER R EPORT
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
E LFIN C OVE U TILITY C OMMISSION P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, I NC.
JULY 28, 2014 PAGE 10 OF 18
Figure 2: Plan and Profile of Crooked Creek and Jim’s Creek
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S C REEK G EOMORPHOLOGY L ETTER R EPORT
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
E LFIN C OVE U TILITY C OMMISSION P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, I NC.
JULY 28, 2014 PAGE 11 OF 18
Figures 3, 4, 5: Typical Creek Sections
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S C REEK G EOMORPHOLOGY L ETTER R EPORT
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
E LFIN C OVE U TILITY C OMMISSION P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, I NC.
JULY 28, 2014 PAGE 12 OF 18
Figure 6: Jim’s Lake Geomorphology
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S C REEK G EOMORPHOLOGY L ETTER R EPORT
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
E LFIN C OVE U TILITY C OMMISSION P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, I NC.
JULY 28, 2014 PAGE 13 OF 18
Photograph 1: Oblique Aerial View of Crooked Creek and Jim’s Creek Basins
Photographs 2 & 3: Crooked Creek station 29+00 to 34+00
Jim’s Lake
(North)
3: Crooked Creek flowing through
jumble of large boulders (~32+00)
2: Crooked Creek flowing over
cobble/gravel substrate (~30+00)
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S C REEK G EOMORPHOLOGY L ETTER R EPORT
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
E LFIN C OVE U TILITY C OMMISSION P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, I NC.
JULY 28, 2014 PAGE 14 OF 18
Photographs 4, 5, 6, 7: Crooked Creek Station 4+50 to 29+00
Photograph 4: Crooked Creek at gauging
station looking downstream (~29+50)
Photograph 6: Crooked Creek tributary
above confluence at 12+85. Channel and
morphology are similar to Crooked Creek
in this reach (~10+00 to ~20+00).
Photograph 5: Crooked Creek flowing
down boulder field (~27+00)
Photograph 7: Fish barrier waterfall on
Crooked Creek at ~4+50.
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S C REEK G EOMORPHOLOGY L ETTER R EPORT
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
E LFIN C OVE U TILITY C OMMISSION P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, I NC.
JULY 28, 2014 PAGE 15 OF 18
Photographs 8, 9, 10: Crooked Creek from Station 4+50 to Tidewater
Photograph 9: Crooked
Creek flowing through
upper end of intertidal at
~0+50, looking upstream.
Photograph 10: Crooked Creek flowing
down beach substrate into Port Althorp.
Photograph 8: Crooked Creek emerging
from gorge at ~1+00, looking upstream.
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S C REEK G EOMORPHOLOGY L ETTER R EPORT
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
E LFIN C OVE U TILITY C OMMISSION P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, I NC.
JULY 28, 2014 PAGE 16 OF 18
Photographs 11, 12, 13, 14: Jim’s Creek from Station 19+16 to 10+00
Photograph 11: Jim’s Lake looking east from outlet.
Jim’s Creek starts in immediate foreground.
Photograph 12: Jim’s Creek at upper end of gorge
below Jim’s Lake at ~18+50.
Photograph 14: Rock chute
on Jim’s Creek at ~10+00.
Photograph 13: Jim’s Creek at lower end of gorge
below Jim’s Lake at ~15+00.
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S C REEK G EOMORPHOLOGY L ETTER R EPORT
C ROOKED C REEK AND J IM’S L AKE H YDROELECTRIC P ROJECT
E LFIN C OVE U TILITY C OMMISSION P OLARCONSULT A LASKA, I NC.
JULY 28, 2014 PAGE 17 OF 18
Photographs 15 and 16: Jim’s Creek at Intertidal Zone
Photograph 16: Jim’s Creek flowing
down beach substrate to Port Althorp.
Photograph 15: Jim’s Creek
emerging onto beach at ~1+50.
CROOKED CREEK AND JIM’S CREEK GEOMORPHOLOGY LETTER REPORT CROOKED CREEK AND JIM’S LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT ELFIN COVE UTILITY COMMISSION POLARCONSULT ALASKA, INC. JULY 28, 2014 PAGE 18 OF 18 Photograph 17: Jim’s Lake looking East‐Northeast from West Shore Cliffs North tributary alluvial fan withyellowpondliliesYellow pond lilies at westendofarm
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0
ATTACHMENT C‐7
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project, Progress Design Prints.
Elfin Cove Utility Commission
Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric Project
Pre‐Application Document – FERC #P‐14514 Polarconsult Alaska, Inc.
February 2, 2015 – Revision 1.0
This page intentionally blank.
DIVERSION SPILLWAY ELEVATION
OPERATING MODE
OPERATING MODE
MAXIMUM RESERVOIR ELEVATION
TURBINE
TURBINE
PERMITTING DRAWINGSNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PERMITTING DRAWINGSNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PERMITTING DRAWINGSNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PERMITTING DRAWINGSNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PERMITTING DRAWINGSNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PERMITTING DRAWINGSNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PERMITTING DRAWINGSNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PERMITTING DRAWINGSNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PERMITTING DRAWINGSNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PERMITTING DRAWINGSNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PERMITTING DRAWINGSNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PERMITTING DRAWINGSNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PERMITTING DRAWINGSNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION