HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA1336SUSITN.A HYDROEL~CTRJC PROJECT
c
er----~--------
o~!O~lI"l
~i II
co ...........··•~_I i
CJ1=1!l t_15.~
,f:lo.-
F'SH A~'D WILDLIFE MtTIGAT'ON POLICY
1 I
I
I
I
I !. I
I IIi
I
I
_~I ~by:
I
NOVEMBER 1eS1
REVISED MARCH 1982
REVISED APRIL 1982
TK.
1425
.S8
A23
no.1336
'ALASKA POVVE R ,AU1-HOR ITY ==-=-=.-1
i'"
i
I
~
[
11-<
\L\?'S
.5Z
f:t?-3
SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
FISH AND WILDLIFE MIT1GATION POLICY
NOVEMBER 1981
ARLIS
Alaska R.-esources
Library &InformatIOn Services
Anchorage.Al'iUilka
REVISED MARCH 1982
REVISED APRIL 1982
Prepared by:
[iJ
1.ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY __--..I
ARLIS
Alaska Resources
Library &InfonnatlOn ServIces
Aflcnof£ise.A1Mka
r-;
,....
,....
l
r
t
.....
I
-
SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
FISH AND WILDLIFE MITIGATION POLICY
NOVEMBER 1981
REVISED MARCH 1982
REVISED APRIL 1982
[i]L....----J
r-
!
(
SUS ITNA HYDROELECTR IC PROJECT
FISH AND WILDLIFE MITIGATION POLICY
1. I NTRODUCTlON
The fish and wildl ife mitigation aspects of the Susitna project have been
addressed through a Fisheries Mitigation Core Group,aWildl ife Mitigation Core
Group,and a Fish and Wildlife l"1itigation Review Group.The two core groups
consisted of staff members of Terrestrial Environmental Specialists,consultants
with expertise in special areas (caribou,furbearers,anadromous fish,etc.),
and a representat iveof the Al aska Department of Fish and Game.The purpose of
the two core groups was to develop the technical specifics of the mitigation
pol icy and pl ans.
The purpose of the Review Group is to review and comment on the results of the
core groups.Agencies represented on the Mitigation Review Group are:
All aska Department of Natural Resources,
A"I aska Department of Fish and Game,
U.S.fish and Wildlife Service,
U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,
U.S.Bureau of Land Managanent,and
Nat ion al Mar i ne Fi sheri es Serv ice.
A mandate of the Al askan Power Authority (hereinafter called the Power
Authority)charter is to develop supplies of electrical energy to meet the
present and fut ure needs of the state of Al aska.The Power Authority al so
recogni zes the val ue of our natural resources and accepts the respons ibil ity of
insuring that the developnent of any new projects is as compatible as possible
with the fish and wildlife resources of the state and the habitat that sustains
them,and that the overall effects of any such projects will be benefi ci al to
the state as a whole.In this regard,the Power Authority has prepared a
f"isheries and Wildlife Mitigation Policy for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project
as contained herein.
r 2.LEGAL MANDATES
-I
i""'"
I,
I
There are nllnerous state and federal laws and regulations th.at specifically
require mitigation planning.The mitigation policy and plans contained within
this doclJl1ent are designed to comply with the collective and specific intent of
these legal mandates.Following are the major laws or regulations that require
the consideration and eventual implementation of mitigation efforts.
Protection of Fish and Game (AS 16.05.870)
-,
The Al aska state 1 aws pertaining to the disturbance of streams important to
anadromous fish address the need to mitigate impacts on fish and game that may
result from such action.The pertinent portion of item (c)from Section
16.05.870 reads as follows:
If the Commissioner determines to do so,he shall,in the letter of
acknowl edgement,require the person or governmental agency to submit
to him full pl ans and specifications of the proposed construction or
work,compl ete pl ans and specifications for the proper protect ion of
fish and game in connection with the construction work,or in
connection with the use,and the approximate date the construction,
work,or use will begin,and shall require the person or governmental
agency to obtain written approval from him as to the sufficiency of
the plans or specifications before the proposed construction or use
is begun.
National Environmental Policy Act
The National Environmental Pol icy Act (NEPA)(42 USC 4321-4347)was designed to
encourage the cons iderat i on of env ironment al concerns in the pl anni ng of
federally controlled projects.Regulations pertaining to the implementation of
NEPA have been issued by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1500-1508;
43 FR55990;corrected by 44 FR 873 Tit 1 e 40,Chapter V,Part 1500).Items (e)
and (f)under Section 1500.2 (Policy)of these regulations describe the
responsibilities of federal agencies in regard to mitigation.
Federal agencies shall to the fullest extent possible:
(e)Use the NEPA process to identify and assess the reasonable alternatives to
proposed actions that will avoid or minimi ze adverse effects of these
actions upon the qual ity of the human environment.
(f)Use all practicable means,consistent with the requirenents of the Act and
other essential considerations of national pol icy,to restore and enhance
.the quality of the human environment and avoid or minimize any possible
adverse effects of their actions upoh the qual ity of the human enviroment.
£:!deral Energy Regulatory Commission
Federal Energy Regul atory Commission (FERC)regul ations al so refer directly to
the need for mitigation actions on the part of the developers of hydroelectric
projects (18 CFR Part 4).The following reference is quoted from Section 4.41roftheNoticeofFinalRulenakingasitappearedintheNovember13,1981,
r
"'""i
~
!
-I
!
-
r
t
r
,....
I
I
-
r
,-
I
i
r
I
r-
I I
I
r
I
I
l"-
i
issue of the Federal Register (46 FR 55926-55953)and adopted.Exhibit E of the
proposed FERC regul ations should incl ude,allong other infonnation,
...a description of any measures or facilities recommended by state or
federal agencies for the mitigation of impacts on fish,wildlife,and
botanical resources,or for the protection or enhancement of these
reso urces ....
The regulations go on to require details concerning mitigation including a
description of measures and facilities,schedule,costs,and funding sources.
fiSh and Wildlife Coordination Act (915 USC 661-667)
Item (a)of Section 662 of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA)
describes the role of the federal agencies in reviewing federally 1 icensed water
projects:
...such department or agency first shall consult with the United St ates
Fish and Wildl ife Service,Department of the Interior,and with the head of
the agency exercising administration over the wildl He resources of the
particular State wherein the impoundment,diversion,or other control
facility is to be constructed,with a view to conservation of wildlife
resources by preventing loss of and damage to such resources as well as
providing for the development and improvenent thereof in connection with
such water-resource developnent.FERC will comply with the consultation
provisions of the FWCA.
-I
1-I
3.GENERAL POLICIES TO BE CARRIED OUT BY THE APPLICANT
!""",
1
i
I"'"
I
-I
l
r
I
r
....
r
r
3.1 -Basic Intent of the Applicant
In fulfilling its mandate,an objective of the Power Authority is to mitigate
the negative impacts of the Susitna Project on the fish and wildlife resources.
This goal will be achieved through comprehensive pl anning during the early
stages of project developnent and through a program of ongoing consultation with
the appropriate resource agencies.Since the Power Authority real izes that
highly coordinated pl anning will be necessary to achieve this goal,a decision-
milking methodology has been developed to provide a framework for addressing each
impact and the mitigation options available.This methodology outline also
iclentifiesthe process for resolving confl icts that may develop between the
Power Authority and the resource agencies.The FERC will resolve any disputes
wbich the agencies and the Power Authority cannot resolve.It is the intent of
Hie Power Authority to negoti ate directly and resolve confl icts with the
concerned agencies.
The mitigation plan will be submitted by the Power Authority to the FERC as a
component of the license appl ication.Prior to this,any draft mitigation plans
wi 11 be submitted to resource agencies for formal review and comment.The final
mitigation plan to be implemented will be stipulated by the FERC.The responsi-
bi 1 ity for impl ementat i on of the pl an wi 11 be that of the Power Authority and
will be carried out by the Power Authority or any other organization charged
with managing the project as stipulated by the FERC.
3.2 -Consultat ion with Natural Resources Agenci es and the Pub 1ic
In order to achieve the above-mentioned goals,it will be necessary to provide
opportunities for the review and evaluation of concerns and recommendations from
the publ ic as well as federal and state agencies.Duri ng the early stages of
planning,representatives of state and federal agencies will be encouraged to
consult with the applicant and the applicant1s representatives,as members of
the Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Review Group.Additional review and evaluation
of the mitigation plan will be provided through formal agency comments in
response to state and/or federally ~dministered licensing and permitting pro-
grams.
The Power Authority wi 11 consider all concerns expressed by members of the
general public and regulatory agencies regarding the mitigation plan.Input
from thepubl ic will be given appropriate consideration in the decision-making
process as it pertains to the direction of the mitigation effort and the selec-
t·jonof mitigation options.
3.3 -Implementation of the Mitigation Plan
r The responsibility for implementation of the mitigation plan rests with the
i Power Authority.Prior to implementing the pl an,an agreement will be reached
as to the most efficient and effective manner in which to execute the plan.TheragreEmentwilldeterminewhichorganizationwi11servetocarryoutvarious
portions of the pl an and will include stipulations to insure adherence to the
accepted pl an.
-I
'"""I
,....
i
!
l
,~
i
-.
!
.-
i
!
{
The mitigation plan will include a brief statement of each impact issue,the
technique or approach to be utilized to mitigate the impact,and the goal
expected to be achieved through implementation of these actions.
With the realization that a mitigation monitoring team will be necessary to
insure the proper and successful execution of the mitigation plan and to
determine its effectiveness,part of the plan will detail the structure and
responsibilities of such a monitoring body.The successful organization and
operat i on of a moni tori ng team wi 11 requi re both fundi ng and commi tments.These
matters wi 11 be reso 1ved throughnegot i at ion 1eadi ng to mutual agreement among
the varinus involved parties after the mitigation plan is complete and the
necessary level of resources can be more accurately defined.
3.4 -Modification of the Mitigation Plan
As part of the mitigation plan,a monitoring plan will be established,the
purpose of which will be to monitor fish and wildlife populations during the
construction and operation of the project to determine the effectiveness of
the plan as well as to identify problems that were not anticipated during the
initial preparation of the plan.
The mitigation plan will be SUfficiently flexible so that,if data secured
during the monitoring of fish ,and wildlife populations indicate that the mitiga-
tion effort should be modified~the mitigation plan can be adjusted accordingly.
This may involve an increased effort in some areas where the original plan has
proven ineffective,as well as a reduction of effort where impacts fai led to
materialize as predicted.Any modifications to the mitigation plan prOposed by
the mon i toringteam will not be implemented without consu Hat i onw-i thappro-
priate state and federal agencies and approval of FERC.It is the intent of the
Power Authority to reach agreement with the resource agencies concerning
modification of the plan prior to seeking FERC approval.The Power Authority
will seek approval of the resource agencies,with FERC as the final arbitrator.
The need for continuing this monitoring will be reviewed periodically.The
monitoring program will be terminated when the mitigation goals described in the
plan have been achieved or determined unachievable.Termination will be subject
toFERC approval.
r-
I
I
-
,....,
,
4.APPROACH TO DEVELOPING THE FISH AND WILDLIFE MITIGATION PLANS
The development of the Susitna Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Plans will follow a
1ogica 1 step-'by-stepprocess.Fi gure 1 illustrates th is process and i dent i fi es
the major components of the process.Also identified in this figure are the
organizations responsible for each step.The following discussion is based on
Figure 1 and uses the numbers in the lower right corner of that figure for
reference purposes.
The first step in the approach (Step 1)entails the identification of impacts
that will occur as a result of the project.Each impacted resource and the
nature and extent of the impact will be defined.The fish and wildlife
resources will vary identification and may include a population,subpopulation,
habitattype~or geographic area.The nature and degree of impact on each
respective resource will be predicted to the greatest extent possible.This
step wi 11 be the responsi bi 1ity of the Core Group of the Mit i gat i on Task Force.
Following the identificationof impact issues,the Core Group will agree upon
a logical order of priority for addressing the impact issues.This will include
ranking resources in order of their importance.The ranking will take into
consideration a variety of factors such as ecological value,comsumptive
value,and nonconsumptive value.Other factors may be considered in the ranking
if deemed necessary.The impact issues will also be considered in regard to
the confidence associated with the impact prediction.In other words,those
resources that will most certainly be impacted will be given priority over
impact issues where there is 1ess confi dence in the impact IS actua 11 y occurri ng.
The result of this dual prioritization will be the application of mitigation
planning efforts in a logical and effective manner.The results of the
priDritization process will be reviewed by the Fish and Wildlife Mitigation
,...Review Group.If additional impacts materialize,the plan will be modified as
discussed in Section 3.4.This could also include a shift in the prioritization
of impacts.
Step 2 is the option analysis procedure to be performed by the Core Group.
The intent of this procedure is to consider each impact issue,starting with
high priority issues,and reviewing all practicable mitigation options.
-
1"""
I
I
r
I
Mitigation for each impact issue will be considered according to the types
and sequence identified by the CEQ (Figure 2).If a proposed form of mitigation
is technically infeasible,only partially effective,or in conflict with other
project objectives,additional options including project modification wi 11 be
evaluated.All options considered will be evaluated and documented;this
documentation will include an identification of the impact issue,mitigation
options,and conflicts (if any)with project objectives.The result of this
process will be an identification and evaluation of feasible mitigation options
for each impact issue and a description of residual impacts.
Step 3 concerns the development of an acceptable mitigation plan.The feasible
mitigation options identified through Step 2,and a description and explanation
of those deemed infeasible,will be forwarded to the mitigation review group for
i nforma 1 agency revi ewand comment.Any recommendati ons rece;ved from the
revi ew group wi 11 be considered by the Power Authority and the Core Group,prior
to the preparation of draft fisheries and wildlife mitigation plans.These
r
i
I
-,
!
I"""
I
I
draft plans will be sent to the Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Review Group for
comment,revised and circulated to the agencies for formal review and comment.
The plans will then be revised and submitted to the FERC as a component of the
license application.The final fish and wildlife mitigation plans to be
implemented will be stipulated by the FERC following discussions with the Power
Authority and appropriate natural resource agencies.
Additional items that may be addressed by the Core Group include an identifi-
cation of organizations qualified to execute the mitigation plan and recommenda-
tions concerning the staffing,funding,and responsibilities of the mitigation
monitoring team.This will be done in consultation with the Fish and Wild'life
Mitigation Review Group.
Step 4 will be the implementation of the plan as agreed to during Step 3.This
will commence,as appropriate,following the reaching uf an agreement by all
parties.
During the implementation of the plan,which will include both the construction
and operation phases of the project until further mitigation is deemed
unnecessary,the mitigation monitoring team will review the work and evaluate
the effectiveness of the plan (Step 5).To accomplish this goal,the munitoring
team wi 11 h ave the respons;bi 1i ty of assuri ng that the agreed upon plan is
properly executed by the designated organizations.The team wi 11 be provided
with the results of ongoing monitori ng efforts.Th is wi 11 enab 1e the team to
determine in which cases the mitigation plan is effective,where it has proven
to be less than effective,and also in which cases the predicted impact did not
materialize and the proposed mitigation efforts are unnecessary.The monitoring
team will submit regularly scheduled reports concerning the mitigation effort
and,where appropriate,propose modifications to the plan.If stipulated in the
FERC license,such reports would be distributed to FERC and state and federal
regulatory agencies.
In the event that plan modifications are recommended (Step 6),they will be
reviewed by a Core Group and appropriate options considered (Step 2).The
results of the option analysis will then be passed onto the Power Authority and
the resource agencies for negotiation of modifications to the plan (Step 3).
Following the reaching of an agreernenton the modifications,they will be
implemented (Step 4)and monitored (Step 5).Any modifications to the
mitigation plan will not be implemented without consultation with appropriate
state and federal agencies and approval of FERC.As discussed in Section 3.4,
it is the intent of the Power Authority to reach agreement with the resource
agencies concerning modification of the plan prior to seeking FERC approval.
The Power Authority will seek approval of the resource agencies,with FERC as
the final arbitrator.
Following satisfactory implementation of any plan modifications and
documentation of evidence that the goals of the modification have been reached,
the mitigation planning process and monitoring will terminate (Steps 7 and 8).
FISH AND WILDLIFE MITIGATION PLAN
DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION
I
I
I
J
I
I
J
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I___..J
---,
I DEN Tl FICATION OF
IMPACTS AND GOALS OF:PLAN
Core Group With Agency Review
I
OPTION ANALYSIS----.f-t---
Core Group
2
NEGOTIATION OF ACCEPTABLE PLAN-
Power Authorify.State Agencies-Federal Agencies
3
IMPLEMENTATION OF PLAN
Designated OrgQni~otions
4
MONITORING OF PLAN.
Monitoring Team
5
PLAN MODIFICATIONS
i--
Recommendations By Monitorin9 Team
6
t
COMPLETION OF MIT1GATlON
Planning
7
TERMINATION OF MONITORING
Program
1---
I
I
I
I
I
IL __
-f
-I
8
FIGUREJ
/
::;...;,.,--_....TOTAL RECT1F1CAT10N
I
~---"SOMe:MINIMIZA'fIONMINIMtZATION
RECTIFICATION
NO MtNIMIZATlON
I
T
OFTlON ANALYSIS
PARTlAL AVOIDANC~_._----[I-""'.A_V_O-:/O_A_N_C_E ----..-,........TOTAL AVOIDANCE
l
NO AVOIOANCE. I
T
PART1AL RECTIF1CAT10N ........----
""'"I .
i
n
\
:;
i Ii.
c
r
r
I
NO RECTIFICATION
I
T
REDUCTION --.__.....SOME REDUCT10N
"""I
0··
NO REDUCTION
Ir
?.o.RT1AL COMP!NSATION ....(----l..-.C_O_M_P_E_N:-S_A_Tl_O_N f/.TOTAe COMPENSATION
NO COMPENSAi"lON
+
I"""
I
l
UNMITIGATED/LOSS
RESIQUAL IMPACT
AUSKl RESOURCES LIBRARY
U.s.~t of thlllnterlor