The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAPA1438AUuVv\' U.&Th;~"~~.Iit SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT TASK 12 -PUBLIC AND AGENCY PARTICIPATION SUBTASK 12.03 " AGENCY CONSULTATiON MARCH 1982' Prepared by: iii] '---ALASKA POWER AUTHOR ITY ~_~ /""" IJIi»i1'4. - SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT TASK 12 -PUBLIC AND AGENCY PARTICIPATION SUBTASK 12.03 AGENCY CONSULTATION ,- - Prepared by: • .. MARCH 1982 U.S.Depart:moot of the Interior ARLIS· Alaska Resources Library &InfonnatlOn Service Anchorage,Alaska ~ I, L...----__ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY __----' ~l TABLES APPENDIX A .... ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY SUS ITNA HYDROELECTRI CPROJECT AGENCY CONSULTATION REPORT F-TABLE OF CONTENTSi Page 1 -ORGANIZATION OF CONSULTATION PROGRAM..........................1-1 1.1 -Formal Consultation 1-1 1.2 -Informal Consultation vi a the Steering Committee........1~3 1.3 -Authorities Contacted ••••.•••••••.••••••••••••.•••••.•••1-3 1.4 -Correspondence •.•••••••••••••••.•••••••••••••.•.•.•.••••1-3 "'""', -AGENCIES CONTACTED FOR INFORMATION DURING PREPARATION OF THE SUSITNA ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS I"""APPENDIX B-1 -FORMAL AGENCY COORDINATION CORRESPONDENCE APPENDIX B-2 -FISH AND WILDLIFE MITIGATION REVIEW GROUP CORRESPQNbENCE APPENDIX B~3 -STEERING COMMITTEE CORRE:SPONDENCE APPENDIX 8-4 .:.MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE - - -ARLIS .Alaska Resources Library Ii fnJonnatton ServIces AnCbma&c.Alaska - AGENCY CONSULTATION REPORT .....,LIST OF TABLES Number Title 1.1 Formal Agency Coordination List (Original) 1.2 1.3 Original List of Reports and Groups to Which Reports Were! Were To Be Sent Original List of Agencies and Reports Received (To Be Received) 1.4 Formal Agency Coordination Expanded List 1.5 Expanded Li st of Reports and G.roups to ~4hich Reports Were! Were To Be Sent ~,1.6 Reports,Data Sent,and Purpose 1.8 i'"'"' I I r""'" I - 1.7 Members of the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Steering Committee Dates and Purposes of Steering Committee Meetings with the Power Authority and/or Its Consultants 1.9 Agencies Invited and Those Which Declined To Be on the Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Review Group (a) f""" I I - r 1-' -! "'"" AGENCY CONSULTATION REPORT Thi s report descri bes the vari ous processes uti 1i zed and committees estab 1i shed to provide agency input into the studies and discussions associated with the SusitnaHydroelectric Project.This agency consultation and resulting agency input was requested and provi ded on both an i nforma 1 and formal bas is as described below.For a discussion of general public participation in the project,refer to Appendix 0 of the Feasibility Report. In addition to this agency consultation·described,a large number of agencies were contacted for information during the preparation of the environmental report.The list of these agencies is included as Appendix A. 1 -ORGANIZATION Of CONSULTATION PROGRAM Consultation with the regul atory agenci es was conducted on both a formal and i n- formal basis as described below.Formal consultation was conducted with the agencies as required by the regulations of the Federal Energy Regulatory Com- mission (FERC)and was done primari ly vi a correspondence.Informal consultation was done primarily via numerous meetings and was conducted to provide an infor- mation flow between the Alaska Power Authority (APA),its consultants,and the agencies to insure agency input into project planning and decisions making. 1.1 -Formal Consultation Regulatory Reguirements The FERC regulations pertaining to applications for license under Part Iof the Federal Power Act require in 18 CFR Part 4,Subpart E,Section 4.41, that app1 icants for 1icenses consult wi ttl local,state,and federal natural resource agencies prior to filing of their license application.Accord- ingly,the Alaska Power Authority (Power Authority)formulated a plan to con su 1t with these agenci es . The process utilized by the Power Authority was based upon circulation of reports on the various aspects of the projects to the agencies and a written request for agency comments.The reports circulated were interim reports in specific study areas (fisheries,wi1d1ife,etc.)as discussed below,as well as planning decision reports {access road,transmission line corridors,etc.}.In addition,prior to initiation of project studies,the Plan of Study and revisions were circulated.Finally,results of the fish and wildlife mitigation efforts were circulated under this formal program via meetings and correspondence with the Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Rev i ew Group. (b)Organization The organization and implementation of the Formal Agency Coordination Pro- gram has been -a dynami c process modifi ed because of agency input.The I: original organization is explained below,followed by an explanation of the ~ revised organization. (i)Original Organization Agency Groups Subject areas for coordination were selected based upon those re- quired by the FERC regulations.These were water quality and use; fish,wildlife,and botanical;historical and archaeological; recreation;aesthetics;and land use.State,federal,and local agencies having jurisdiction over resources in each of these sub- ject areas were then placed in the appropri ate group of agenci es which would receive reports concerning these subjects.A general category was also added to include agency involvement with policy decisions.Table 1.1 lists the agencies originally included in each of these groups. -Reports Circulated A list of the reports and the groups to which they were sent ap- pears in Table 1.2.Because of overlapping jurisdictions (one agency present in more than one group),several agencies received reports on different subjects.Table 1.3 lists by agency the reports received. (ii)Revised Organization Initial circulation of these reports resulted in feedback from the agencies concerning the organization of the formal agency coordin- ation program.Following several meetings between the Power Authority and the agencies,the program was revised.The revisions included: An expansion of the number of groups; An expansion of the number of agencies within each group;and - A decrease in the number of reports for which formal comments were requested and,instead,simply providing reports for information as backup documents to reports on which comments were requested. Table 1.4 lists the revised subject groups and the agencies within each group.Table 1.5 lists the reports to be received by each group,and Table 1.6 reports date circulated and purpose (informa- tion or comment).This revised program exceeds the consultation required by FERC but was implemented to insure that all agencies received adequate information. 1-2 - i ~ j I .1 - (c) - r r - Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Review Group Throughout the Susitna Hydroelectric Project studies,technical mitigation p1anni nghas been conducted by the Power Authori ty and its consultants to reduce impacts to fish and wildlife recources.To insure agency input into this process,a Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Review Group was established. The purpose of this group was to review fish and wildlife mitigation options presented to them and provide comments on priority and practicality of thei r opt ions.Agenci es invited to be on thi s committee and those who accepted are 1i sted in Tab 1e 1.9. 1.2 -{nforma 1 Consu1tat i on vi a the Steer"j n9 Committee The Susitna Hydroelectric Project Steering Committee was established in 1980 as a mechanism to insure agency interaction in project progress and decision making.The first meeting was held in July 1980 and meetings continue to date. Originally envisioned as a formal process,it was decided the committee would function as an informal body with offici al agency comment addressed vi a the Forma 1 Agency Coordi nati on Program. The committee consists of representatives of state and federal agencies as listed in Table 1.7.Table 1.8 lists the dates of meetings between the Power Authority and the Steering Committee and the purpose of these meetings. 1.3 -Authori ties Contacted Appendix A of this report lists individuals from federal,state,and local agencies as well as other institutions and organizations who were contacted regarding the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Environmental Studies Program. These individuals were consulted between October 1,1979,and January 15,1982. Arranged by environmental report section,the names listed include: (a)Those contacts made by TES and/or TES subcontractors for input related specifically to that report section; (b)Those contacts made by TES and/or rES subcontractors,the information from which,whi le pertinent to a different environmental report section,was also applicable to the section in question;and (c)Contacts made by TES,TES subcontractors,Acres,or the Power Authority applicable to the Susitna Environmental studies in general. The nature of these contacts range from requests for data to i nquiri es concern- ,...i ng the envi ronmenta 1 st udi es procedures.These 1i st s are not intended to i n- !elude those contacts made with other members of the Environmental Studies Team, although some project personnel are listed because of the capacity in which they were consulted. 1.4 -Correspondence !"'"Appendix B contains correspondence with the resource agencies that has occurred during the course of the study.This correspondence appears in chronological order and is divided into four sections: 1-3r -Formal Agency Coordination Correspondence; -Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Review Group Correspondence; -Steering Committee Correspondence;and -Miscellaneous Correspondence. 1-4 -I l!IIll, - TABLE 1.1:FORMAL AGENCY COORDINATION LIST (ORIGINAL) r Water Quality and Use Group Mr.John Katz Alaska Department of Natural Resources Pouch M Juneau.Alaska 99811 Colonel Lee Nunn District Engineer Alaska District U.S.Army COrps of Engineers P.O.Box 7002 Anchorage.Alaska 99510 Mr.John Spencer Regional Administrator Region X U.S.Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Sixth Avenue Seattle.Washington 98101 Fish,Wildlife,and Botanical Group Mr.Robert McVey Direc~or,Alaska Region National Marine Fisheries Service NOAA P.O.Box 1668 Juneau,Alaska 99802 cc:Mr.Alan Carson Division of Natural Resources Alaska Department of Natural Resources Pouch 7-005 Anchorage,Alaska 99510 cc:Judy Swartz U.S.Environmental Protection Agency Mail Stop 443 Region X EPA 1200 Sixth Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101 cc:Mr.Ron Morris Director Anchorage Field Office National Marine Fisheries Service 701 C Street,Box 43 Anchorage,Alaska 99513 "..., Mr.Ernest W.Mueller Commissioner Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Pouch 0 Juneau,Alaska 99801 Mr.Keith SChreiner Regional Director,Region 7 U.S.fish and Wildlife Services 1011 East Tudor Road Anchorage,Alaska 99503 Mr.Ronald O.Skoog cc: Commissioner State of Alaska Department of fish and Game Support Building Juneau,Alaska 99801 Mr.Thomas Trent State of Alaska Department of fish and Game 2207 Shepard Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502 Ii TABLE 1.1 (Cont 'd) Historical and Archeological Group Mr.John E.Cook cc: Acting Regional Director Alaska Office National Park Service 540 West Fifth Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Ms.Lee McAnerney Department of Community and Regional Affairs Pouch B Juneau,Alaska 99811 Mr.Larry Wright National Park Service 1011 East Tudor Ro ad Suite 297 Anchorage,Alaska 99503 -, Mr.Robert Shaw State Historic Preservation Officer Alaska Department of Natural Resources Division of Parks 619 Warehouse Avenue,Suite 210 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Recreation Group Mr.John E.Cook Acting Regional Director Alaska Office National Park Service 540 West Fifth Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Mr.John Katz Alaska Department of Natural Resources Pouch M Juneau,Alaska 99811 Mr.Lee Wyatt Planning Director Matanuska-Susitna Borough Box B Palmer,Alaska 99645 Aesthetics and Land Use Group Mr.Roy Huhndorf President Cook Inlet Region,Incorporated P.O.Drawer 4N Anchorage,Alaska 99509 Mr.John Katz Alaska Department of Natural Resources Pouch M Juneau,Alaska 99811 cc:Mr.Alan Carson Division of Natural Resources Alaska Department of Natural Resources Pouch 7-005 Anchorage,Alaska 99510 cc:Mr.Larry Wright National Park Service 1011 East Tudor Road Suite 297 Anchorage,Alaska 99503 cc:Mr.Alan Carson Division of Natural Resources Alaska Department of Natural Resources Pouch 7-005 Anchorage,Alaska 99510 cc:Mr.Alan Carson Division of Natural Resources Alaska Department of Natural Resources Pouch 7-005 Anchorage,Alaska 99510 -') -. -I - r I""", - TABLE 1.1 (Cont'd) Aesthetics and Land Use Group (cont'd) Mr.John Raga Bureau of Land Management Anchorage District Office 4700 East 72nd Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99507 General Ms.Wendy \'40lt Office of Coastal Management Division of Policy Development and Planning Pouch AP Juneau,Alaska 99811 Ii TABLE 1.2:ORIGINAL LIST Of REPORTS AND GROUPS TO WHICH REPORTS WERE/WERE TO BE SENT Report Plan of Study and Plan of Study Revisions Development Selection Report 1980 Annual Environmental Summary Report 1980 Annual Reports Fish Ecology Big Game Birds and Non-Game Mammals Furbearers Plant Ecology Land Use Socioeconomics Cultural Resources Recreation Instream Flow Study Plan Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy Feasibility Report 1981 Final Phase I Reports FWB =Fish,Wildlife,and Botanical ALU =Aesthetics,Land Use HA =Historic and Archaeological R =Recreation WQ =Water Quality G =General Group A11 A11 A11 FWB FWB FWB FWB FWB ALU HA HA R WO,FWB,G A11 FWB A11 A11 - - - - -TABLE 1.3:ORIGINAL LIST OF AGENCIES AND REPORTS RECEIVED (TO BE RECEIVED) r -I Agency Alaska Department of Natural Resources Alaska Department of Fish and Game Alaska Department of . Environmental Conservation Alaska Department of Community and Regional Affairs Report Plan of Study Plan of Study Revisions Development Selection Report 1980 Annual Environmental Summary Report Instream Flow Study Plan 1980 Socioeconomic Annual Report 1980 Cultural Resources Annual Report 1980 land Use Annual Report 1980 Recreation Annual Report Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy Feasibility Report Final Phase I Reports Plan of Study and Plan of Study Revisions Development Selection Report 1980 Annual Environmental Summary Report Instream flow Study Plan 1980 Fish Ecology Annual Report 1980 8ig Game Annual Report 1980 8irds and Non-Game Mammals ,'\nnual Report 1980 fur bearers Report 1980 Plant Ecology Report Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy Feasibility Report Final Subtask Reports Plan of Study Plan of Study Revisions Development Selection Report 1980 Annual Environmental Summary Report Instream Flow Study Plan 1980 Fish Ecology Annual Report 1980 Big Game Annual Report 1980 Birds and Non-Game Mamlilals Annual Report 1980 Furbearers Report 1980 Plant Ecology Report Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy Feasibility Report Final Subtask Report Plan of Study Plan of Study Revisions Development Selection Report 1980 Annual Environmental Summary Report 1980 Socioeconomic Annual Report 1980 Cultural Resources Annual Report Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report Feasibility Report final Subtask Reports TABLE 1.3 (Cont'd) Agency Division of Policy Development and Planning Office of Coastal Management Mantanuska-Susitna Borough Cook Inlet Region,Inc. u.s.Environmental Protection Agency u.s.Army Corps of Engineers National Marine Fisheries Service Report Plan of Study Plan of Study Revisions Development Selection Report 1980 Annual Environmental Summary Report Instream Flow Study Report Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report Feasibility Report Final Subtask Reports Plan of Study Plan of Study Revisions Development Selection Report 1980 Annual Environmental Summary Report 1980 Recreation Annual Report Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report Feasibility Report Final Phase I Reports Plan of Study Plan of Study Revisions Development Selection Report 1980 Annual Environmental Summary Report 1980 Land Use Annual Report Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report Feasibility Report Final Phase I Reports Plan of Study Plan of Study Revisions Development Selection Report 1980 Annual Environmental Summary Report Instream Flow Study Plan Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report Feasibility Report 1981 Final Phase I Reports Plan of Study Plan of Study Revisions Development Selection Report 1980 Annual Environmental Summary Report Instream Flow Study Plan Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report Feasibility Report 1981 Final Phase I Reports Plan of Study Plan of Study Revisions Development Selection Report 1980 Annual Environmental Summary Report Instream Flow Study Report 1980 Fish Ecology Annual Report 1980 Big Game Annual Report 1980 Birds and Non-Game Mammals Annual Report 1980 Furbearer Report 1980 Plant Ecology Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy Feasibility Report 1981 Final Phase 1 Reports - -. - -. -,, !"'"' I - TABLE 1.3 (Cont'd) Agency U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service National Park Service U.S.Bureau of Land Management Report Plan of Study Plan of Study Revisions Development Selection Report 1980 Annual Environmental Summary Report Instream Flow Study Plan 1980 Fish Ecolo9Y Annual Report 1980 Big Game Annual Report 1980 Birds and Non-Game Mammals Annual Report 1980 Furbearer Report 1980 Plant Ecology Report Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy Feasibility Report 1981 Final Phase I Reports Plan of Study Plan of Study Revisions Development Selection Report InstreamFlow Study Plan 1980 Annual Environmental Summary Report 1980 Socioeconomic Annual Report 1980 Cultural Resources Annual Report 1980 Recreation Annual Report Transmission Line Carr idol'Screening Report Feasibility Report 1981 Final Phase I Reports Plan of Study Plan of Study Revisions Development Selection Report Instream Flow Study Report 1980 Annual Environmental Summary Report 1980 Land Use Annual Report Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report Feasibility Report 1981 Final Phase 1 Reports TABLE 1.4:AGENCY COORDINATION EXPANDED LIST Water Quality and Use Group Mr.Max Brewer * Office of the Director Special Assistant for Alaska U.S.Geological Survey 218 East Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Mr.John Cook ** Acting Regional Director Alaska Region National Park Service 540 West Fi fth Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Mr.John Katz Alaska Department of Natural Resources Pouch M Juneau,Alaska 99811 Mr.Robert McVey * Director,Alaska Region National Marine Fisheries Service NOAA P.O.Box 1668 Juneau,Alaska 99802 Mr.Ernest W.Mueller * Commissioner Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Pouch 0 Juneau,Alaska 99801 Colonel Lee Nunn District Engineer Alaska District U.S.Army Corps of Engineers P.O.Box 7002 Anchorage,Alaska 99510 Hr.John Rego Bureau of Land Management Anchorage District Office 4700 East 72nd Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99507 Mr.Keith Schreiner * Regional Director,Region 7 U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service 1011 East Tudor Road Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Mr.Ronald O.Skoog * Commissioner State of Alaska Department of Fish &Game Support Building Juneau,Alaska 99801 cc:Mr.larry Wright National Park Service 1011 East Tudor Road Suite 297 Anchorage,Alaska 99503 cc:Mr.Alan Carson Division of Natural Resources Alaska Department of Natural Pouch 7-005 Anchorage,Alaska 99510 cc:Mr.Ron Morris Director Anchorage Field Office National Marine Fisheries Service 701 C Street,Box 43 Anchorage,Alaska 99513 cc:Mr.Bob Martin Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 437 East Street,2nd Floor Anchorage,Alaska 99501 cc:Mr.lenny Corin U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service Western Alaska Ecological Service 733 West 4th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 cc:Mr.Thomas Trent State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game 2207 Spenard Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502 - lillI". -. *Added at the suggestion of the Susitna Hydro Steering Committee. **Added as a result of specific agency request. r, TABLE 1.4 (Cont'd) Hr.John R.Spencer Regional Administrator Region X U.S.Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Sixth Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101 cc:Ms.Judy Swartz U.S.Environmental Protection Agency Mail stop 443 Region X EPA 1200 South 6th Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101 Fish,Wildlife,and Botanical Group - - LJ - Mr.Max Brewer * Office of the Director Special Assistant for Alaska U.S.Geological Survey 218 East Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Mr.John Katz Alaska Department of Natural Resources Pouch M Juneau,Alaska 99811 Mr.Robert McVey Director,Alaska Region National Marine Fisheries Service NOAA P.O.Sox 1668 Juneau,Alaska 99802 Mr.Ernest W.Mueller Commissioner Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Pouch 0 Juneau,Alaska 99801 Mr.John Rego * Bureau of Land Management Anchorage District Office 4700 East nnd Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99507 Mr.Keith Schreiner Regional Director,Region 7 U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service 1011 East Tudor Road Anchorage,Alaska 99503 cc:Mr.Al an Carson Division of Natural Resources Alaska Department of Natural Pouch 7005 Anchorage,Alaska 99510 cc:Mr.Ron Morris Director Anchorage Field Office National Marine Fisheries Service 701 C Street,Box 43 Anchorage,Alaska 99513 cc:Mr.Bob Martin Alaska Department of Env ironmental Conservation 437 East Street,2nd Floor Anchorage,Alaska 99501 cc:Mr.Robert Bowker U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service Western Alaska Ecological Service 733 West 4th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 ro- I Mr.Ronald O.Skoog c c: Commissioner State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game Support Building Juneau,Alaska 99801 Mr.Thomas Trent State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game 2207 Spenard Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502 *Added at the suggestion of the Susitna Hydro Steering Committee. I! - TABLE 1.4 (Cont'd) Mr.John Spencer * Regional Administrator U.S.Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Sixth Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101 cc:Ms.Judy Swartz U.S.Environmental Protection Agency Mail Stop 443 Region X EPA 1200 Sixth Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101 Historic and Archaeological Group Mr.John Cook cc: Acting Regional Director Alaska Region National Park Service 540 West Fifth Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Mr.Larry Wright National Park Service 1011 East Tudor Road Suite 297 Anchorage,Alaska 99503 Ms.Lee McAnerney Department of Community and Regional Affairs Pouch B Juneau,Alaska 99811 - - - - Mr.Thomas Trent State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game 2207 Spenaru Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502 cc:Mr.Alan Carson Division of Natural Resources Alaska Department of Natural Resources Pouch 7-005 Anchorage,Alaska 99510 Mr .John Rego * Bureau of Land Management Anchorage District Office 4700 East 72nd Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99507 Mr.Robert Shaw State Historic Preservation Officer Alaska Department of Natural Resources Division of Parks 619 Warehouse Avenue,Suite 210 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Mr.Ronald o.Skoog *cc: Commissioner State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game Support Building Juneau,Alaska 99801 Mr.Lee Wyat t** Planning Director Matanuska-Susitna Borough Box 8 Palmer,Alaska 99645 Recreation Group - Mr.John Cook Acting Regional Director Alaska Region National Park Service 540 West Fifth Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 cc:Mr.Larry Wright National Park Service 1011 East Tudor Road Suite 297 Anchorage,Alaska 99503 J- *Added at the suggestion of the Susitna Hydro Steering Committee. **Added as a result of specific agency request.., i J TABLE 1.4 (Cont'd) ~1r.John Katz Alaska Department of Natural Resources Pouch M Juneau,Alaska 99811 Mr.Robert McVey * Director,Alaska Region National Marine Fisheries Service NOAA P.O.Box 1668 Juneau,Alaska 99802 cc:Mr.Alan Carson Division of Natural Resources Alaska Department of Natural Resources Pouch 7-005 Anchorage,Alaska 99510 cc:Mr.Ron Morr is Director Anchorage Field Office National Marine Fisheries Service 701 C Street,Box 43 Anchorage,Alaska 99513 Mr.Keith Schreiner * Regional Director,Region 7 U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service 1011 East Tudor Road Anchorage,Alaska 99503 Mr.Ronald O.Skoog *cc: Commissioner State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game Support Building Juneau,Alaska 99801 Mr.Lee Wyatt Planning Director Matanuska-Susitna Borough Box B Palmer,Alaska 99645 Mr.Thomas Trent State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game 2207 Spenard Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502 Aesthetics and Land Use Group Mr.John Cook ** Acting Regional Director Alaska Region National Park Service 540 West Fifth Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Mr.Roy Huhndorf President Cook Inlet Region,Incorporated P.O.Drawer 4N Anchorage,Alaska 99509 Mr.John Kat z Alaska Department of Natural Resources Pouch M Juneau,Al aska 99811 Mr.John Rego Bureau of Land Management Anchorage District Office 4700 East 72nd Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99507 cc:Mr.Larry Wright National Park Service 1011 East Tudor Road Suite 297 Anchorage,Alaska 99503 cc:Mr.Alan Carson Division of Natural Resources Alaska Department of Natural Resources Pouch 7-005 Anchorage,Alaska 99510 ,..., I *Added at the suggestion of the Susitna Hydro Steering Committee. **Added as the result of specific agency request. TABLE 1.4 (Cont'd) Mr.Keith Schreiner * Regional Director,Region 7 U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service 1011 East Tudor Road Anchorage,Alaska 99503 Mr.Ronald O.Skoog *cc: Commissioner State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game Support Building Juneau,Alaska 99801 Mr.Lee Wyat t** Planning Director Matanuska-Susitna Borough Box B Palmer,Alaska 99645 Mr.Thomas Trent State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game 2207 Spenard Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502 -, Socioeconomic Group* Director of Planning Fairbanks North Star Borough 520 5th Avenue P.O.Box 1267 Fairbanks,Alaska 99701 Mr.Roy HUhndorf President Cook Inlet Region,Incorporated P.O.Drawer 4N Anchorage,Alaska 99509 Mr.John Katz Alaska Department of Natural Resources Pouch M Juneau,Alaska 99811 cc:Mr.Max Dolchak Executive Director Cook Inlet Native Association 670 Firewood Lane Anchorage,Alaska 99502 cc:Mr.Alan Carson Division of Natural Resources Alaska Department of Natural Resources Pouch 7-005 Anchorage,Alaska 99510 /III'I!II, Ms.Lee MeAnerney Department of Community and Regional Affairs Pouch B Juneau,Alaska 99811 Mr.Michael Meehan Director,Planning Department Municipality of Anchorage Pouch 6-650 Anchorage,Alaska 99502 Mr.Ronald O.Skoog *cc: Commissioner state of Alaska Department of Fish and Game Support Building Juneau.Alaska 99801 Mr.Herb Smelcer,President General Manager AHTNA Corporation Drawer G Copper Canter,Alaska 99573 Mr.Thomas Trent State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game 2207 Spenard Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502 - *Added at the suggestion of the Susitna Hydro Steering Committee. HAdded as a result of specific agency request. """ ...., TABLE 1.4 (Cont'd) Mr.Lee Wyatt Planning Director Matanuska-Susitna Borough BoxB Palmer,Alaska 99645 Geological and,Soils Group * - Mr.Max Brewer Office of the Director Special Assistant for Alaska U.S.Geological Survey 218 East Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Mr.John Katz Alaska Department of Natural Resources Pouch M Juneau,Alaska 99811 General Mr.David Haas State-Federal Assistance Coordinator State of Alaska Office of the Governor Division of Policy Development and Planning Pouch AW Juneau,Alaska 99811 Ms.Wendy Walt Office of Coastal Management Division of Policy Development and Planning Pouch AP Juneau,Alaska 99811 cc:Mr.Alan Carson Division of Natural Resources Alaska Department of Natural Pouch 7-005 Anchorage,Alaska 99510 *Added at the suggestion of the Susitna Hydro Steering Committee. I I TABLE 1.5:EXPANDED LIST OF REPORTS AND GROUPS TO WHICH REPORTS WERE/WERE TO BE SENT REPORT GROUP* Instream Flow Study Plan Dra ft Fishery Mit igation Plan Draft Wildlife Mitigation Plan Final Phase I Reports: (a)Fish Ecology (b)Wildlife Ecology (c)Plant Ecology (d)Birds and Non-Game Mammals (e)Furbearers (f)Land Use (g)Socioeconomics (h)Cultural Resources (i)Recreat ion Land Status Report Interim Report on Seismic Studies Final Report on Seismic Studies Geotechnical Exploration Report on 19BO Studies Geotechnical Exploration Report on 19B1 Studies Water Quality Report Water Use Report River Morphology Sociocultural Report Env ironmental Evaluat ion of Access Plans Engineering Evaluation of Access Plans R,ALU WQ,FWB,R,ALU WQ,FWB,R,ALU WQ,FWB,R WQ,FWB,R FWB,ALU FWB,R FWB,R,SE ALL FWB,R,ALU,SE,G HA,SE R R,ALU,SE,GS GS GS GS GSwa,FWB,R,ALU ~Q,FWB,R,ALU,SEwa,FWB,R,ALU,GS FWB,HA,R,ALU,SE WQ,FWB,HA,R,ALU,SE,GS WQ,FWB,HA,R,ALU,SE,GS """"r *ALU FWB HAwa R SE GS G =Aesthetics,Land Use =Fish,Wildlife,and Botanical =Historic,Archaeological=Water Quality=Recreat ion=Socioeconomic =Geology and Soils =General Note:These reports and groups were added to those listed in Table 1.2. Groups refer to those listed in Table 1.4.- - ~. TABLE 1.6:REPORTS,DATE SENT,AND PURPOSE DOCUMENT Plan of Study Plan of Study -Revision 1 1980 Summary Environmental Report 1980 Annual Environmental Reports: (a)Fish Ecology (b)Plant Ecology (c)Big Game,Birds,and Non-Game Mammals,Furbearers (d)Land Use (e)Socioeconomics (f)Cultural Resources Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report Development Selection Report Initial Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy (Revised Mitigation Policy) InstreamFlow Study Feasibility Report Draft Fishery Mitigation Plan Draft Wildlife Mitigation Plan Phase I Environmental Reports: (a)Fish Ecology -ADF&G (b)Wildlife Ecology -ADf&G (c)Plant Ecology (d)Bird and Non-Game Mammals (e)Furbearers (f)Land Use (g)Socioeconomics (h)Cultural Resources (i)Recreation Land Status Report Interim Report on Seismic Studies Final Report on Seismic Studies Geotechnical Exploration Report on 1980 Studies Geotechnical Exploration Report 1981 Studies Water Quality Report Water Use Report River Morphology Report Sociocultural Report Environmental Evaluation of Access Plans Access Route Selection Report PRIOR TO 03/15/82 03/15/82 04/01/82 04/15/82 04/30/82 PURPOS£* X FC X Fe X I X I X I X I X I X I X I X Fe X FC X FC X FC X FC X FC X FC X FC X I X I X I X I X I X I X I X I X FC X I X I X I X I X I X I X I X I X I X I X I - r l *FC =Formal Comments Requested I =Provided for Information Only TABLE 1.7:MEMBERS OF THE SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT STEERING COMMITTEE State Agencies Alaska Department of Fish and Game Alaska Department of Natural Resources Alaska Department of Commerce Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Other Federal Agencies U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service U.S.Geology Survey National Park Service National Marine Fisheries Service U.S.Bureau of land Management Environmental Protection Agency Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service - Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center Note:U.S.Army Corps of Engineers,Alaska Division of Policy Development and Planning and Matanuska-Susitna Borough were invited but declined to sit on the Steering Committee. - , I ,I DATE Jun e 12,1980 July 17,1980 TABLE 1.8:DATES AND PURPOSE OF STEERING COMMITTEE MEETINGS WITH APA AND/OR ITS CONSULTANTS PURPOSE Objective of Committee and Introduction to Project Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and State License Process,Instream Flow Studies - November 5,1980 April 13,1981 October 20,1981 December 2,1981 January 20,1982 Evaluation of Alternatives to Susitna Alternatives,Access Road Evaluation,and Comments on Environmental Studies Access Road Evaluation Explanation of Agency Comment Requests from APA Environmental Studies and Concerns, Fisheries Mitigation I j TABLE 1.9:AGENCIES INVITED AND THOSE WHICH DECLINED TO BE ON THE FISH AND WILDLIFE MITIGATION REVIEW GROUP State Agencies Status Alaska Department of Fish and Game Alaska Department of Natural Resources Federal Agencies U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service National Marine Fisheries Service U.S.Bureau of Land Management Environmental Protection Agency U.S.Geological Survey U.S.Army Corps of Engineers Agreed Agreed Agreed Agreed Agreed Agreed Declined Declined -i - , J - APPENDIX A AGENCIES CONTACTED FOR INFORMATION DURING PREPARATION OF THE SUSITNA ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS I""" I I ..r""> ) APPENDIX A AGENCIES CONTACTED FOR INFORMATION DURING PREPARATION OF THE SUSITNA ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS The following list names individuals from federal,state,and local agencies as well as other institutions and organizations who were contacted regarding the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Environmental Studies Program.These individuals were consulted between October 1,1979,and January 15,1982.Arranged by environmental report section as they app.eared in Volume 2 of the Feasibility Study,the names listed include: (1)Those contacts made by TES and/or TES subcontractors for input related specifically to that report section; (2)Those contacts made by TES and/or TES subcontractors,the information from which,while pertinent to a different environmental report section,was also applicable to the section in question;and (3)Contacts made by TES,TES subcontractors,Acres,or the Alaska Power Authority applicable to the Susitna Environmental Studies in general. The nature of these contacts ranges from requests for data to inquiries con- cerning the environmental studies procedures.These lists are not intended to include those contacts made with other members of the Environmental Studies Team,although some project personnel are 11 sted because of the capacity in which they were consulted. - !""I' I ../ .- Report on Fi sh,Wildl He,and Botanical Resources FEDERAL AGENCIES United States Department of Agriculture Agricultural Stabil ization and Conservation Service .-Lola Britton:File Manager Forest Service,Institute of Northern Forestry -Joan Foote:Biologist . -Fred Larson:Research Forester -Vic VanBallenberghe:Wildlife Biologist -Leslie Viereck:Principal Plant Ecologist Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experimental Station -Robert Ethi naton:Di rector Soil Conserv at i on Service -Weymeth Long:Director of State Office -Sterling Powell:Physical Engineer.Water Resource Specialist Un ited States Department of Commerce National t4arine Fisheries Service -Robert McVey:Director -Ronald Morri s:Supervi sor -Bradley Smith:Fishery Biologist United States Department of Defense Army Cold Regi on Research Envi ronmental Laboratory -Jerry Brown:Chief.Environmental Research Branch Army Corps of Engineers.Alaska District -Loran Baxter:Civil Engineer -Richard Borcetti:Biologist,Permit Processing -Phillip Brna:Biologist .-James Caruth:Chief of Regulatory Functions -Jack Ferri se:Civil Engi neering Techni ci an Compl i ance Investigator -Col.Lee Nunn:District Engineer -Lt.Col.J.Perkins:Deputy District Engineer United States Department of Energy Alaska Power Administration -Fredrick Chief:Deputy Regional Representative -Robert Cross:Administrator -Donald Shira:Chief of Planning Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,Division of Licensed Projects -Ronald Corso:Director -Paul Carrier:Engineer -Donald Cl arke:Staff Counsel -Thomas Dewit:Landscape Architect -Quentin Edson:Chief,Environmental Analysis Branch -Julian Flint:Supervisor.Engineering Project Analysis Branch -Peter Foote:FisheryBiologist -Donald Giarnpaoli:Department Director Ii -Mark Robinson: -Dean Shumway: -Gerald Wil son: Environmental Biologist Chief,Conservation Section Chief,Project Analysis United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management -Patrick Beckley:Chief,Branch of Lands and Minerals -Louis Carufel:Fisheries Biologist -Ann Dawe -Art Hosterman:Chief,Branch of Biological Resources -Paula Krebs:Remote Sensing Specialist -Steve Leskosky:Environmental Planner -John Rego:'Geo log i st -Mike Scott:Fisheries Biologist -Gary Seitz:Environmental Coordinator -Page Spencer:Remote Sensing Specialist -Steve Talbot:Ecologist -Dick Tindall:Anchorage District Manager Bureau of Mi nes -Bob Ward:Chief,Environmental Planning Staff Fish and Wildlife Service -Mike Amaral:Endangered Species Biologist -Skip Ambrose:Endangered Species Biologist -Bruce Apple:Fisheries Biologist -Dale Arhart:Staff Biologist -Keith Baya:Assistant Director for the Environment -Robert Bowker:Field Supervisor,Western Alaska Ecological Services Unit -Carl Burger:Research Fisheries Biologist,Advisor,Radio Telemetry Project -Bruce Conant:Wildlife Biologist/Pilot -Lenny Corrin:Fish and Wildlife Projects Coordinator -Dirk Derksen:Waterfowl Biologist -Gregory Konkel:Habitat Evaluation Coordinator -Donald McKay:Wildl ife Biologist -Dennis Money:Endangered Species Coordinator -John Morrison:Supervisor,Biological Services Program -Mel Munson:Progr am Superv i sor,Land and Wat er Program -A.Palmisana:Research Chemist -Wayne Regelin:Research Biologist -Mel Schamberger:Habitat Evaluation Procedures Group Leader,Biological Servi ces Progr am -Keith Schreiner:Region Seven Director -Gary Stackhouse:Fish and Wildl ife Biologist,Federal Projects/Technicial Ass i stance Coordinator -Mike Thompson:Fisheries Biologist -John Trapp:Marine Bird Management Project Leader -Dave Waangard:Research Fisheries Biologist - -Richard Wilmot:Fisheries Research Project Leader Geological Survey -Derrill Cowing:Hydrologist -Gary Hickman:Area Director -Robert Lamke:Chief,Hydrology Section -Bob Madison:Hydrologist,Water Quality Specialist Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service -William Welch:Supervising Outdoor Recreation Planner """"', ~" " il \__,i Nat i ona 1 Park Servi ce -Brailey Breedlove:LandscapeArchitect -Terry Carlstrom:Chief of Planning and Design -Ross Cavenaugh:Fisheries Bi 01 ogi st -Carl Stoddard:Park Ranger United States Environmental Protection Agency -John Spencer:Region X Administrator Environmental Evaluation Branch -Judi Schwartz:Environmental Protection Specialist Environmental Impact Statement Review Section -Elizabeth Corbyn:Chief.Environmental Evaluation Branch -Dan Sternborn:Team Leader STATE AGENCIES Alaska Department of Commerce and Economi c Development -Charl esWebber:Cammi ssi oner Alaska Power Authority -Bruce Bedard:Inspector,Native Liaison -David Wozni ak:Proje.ct Engineer Division of Energy and Power Development -Hei nz Noonan:Economi st Alaska Department of Community 'and Regional Affairs ..Lee McAnerney:Commissioner Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation ..Erns t Mus 11 er :Commi ss i oner -Robert Flint:Region II Program Coordinator -RikkiFowler:Ecologist -Robert Martin:Regional Supervisor -David Sturdevant:Management and Technical Assistant Ecologist -Dan Wilkerson:Special Projects Planner -Steve Zrake:Environmental Field Officer Alaska Department of Fish and Game -Ronald Skoog:Commissioner Division of Boards -Robert Larson:Biologist,Division Director Division of Commercial Fisheries ..Dennis Haanpaa:Assistant Regional Supervisor -Alan Kingsbury:Regional Research Supervisor Divi sian of Game -Paul Arneson:Biologist -Gregory Bas:Game Biologist IV -Bruce Cambell:Waterfowl Biologist -Jack Oidrickson:Game Biologist -Sterling Eide:Regional Supervisor -David Johnson:Game Biologist Herbert Me 1chi or:.Game Bi 0 1ogi sts I II -Lee Miller:Fish and Game Technician V -Sterling Miller:Game Biologist III -Suzanne Miller:Statistician.Biometrician III -Kenneth Pitcher:Game Biologist -Karl Schneider:Research Coordinator -Charles Schwartz:Biologist II -Jerome Sexton:Game Biologist II -Dan Timm:Game Biologist III.Chief Waterfowl -Elroy Young:'Game 8iologist III Division of Habitat Protection -Richard Logan:Chief -Thomas Arminski:Regional Land Special ist -Dimitri Bader:Lands Coodinator.Habitat Biologist -Phil Brna:Habitat Biologist II -Richard Cannon:Habitat Biologist III -John Clark:Assistant Chief' -Devony Lehner-Welch:Habitat Biologist II -Don McKay:Habitat Biologist III -Marguerite Paine:Habitat Biologist II -Frances VanBallenberghe:Habitat Biologist III -Carl Yanagawa:Regional Supervisor Division of Sport Fisheries -Kevin Delaney:Fishery Biologist II -Christopher Estes:Fishery Biologist III.Susitna Aquatic Studies -Larry Heckart:Fishery Biologist IV -Michael Mins:.Senior Fisheries Biometrician III -Thomas Trent:Regional Supervisor.Susitna Aquatic Studies Coordinator. Vice-Chairman of Susitna Steering Committee -Kyle Watson:Clerk IV.Susitna Hydroelectric Aquatic Studies Staff Roster Subsistence Division -Ronald Stanek:Resource Specialist II Alaska Department of Natural Resources -Robert LeResche:Commi ss i ooer Division of Forest Land and Water -Ted Smith:Director -Mary Lou Harle:Water Management Officer Division of Lands -Dean Brown:Southcentral District lands Officer -Michael Franger:Special Projects Officer Division of Minerals and Energy -Glen Harrison:Director Divi si on of Park s -Jack Wil es:Chi ef Division of Research and Development -Linda Arndt:Land Management Officer -Christopher Beck:Planner III -Al Carson:Deputy Director -lloyd Eggan:Ass i st ant Ana lyst II Divison of Water Resources -Brent Petrie:Chief -Richard Stern:Historian.Research and Planning Alaska Department of Revenue -Linda Lockridge:Records and Licensing Supervisor.Fish and Game Licensing Division -Hazel Nowlin:Administrative Assistant,Administration Services ..., ~, ~ I r-I I \ Alaska Department of Public Safety Division of Fish and Wildlife Protection -Col.Robert Stickles:Director -Wayne Fleek:Region III Commander -Lt.Rod Mills:Administrative Officer -Lt.CoL Tetzlaff:Deputy Director Alaska Department of Transportation -Jay Bergstrand:Transportation Pl anner IV -Cathy Derickson:Transportation Planner -Reed Gibby:Transportation Pl anner .Brock University ~nstitute of Urban and Envi ronmental Stud ies,St.Cathari nes,Ontari 0,Canada -Fikret Berkes:Director Canadi an Territorial Agencies Northwest Territori es Fi sh and Game Branch,Yell owknife,Northwest Territor i es -Bruce Steven son:Research Co-ordi n ator Office of the Governor Division of Policy Development and Planning ~.-Frances Ulmer:Director University of Alaska -Roseann Dunsmore:Graduate Student -Tony Gharret:Professor Agricultural Experiment Stat ion -Will i am Mitche 11 :Head Agronomi st Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center -Mr.Becker:Climatologist -Chuck Evans:Research Associate,Wildlife BiDlogist ,.,...-Richard Hensel:Game Biologist -William Wilson:Fisheries Biologist Geophysical 'Institute -Ken Dean:Remote Sensing Geologist -Ian Hutchison:Professor of Physics -T.Osterk amp:Professor of Physics Museum -David Murray:Her5ari um Curator t-'LOCAL AGENCIES ! Matanuska-Susitna Borough Borough Office -Lee Wyatt:Acting Borough Manager,Planning Director OTHER INSTITUTIONS.ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS r .,..,.. Institutions and Organizations Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories,Richland,Washington -Lester E.Ebechardt:Terrestrial Ecology Section Chickaloon Village -Jess Landsman:President Colorado State University Department of Fi shery and Wil dl ife Si 0 logy -Gustav Swanson:Professor and Department Head Cook Inlet Aquaculture Association -Floyd Heimback:Director -Thomas Mears:Biologist -Thomas Walker:Economist Cook Inlet Region,Incorporated -Agnes Brown:Executive -Lynda Hays:Sharehol der and Community Rel at ions Coordinator -Robert Rude:Senior Vice-President -John Youngblood:Executi ve Director Fairbanks Environmental Center -Jeff Weltzin:Energy Coordinator HDR Sciences,Santa Barbara,California -Ken Reed Hol mes and Narver -James Pederson:Susitna Project Manager Idaho Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit -Dudley Reiser:Fisheries Biologist,Private Consultant Keual Village -James Shoalwolfer:President Knikatnu Incorporated -Paul Theadore:Chief L.G.L.Alaska,Incorporated -David Roseneau:Biologist National Museum Canada Museum of Natural Hi story -George Argus:Associate Curator,Vascular Plant Section Ninilchik Native Assodation,Incorporated -Arno 1d Orhdh off:Ch i ef Ninilchik Vil.l age -Arnold Orhdhoff:President Norsk Hydro,Sweden -Iver Hagen:Public Relations Northern Prairie WildI ife Research Center,Jamestown,North Dakota -Al Sargeant:Wildlife Research Biologist Sagehen Creek Fi e ld St at i on.Cal Horn ia -Wayne Spencer:Biologist -William Zielinski:Biologist Salamatoff Native Association,Incorporated ~Andy Johnson:President Seldovia Native Association,Incorporated -James Segura:Chief Susitna Power Now -E.Dischner:Executive Director Tyonek Native Corporation -Agnes Brown:President United Fi shermen of Al aska -Rodger Painter:Executive Director University of Calgary,Alberta,Canada -Dr.Stephen Herrero:Faculty of Experimental Design and Department of Biology Un i vers i ty of Mont ana School of Forestry -Dr.Charles Jonkel:Director,Northern Border GriZZly Bear Project - r University of Uppsala,Sweden -Dr.Hugo Sjors:Professor of Ecological Botany Individuals -Ron Long:Trapper -Mary Kay McDonald:Trapper Cleo McMahon:Pilot,Hunter in Upper Susitna Basin Don Newman:Trapper -DorothyPalZin:Deshka Resident -Carol Resnick:Tsusena Creek Resident -Philip Roullier:Indian River Resident -Robert Scheufele:Talkeetna Resident -Leroy Shank:Trapper -Robert Smith:Tsusena Creek Resident ~Roger Smith:Trapper -Glen Wingkte:Trapper Report on Historic and Archeological Resources FEDERAL AGENCIES United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service -Sterling Powell:Physical Engineer,Water Resource Specialist United States Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers,Alaska District -Col.lee Nunn:District Engineer -Lt.Col.J.Perkins:Deputy District Engineer United States Department of Energy A1ask a Power Admi ni st rat i on -Fredrick Chiei =Deputy Regional Representative -Robert Cross:Administrator -Donald Shira:Chief of Planning Federal Energy Regul atory Commi ssi on,Divi si on of Li censed Projects -Ronald Corso:Director -Paul Carrier:Engineer -Donald Cl arke:Staff Counsel -Thomas Dewit:'Landscape Architect -Quentin Edson:Chief,Environmental Analysis Branch -Julian Flint:Supervisor,Engineering Project Analysis Branch -Peter Foote:Fishery Biologist -Donald Giampaoli:Department Director -Mark Robinson:Environmental Biologist -Dean Shumway:Chief,Conservation Section -Gerald Wilson:Chief,Project Analysis United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management -Mike Brown:Historian Louis Carufel:Fisheries Biologist -Art Hosterman:Chief,Branch of Biological Resources -Ray Leicht:Archeologist -Steve Leskosky:Environmental Pl anner -John Rego:Geologist -Gary Seitz:Environmental Coordinator Bureau of Mines -Michael Brown:Chemist -Bob Ward:Chief,Environmental Planning Staff Fish and Wildlife Service -Dale Arhart:Staff Biologist Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service -Janet McCabe:Regional Director -Charles McKinney:Consulting'Archeologist -Gail Russell:Interagency Services Division -William Welch:Supervising Outdoor Recreation Planner -Larry Wright:Review Section Chief,Federal Projects ,s - ;;;- ~, 1""'>. I I ) r I'{~ ,..... ! 1 National Park Service -Brailey Breedlove:Landscape Architect John Cook:Regional Director Gail Russell:Staff,Interagency Service Division Carl Stoddard:Park Ranger Howard Wagner:Associate Director of Professional Services United States Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Impact Statement Review Section -Elizabeth Corbyn:Chief,Environmental Evaluation Branch STATE AGENCIES Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic Development -Charles Webber:Commissioner Alaska Power Authority -Bruce Bedard:Inspector,Native Liaison Division of Energy and Power Development -Heinz Noonan:Economist Alaska Department of Community and Regional Affairs -Lee McAnerney:Commissioner Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation -Robert Flint:Region II Program Coordinator -David Sturdevant:Management and Techni ca 1 Ass i stant Eco10gi st -Dan Wilkerson:Special Projects Planner Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Sport Fisheries -Michael Mills:Senior Fisheries Biometrician III -Thomas Trent:Regional Supervisor,Susitna Aquatic Studies Coordinator, Vice-Chairman of Susitna Steering Committee Alaska Department of Natural Resources -Robert LeResche:Commi ss i oner Division of Forest"Land and Water -Mary Lou Harle:Water Management Officer Division of Lands -Mi:hJ:1 Franger:Special Projects Officer Divisic~of Parks -Chip Dennerlein:Director -Jack Wiles:Chief -William Hanable:State Preservation Officer -Doug Reger:State Archeologist -Robert Shaw:State Historic Preservation Officer Division of Research and Development -Linda Arndt:Land Management Officer -Al Carson:Deputy Director Office of the Governor Division of Policy Development and Planning -Frances Ulmer:Director University of Alaska Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center -William Wilson:Fisheries Biologist OTHER INSTITUTIONS.ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS Institutions and Organizations Cook Inlet Region.Incorporated -Lynda Hays:Shareholder and Community Rel at ions Coordinator -Robert Rude:Senior Vice-President Fairbanks Environmental Center -Jeff Weltzin:Energy Coordinator Land Field Services.Incorporated -P.J.Sullivan:Representative Susitna Power Now -E.Dischner:Executive Director Individuals -Glenn Bacon:Consulting Archeologist A I Report on Socioeconomic Impacts FEDERAL AGENCIES United States Department of Agriculture Economics~Statistics t and Cooperative Services -Paul Fuglestad:Agricultural Economist~Natural Resource Economics Division Farmers Home Administration -Delon Brown:Chief Researcher Soil Conservation Service -John 0'Neil:Coordinator -Sterling Powell:Physical Engineer t Water Resource Specialist United States Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers,Alaska District -Col.Lee Nunn:District Engineer -Lt.Col.J.Perkins:Deputy District Engineer Army Corps of Engineers~Portland District -Ruth Love:Sociologist United States Department of Educati on -Lee Hays:Facilities Planner United States Department of Energy Alaska Power Administration -Fredrick Chiei:Deputy Regional Representative -Robert Cross:Admi ni strator -Donald Shira:Chief of Pl anning Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,Division of Licensed Projects -Ronald Corso:Director -Paul Carrier:Engineer -Donald Clarke:Staff Counsel -Thomas Dewit:Landscape Architect -Quentin Edson:Chief,Environmental Analysis Branch -Julian Flint:Supervisor,Engineering Project Analysis Branch -Peter Foote:Fishery Biologist -Donald Giampaoli:Department Director -Mark Robinson:Environmental Biologist -Dean Shumway:Chief,Conservation Section -Gerald Wilson:Chief,Project Analysis Un ited States Department of Heus iog and Urban Oeve10pment -E.Robinson:Area Economist United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management -Louis Carufel:Fisheries Biologist -Gary Henn i gh :Soc i oeconomi c Sped ali st -Art Hosterman:Chief,Branch of Biological Resources -John Rego:Geologist -Gary Seitz:Environmental Coordinator -Charles Smythe:Socioeconomics Specialist Bureau of Mines -Bob Ward:Chief,Environmental Planning Staff Fish and Wildlife Service -Bruce Apple:Fisheries Biologist -Dale Arhart:Staff Biologist Geological Survey -Robert Lamke:Chief.Hydrology Section National Park Service -Brailey Breedlove:Landscape Architect -Joanne ~idlund:Public Affairs United States Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration,The Alaska Railroad -Fred Hoefler:Traffic Officer United States Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Impact Statement Review Section -Elizabeth Corbyn:Chief,Environmental Evaluation Branch STATE AGENCIES Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic Development -Charles Webber:Commissioner Al aska Power Authority -Bruce Bedard:Inspector,Native Liaison -Nancy Blunck:Coordinator Oivfsi on of Energy and Power Deve lopment -Heinz Noonan:Economist -David Reume:Economist Alaska Department of Community and Regional Affairs -Lee McAnerney:Commi ss i oner -Edward Busch:Sen i or Planner -Lemar Cotton:Pl anner II I -Sylvia Spearon:Assistant Planner -Richard Spitler:Planner -Mark Stephens:Planner Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation -Jim Allen:Sanitari an -Robert Flint:Region II Program Coordinator -Rob-ert Martin:Regional Supervisor -Dan Wilkerson:Special Projects Planner -Steve Zrake:Environmental Field Officer Alaska Department of Fi sh and Game Division of Commercial Fisheries -Dennis Haanpaa:Assistant Regional Supervisor Division of Game Gregory Bos:Game Bi 01 ogi st IV -Sterling Eide:Regional Supervisor -Lee Mil 1er:Fi sh and Game Techni ci an V -Sterling Miller:Game Biologist III -Jerome Sexton:Game Bi 01 ogi st II -Dan Timm:Game Biologist III~Chief Waterfowl .~ 'i Division of Sport Fisheries -Christopher Estes:Fishery Biologist III~Susitna Aquatic Studies -Larry Heckart:Fishery Biologist IV ...Michael Mills:Senior Fisheries Biometrician III -Thomas Trent:Regional Supervisor,Susitna Aquatic Studies Coordinator, Vice-Chairman of Susitna Steering Committee Subsistence Division -Ronald Stanek:Resource Specialist II Alaska Department of Labor Administrative Services -Neil Fried:Labor Economist -Greg Huff:Labor Economi st Division of Research and Analysis -Chuck Caldwell:Chief -Rod Brown:Supervisor of Research,Administration Services -Cal Dauel:Labor Economist -Neil Fried:Labor Economist -Steve Harrison:Labor Economist -Chris Miller:Labor Economist -Sally Sadler:Labor Economist -Dave Swanson:State Demographer -James Wilson:Labor Economist Alaska Department of Natural Resources -Robert LeResche:Commissioner Division of Lands -Mi~hael Franger:Special Projects Officer -Robert Loeffl er:Associ ate Lands Pl anner Division of Parks -Jack Wiles:Chief Division of Pipeline Surveillance -Elstun Lauesen:Socioeconomic Officer Division of Research and Development -Linda Arndt:Land Management Officer -Al Carson:Deputy Director -Carol Larsen:Public Information Officer -Robert Loeffler:Associate Planner -Steve Reeves:Chief,Land and Resources Planning Section Alaska Department of Revenue -Linda Lockridge:Records and Licensing Supervisor,Fish and Game Licensing Di vi si on -Haze 1 N.owl in:Admi ni strat ive Ass i stant,Admi ni strat i on Servi ces -Wi 11 i am Yankee:Economi st II Alaska Department of Public Safety Division of Public Safety -Michael Dekreon,State Trooper -Lt.Rhodes:State Trooper,Deputy Commander Detachment B Division of Fire Protection -Dave Taylor:Fire Protection Engineer Division of Fish and Wildlife Protection -CoL Robert Stickles:Director -Wayne Fl eek:,Reg i on II I Commander -Ms.Lobb:Cl erk -Lt.Rod Mills:Administrative Officer -Lt.Col.Tetzlaff:Deputy Director Alaska Department of Transportation -Jay Bergstrand:Transportation Planner IV Cathy Derickson:Tran~portation Planner Reed Gibby:Transportation Planner William Humphrey:Transportation Planner I Richard Quiroz:District Environmental Coordinator Eugene Weiler:Traffic Data Supervisor Al aska State Housing Authority -Wi 11 i am Foster:Admi ni strat ive Officer Gl enna 11 en State Trooper Post -Robert Cockrell:1st Sergeant House Power Alternatives Study Committee -Hugh Malone:Committee Co-Chairman,District 13 Office of the Governor Division of Policy Development and Planning -Frances Ulmer:Director University of Alaska -Lydia Selkreg:Professor of Resource Economics and Planning Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center -Barbara Sokolov:Senior Research Analyst,Library Science -William Wilson:Fisheries Biologist Institute of Social and Economic Research -Lee Gorsuch:Director -SCv~t Goldsmith:Assistant Professor of Economics -Lee Huskey:Associ ate Professor of Economics Urban Observatory , -Richard Ender:Assistant Professor of Public Administration LOCAL AGENCIES City of Glennallen -Sheldon Spector:Magistrate City of Houston,Al aska -Elsie OIBrien:City Clerk City of Palmer -David Soulak:City Manager Ci ty of we::.!11 a -Earling Nelson:City Clerk Copper River School District -Dr.Krinke:Superintendent Fai rbanks North Star Borough -Philip Berrian:Planning Director Community Information Center -Karen Fox:Research Analyst /lI!!IllI I - ~, I I ) ..,, ..... r-, r"" I. Matanuska-Susitna Borough Land Management Department -Steve Van Sant:Borough Assessor,Division of Land Assessment/Director of Land Management Planning Department,Borough Office -Rick Feller:Planner -Claud Oxford:Engineer -Vern Roberts:Finance Director -Rodney Schull ing:Planning Director -Alan Tesche:In-house Authority -Lee Wyatt:Acting Borough Manager,Planning Director Schoo 1 Di st ri ct -Mr.Monty Hotchkiss:Business Manager -Kenneth Kramer:Superintendent Municipality of Anchorage -Charles Becker:Economic Development Director -Sh awn Hemme:As si st ant Planner -Michael Meehan:Director of Planning -Bruce Silva:Demographer -Barbara Withers:Regional Economist Valdez Police Department -Police Officer OTHER.INSTITUTIONS,ORGANIZATIONS AND IND)VIDUALS Institutions and Organizations Ahtna,Inc. -Lee Adler:Director A1as ka Ho s pit a1 -Head Nurse Alaska Miners'Associati.on Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories,Richland,Washington Jeff King:Senior Research Engineer -Michael Scott:Senior Research Engineer -Ward Swi ft :Economi st Ben Marsh and Associates -Nancy Cole:Assistant Property Manager Chickaloon Village -Jess Landsman:President Cornmun ity Counc 11 Center Feder at i on of Corrmun ity Schoo 1s -Mary Amouak:Representative -Margaret Wolfe:Representative Cook Inlet Aquaculture Association -Floyd Heimback:Director -Thomas Mears:Biologist Cook Inlet Region,Incorporated -Agnes Brown:Executive -Lynda Hays:Sharehol der and Conmunity Re 1at ions Coordinator -Robert Rude:Senior Vice-President -Marge Sargerser:Land Manager -John Youngblood:Executive Director Copper River Housing Authority -Thea Smelcher:Housing Director Copper River Native Association -Billy Peters:Health Director Copper Va 11 ey E1 ect ri c As soc i at ion -Daniel Tegeler:Office Manager Copper Valley Views -Reporter Darbyshire and Associates -Ralph Darbyshire:President Doyon Corporation -Doug Williams:Land Planner Fairbanks Borough Community Information Center -Karen Fox:Research Analyst Fairbanks Chamber of Commerce -Robert Dempsey:Chairman,Economic and Development Committee Fairbanks Environmental Center -Jeff Weltzin:Energy Coordinator Fairbanks Town and Village Association for Development,Inc. -Art Patterson:Planner Fairbanks Visitor and Convention Bureau -Karla Zervos:Executive Director Frank Moolin and Associates,Incorporated -Mike Finnegan:Project Control Manager Guide License Review Board Hi gh Lake Lodge -John Wilson:Resident Manager Ho 1mes and Narver -Karl Hansen:Project Engineer -James Pederson:Susitna Project Manager Insurance Service Organization,San Fransisco,California -Gary Morse:Customer Service Representative Keual Vi 11 age -James Shoalwolfer:President· Knikatnu Incorporated -Paul Theadore:Chief Matanuska El ectri c Assocati on,Incorporated -Bud Goodyear:Publ ic Information Officer -Ken Ritchey:Manager,Engineering Services Matanuska Telephone Association -Grah am Ro 1stad:Ch i ef Eng;neer -Donald Taylor:Traffic and Equipment Engineer Ninilchik Native Association,Incorporated -Arno 1d Orhdhoff:Ch i ef Ninilchik Village -Arnold Orhdhoff:President Norsk Hydro,Sweden -Iver Hagen:Public Relations Northwest Alaskan Pipeline Company -Susan Fisson:Director,Socioeconomic Analysis -Virginia Manna:Research Analyst Overall Economic Development Program,Incorporated -Russell Cotton:Project Development Coordinator -Dona 1d Lyon:Ex ecut i ve Oi rector -, - ~, ~ I - """' Pa 1mer Ch a'1lber of Commerce Pa lmerFi re Hall -Daniel Contini:Fire Chief Palmer Valley Hospital -Valerie Blakeman:Administrative Secretary -Ann Demmings:Nurse -Rae-Ann Hickling:Consultant .PUblic Power Supply System.Richland,Washington -Alice Lee:Coordinator Puget Sound Power and Light Company -Terry Galbraith:Public Relations Officer Quebec Hydro Center,Quebec,Ontari 0 -Mr.Savignac:Counsel R.W.Beck and Associates,Seattle,Washington -Richard Flemming:Principal Scientist -Ron Melnifokk:Socioeconomic Coordinator Salamatoff Native Association,Incorporated -Andy Johnson:President Seldovia Native Association,Incorporated -James Segura:Chief Stephen Braund and Associates -Stephen Braund:President Susitna Power Now -E.Dischner:Executive Director Trapper Creek Community Council -David Porter:Member -Gail Robinson:Member Tri-Valley Realty -Lois Dow:Associate Tyonek Native Corporation -Agnes Brown:President -Nurse Valdez Community Hospital -Nurse Va 1dez Vanguard -Reporter Yukon Wildlife Branch -Ralph Archibald:Biologist Individuals -Harold Larson:Agent for Alaska Railroad at Gold Creek,Trapper -Bradford Tuck:Economi c Consultant' -Wi 11 ;am Workman:Soc i oeconomi c Con sultant Report on Recreational Resources FEDERAL AGENCIES United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service~Institute of Northern Forestry -James Tellerico:Landscape Architect United States Department of Commerce National Marine Fisheries Service ~Bradley Smith:Fishery Biologist United States Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers~Alaska District -Loran Baxter:Civil Engi neer -Col.Lee Nunn:District Engineer -Lt.Col.J.Perkins:Deputy District Engineer United States Department of Energy Alaska Power Admi oi st rat i on -Fredrick Chiei:Deputy Regional Representative -Robert Cross:Administrator -Donald Shira:Chief of Planning ;> Federal Energy Regulatory Commission~Division of Licensed Projects -Ronald Corso:Director -Paul Carrier:Engineer -Donald Clarke:Staff Counsel -Thomas Dewit:Landscape Architect -Quentin Edson:Chief,Environmental Analysis Branch -Julian Flint:Supervisor~Engineering Project Analysis Branch -Peter Foote:Fishery Bio1 09i st -Donald Giampaoli:Department Director -Mark Robinson:Environmental Biologist -Dean Shumway:Chief,Conservation Section -Geral d Wi]son:·Ch i ef ~Project Ana 1ys is United States Department of Housing and Urban Development -Debra Pevlear:Neighbor Volunteer and Consumer Protection Official United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management -Lee Barkow:Planner,Easement Identification Branch -Patrick Beckley:Chief~Branch of Lands and Minerals -Stanley Bronczyk:Chief,Easement Identification Branch -Louis Carufel:Fisheries Biologist -Wi 11 i am Gabri ell:leader,Special Studi es Group -Art Hosterman:Chief~Branch of Biological Resources -Peter Jerome:Landscape Architect -John Rego:Geologist -Gary Seitz:Environmental Coordinator - r -l - -i -Dick Tindall:Anchorage District Manager ~Richard Tobin:Recreational Planner Bureau of Mines -Mi ch ae 1 Brown:Chemi st -Bob Ward:Chief,Environmental Planning Staff Fish and Wildlife Service -Bruce Apple:Fisheries Biologist -Dale Arhart:Staff Biologist -Keith Baya:Assistant Director for the Environment -Donald McKay:Wildlife Biologist -Gary Stackhouse:Fish and Wildlife Biologist,Federal Projects/Technicial Assistance Coordinator Geo 1ogi cal Survey -Robert Lamke:Chief,Hydrology Section Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service -Janet McCabe:Regional Director -Wi 11 i am We 1ch:Supervi sing Outdoor Recreat ion Pl anner -Larry Wright:Review Section Chief,Federal Projects Nati~nal Park Service . -Brailey Breedlove:Landscape Architect -Terry Carlstrom:Chief of Planning and Design -Ross Cavenaugh:Fisheries Biologist -John Cook:Regional Director -Carl Stoddard:Park Ranger -Howard Wagner:Associate Director of Professional Services United States Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Impact Statement Review Section -El izabeth Corbyn:Chief,Environmental Evaluation Branch STATE AGENCIES Alaska Department of Administration Division of General Services and Supplies -Bill Ower:Contracting Officer Al aska Department of Commerce and Economic Development -Charles Webber:Commissioner Alaska Power Authority -Bruce Bedard:Inspector,Native Liaison Di vi si on of Energy and Power Deve 1opment -Heinz Noonan:Economist Alaska Department of Community and Regional Affairs -Lee McAnerney:Commissioner Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation -Ernst Mueller:Commissioner -Robert Flint:Region II Program Coordinator - Rikki Fowl er :Eco 1ogi st -Robert Mart in:Regi ona 1 Supervisor -David Sturdevant:Management and Techni cal Assistant Eco 1ogi st -Dan Wil kerson:Spec ia1 Projects Pl anner -Steve Zrake:Environmental Field Officer A1ask.a Department of Fi sh and Game Division of Game -Dan Timm:Game Biologist III,Chief Waterfowl Division of Habitat Protection -Phil Brna:Habitat Biologist II -Carl Yanagawa:Regional Supervisor Division of Sport Fisheries -Michael Mills:Senior Fisheries Biometrician III -Thomas Trent:Regional Supervisor,Susitna Aquatic Studies Coordinator, Vice-Chairman of Susitna Steering Committee Alaska Department of Natural Resources -Robert LeResche:Commissioner Divi sion of Forest Land and Water -Ted Smith:Director -Mary Lou Harle:Water Management Officer -Raymond Mann:Land Management Offi cer II -Debbie Robertson:Land Management Officer II Division of Geological and Geophysical Survey -Roy Merritt:Geologist Division of Lands -Frank.Mielke:Chief -Jim Fichione:Land Management Officer -Michael Franger:Special Projects Officer -Joe Joiner:Land Management Officer Division of Minerals and Energy -Glen Harrison:Director Division of Parks -Jack Wil es:Ch ief -Ronald Crenshaw:State Park Planner -Liza Holzapple:Park Planner -Al Miner:Student Intern -Doug Reger:State Archeologist -Sandy Robi nowitz:Park Pl anner -Robert Shaw:State Historic Preservation Officer -Larry Snarsky:District Manager -Vicky Sung:Park Planner -Larry Wilde:District Manager Division of Research and Development -Linda Arndt:Land Management Officer -William Beatty:Planning Supervisor,Land Resources -Christopher Beck.:Planner III -Al Carson:Deputy Director -Randy Cowart:Planner V -Ronald Swanson:Land Management Officer,Policy Research Land Entitlement Unit Division of Transportation and Public Facilities -Joh-n Mi 11 er Alaska Department of Public Safety Division of Fish and Wildlife Protection -Col.Robert Stickles:Director -Wayne Fl eek:Regi on I II Commander -Lt.Rod Mills:Administrative Officer -Lt.Col.Tetzlaff:Deputy Director .j .J - - r I .... .... r r Al aska Department of Transportat ion -Jay Bergstrand:Transportation Planner IV -Cathy Derickson:Transportation Planner -Reed Gibby:Transportati on Pl anner Office of the Governor Division of Policy Development and Planning -Frances Ulmer:Director -Davi d All i son:Po 1icy and Pl ann i ng Sped ali st Un i vers ity of Alaska Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center -Chuck Evans:Research Associate,Wildlife Biologist -William Wilson:Fisheries Biologist LOCAL AGENCIES City of Houston,Alaska -Elsie O'Brien:City Clerk City of Palmer -David Soul ak:City Manager Fairbanks North Star Borough -Paula Twelker:Planner II Matanuska-Susitna Borough Borough Office -Rick Feller:Planner -Rodney Schulling:Planning Director -Lee Wyatt:Act i ng Borough r~anager,Plann i ng Di rector OTHER INSTITUTIONS,ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS Institutions and Organizations Ahtna,Inc. -Robert Goldberg:Attorney -Douglas MacArthur:Special Projects D-irector Chickaloon Village -Jess Landsman:President Cook Inlet Region,Incorporated -Agnes Brown:Executive -Lynda Hays:Shareholder and Community Relations Coordinator -Robert Rude:Senior Vice-President -John Youngblood:Executive Director Fairbanks Environmental Center -Jeff Weltzin:Energy Coordinator Keual Vi 11 age -James Shoalwolfer:President Kn ikatnu Incorporated -Paul Theadore:Chief Knik Canoers and Kayakers -Bruce Stanford:Member Land Field Services,Incorporated -P.J.Sullivan:Representative Ninilchik Native Association,Incorporated -Arnold Orhdhoff:Chief Ninilchik Village -Arnold Orhdhoff:President Norsk Hydro,Sweden -Iver Hagen:Public Relations Salamatoff Native Association,Incorporated -Andy Johnson:President Seldovia Native Association,Incorporated -James Segura:Chief Susitna Power Now -E.Oischner:Executive Director Tyonek Native Corporation -Agnes Brown:President Individuals -Bob Brown:Owner of Bobls Service Unlimited OII!I'IJ I l "i ,., 1 - ., J -! I I ~ I F""'"' ! 1""'\ !I Report on Aesthetic ResourceS FEDERAL AGENCIES United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service -Sterling Powell:Physical.Engineer,Water Resource Specialist United States Department of Commerce National Marine Fisheries Service -Ronald Morris:Supervisor -Bradley Smith:Fishery Biologist United States Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers,Alaska District -Col.Lee Nunn:Oistrict Engineer -Lt.Col.J.Perkins:Deputy District Engineer United States Department of Energy Alaska Power Administration -Fredrick Chiei:Deputy Regional Representative -Robert Cross:Administrator •Donald Shira:Chief of Planning Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,Division of Licensed Projects -Ronald Corso:Director -Paul Carri er:Engi neer -Donald Clarke:Staff Counsel -Thomas Dewit:Landscape Architect -Quentin Edson:Chief,Environmental Analysis Branch -Julian Flint:Supervisor,Engineering Project Analysis'Branch -Peter Foote:Fishery Biologist -Donald Giampaoli:Department Director -Mark Robinson:Environmental Biologist -Dean Shumway:Chief,Conservation Section -Gerald Wilson:Chief,Project Analysis United States Department of Housi ng and Urban Oevelopment -Debra Pevlear:Neighbor Volunteer and Consumer Protection Official United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management -Lee Barkow:Plann~r,Easement Identification Branch -Patrick Beckley:Chief,Branch of Lands and Minerals -Stanley Bronczyk:Chief,Easement Identification Branch -Louis Carufel:Fisheries Biologist -Art Hosterman:Chief,Branch of Biological Resources -Peter Jerome:Landscape Architect John Rego:Geologist -Gary Seitz:Environmental Coordinator -Richard Tobin:Recreational Planner Bureau of Mines -Bob Ward:Chief,Environmental Planning Staff Fish and Wildlife Service -Dale Arhart:Staff Biologist National Park Service -Brailey Breedlove:Landscape Architect -Terry Carlstrom:Chief of Planning and Design -Ross Cavenaugh:Fi sheries Bi 01 og1 st -Howard Wagner:Associate Director of Professional Services United States Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Impact Statement Review Section -Elizabeth.Corbyn:Chief,Environmental Evaluation Branch STATE AGENCIES Alaska Department of Administration Division of General Services and Supplies -Bill Ower:Contracting Officer -. -I Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic -Charles Webber:Commissioner Division of Energy and Power Development -Heinz Noonan:Economist Alaska Department of -lee McAnerney: -Edward Busch: -Lemar Cotton: Community and Regi onal Commissioner Senior Planner Pl anner II I Development Affairs -, -.II Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation -Ernst Mueller:Commissioner Robert Flint:Region II Program Coordinator Rikki Fowler:Etologist David Sturdevant:Management and Technical Assistant Ecologist Dan Wilkerson:Special Projects Planner Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Habitat Protection -Carl Yanagawa:Regional Supervisor ~ Division of Sport Fisheries -Thomas Trent:Regional Supervisor,Susitna Aquatic Studies Coordinator, Vice-Chairman of Susitna Steering Committee Al aska Department of Natural Resources -John Katz:Commissioner -Robert LeResche: Commissioner Division of Forest Land and Water -Raymond Mann:Land Management Offi cer II -Debbie Robertson:Land Management Officer II Division of Lands -Michael Franger:Special Projects Officer -Joe Jo i ner:Land Man agement Offi cer Division of Parks -Jack Wiles:Chief -Ronald Crenshaw:State Park Pl anner -liza Holzapple:Park Planner - Division of Research and Development -Linda Arndt:Land Management Officer -William Beatty:Planning Supervisor,Land Resources -Al Carson:Deputy Director -Randy Cowart:Pl anner V -Ronald Swanson:Land Management Officer,Policy Research Land Entitlement Unit Alaska Department of Public Safety Oivision of Fish and Wildlife Protection -Col.Robert Stickles:Director -Wayne Fleek:Region III Commander -Lt.Rod Mills:Administrative Officer ~, .... Alaska Department of Transportation -Jay Bergstrand:Transportation Planner IV Office of the Governor Division of Policy Development and Planning -Frances Ulmer:Director -David Allison:Policy and Planning Specialist University of Alaska Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center -Chuck Evans:Research Associate,Wildlife Biologist -William Wilson:.Fisheries Biologist LOCAL AGENCIES City of Houston Alaska -Elsie O'Brien:City Clerk City of Palmer -David Soulak:City Manager Matanuska-Susitna Borough Borough Offi ce -Rick Feller:Planner -Claud Oxford:Engineer -Rodney Schulling:Planning Oirector -Lee Wyatt:Acting Borough Manager,Planning Director r OTHER INSTITUTIONS,ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS Inst ituti ons and Organi zati ons Ahtna,Inc. -Robert Goldberg:Attorney -Douglas MacArthur:Special Projects Director Cook Inlet Region,Incorporated -Lynda Hays:Shareholder and Community Relations Coordinator -Robert Rude:Senior Vice-President Fairbanks Environmental Center -Jeff Weltzin:Energy Coordinator Land Field Services,Incorporated -P.J.Sullivan:Representative Norsk Hydro,Sweden -Iver Hagen:Public Relations Susitna Power Now -E.Dischner:Executive Director ,<10!11; I - - ,.... ,..., \ ! ! Report on Land Use FEDERAL AGENCIES United States Department of Agriculture Economics~Statistics~and Cooperative Services -Paul Fuglestad:Agricultural Economist~Natural Resource Economics Division Soil Conservation Service -Sterling Powell:Physical Engineer,Water Resource Specialist United States Department of Defense Air Force -Major Fred Haas:Blair Lakes Range Officer~Deputy Director of Operations and Training Army Corps of Engineers~Alaska District -Loran Baxter:Civil Engineer -Jeanne Bradley:Constructfon Inspector -Col.Lee Nunn:District Engineer -Lt.Col.J.Perkins:Deputy District Engineer United States Department of Energy Alaska Power Administration -Fredrick Chiei:Deputy.Regional Representative -Robert Cross:Administrator -Donald Shira:Chief of Planning Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,Division of Licensed Projects -Ronald Corso:Director -Paul Carrier:Engineer -Donald Clarke:Staff Counsel -Thomas Dewit:Landscape Architect -Quentin Edson:Chief~Environmental Analysis Branch -Julian Flint:Supervisor,Engineering Project Analysis Branch -Peter Foote:Fishery Biologist -Donald Giampaoli:Department Director -Mark Robinson:Environmental Biologist -Dean Shumway:Chief~Conservation Section -Gerald Wilson:Chief~Project Analysis United States Department of Housing and Urban Development -Debra Pevlear:Neighbor Volunteer and Consumer Protection Official United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management -Lee Barkow:Planner~Easement Identification Branch -Patrick Beckley:Chief~Branch of Lands and Minerals -Stanley Bronczyk:Chief~Easement Identification Branch -Mike Brown:Historian -Louis Carufel:Fisheries Biologist -William Gabriell:Leader~Special Studies Group -Art Hosterman:Chief ~Branch of Si 01 09i cal Resources -Steve Leskosky:Environmental Planner -John Rego:Geologist -Gary Seitz:Environmental Coordinator -Tom Taylor:Cartographer,National Mapping Division -Dick Tindall:Anchorage District Manager Bureau of Mines -Mi chael Brown:Cherni st -Bob Ward:Chief.Environmental Planning Staff Fish and Wildlife Service -Bruce Apple:Fisheries Biologist -Dale Arhart:Staff Biologist -Keith Baya:Assistant Director for the Environment -Donald McKay:Wildlife Biologist -Gary Stackhouse:Fish and Wildlife Biologist.Federal Projects/Technicial Assistance Coordinator Geological Survey -Raymond George:Acting District Chief,Water Resources Oivision -Robert Lamke:Chief,Hydrology Section Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service -Larry Wright:Review Section Chief,Federal Projects National Park Service -Brailey Breedlove:Landscape Architect -Terry Carlstrom:Chief of Planning and Design -Ross Cavenaugh:Fisheries Biologist -Carl Stoddard:Park Ranger -Howard Wagner:Associate Director of Professional Services United States Environmental Protection Agency Envi ronmental Impact Statement Revi ew Sect i on -Elizabeth Corbyn:Chief,Environmental Evaluation Branch STATE AGENCIES Alaska Department of Administration Division of General Services and Supplies -Bill Ower:Contracting Officer Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic Development -Charles Webber:Commissioner Alaska Power Authority ~Bruce Bedard:Inspector,Native Liaison Division of Energy and Power Development -Hei nz Noon an:Economi st ~I Alaska Department of -Lee McAnerney: -Edward Busch: -Lemar Cotton: Community and Regional Commi ss i oner Senior Planner Pl anner II I Affairs Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation - Ernst Mueller:Commissioner -Robert Flint:Region II Program Coordinator -Rikki Fowler:Eco1 ogi st -Robert Martin:Regional Supervisor .... .I I""'" I \ r-, r l , -:I -David Sturdevant:Management and Technical Assistant Ecologist -Dan Wilkerson:Special Projects Planner -Steve Zrake:Environmental Field Officer Al aska Department of Fi sh and Game Division of Game -Karl Schneider:Research Coordinator Division of Habitat Protection -Thomas Arminski:Regional Land Specialist -Phil Brna:Habitat Biologist II -Carl Yanagawa:Regional Supervisor Division of Sport Fisheries -Thomas Trent:Regional Supervisor.Susitna Aquatic Studies Coordinator, Vice-Chairman of Susitna Steering Committee Al aska Department of Natural Resources -John Katz:Commissioner -Robert LeResche:Commissioner Division of Forest Land and Water -Ted Smith:Director -Mary Lou Harle:Water Management Officer -Raymond Mann:Land Management Officer II -Debbie Robertson:Land Management Officer II Division of Lands -Frank Mielke:Chief -Dean Brown:Southcentral District Lands Officer -Jim Fichione:Land Management Officer -Michael Franger:Special Projects Officer -Joe Joiner:Land Management Officer Division of Minerals and Energy -Glen Harrison:Director Division of Parks -Jack Wiles:Chief -Ronald Crenshaw:State Park Planner -Liza Holzapple:Park Planner -Al Miner:Student Intern -Doug Reger:State Archeologist -Robert Shaw:State Historic Preservation Officer Division of Research and Development -Linda Arndt:Land Management Officer -Wi 11 i am Beatty:Pl anni n9 Superv i sor.Land Resources -Christopher Beck:Planner III -Al Carson:Deputy Director -Randy Cowart:Planner V -Dale Sterling:Historian -Ronald Swanson:.Land Management Officer,Policy Research Land Entitlement Unit Division of Transportation and Public Facilities -John Miller Alaska Department of Public Safety Division of Fish and Wildlife Protection -Col.Robert Stickles:Director -Wayne Fl eek:Regi on I II Commander -Lt.Rod Mills:Administrative Officer -Lt.Col.Tetzlaff:Deputy Director Alaska Department of Transportation -Jay Bergstrand:Transportati on Pl anner IV -Cathy Derickson:Transportation Planner -Reed Gibby:Transportation Planner Office of the Governor Division of Policy Development and Planning -Frances Ulmer:Director -David Allison:Policy and Planning Specialist University of Alaska Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center -Chuck Evans:Research Assot i ate,Wildl ife Bi 01 ogi st -William Wilson:Fisheries Biologist Geophysical Institute -Ken Dean:Remote Sensing Geologist -Ian Hutchison:Professor of Physics Geology Department -Steve Hardy:Geologist Museum -Robert Thorson:Geologist LOCAL AGENCIES City of Houston,Alaska -Elsie OIBrien:City Clerk City of Palmer -David Soulak:City Manager Ci ty of Wasi 11 a -Earling Nelson:City Clerk Fairbanks North Star Borough -Paula Twelker:Planner II Matanuska-Susitna Borough Borough Office -Rick Feller:Planner -Claud Oxford:Engineer -Rodney Schull i ng:PT anni ng Di rector -Lee Wyatt:Acting Borough Manager,Planning Director School District -Mr.Hotchkiss:Business Manager -Kenneth Kramer:Superintendent OTHER INSTITUTIONS,ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS Institutions and Organizations Ahtna,Inc. -lee Adler:Director -Robert Goldberg:Attorney -Doug 1as MacArth ur:Spec;a1 Projects Director ~ I j r ,.... I i. l ' [ ,.".. \! -Chuck McMahon:Pilot~Hunter,Trapper,Fisherman in Upper Susitna Basin ..Cleo McMahon:Pilot~Hunter in Upper Susitna Basin ..Tom Mercer:President of Denali Wilderness Treks,Bush Pilot,Dog Musher ..James Moran:Pilot~Partner in Tsusena Lake Lodge ..Mrs.Ken Oldham:Co-owner of High Lake Lodge,Guide,Bush Pilot~Author -Butch Potterville:Sportfish Biologist in Upper Susitna Basin -Andy Runyon:Pilot~Hunter ..Roberta Sheldon:Partner in Sheldon Air Service~Talkeetna Resident -Judy Simco:.Hunter,Trapper -Kathy Sullivan:Owner of Genet Expeditions ..Minnie Swanda:Widow of Master Guide,Talkeetna Resident -Jake Tansy:Nat ive Hunter and Trapper ..Bob Toby:Game Biologist~Hunter ..Lee and Helen Tolefson:Subsistence Trappers/Hunters,Talkeetna Residents ..Mrs.Oscar Vogel:Hunter~Trapper,Stephan Lake Resident,Widow of Master Guide -Jeff Weltzin:Devil Canyon Backpacker ..Ed Wick:Talkeetna Resident Chickaloon ViJ 1age -Jess Landsman:President Cook Inlet Aquaculture Association -Floyd Heimback:Director Cook Inlet Region,Incorporated -Agnes Brown:Executive -Lynda Hays:Shareholder and Community Relations Coordinator -Robert Rude:Senior Vice-President -Marge Sargerser:Land Manager -John Youngblood:Executive Director Fai rbanks Envi ronmenta 1 Center -Jeff We1tzin:Energy Coordinator Holmes and Narver -James Pederson:Sus itna Proj ect Manager Keual Village -James Shoalwolfer:President Knikatnu Incorporated -Paul Theadore:Chief Mahay's Riverboat Service -William Carrera:Guide Ninilchik Native Association,Incorporated -Arnold Orhdhoff:Chief Ninilchik Village -Arnold Orhdhoff:President Nors k Hydro,Sweden -Iver Hagen:Public Relations Northwest Al askan Pi pel i ne Company -'Susan Fisson:Director,Socioeconomic Analysis Palmer Valley Hospital -Valerie Blakeman:Administrative Secretary -Rae-Ann Hi ckl i ng:Consultant Salamatoff Native Association,Incorporated -Andy Johnson:President Seldovia Native Association,Incorporated -James Segura:Chief Susitna Power Now -E.Dischner:Executive Director Tyonek Native Corporation -Agnes Brown:President Individual s -Warren Ballard:Game Biologist,Hunter -Dennis Brown:President Akland Air Service -Verna and Carrol Close:Owners of Talkeetna Roadhouse -Mike Fisher:Pilot,Talkeetna Resident -Jim and Vonnie Grimes:Pilots,Owners of Adventures Unlimited Lodge -Pete Haggland:President of Alaska Central Air,Pilot -Paul Hall and:Owner-Manager of Evergreen Lodge,Boater -Cl iff Hudson:Owner/Pil ot of Hudson I s Air Taxi.Talkeetna Res ident -John Ireland:Alaskan Sourdough,Murder Lake Resident -Dave Johnson:Manager,Denali State Park, -Dorothy Jones:President of Talkeetna Historical Society,Representative- elect of Mat-Su Borough Assembly -Frenchy Lamoureux:Hunter,Trapper.Wife and Mother of Big Game Guides -Don Lee:Manager Stephan Lake Lodge,Pilot - -, APPENDIX B~l FORMAL AGENCY COORDINATION CORRESPONDENCE n 1 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water Resources Division 733 W.Fourth Ave.,Suite 400 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 July 27.1981 RECEIVED .JUL "3)1981 ALASKA POW'::::.~.:"::-:·iC.JkITY r i (~ Ii' I I:I r-: )I - f"""; ! i ,.. \!I . ~." ".... r I i I" \.i rTF.I \", At Carson State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources 323 E.Fourth Avenue Anchorage.Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Carson: I have reviewed the Draft Development Selection Report for the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project as requested in the APA transmittal of June 18~1981.The review was limited to the evaluation process used by Acres,the relative impacts of several alternative development plans of Susttna hydroelectric resources,and the conclusion that the Watana- Devil Canyon plan is the preferred basin alternative. There were no problems involved in understanding the selection process used by Acres and there were enough data and inform~tion presented to compare the final candidate lalternative)plans.The relative impaets of the candidates were presented in an understandable and credible manner. Although enly a qualitative evaluation of impacts is presented (pending reports of on-going studies),a reasonable conclusion is that the Watana- DeVil Canyon plan is the preferred candidate for Susitna hydroelectric development. \ cc:Davi dO.Wozniak.Project Engi neer,APA.Anchorage,AK I ~ L:;jH;; f~ii I !"""'l. ~, l J: ,j t , i RECEIVED /\UG ?1981 /JJ.ASKA POWER AUTHORITY AUG;;1901 334 West Fifth Avenue,Suite 250 Anl:horagc,Alaska 99501 Save Energy and You Serve America! United States Departmept of the Interior NATIONAL PARK SERVICE ALASKA STATE OFFICE l20l-03a Mr.David D.Wozniak Susitna Hydro Project Engineer Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31 Anchorage,AK 99501 Dear David: Sincerely, J ~'MLI--icW J Ull C')/j:V\ Larry .Wright ' Outdoo Recreation Planner An additional item of interest which should perhaps be included in the final report is a comparison of the expected life of the project for each alternative dam site considering the effect of silt accumulation in the reservoirs. In response to your request I have reviewed the Draft Devel- opment Selection Report for the Susitna Project.Based upon the information presented in the report,I would judge the evaluation process to be satisfactory.However,I would not want to recommend or otherwise comment on a preferred basin alternative prior to the completion of ongoing studies which will further quantify the anticipated environmental impacts. I assume the final report will reflect a more precise com- parison of environmental impacts for the dam sites under consideration.. Thank you for the opportunity to review the report.The above comments are my own and should not be interpreted as representing the official position of the National Park Service. " IN REPLY REfER TO: ( September 4,1981 P5700.11.87 T.1129 WIl.l.ETT WITTE Susitna t~Jrcelectric Project Reoorts 13EFlRV ,/' ~.!a{l('"/1'4 -St l'ROb~r ~/Ac!i r.·er 109 • S orne ..(~/f...n1t~d States Department of the Interior"-.ir 1/,eological Survey -.l I 7///t .D• •i~i..AMB 1/'I o~se~va l~n_lV1S on l.AWRENCE f .1.1.LtOX 2~61 ,l.SINCl.AIR !ortU.tirl t Oregon 9720B _tANOEFlBUFlGH _t --*,.Q'~l V"-,I Cu:~.r.'suorne; -:::'l ---""-'" _I~./- -;i.:ARl.SON~~r~R~eT~z~~his is in rcferznc2 to your lc~ter dated A~c~st 11. ~~J=;;EX;,;,=~_~o acJ your office to t~"lt::r::ailir:c list for lIRc.;"\;-,crt"• .l.l..OWREV· ie will be pleased -,IINGH ••_.........,I ur Client)t:1S ;qaskc °C1:ier ,tutr,crit,Y,recL!ire~that \,,'e ur.cert~ke on t':V:n..:.4!:'r':l;;z;"l""""-IVA,,----:l,heir behalf both fer:-:'.l an0 il~~":'Gli"dl cnordinatiol!\-Ji-::J.all fe,-~Qral and Joo--7...,,-.-------""'fta te aQ-=i-n::i ~$thG:~i 12\';;;2.;C:i \~c.cJ:..;nteres tin thc:Sl!S i t!lC cro,h::ct.Thisji~usTeAo (of course is .:::i~c f).r~:r:'!)ir2nC:Eta-:-thE"FFRf:Lic2r:sin r prOCf:Ss.P-.s part ~~a..;.o_v_e_--...:.Jf this ,-,rocess~"e (Ire conrdinatinr;\iith .'/N!r !'nc;-'GI~;_~e offio:throuGh H.__r:.......,_,~;y;::_z::::..---H:r.KClt;srt D.LaF::-.'2 ~l'iL0 h:is .::.1 rt::~,jj ~~c"i ved ant .cJ:;::r;nteu 01 i V~ri nus:;i I /-,raj Gct documents as theY j iil ve :,E'S:11 rroduced. J:HAse t 1-1i---------H~y copy of this letter I ':1;11 r'?r;L:·~st r:r.::'lavid ~!oz:-:i:!:of the Alaska _.i!:--.,r,m:.;er Authority to add ~cur office to th,~!'i~a i1 in~1i st for ap:.:rcrri ate ~i""r roject rt:ports anc nE~-;sl£tt€.rs.'>I.'-.Q..-"Ilio-oJ. -,c-%y, Jo~n D.Lawrence Project i~il.na<1e)" JDL/jmh xc:D.Wozniak (APA)-,- J.G.Harnock...""""-- -'L",....-__..~ RECEIVED r !QV 131981 ._"'~.~.., ~ovemDer 9,1961 P5700.06 Araska Dept.of Fish &Game Sport Fish/Susitna Hydro Mr.Ronald O.Skoog Commissioner State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game Juneau,Alaska 99801 Susitna Hydroelectric Project Development Selection Report Dear Mr.Skoog: As you know,Acres American Incorporated is under contract to the Alaska Power Authority to conduct a feasibility study and prepare a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)1icense appl ication for the Susitna Hydro- electric Project.The scheduled date for submission of the app'lication is in June of 1982. Federal law and FERC regulations require that the reports supporting the FERC appl ication be prepared in consultation with Federal and State agen- cies having managerial authority over certain project aspects.This coor- dination must be documented in the license application. A great deal of coordination has taken place at agency staff levels by dir- ect participation in studies or oy participation in committees and task groups.This input,·however,has been primar;ly by staff and may.not nec- essarily reflect the views of the agency.For this reason,we are conduct- ing a parallel formal coordination process by requesting agency comments on ""key study outputs.The pl an of study was the first document coordinated in this manner.Over the next year,there will be several more.This parallel process will affect the other coordination activities of the study. At this time,we request that the Department of Fish and Game review the attached Report,"Development Selection Report",particularly in the areas impacting on the ·fish and game resources. ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED Consu:;'''9 Engineers The Lib~'!Y Banl<Bui!ding.Main at Court Sulfa10 N~....York 1~202 ~ .:j ':_~ , j ueve10pment Se1ection Report -2 ~ovember 9,1981 Your prompt attention to this matter will enable us to continue planning the best possible development for all interests.A response within thirty days of receipts would be greatly appreciated.Please send a copy of your comments to: Mr.Eric Yould,Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 JDL/MMG:jgk Very truly yours, QUvn ~.h//d4V .tc;hn o.Lawrence Project Manager - r -, n II cc:Eric Yould,Alaska Power Authority Mr.Thomas Trent,Department of Fi sh &Game ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED ." .. 1 ..7"'\....'"I!" -"--November 9,1981 P5700.11.75 T.1258 Federal 1 aw and FERC regul ations require that the reports supporting the FERCappl kat ion be prepared in consul tat ion with Federal and State agen- cies having managerial authority over certain project aspects.This coor- dination must be documented in the license application." As you know,Acres Amer~can,Incorpor"ated is under contract to the Al ask"a Power Authority to conduct a feasibility study and prepare a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)license application for the Susitna Hydro- electric Projecta The scheduled date for submission of the application is in June of 1982. A great deal of coordination has taken pl ace at agency staff 1evels by dir- ect participation in studies or by participation in committees and task groups.This input,however,has been primarily by staff and may not nec- essarily reflect the views of the agency.For this reason,we are conduct- ing a parallel formal coordination process,by requesting agency comments on key study outputs.The plan of study was the first document coordinated in this mannera Over the next year,there will be several morea This par- allel process will affect the other coordination activities of the study. At this time,we request that the Bureau of Land r""lanagement review the attached Report,"Transmission line Corridor Screening Closeout "Report", particularly in the areas of aesthetics,land use,and land management. WILLETT WI TTl: BERRY HAYOEN LAMB LAWRENCE SINCLAIR VANOER8URGH tJ "...... ......., CARLSON F.FlET.Z JEX LCWRE,Y SINGH HUSTEAO seVE CHAse /" r -=:7:/t':-.( Mr.John Rego Bureau of Land Management 701-C Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Rego:.". Susitna Hydroelectric Project Transmission Corridor Report -. J t ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED ..'.~..j .•.. i ..""'. .'I ,,' Development Selection Report -2 November 9 ~1981 Your prompt attention to this matter will enable us to continue planning the best possible development for all i'nterests.A response within thirty days of receipts would be greatly appreciated.Please send a copy of your comments to: Mr.Eric Yould~Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4tn Avenue Anchorage,Al aska 99501' Very truly yours, JUL/MMG:jgk cc:Eric Yould,Alaska Power ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED jiJ,t)IJV/~Mveb: ,-4.A!John 0.LJwrence IT'~roject Manager Authority /.. ".;-"~ #!t '1-..~"''"''I ;3\:';"j:,'~~ ~~::_~;November 9,1981 P5700.11 .71 T.1268 ~, I Susitna Hydroelectric Project Transmission Corridor Report ear Mr.Schreiner: s you know,Acres American,Incorporated is under contract to the Alaska ower Authority to conduct a feasibility study and prepare a Federal Energy egulatory Commission (FERC)license application for the Susitna Hydro- lectric Project.The scheduled date for submission of the application is n June of 1982. ederal law and FERC regulations require that the reports supporting the ERC application be prepared in consultation with Federal and State agen- ies having managerial authority over certain project aspects.This coor- ination must be documented in the license application. Mr.Keith Schreiner egional Director,Region 7 .S.Fish and Wildlife Service all E.Tudor Road nchorage~Alaska 99503 yreat deal of coordination has taken place at agency staff levels by dir- ct participation in studies or by participation in committees and task roups.This input,however,has been primarily by staff and may not nec- ssarily reflect the views of the agency.For this reason,we are conduct- ng a parallel formal coordination process,by requesting agency comments on key study outputs.The plan of study was the first document coordinated in this manner.Over the next year,there will be several more.This par- allel process will affect the other coordination activities of the study. At this time,we request that the U.S.FiSh and Wildlife Service review the attached Report,JlTransmi ssi on Line Carri dar Screeni ng Cl aseaut Report ll, particularly in the areas impacting on the fish and wildlife resources. I ,Wll.l.eTT RWITTe BEARY U 1 A HAYDEN I.AMB l.AWASNCe SINCI.AIR VANoeRBURGH D :(~ A CARI.SON P FReTZ RJex I.OWREY e SINGH ; F F HUSTEAD Bove C d ACHASE" e g .--/e .->'"':~~,-i t ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED 1.,~'(:~....J ;.,:~-~[::,"_, (], ,; Development Selection Report -2 November 9,1981 .. Your prompt attention to this matter will enable us to continue planning the best possible development for all interests.A response within thirty days of receipts would be greatly appreciated.Please send a copy of your comments to: Mr.Eric Yould,Executive Director' Al aska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Very truly yours, cc:·Eric Yould,Al aska Power Authority/~------- ~ I I I I t'I rtI,' JDL/NfvIG:j gk /(}tJc'!!lAf d!iU..:IX ....4%V John D.Lawrence I'~.Project Manager ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED ..'.~~. .'.-..---... Mr.Robert Shaw State Historic Preservation Officer Alaska Department of r~atural Resources Division of Parks 619 Warehouse Avenue,Suite 210 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 November 9,1981 P5700·.11.74 T.1263 Susitna Hydroelectric Project Transmission Corridor Report c' ..,-// C /.A Dear Nr.Sh aw: As you.know,Acres American,Incorporated is under contract to the Alaska Power Authority to conduct a feasibility study and prepare a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)license application for the Susitna Hydro- electric Project.The scheduled date for submission of the application is in June of 1982. Federal law and FERC regulations require that the reports supporting the FERC application be prepared in consultation with Federal and State agen- cies having managerial authority over certain project aspects.This coor~ dination must be documented in the license application. A great deal of coordination has taken place at agency staff levels by dir- ect participation in studies or by participation in committees and task groups.This input,however,has been primarily by staff and may not nec- essarily reflect the views of the agency.For this reason,we are conduct- ing a parallel formal coordination process,by requesting agency comments on key study outputs.The plan of study was the first document coordinated in this manner.Over the next year,there wi 11 be several more.Th is par- allel process will affect the other coordination activities of the study. ~ At this tirne,we request that the State Historic Preservation Officer review the attached Report,"Transmission Line Corridor Screening Close.out Report", particularly in the areas impacting on cultural resources.~ , ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED C ...;,J:;..;!>..".',•.. Ti ••,,::.:..:',...•.o'•....,..', 'J,".- Tl·:·.·.' ______fl!·.· ..~• I -:. :•;.J :.:::,:.:- .••:'.l...•~•.•••r -r - Development Selection Report -2 November 9,1981 Your prompt attention to this matter will enable us to continue planning- the best possible development for all interests.A response within thirty days of receipts waul d be greatly appreci ated.Please send a copy of your- comments to: -Mr.Eric Yould,Executive Director- Alaska Power Authority 333 \>Iest 4th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Very truly yours, i I JDl/MMG:jgk jJrnIJYJul tJudu John D.lawrence Proj ect Man ager ......r j: ,! I !,! <I cc:Eric Yould,Al aska Power Authority --;L~ Mr.Alan Carson,Alaska Department of Natural Resources /. // .' ACRES AMERICAN iNCORPORATED ,.. ,._._-_._-----November 9.1!:l81 P5700.11.74 T.1260 ..JI ~i Susitna Hydroelectric Project Transmission Corridor Report John Katz aska Department of Natural Resources uch M neau~Alaska 99811 ar f-1r.Katz: you know~Acres American~Incorporated is under contract to the Alaska' wer Authority to conduct a feasibility study and prepare a Federal Energy gul atory Commission (FERC)1icense appl ication for the Susitna Hydro- ectric Project.The scheduled date for submission of the application is June of 1982. deral law and FERC regulations require that the reports supporting the RC appl ication be prepared in consuHation with Federal and State agen- es having managerial authority over certain project aspects ..This coor- nation must be documented in the license application. great deal of coordination has taken place at agency staff levels by dir- t participation in studies or by participation in committees and task oups.This input,however~has been primarily by staff and may not nec- sarily reflect the views of the agency.For this reason,we are conduct- g a parallel formal coordination process,by requesting agency comments key study outputs.The plan of study was the first document coordinated in this manner.Over the next year,there will be several more.This par- allel process will affect the other coordination activities of the study. /.". II WIL.L.ETT . WITTE 1"1. BERRY P,,...' HAYOEN L.AMB l.AWRENCE SINCLAlf'l n VANOERBURGIol( ....,h.II ....l ~f" CARLSON K::I FRETZ ~ JEX LOWREY 1[1 SINGH -• t ~. HUSTEAO . BOVE U CHAse e :l t::~ ~ih .-'--'/-?, At this time,we request that the Department of Natural Resources review the attached Report,"Transmission Line Corridor Screening Closeout Report Jl ,- particularly in the areas of water quality and use,aesthetics and land use~-, t ,411!'!1, " ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED. ;:.;:_.f>. " :~..; . ..-.':",.•:....'1 -----=----------------..,......~---_. .-., -Development Selection Report -2 November 9,1981 Your prompt attention to this matter will enable us to continue planning the best possible development for all interests.A response within thirty days of receipts would be greatly appreciated.Please send a copy of your comments to: Mr.Eric Yould.Executive Director Alaska Power Authori ty 333 West 4th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Very truly yours, £':~:..../ (::'! JDl/f'.1HG:j gk iJil0 iflU1 &w:t: Jj.fft/John O.Lawrence ~Project Manager rr i : L I ti' 1.1 cc:Eric Yould,Alaska Power Authority :-J /;' Mr.Alan Carson,Alaska Department of Natural Resource;~~ ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED " Wtl-I.ETT WITTE BERRY HAYOEN l.AMB l.AWRENCE SINCl.AIR VANOERBURGH ....' ~r---.. CARl.SON FReTZ JEX' l.OWREY SINGH HUSTEAO BO'tE CHAse /'.'.-;-:::P...-t'~..r. November 9-1981 P5700.11.91 T.1261 Mr.John E.Cook Regional Director Alaska Office .""" National Park Service 540 West Fifth Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 '~ Susitna Hydroelectric Project Transmission Corridor Report ~ Dear Mr.Cook: As you know,Acres American,Incorporated is under contract to the Alaska Pm'ler Authority to conduct a feas ib il ity study and prepare a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)license application for the Susitna Hydro-'.~ electric Project.The scheduled date for submission of the appl kation is in June of 1982.~ -. Federal law and FERC regulations require that the reports supporting the FERC application he prepared in consultation with Federal and State agen- cies having manageri aT authority over certain project aspects.Thi s coor- dination must be documented in the license application.~ A great deal of coordination has taken place at agency staff levels by dir- ect participation in studies or by participation in committees and task groups.This input,however,has been primarily by staff and may not nec- essarily reflect the views of the agency.For this reason,we are conduct- ing a parallel formal coordination process,by requesting agency comments on key study outputs.The plan of study was the first document coordinated in thi s manner.Over the next year,there will be sever a1 more.Th is par- allel process will affect the other coordination activities of the stUdy. At this time,we request that the National Park Service review the attached Report,IlTransmission Line Corridor Screening Closeout Report ll ;particularly in the areas of history and archeology,and recreation.~1 t ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED i:,":..~.:.:-;~.""'"I;_~••••:••••:•••l~."•: ....... '. r \o " Development Selection Report - 2 JOUMMG:'j gk November 9,1981 Very truly yours, ;OOJO Vlu;-tiuLTv John '0.Lawrence Project Manager ,...., ~; I' \.'- cc:Eric Yould,Al aska Power Authority ~ Mr.Larry Wright,National Park Service I'.. ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED .., " WILL.ETT WITTE BERRY HAYOEN LAMB LAWR.ENCE SINCL.AIR VANOERBURGH r-..... '-'r-- CARL:.SON FRETZ Jex L.OWREY SINGH HUSTEAD Bove cHASe e /~ November 9~1981 P5700.11.91 T.1267 - Regional Administrator Region X U.S.Environmental Protectipn Agency 1200 South Avenue Seattle~WA 98101 Susitna Hydroelectric Project Transmission Corridor Report. Dear Sirs: As you know~Acres ftrneri can ~Incorporated is under contract to the Al aska Power Authority to conduct a feasibil ity study and prepare a Federal Energy ~ Regulatory Commission (FERC)license application for the Susitna Hydro- electric Project.The scheduled date for submission of the application is in June of 1982. Federal law and FERC regulations require that the reports supporting the FERC appl ication be prepared in consultation with Federal and State agen- cies having managerial authority over certain project aspects.This coor- dination must be documented in the license application. A great deal of coordination has taken place at agency staff levels'by dir- ect participation in studies or by participation in committees and task groups.This input~however,has been primarily by staff and may not nec- essarily reflect the views of the agency.For this reason~we are conduct- ing a parallel formal coordination process,by requesting agency comments on key stUdy outputs.The plan of study was the first document coordinated in this manner.Over the next year,there wi 11 be several more.Th i s par- allel process will affect the other coordination activities of the study. At this time,we request that the Environmental Protection Agency review the ~ attached Report~IITransmission Line Corridor Screening Closeout Report", particularly in the areas impacting on land,water~or air quality.-, t ACRES AMERICAN fNCORPORATED T····.: ,'. Development Selection Report -2 November 9 ~1981 Your prompt attention to this matter will enable us to continue planning the best possible development for all interests.A response within thirty _days of receipts would be greatly appreciated.Please send a.copy of your comments to: Mr.Eric Youl d~Executive Di rector Alaska Pow~r Authority . 333 West 4th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Very truly yours, JDL/MMG:jgk }i.e>lJ\fllAj r!/(i./tr~ John D.Lawrence Project Manager ,- cc:Eric Ybuld,Al aska Po~er Authority./~ Judy Swartz,U.S.Envlronmental Protectl0nAgency.1 ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED ,.------ November CJ _ )ClRI .", P5700.11.92 T.1262 WILLETT WITTE BEARY HAYDEN LAMB l.AWRENCE SINCLAIR VANOe~aURGH "-',~ CARLSON FRETZ JEX l.OWREY SINGH HUSTEAO eove CHAse ,/ .:..--/;/.r. ,- Mr.Lee McAnerney State Archeologist Department of Regional Affairs Pouch B Juneau,Alaska 99811 Susitna Hydroelectric Project ~, Transmission Corridor Report Dear ft1r.McAnerney:'~ As you know,Acres American,Incorporated is under contract to the A1 aska Power Authority to conduct a feasibility study and prepare a Federal Energy ~ Regulatory Commission (FERC)license application for the Susitna Hydro- electric Project.The scheduled date for submission of the application is in June of 1982. federal law and FERC regulations require that the reports supporting the FERC application be prepared in consultation with Federal and State agen-~~ cies having managerial authority over certain project aspects.This coor- dination must be docLrnented in the license appl kation. •A great deal of coordination has taken place at agency staff levels by dir- ect participation in studies or by participation in committees and task groups.This input,however,has been primarily by staff and may not nec- essarily reflect the views of the agency.For this reason,we are conduct-~ ing a parallel formal coordination process,by requesting agency comments on key study outputs.The plan of study was the first document coordinated in this manner.Over the next year,there will be several more.This par-I'lI'I'f a11el process will affect the other coordination activities of the study. At this time,we request that the Department of Regional Affairs review the """"l; attached Report,IITransmission Line Corridor Screeni ng Closeout Report", particularly in the area of history and archeology. , ~I ACRES AMERrCAN INCORPORATED ., -! I Development Selection Report - 2 November 9,1981 Your prompt attention to this matter will enable us to continue planning the best possible development for all interests.A response within thirty days of recei pts would be greatly appreci ated."Pl ease send a copy of your comments to: r I C'!;JDL/HMG:j gk Mr.Eric Yould,Executive Director Alaska Power 'Authority 333 West 4th Avenue Anchorage,"Al aska 99501 Very truly yours, ;Dt}&'#01 IJAr.J:u John D.Lawrence Project Man ager cc:Eric Yould,Alaska Power Authority c,./:----:-- ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED ,, . II...·cl,.-t '"&,'.~,.. ~~<.. .------, November Q.1981 P5700.11.92 1.1266 <' L ,J - Susitna Hydroelectric Project Transmission Corridor Report Service ear Mr.'Me Vey: s you know,Acres American,Incorporated is under contract to the Alaska ower Authority to conduct a feasibility study and prepare a Federal Energy egul atory Commission (FERC)license appl kation for the Susitna Hydro- lectric Project.The scheduled date for submission of the application is n June of 1982. ederal law and FERC regulations require that the reports supporting the ERC application be prepared in consultation with Federal and State agen- ies having managerial authority over certain project aspects.This coor- ination must be documented in the license application. r.Rooert McVey irector,Alaska Region ational Marine Fisheries OAA .0.Box 1668 uneau,Alaska 99802 great deal of coordinat ion has taken pl ace at agency staff 1eve 1s by dir- ct participation in studies or by participation in committees and task roups.This input,however,has been primarily by staff and may not nec- ssarily reflect the views of the agency_For this reason,we are conduct- ng a parallel formal coordination process,by requesting agency comments on key study outputs.The plan of study was the first do!=ument coordinated in this manner.Over the next year,there will be several more.This par- allel process will affect the other coordination activities of the study. r WIl.L.ETT WITTE BERRY I ! I HAYDEN L.AMB L.AWRE;NCE SINCL.AIR VANDERSURGH "'1 -. -.1 -- CARL.SON FRETZ JEX L.OWREY SINGH i ;. HUSTE;AD •• SOVE • CHASE - ~,.- :;~..-:/'£.r (/i At this time,we request that the National Marine Fisheries Service review the attached Report,"Transmission Line Corridor Screening Closeout Report", .particularly in the areas,impacting on the marine resources.~ d- t ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED •J ;~~:: •.-.:":...~~..~~ .'-,., Development Selection Report - 2 November 9,1981 Your prompt attention to this matter will enable us to continue planning the best possible development for all interests.A response within thirty days of receipts would be greatly appreciated.Please send a copy of your comments to: Mr.Eric Yould,Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue. Anchorage,Al aska 99501 rr"'-,' I,. t JDl/MMG:jgk Very truly yo~rs, Aw'j,fl-'f N~i:u John D.lawrence Project Manager cc:Eric Yould,Alaska Power Authority Mr.Ron Morris,National t4arine Fisheries .' ACRES AMERICAN iNCORPORATED November 9)1981 P5700.11.73 T.1269 ----~~ol.lee Nunn '----~istrict Engineer __..,..ll.S.Army Corps of Engi neers ~-~nchorage District ---~.O.Box 7002 '~nchorage.Alaska 99510 ) y .ce R \SUFIGH . I :---vl1ear Col.Nunn: Susitna Hydroelectric Project Transmission Corridor Report ·.:N:.,;.__pS you know)Acres Prnerican"Incorporated is under contract to the Al aska ~---~ower Authority to conduct a feasibility study and prepare a Federal Energy :regulatory Commission (FERC)license application for the Susitna Hydro- .~--t:lectric Project.Tne scheduled date for submission of the application is ~---~·n June of 1982. ::.-,:,o-----rederal 1 aw and FERC regul at ions require that the reports supporting the ERC application be prepared in consultation with Federal and State agen-:---....;~_-+~tes having managerial authority over certain project aspects.This coor- :----ninat ion must be documented in the 1icense appl ication. :-----i"\ll.g reat deal of coordination has taken place at agency staff levels by dir- :----b;::ct participation in studies or by participation in committees and task !-?-_~aroups.Tni s input.however"has been primari ly by staff and may not nec- ,..'v----e....ssarily reflect the views of the agency.For this reason)we are conduct- ing a parallel formal coordination process,by requesting agency comments on key study outputs.The plan of study was the first document coordinated in this manner.Over the next year,there will be several more.This par- allel process will affect the other coordination activities of the study. At this time~we request that the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers review the attached Report,"Transmission Line Corridor Screening Closeout Report ll , particularly in the areas impacting on land and water quality. , ACRES AMERICAN lNCORPORATED <.'•••••1 1:j . •-..~~..••....! (..." 1 "",I .in ~o., ~ ~I,/l ~~ ,.,., :::s""",co J ....;:::s ;1\) I\) '"1 Ul ~ IlIll!il I j r'" I uevelopment Selection Report - 2 November 9~1981 r"". I r Your prompt attention to this matter will enable us to continue planning the best possible development for all interests.A response within thirty days of receipts would be greatly appreciated.Please send a copy of your comments to: Mr.Eric Yould,Executive Director Al aska Power Authority 333 West 4th.Avenue Anchorage~Alaska 99501 Very truly yours, JDL/MMG:j gk /':i~"'11 del;'t til I ./,. /'.J{)t ....~'1 ~...'-l·t,. John D.lawrence Project Man ager . i, ,I i (, I,"- cc:Eric Yould,Al aska Power Authority ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED ear Mr.Mueller:· ederal law and FERC regulations require that the reports supporting the ERC application be prepared in consultation with Federal and State agen- ies having managerial authority over certain project aspects.This coor- ination must be documented in the license appl kation. s you know,Acres American,Incorporated ;s under contract to the Alaska ower Authority to conduct a feasibil ity study and prepare a Federal Energy egulatory Commission (FERC)license application for the Susitna Hydro- 1ectric Project.The schedul ed date for submission of the appl kat ion is n June of 1982. ~ I J November 9~1981 P5700.11.92 T.1264 Susitna Hydroel ectric Project Transmission Corridor Report r.Ernest w.Mue 11 er ommissioner laska Department of Environmental Conservation uneau,Alaska 99801 ..---_.~.... great deal of coordination has taken place at agency staff levels by dir- ct participation in studies or by participation in committees and task roups.This input,however,has been primarily by staff and may not nec- ssarily reflect the views of the agency.For this reason,we are conduct- n9 a parallel formal coordination process,by requesting agency comments n key study outputs.The plan of study was the first document coordinated 1n this manner.Over the next year,there will be several more.This par- allel process will affect the other coordination activities of the study. -", 1.. ..-- WILLEn I WinE I BERRY .HAYDEN L.AMB L.AWRENCE SINCLAIR VANOeRBUI=IGHI ......1-.,...,- CARL.SON FRETZ JeX L.OWREY SINGH H-USTEAO BOVE CHASE //,-///..,;'. At this time,we request that the Department of Environmental Conservation review the attached Report,IITransmission Line Corridor Screening Closeout keport ll ,particularly in the areas impacting on the air,land,and water qual ity. t ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED :.•,•••1:.'.l~....'.,-.~~:."~-::::."... =J ..•.;-.'-.1:_.•:'~~~. !"••:....;•••4 ....'."..,.~....1-.:.:.~::n·~ Development Selection Report - 2 Nov ernb er 9 ~1981 Your prompt attention to this matter will enable us to continue planning the best possible development for all interests.A .response within thirty days of receipts would be greatly appreciated.Please send a copy of your comments to: Mr.Eric Yould~Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue .Anchorage~Alaska 99501 Very truly yours~ JDL/NMG:jgk· ...P'1tJ'/I'1 I!Iw:i:£ ..~tv John D.Lawrence--r Project Manager ~. \ f-·... -.. cc:Eric Yould,Alaska Power Authority Mr.Bob Martin~Alaska Department of Environmental ..~.:~... .' ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED cL!--- Con serv at ;0/) November 9,1981 P5700.1l.92 T.1257 ~, WIL.L.ETT WITTE BEARY HAYOEN L.AMB L.AWAENCE $INCLAIA VANOERSURGH r-,lo'-. r-'1".."/ CARL.SON FRETZ ",ex L.OWREY I SINGH HUSTEAD sove CHASE ....- (-..;?-/....- Hr.Tom Barnes Office of Coastal Management Division of Policy Development &Planning Pouch AP Juneau,Alaska 99811 Susitna Hydroelectric Project Transmission Corridor Report Dear Mr.'Barnes: As you know,Acres American,Incorporated is under contract to the Al aska Power Authority to conduct a feasibil ity study and prepare a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)license application for the Susitna Hydro- electric Project.The scheduled date for submission of the application is in June of 1982. Federal law and FERC regulations requir~that the reports supporting the FERC application be prepared in consultation with Federal and State agen- cies having managerial authority over certain project aspects.This coor- dination must be documented in the license application. A great deal of coordination has taken place at agency staff levels by dir-~ ect participation in studies or by participation in committees and task groups.This input,however,has been primarily by staff and may not nec-~ essarily reflect the views of the agency.For this reason,we are conduct- ing a parallel formal coordination process,by requesting agency comments on key study outputs.The plan of study was the first document coordinatea ~ in this manner.Over the next year,there will be several more.This par- allel process will affect the other coordination activities of the study. At this time,we request that the Office of Coastal Management review the attached Report,IITransmission Line Corridor Screeni 09 Closeout Report ll , particularly in the areas affecting coastal management. , ACRES Af,,1ER1CAN INCORPORATED ". ".t..".;...."_.' ,. '. Developnent Selection Report - 2 November 9,1981 Your prompt attention to this matter will enable us to continue planning the best possible development for all interests.A response within thirty .days'of receipts would be greatly appreciated.Please send a copy of your comments to: Mr.Eric Yould,Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue Anchorage,.Al aska 99501 [ \ ~, I ! JDL/r.,MG:jgk Very truly yours, ..i£!tJO tJjUl .8/i,vLIV] ~John D.Lawrence v Project Manager ...... ), cc:Eric Yould;Alaska Power Authority r -I I (':"\. i i November 19,1981 P5700.1l.92 Mr.Ernest W.Mueller Conmissioner Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Juneau,Alaska 99801 Susitna Hydroelectric Project .~. Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy Uear Mr.Mueller: As you know,Acres Ameri can,Incorporated is under contract to the Al aska Power Authority (APA)to conduct a feas ibi 1 ity study and prepare a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)license application for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project.The scheduled date for submission of the application is in June of 1982. Federal law and FERC regulations require that the reports supporting the FERC application be prepared in consultation with Federal and State agen- cies having managerial authority over certain project aspects.This coor- dination must be documented in the license application. A great aeal of coordination has taken place at agency staff levels by dir- ect participation in studies or by participation in committees and task groups.Thi s input,however,has been primari ly by staff and may not nec- essarily reflect the views of the agency_For this reason,1Ne are conduct- ing a parallel formal coordination process,by requesting agency comments on key study outputs.The pl an of study was the first document coordinated in this manner.Over the next year,there will be several more.This par- allel process will affect the other coordination activities of the study. At this time,we request that the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation review the attached Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy,which has been developed by APA,the resource agencies and Terrestrial Environmental Specialists. ACRES AMERJCAN INCORPORATED c ~.·_~~l,"g E~g.:;(;efS T:"!:Lit;~:rl-y e~!'".k Sui',;·...;;r..~a-tn al CC..Ht =_'·c.kL r~(~.·.Vcr".~':202 .., .1 )/ r-: I '. Fish and Wildlife Mitigation.Policy Page 2 November 19.1981 Your prompt attention to this matter will enable us to continue planning the best possible development for all interests.A response within thirty days of recei pts woul d be greatly appreci ated.Pl ease send a copy of your ,-.....comments to me and to: ! Mr.Eric Yould.Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue Anchorage •.Alaska 99501 Very truly yours. JDL/MMG:jgk Enc. ~J)\L-'t ~1.1'-1 b John D.Lawrence .Project Manager ..- I t cc:Bob Martin (letter on ly) ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED Lj.,i!1 ,~~~I:..,' ",'.~'... Mr.Robert McVey Director,Alaska Region National Marine Fisheries Service NOAA P.O.Box 1668 Juneau,Alaska 99802 November 19,19~1 P5700.11.91 ~:.1 ~. I ( Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy ~ Dear Mr.McVey: As you know~Acres American,Incorporated is under contract to the Alaska Power Authority (APA)to conduct a feasibility study and prepare a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)license application for the Susitna Hydroel ectri c Project.The schedul ed date for submis$ion of the appl icat ion is in June of 1982. Federal law and FERC regulations require that the reports supporting the FERC appl ication be prepared in consultation with Federal and State agen-. cies having managerial authority over certain project aspects.This coor- dination must be documented in the license application. A great deal of coordination has taken pl ace at agency staff level s by dir- ect participation in studies or by participation in committees and task groups.This input,however ~has been primari ly by staff and may not nec- essari ly refl ect the views of the agency.For this reason,we are conduct- ing a parallel formal coordination process,by requesting agency comments on key study outputs.The plan of study was the first document coordi nated ~I in this manner.Over the next year,there will be several more.This par-'. all el process will affect the other coordinat ion activities of the study. At this time,we request that the National Marine Fisheries Service review the attached Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy,which has been developed by APA,the resource agenci es and Terrestri al Environmental Speci ali sts..."" ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED C'_,:U:!;I'1g Er.:;ln~ers ~.';Lit ~rti's~nk euil::.I"g r.'.",n al Cc:url =-....u~'o r~,?:~yv"p,.~-':2D2 ~ I I~ r J \ ,'. Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy Page 2 November 19,1981 ~ i I' Your prompt attention to this matter will enable us to continue planning the best possible development for all interests.A response within thirty days of receipts would be greatly appreciated.Please send a copy of your comments to me and to: Mr.Eric Yould,Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Very truly yours, -JDL/MI"1G:jgk Ene. cc:Ron Morr is (letter only) ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED ~]),v'r~/.-M.b John D.Lawrence Project Manager Mr.Keith Schreiner Regional Director,Region 7 U.S~Fish and Wildlife Service 1011 E.Tudor Road Anchorage,Al aska 99503 Dear Mr.Schreiner: •November 19,1981 P5700 •.11.91 Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy I'~ I As you know~Acres American,Incorporated is under contract to the Alaska Power Authority (APA)to conduct a feasibil ity study and prepare a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)license application for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project.The scheduled date for submission of the application is in June of 1982. Federal law and FERC regulations require that the reports supporting the FEHC application be prepared in consultation with Federal and State agen- cies having managerial authority over certain project aspects.This coor- dination must be documented in the 1 icense appl ication. A great deal of coordinat i on has taken pl ace at agency staff 1evel s by dir- ect participation in studies or by participation in committees and task groups.This input,however,has been primarily by staff and may not nec- essarily reflect the views of the agency.For this reason,we are conduct- ing a parallel formal coordination process,by requesting agency comments on key study outputs.The plan of study was the first document coordinated in this manner.Over the next year,there will be several more.This par- allel process will affect the other coordination activities of the study. At this time,we request that the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service review the attached Fi sh and Wild 1i fe Hi ti gat i on Pol icy,wh i ch has been developed by APA,the resource agencies and Terrestrial Environmental Specialists. ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED ~. ; - C:-;:;U'!H':J Er,glr.<;:ers T ....;:lib-!:rty e2'rll-;c:.J~!d~"'!g.t.~aln at Court EiJ~~a!o.r:e,',yo,l<14202 ~ T€:j{;ph~'1e 7!E-a;3·;'£2£TE:'ex 91-~':23 ':'CnES auF +"""- Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy Page 2 -.5'.,"r'-ex November 19,1981 Ar Your prompt attention to this matter will enable us to continue planning the best possible development for all interests.A response within thirty ,days of receipts would be greatly appreciated.Please send a copy of your comments to me and to: Mr.Eric Yould,Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Very truly yours, """.;'\ JDL/MMG:j gk Enc. ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED John D.Lawrence Project Manager November 19,1981 P5700.11.92 -i i Mr.Ronald Skoog Conmissioner State of Al aska Department of Fish and Game Juneau,Alaska 99801 Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy Dear Mr.Skoog: As you know,Acres Pmeri can,Incorporated is under contract to the Al aska Power Authority (APA)to conduct a feasibility study and prepare a Federal Energy Regulatory Corrmission (FERC)license application for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project.The scheduled date for submission of the application is in June of 1982. Federal law and FERC regul ations require that the reports supporting the FERC appl icat;on be prepared in consultation with Federal and State agen- ci es having manageri a 1 authority over certai n proj ect aspects.Th is coor- dination must be documented in the license application. A great deal of coordination has taken place at agency staff levels by dir- ect participation in studies or by participation in committees and task groups.This inpot,however,has been primarily by staff and may not nec- essarily reflect the views of the agency.For this reason,we are conduct- ing a parallel formal coordination process,by requesting agency comments on key study outputs.The plan of study was the first document coordinated in this manner.Over the next year,there will be several more.This par- allel process will affect the other coordination activities of the study. At this time,we request that the State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game review the attached Fish and Wildl He Mitigation Pol icy,which has been developed by APA,the resource agencies and Terrestrial Environmental Speci al i sts. ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED " Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy Page 2 November 19~1981 Your prompt attention to this matter will enable us to continue planning the best possible development for all interests.A response within thirty days of receipts would be greatly appreciated.Please send a copy of your comments to me and to: Mr.Eric Yould,Executive Dire'ctor Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 I"""" I JDL/MMG:jgk Enc. cc:Tom Trent (letter only) ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED Very truly yours, ~:D.!-..~/~G John D.Lawrence Proj ect Man ager ~I Enclosure November 24 11 1981 P5700.'1.92 T.1297 xc:Alaska Power Authority JDl:dlp Mr.David Haas Of11 ce of the Governor ~Division of Policy Development andPlann1ng Pouch AW Juneau.AK 99811 Dear Mr.Haas:Susitna Hydroelectric Project c,o(l'/FonnalAgency Coordination As discussed yesterday.I am enclosing a list'of all people within state and federal agencies to whom we are sending Susitna Hydroelectric Project Reports.The list is keyed to explain who gets which reports.we are attempting to insure that each agency has the opportunity to review reports dealing with resources or issues for which it has jurisdiction. If I can be of further help,please let me know. Sincerely, ·~~n~ Project Manager ·. .; WIL1.ETT WITTE BERRY /")..J"'1 r;.." IXI 'l _liz.-.::~I'~~ /"'lof U £JA\- LAMB I LAWRENce LBINRCAIR y ~A~GH_r -f( CARLSON FR,ETZ Jex LOWREY SINGH I V ~rA 1 ~l:.n HU~ Bove CHAse I---'-- r, I , .~l SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT REPORTS CIRCULATED FOR FORlW..AGENCY COORDINATION NtMJER KEY WIL.l..ETT --1 I/ITTE ERRY- -r'*'"-f'~AYOEN LAMS l..L.AWRENCE ;r iINCL.AIRrifANOERSU.RGH ;-'1 ~.~ON I FRETZ', ~EX • ,LOWREY -'INGH 1 ~r~i_'HUSTEAO 1SaVE £ I CHASE J, ~ Plan of Study 1980 Envi ronmenta 1 SUIIIIlary Report 1980 Fi sh Ecology Annual Report 1980 Plant Ecology Annual Report 1980 Big Game Annual Report 1980 Furbearer Annual Report 1980 Birds and Non-Game Manrnal Annual Report 1980 land Use Annual Report• 1980 Socioeconomic Annual Report 1980 Cultural Resources Annual Report Transmission Line Cocridor Screening Report Development.Selection Report 1981 Final Subtask Report Draft Feasibility Report 1 2 3 ·4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 (.' \. Regional Administrator Region X U.S.Environmental Protection Agency 1200 South Avenue Seattle,WA 98101· Co 1.Lee Nunn District Engineer U.S.Army Corps of Engineers Anchorage District P.O.Box 7002 Anchorage,Ala~ka 99510 Mr.Keith Schreiner Regional Director,Region 7 U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service 1011 E.Tudor Road Anchorage,Alaska 99503 Mr.John E.Cook Regional Director Al aska Office National Park Service 540 West Fifth Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Ms.Judy Schwarz U.S.Environmental Protection Agency Ma il Stop 443 Region X EPA 1200 South 6th Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101 Mr.Ron Morris Director,Anchorage Field Office National Marine Fisheries Service 701 C Street Box 43 Anchorage,Alaska 99513 Reports sent/to be sent 1,2,11,12,13,14 1,2,11,.12,13,14 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,11, 12,13,14 1,2,3,4,5,6,7, 11,12, 13,14 1,2,9,10, 11,12,13~14 1,2,8,11,12,13,14 1,2,11,12,13,14 1,2,11,12,13,14 1,2,11,12,13,14 - -I !",... Mr.Ronald O.Skoog Commissioner State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game Juneau,Alaska 99801 Mr.Ernest W.Mueller Convnissioner Al aska Department of Environmental Conservation Juneau,Alaska 99801 Mr.Lee Wyatt Planning Director Matanuska-Susitna Barough Box B Palmer,Alaska 99811 Mr.Tom Barnes Office of Coastal Management Division of Policy Development &Planning Pouch AP Juneau,Alaska 99811 Mr.Thomas Trent State of Al aska Department of Fish &Game 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502 Ms.Lee McAnerney Commissioner Department of Community &Regional Affairs Pouch B Juneau,Alaska 99811 Mr.Robert Shaw State Historic Preservation Officer Alaska Department of Natural Resources Uivision of Parks 619 Warehouse Avenue,Suite 210 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Reports 'sent/to be sent 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,11, 12,13,14 l r 2,3,4,5,6,7,11, 12,13,14 1,2,11,12, 13,14 1,2,11,12,13,14 1,2,8,11,12,13,14 1,2,11,12,13,14 1,2,11,12, 13,14 1,2,11,12,13,14 1,2,9,11,12,13,14 1,2,9,10,11,12,13, 14 1,2,8,11,12,13,14 Dear Mr.Trent: Wll.l.ETT WITTE BERRY i {:u.-1 1 I.AMB LAWRENce SINCI.AIR VANOERBU~GH [ CARL.SON FFlE'TZ . JEX 1.0WReV SINGH ...,.J-w ( HUSTEAO BOVE ..7-:.J1.'",..,11'7'- ;l(p ~..~./ CHASe f- .1-0 November 25,19B1 P5700.1l.92 Te 1301 Mr.Tom Trent Al aska Department of Fish and Game 2207 Spenard Road Anchorage,AK 99503 Susitna Hydroelectric Project Report Review As you discussed with Michael Grubb on November 24,1981, I am enclosing the following Sus1tna Hydroelectric Reports which were also sent to Mr.Skoog for ADF&G review and convnent: 1.1980 Environmental SWIII'Iary Report 2.1980 Big Game Annual Report 3.1980 Fish Ecology Annual Report 4.1980 Plant Ecology Annual Report 5.1980 Furbearer Annual Report 6.1980 Bird and Non-Game Annual Report As you suggested we win in the future send reports both to Mr.Skoog and directly to you • Sincerely, John o.Lawrence Project Manager MMG:dlp xc:E.Yould/APA R.Skoog/ADF&G Enclosures OFEICI&OIl TEtE OOVgSNOa DIVISION OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND PlANNING GOVERNMENTAL COORD INA nON UNrr, JAY S.HAMMOND,Governor POUCH AW (MS·0165J JUNEAU,ALASKA 99811 PHONE:(907)465·3562 December 2,1981 RECEIVED DEC 7 1981 Mr.John D.Lawrence Project Manager,Susitna Hydroe1 ectric Project Ac res Ameri can Incorporated The Liberty Bank Building,Main at Court Buffalo,New York 14202 Dea r Mr.lawrence: , (This letter should clarify a telephone conversation we had on November 23,1981 ~!and the role of this office in reviewing subsequent materials relating to thet,Susitna Hydroelectric Project. Sincerely, ilu~Iv',;J~vJ David W.Haas State~Federal Assistarice Coordinator ease ad vi se us if you can c1 ari fy any of the revi ew process and if you ve any questions._" Ou~office recently received copies of correspondence addressed to To~Barnes, formerly of the Alaska Office of Coastal Management (oCM).We conduct Alaska _____----:::lCo.asta1 Management Program (ACMP)cons i stency revi ews for OCM as well as uni fied .ate responses on many major projects.Thus,oCM notified us of this correspond- ceo In this regard,weld first like to inform you that Ms.Wendy Wolf has placed Tom Barnes atoCM and will handle any future reviews of the Susitna oposa1 for oCM. ALASKA?OWER rUTHORITY --l..USJTNA FILE 'P5700 Pr./j.9?sg UJ:\II"'C N for future reviews,we would like to receive a mailing list of all agenciesP-:;;/5-q°·c ntacted and a copy of the parti cu1 ar report.We would.l ike to do an i nforma- cl':·ona1 review of the feasibility study when it is available.We would expectzrIj;1 cri I t at an Environmental Impact Stat.ement (EIS)would also be prepared for this 2 Ie ~.!jor project and that we would conduct an ACMP consi stency revi ew of it.If ~I~,p !.u do prepare such an EIS ,we would like to coordinate the mail i ng of such_,.JI~j .~d cument with you to simplify our review procedures.We would,of course,like I'i iJ:::','J :.t know if there won It be an EIS.--.-77"-,-:- I,/I .'.-fi c .~~---p -ll~-::,-I-.~i ~-;-;---rl--,--,~J P:::!=1~I'PGHl/ -g'-!.!~!k'~ {SNT !~;-DlAI L I ~=h :~~I c:Eric Youl d,APA-j",_.-----_[__I =fll--1-~-1-n ~I-_- December 4,1981 P5700.11.92 T.1325• Susitna Hydroelectric Project Document Transmittal Form Sincerely yours, ~7'n~c€-L- ~John O.Lawrence Proj ect Man ager ear Mr.'Mue 11 er: r.Ernest W.Mueller ommissioner laska Department of Environmental Conservation uneau,Alaska 99801- nclosed·isa document transmittal form which should have accompanied our ackage dated November 10 containing copies of the Development Selection eport and its appendices.The document transmittal form is part of a ewly-implemented procedure at Acres which is intended to verify the arrival f documents shipped via various carriers and thus alleviate as quickly as ossible any problems which may arise due to documents being misplaced uring transit. f you have any questions,pl ease do not hesitate to call. MWIl-1.ETT WITTE C BERRY A "\ J HAYDEN l.AMB l.AWRENCE SINC1.AIR VANOERBURGH ,....(~ CARL.SON FRETZ JEX ~ L.OWREY SINGH r- J ~ HUSTEAD II sove ~ n CHASE· ////- {.;-d..-{~ JEM/jh Enclosures cc:Mr.Bob Martin 1·~;l7 Alaska Dept.of Environmental Conservation ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED CO"~uH"',;E"gineers T~e liberty ean"BUild'ng.Mo,n at Ctlurl E~~~aio Nc ..·..York j4202 ~, .,WIL.1.ETT -i 'ITTE EI'I:RY,... -r,. .........AYDEN LAMB .u.AWAENCe-.INCLAIR ANDERBURGH-" --t..'.-I . -;"':ARLsaN FRETZ .Io.l.ExIJaWREV \INGH JIHUSTEAO I save ~. I CHASE .!. B~/.// ~/'/ / r ---~-- December 4,1981 P5700,11.92 T.1330, Mr.Lee Wyatt Planning Director Matanuska-Susitna Barough Box B Palmer,Alaska 99645 Sus Una Hydroel ectric Project Document Transmittal Form Dear Mr.Wyatt: Enclosed is a document transmittal form which should have accompanied our package dated November 10 containing copies.of the Development Selection Report and its appendices.The document transmittal form is part of a newly-implemented procedure at Acres which is intended to verify the arrival of documents shipped via various carriers and thus alleviate as quickly as possible any problems which may arise due to documents being mispl aced during transit. If you have any quest ions,please do not hesitate to call . Sincerely yours, ~~.Yn~ ~John D.Lawrence Proj ect Man ager' JEM/jh Enclosures ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED C cnsu'tir.g E!'\!t,"eers The Liber:y 9ank BuJc:ng 1.~a·!'\a1 Courl ;u~·a!o.!·:e:.Yo'I,U202 December 4,1981 PS700.11091 T..1323 - • ....J j , j Susitna Hydroelectric Project Document Transmittal Form Sincerely yours, r.Robert McVey irector,Alaska Region ational Marine Fisheries Service OAA .0.Box 1668 uneau,Alaska 99802 ear Mr.McVey: f you have any questions,please do not hesitate to call . nclosed is a document transmittal form which should have accompanied our ackage dated November 10 containing copies of the Development Selection eport and its appendices.The document transmittal form is part of a ewly-implementect procedure at Acres which is intended to verify the arrival f documents shipped via various carriers and thus alleviate as quickly as ossible any problems which may arise due to documents being misplaced uring transit. WII..LETT ~ WITTE ~ BERRY N , HAYOEN LAMB LAWRENCE SINCLAIR VANOEABURGH ,....r--k CARLSON FRETZ JEX LOWREY SINGH !HUSTEAD I BOVE \ ! CHASE " 1 I ./ ...;;;.,/f- ~~~eR._r John D.Lawrence Project Manager JEM/jh Enclosures cc:Mr.Ron Morr is,Di rector (,;1 h Anchorage Field Office National Marine Fisheries Service. ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED - Cc:,r~u':lng Eng:ir.eers n.e L'b!;rty e2nk Buildmg r.lain <It Court euUalo N.e·.·;YC'~~~202 ~,'r-,,",~ !i .'ii,:,: j -;J nI.i........._~ , --. I 1"'""'To~":""':':::::::---t'''lr.John E.Cook~~w~'L=L=E~TT~__~egional Directorl-WITTE _IIiFlRY 1\1 aska Office -'--__--1'~ational Park Service 1-+---------1i40 West Fifth Avenue ~·~~~_~.nchorage,Alaska 99501~:AYDEN 1-;..AMB LAWRENCE ~INCLAIFl C\:ARLSON 1-'1 FRETZ December 4,1981 P5700.11 .91 T.1328 Susitna Hydroelectric Project Document Transmittal Form HI..;;Je;:x~~__'l:frear Mr.Cook: _r"0WREY _{iNGH enclosed is a document transmittal form which should have accompanied our I ,:ackage dated November 10 containing copies of the Development Selectionf-~-----'l'lIjjeport and its appendices.The document transmittal form is part of aPIlUSTE.AD rbwly-implemented procedure at Acres which is intended to verify the arrival Isove [.,.documents shipped via various carriers and thus alleviate as quickly as-r j.;ussible any problems which may arise due to doc.uments being misplaced -',';HASE n ring transit. I 1 J :...---.----t you have any questions,please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely yours, 9C~~ ~John D.Lawrence Project Manager ~' JEM/jh Enclosures cc:Mr.Larry Wright National Park Service ,/i.~I I ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED T~.;;L:co:r:,Ban;'9:;"d,~,g '!J:'"at C:"rt ~BUH2;~Ne~:~YO·..;"!~202 December 4,1981 P5700.11.91 T.1320, ,.., :,;~, ] Susitna Hydroelectric Project Document Transmittal Form Sincerely yours, ear Sirs: nclosed is a document transmittal form which should have accompanied our adage dated November 10 containing copies of the Development Selection eport and its appendices.The document transmittal form is part of a ewly-implemented procedure at Acres which is intended to verify the arrival f documents shipped via various carriers and thus alleviate as quickly as ossible any problems which may arise due to documents being misplaced ur in 9 tr an sit. f you have any questions,please do not hesitate to call. Regional Administrator egion X .5.Environmental Protection Agency 200 South Avenue eatt 1e,WA 98101 ! WILI.ETT RWITTE BERRY U 1 S HAYDEN LAMB I.AWRENCE SINCLAIR VANDERBUFIGH '-( CARLSON FRET%. JEX n 1.0WREY ~ , SINGHI " I K HUSTEAD II' I Beve I .., 01 ,-I CHAse --- ~~~p.John D.Lawrence Project Manager JEM/jh Enclosures cc:Ms.Judy Swartz U.S.Environmental Protection Agency ,1IO!'!l ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED Cc.nsullin'g Engineers The Liberty Bank 8u;Jc"ng,~.~am al Coull 81.:"'='0 New Yor~1~202 .\- December 4,1981 P5700.11.70 T.1324 • Susitna Hydroelectric Project Document Transmittal Form Sincerely yours, r.Ronald O.Skoog orTlmissioner laska Department of Fish and Game uneau,Alaska 99801 ygW?~ ~John D.Lawrence Project Manager ear Mr.Skoog: nclosed is a document transmittal form which should have accompanied our ackage dated November 10 containing copies of the Development Selection eport and its appendices.The document transmittal form is part of a ewly-implemented procedure at Acres which is intended to verify the arrival f documents shipped via various carriers and thus alleviate as quickly as ossible any problems which may arise due to documents being misplaced uring transit. f you have any questions,please do not hesitate to call. "I WIL.L.ETT " r-r"WITTE r-!:''eE~RY 1 I I ~....,.HAYDEN IL.AMS I L.AWRENCE [fINCL.AIR VANDERSURGH ~/r- jCARLSON IFReTZ r I Jex :C!L.OWREY'SINGH ~ .' I t ,...J t I 1'1 HUSTEAO I save I [ l['" I",CHASE 1 .I'""'l .-...""".'{( aEM/jh Enclosures , )I'T)cc:Mr.Thomas Trent J -.,l State of Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game r \t ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED L..-J' I .. f _t :~i :.-:.:: i ...........LIoii .........,r , December 4,1981 P5700.11 .71 T.1322 , WILLETT WITTE BERRY HAYOEN LAMB LAWRENCE SINCLAIR VANOERSURGH f0-r fo-s... CARLSON FRETZ JEX l.OWREY SINGH HUSTEAD BOVE CHAse /-/ (!..--/----t(..... Mr.Keith Schreiner Regional Director,Region 7 U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service 1011 E.Tudor Road Anchorage,Al aska 99503 Susitna Hydroelectric Project Document Transmittal Form Dear Mr.Schreiner: Enclosed is a document transmittal form which should have accompanied our package dated November 10 containing copies of the Development Selection . Report and its appendices.The document transmittal form is part of a newly-impl emented procedure at Acres wh ich is intended to verify the arrival of documents shipped via various carriers and thus alleviate as quickly as possible any problems which may arise due to documents being misplaced during trans it. If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely yours, ~~~~ tf»'-John D.Lawrence Project Manager JEM/jh Enclosures , .j , .J., .,1 -.' - ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED L....J '}"o"f r~ 1...,"-'-~~~ , December 4,1981 P5700.11.74 T.1329 Si ncere ly yours, Susitna Hydroelectric Project Document Transmittal Form ear Mr.Katz: nclosed is a document transmittal form which should have accompanied our ackage dated November 10 containing copies of the Development Selection eport and its appendices.The document transmittal form is part of a ewly-implemented procedure at Acres which is intended to verify the arrival f documents shipped via various carriers and thus alleviate as quickly as ossible any problems which may arise due to documents being misplaced uring transit.. f you have any questions,please do not hesitate to call. ~'~&-e- ~.John D.Lawrence Project Manager Mr.John Katz laska Department of Natural Resources ouchM uneau,Alaska 99811 WILL.ETT ~ _r"WITTE i .'3E.RRY""',Jl. .F HAYDEN -l L.AM9 L.AWRENCE IoSINCL.Al R VANDEASURGH ~ALSON I FRETZ IJEX I""l"l.OWREY t SINGH' L, I ...,.\ L •HUSTEAD ISOVE, -':iICHASE I ~""'. I ~ ~'~---L/"- JEM/jh Enclosures i"cc:Mr.Al an Carson \~\'I Alaska Dept.of Natural Resources .... ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED , December 4,1981 P5700.11.74 1.1326 - 1 1.·,,12 Susitna Hydroelectric Project 1 Document Transmittal Form ,J Si ncere1y yours, ear Mr.Shaw:.'1_ ~1'_:1 nclosed is a document transmittal form which should have accompanied our ackage dated November 10 containing copies of the Development Selection 1 eport and its append ices.The document transmittal form is part of a l.,i ewly-implemented procedure at Acres which is intended to verify the arrival f documents shipped via various carriers and thus alleviate as quickly as ossible any problems which may arise due to documents being mispl aced uring trans it. f you have any questions,please do not hesitate to call. r.Robert Sh aw tate H-istoric Preservation Officer 1 aska Department of Natural Resources ivision of Parks 19 Warehouse Avenue~Suite 210 nchorage~Alaska 99501 WIt.LETT 1'1 WITTE BERRY- ) HAYDEN "I L..AMB LAWRENCE SINC1.AIR VANDER BURGH -r-~ CARl.SON FRETZ JEX l.OWREY SINGH h, HUSTEAD save CHASE /:,-' ~-?//-({/ JEM/jh \1-\~ Enc1 osures cc:Mr.Alan Carson Alaska Dept.of Natural Resources ~77JC6'L£J ~John D.Lawrence Project Manager - ., ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED i i }J r : , December 4,1981 P570Q,11,75 1.1331 Susitna Hydroelectric Project Document Transmittal Form Sincerely yours, r.John Rego ureau of land Management 01-C Street nchorage,Al aska 99501 ear Mr.Rego: t1C.77JS!3~ r-John D.Lawrence Project Manager nclosed is a document transmittal form which should have accompanied our ackagedated November 10 containing copies of the Development Selection eport and its appendices.The document transmittal form is part of a ewly-impl emented procedure at Acres wh ich is intended to ver ify the arr iva 1 f documents shipped via various carriers and thus alleviate as quickly as oss ible any problems wh ich may ari se due to documents bei ng mispl aced uring transit. f you have any questions,please do not hesitate to call. i M I WIL1.ETT B~WITTE ~[BERRV .7 A I I ~HAVDEN I.AMB I1.AWRENCE "'*'5INC1.AI R ~:VANDERBURGH :-1(; ~[CARLSON ,'FRETZ ~ IJEX l:ri-r WREY ~ SINGH P I R, .J..8HUSTEAD D I'SOVE n, Ii:HASE fI I "J., ~,d~i; ../ JEM/jh Enclosures !""", j r l ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED Consultln;-Eng,nfl'ers Tt;e Liberty Bank 8uilc.ng.I!.ain at Court a ..._·~alo,Ne\'"Vor",1':202 WILLETT WITTE SERRY HAYDEN LAMS LAWRENCE SINCLAIR VA ND.ER SlJRGH ~.".'"'"'l'----i_c.:.;a.;-_-------1 '..I.sON ~"Z .~.··.·1111--1 .December 4,1981 P5700.11 .73 T.1321, Col.Lee Nunn District Engineer U.S.Army Corps of Engineers Anchorage District P.O.Box 7002 Anchorage,Alaska 99510 Susitna Hydroelectric Project Document Transmittal Form Dear Co 1.Nunn: Enclosed is a document transmittal form which should have accompanied our package dated November 10 containing copies of the Development Selection Report and its appendices.The document transmittal form is part of a newly-impl emented procedure at Acres which is intended to verify the arrival of documents shipped via various carriers and thus alleviate as quickly as possible any problems which may arise due to documents being misplaced during transit . If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely yours, ~.7:J7~.a.£-- ~John D.Lawrence Proj ect Man ager JEM/jh Enclosures ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED Consu'ltlngEngineers The Liberty Sank 6ulldJl'g.Main at Court Suffalo.New YOtil 14202 .- , '.-~r ,j , ',.J !!'"'I! I I J iII!I'!J ! TelephO.,e 716-853-;525 Telex 91-6423 ACRES eUF F i December 4,1981 ('5700.11.91 T.1332, JEM!jh Enclosures .Tom Barnes fice of Coastal Management vision of Policy Development &Planning x AP neau,Alaska 99811 closed is a document transmittal form wh ich should have accompanied our ckage dated November 10 containing copies of the Development Selection port and its appendices.The document transmittal form is part of a wly-implemented procedure at Acres which is intended to verify the arrival documents shipped via various carriers and thus alleviate as quickly as ssible any problems which may arise due to documents being misplaced ring transit. ~rrWILLETT"If wrTTE BERRY i 0 J..UiHAYOEN LAMBrLAWRENCE I SINCl.AIR YANOERBURGH Ir', r 'I CARLSON I FReTZ erJEX LOWREY nSINGH I !a I (e 1 e HUSTEAD ( f I Bove a ""'"- u I CHASE ~ Ir /P'v':' t1 ~/ r t" I r \ r- I r r" 1 l Susitna Hydroelectric Project Document Transmittal Form ar Mr.Barnes: you have any questions,please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely yours, 9C-.~ pz...John D.lawrence Project Manager ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED C~~·S~;1;~;~Eng:r.f:ers 619 WAREHOUSE DR.,SUITE 210 III!!\I ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 .. PHONE:214-467<ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY SUSITNA F;./'00 ,------~~- ..,Ir"·"'I' :.::\-,,=,j~.........~1~\,i_:'1 r:~/;;r) ~~J__.J ~ JAY S.HAMMOND,GOVERNOR ~ RECEIVED DEC 14 1981 ACRES AmtllJlilUl m~UHPORATrn Re:1130-13 December 4,1981 DIVISION OF PARKS John D•.Lawrence Project Manager Acres American,Inc. The Liberty Bank Building,Main at Court Buffalo,New York 14202 Dear Mr.Lawrence: We have reviewed the 1980 reports by the University of Alaska Museum de nflg -5 NT - with the cultural resources of the Susitna Hydroelectric project area.Th ~ report documents the survey activities conducted during 1980 which adeq ~r~~-- accomplish the tasks outlined in the proposed work plan.The sampling ... designed on the basis of geomorphic features and known use areas seems surpassed our expectations of site incidence in the area.The report s that the first level inventory was very competently conducted and recor The second year activities as outlined in the procedures manual was acco plished in the 1981 field season according to information gained throug verbal communication with the principle archaeological investigators. understand that the field research strategy was changed slightly from th~·l--I...".":=--\ expected due to information gained during 1980.These changes appear tOUJ.aJle...-_.:-.~'" more directly addressed problems which surfaced during the course of analysis of the 1980 data.A final review of the 1981 results and reports will have to await receipt of that document. DEPARTMElWT OF N&nJRAL RESOIJRCES (. We feel that the steps taken thus far in the cultural resource management of the project have been excellent and one of the few instances of adequate lead time.We would like to make the observation that the work thus far is only preliminary to the work yet needed for the Susitna Hydroelectric project. Reconnaissance and testing of yet to be examined areas should continue.The clearances of specific areas of disturbance provided as additional survey by the Museum should indicate the continued need for clearances of ancillary projects which could affect cultural resources.Also,a formal mitigation plan for those sites to be affected by the project must be formulated.Once definite decisions on the route of access to the project area from existing road systems are made,those access routes and material sites must be examined for conflicts and needs for mitigation.Issuance of a permit by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission should and probably will in.clude provisions specifying under federal law the need for such protection. - ,o-J11 LH JA Y S.HAMMOND,GOYERNOR / SUBPORT BUILDING JUNEAU,ALASKA 99801 DEPART)IE'T OF FISH :\~D GA .1IE OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER October 23,1981 Mr.Eric P.You1d Alaska Power Authority 334 West 5th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.You1d: Thank you for your invitation to place a member of my staff on the committee being established to review mitigatory recommendations for the Susitna Hydroelectric project.I have designated Mr.Carl Yanagawa, Regional Supervisor for the Habitat Division,to sit as our represent- ative on the review committee. -l I anticipate that Mr.Yanagawa will work closely with the other members of the committee,and with Tom Trent and Karl Schneider,to develop sound policy recommendations for Su-Hydro. Mr.Yanagawa's office is in the Fish and Game building at 333 Raspberry Road and he can be reached at 267-2138. Sincerely, - 1 .Ronald O.Skoog -+d"t Commissioner J---(907)465-4100 -I u.s. REPLY TO /S 443....TTN Of:M· .~I.'. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION X 1200 SIXTH AVENUE SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101 it E CE I V E 0 Orr ..., """"..- AlASM pnl'ILR~..Il,;AUT11"';'7•LII.\' Eric P.Yould,Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 534 West 5th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 DearMr~~ RECEIVED OCT 3 n 1531 ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)accepts your invitation to participate on the Review Committee for the Fisheries Mitigation Task Force on the hydroelectric development of the Upper Susitna River Basin. EPA generally relies on the state and Federal fish and wildlife agencies for the technical input and evaluation on such task forces.However,I feel that we may be able to provide as a member of the Review Committee, a different perspective which may help your efforts.Because of our limited resources both in staff and travel money,our participation will have to be somewhat limited. I have designated Ms.Judi Schwarz as our formal contact for the activi- ties of this Review Corrmittee.Ms.Schwarz is in the Environmental Evaluation Branch in our Seattle Office and has had primary contact with the Susitna project through our EIS review responsibilities.She can be reached at (206)442-1285.I have also asked Jim Sweeney,Director of our Alaska Operations Offi~e to provide support in this effort because of his proximity and knowledge of the unique Alaska conditions.His tele- phone number in Anchorage is (907)271-5083. We look forward to actively participating on this Review Committee.Any information you can send us on the activities of the wildlife mitigation task force would be appreciated. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to become actively involved in this important development. c c:Jim Sweeney ,P-- ; i .," ",I....._. December 1,1981 -' OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER 11.Y S.HAMMOND.GOVERNOR POUCHM JUNEAU,ALASKA 99811 PHONE:(9 a7)4 65 - 2 40 0 ""'"! I t i J~ - ..r--, lO·J9LH Mr.Eric Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 334 West 5th Avenue Anchorage,AK 99501 Dear Eric: This letter is in response to your September 28,1981 letter offering an opportunity for DNR participation on the mitigation review committee for the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project. Al Carson of the Division of Research and Development will be our representative for the committee.He can be reached by phone at 276-2653. Thanks for providing us with the opportunity to participate in this important endeavor. Sincerely, ~z Commissioner cc:"Reed Stoops ---ALASliA POWER AUTHORITY 334 WEST 5th AVENUE·ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 RECEIVED DEC 14 1981 December 9,1981 -Phone:(907)277·764-' (907)276·0001 ACktl)I\ltl.c.nlli#\ft llttiUltl'UttATED Mr.Keith Schreiner Regional Director,Region 7 U.S.Fish &Wildlife Service 1011 E.Tudor Road Anchorage,Alaska 99503 Dear Mr.Schreiner: '- A member of your staff advises me you did not receive my letter of September 25,1981,inviting your participation to the Susitna Hydroelectric Project mitigation Review Group.Let me hasten to repeat the invitation. - ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY SUSfTNA FILE P5700 ./1 SE(JUENCE NO. ;=;c:?/~ Integral to our study of the potential effects of hydroelectric development of the Upper Susitna River Basin is the formulation of fisheries mitigation plans.To that goal,a Fisheries !-1itigation Task Force,in two parts,is being formed.One part will be a core group of the principal investigators.Their task will be to identify and address impacts,and develop appropriate mitigation plans. A Second group will act as a review committee commenting on the efforts of the core group. You are invited to be a member of the Revi.ew Committee. If you agree,your role would be to work in concert with other concerned agencies to assess the adequacy of the impact predictions and associated mitigative planning.In addition to reaping the benefits of your expertise,your participation would also fulfill key consultation requirements outlined in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)regulations and in the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. A similar structure was established early this year for wildlife mitigation.An early objective will be to reorganize into one-common review committee for mitigation, overviewing separate core groups for fisheries and wildlife. You might consider this when you appoint your organizational representative. - - ,-" r i \i r r Dear I am enclosing for your review the following reports prepared by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project: 1.Fi na 1 Draft Report ,Adult Anadramous Fi sheri es Proj ect 2.Resident and Juvenile Anadramous Fish Investigations on the Lower Susi tna Ri vet 3.Aquatic Habitat Investigations. These reports are provided for your information only;they are not part of our formal Agency Coordination Program.Comments are not requested but will certainly be accepted. Sincerely, !1 I ._------_.-.__.._- r"1r.A1 Carson Division of Research &Development Department of Natural Resources 323 East Fourth Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 -. Mr.Gary Stackhouse U.~.Fish &Wildlife Service 1011 East Tudor Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502-------~M2r..::..:..:..C~a:-:r;.;lRyT:a~n~a~g:-:a~w~a~.::..=..~=--------------------------J~- Regional Supervisor for Habitat Division Al ask a Department of Fish &Game 333 Raspberry Road Anchor age,A1 ask a 99502 Ms.JUdl Schwarz Environmental Evaluation Branch U.S.Environmental Protection Agency Region X 1200 Sixth Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101 ~ i - - December 18,1981 P5700.11.91 T.1355 Ms.Janet McCabe Area Di rector u.S.Geo 109i ca 1 Survey 1011 E.Tudor Suite 297 Anchorage,AK 99501 Dear Ms.McCabe:Susitna Hydroelectric Proj~ct Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Review Group In September of thi s year the Al aska Power Authority (APA)invited you or a member of your staff to participate in a Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Review Group for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project.To date,APA has received no response. The first Review Group meeting is to be held January 20,1982,at 10:·00 a.m. at the offices of APA.Please inform APA if you will be attending this meeting and if you wish to participate in future mitigation planning efforts. If so,we will ·send material for your review prior to this meeting. Thank you. Sincerely, t ' ."",I . MG:adh cc:APA ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED Kevin Young Environmental Coordinator Mr.Carl Yanagawa Regional Supervisor for Habitat Division Alaska Department of Fish &Game 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502 Dear Mr.Yanagawa: December 18,1981 P5700.11.92 T1360 ...'- --I 1 - As a member of the group establ ished to review fish and wildl ife mitigation recommendations on the Susitna Hydroelectric Project,I request your atten- dance at a meeting on January 20,1982,at 10:00 a.m.,in the office of the Alaska Power Authority.In the first week of January,I will forward for -your review,a prel iminary outl ioe of project operations,impact issues,and mitigation options as prepared by our design teem and the fish and wildlife mitigation technical core groups.I would appreciate receiving by January 30,1982,any written comme.nts you may have regarding our approach,results,- or evaluations to date. Following the preparation of the Feasibility Report,which will contain more detailed information on project operations and our evaluation of these oper- ations,.an opportunity will be provided for you to perform a more thorough review. If you have any questions relating to this meeting or the proposed functions of the review group,please contact Mr.Dave Wozniak of APA or myself at 716-853-7525. Sincerely, Kevin Young Susitna Environmental Coordinator MG/jk ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED Consulting Engineers The Liberty Bank Building.1.lam at Court Sulfa/o.Ne':.Yor""14202 J.' Telex S1·6~23 ACR.~S S\JF Ot~er Offices:CC!..:""It'a,r.lD·P,:~sbwgh.PA:Rarei;)!".NC;Was~jr.gl0n.DC ~. - December 18,1981 P5700.11.91 T1361 - Ms.Judi Schwarz Environment a1 Eva 1 uat ion Br anch U.S.Environmental Protection Agency Region X 1200 Sixth Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101 Dear Ms.Schwarz: As a member of the group established to review fish and wildlife mitigation recommendations on the Susitna Hydroelectric Project,I request your atten- dance at a meeting on January 20,1982~at 10:00 a.m.~in the office of the Al aska Power Authority.In the first week of January~I will forward for your review,a prel iminary outl ine of project operations~impact issues~and mitigation options as prepared by our design team and the fish and wildlife mitigation technical core groups.I would appreciate receiving by January 30~1982,any written comments you may have regard ing our approach,results, or evaluations to date. Following the preparat ion of the Feasibil ity Report,which will contain more detailed information on project operations and our evaluation of these oper- ations~an opportunity will be provided for you to perform a more thorough review.. If you have any questions relating to this meeting or the proposed functions of the review group,please contact Mr.Dave Wozniak of APA or myself at 716-853-7525. Sincerely~ f.eVI ....Y<.>w"".;//"1& Kevin Young Susitna Environmental Coordinator MG/jk ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED Consulting Engineers The Liber::;S<ln~aUjJ~lng ~.~a;n al Court Bul!alo.Ne....Yor~H202 Tele;>hone 71e·El53·7:'25 Te!ex 91 ·E~:<3 ,t..CRES aUF Other O'Lees:Colu:r.t.ia.r.~O:P,tls!;urgJ'l.PA·Raleigh.NC Washir.~lon.DC Mr.Bradley Smith Environmental Assessment Division National Marine Fisheries Service Federal Building &U.S.Court House 701 C Street,Box 43 Anchorage,Alaska 99513 Dear Mr.Smith: December 18,1981 P5700.11.92 T1363 - As a member of the group establ ished to review fish and wildl ife mitigation recommendations on the Susit.na Hydroelectric Project,I request your atten- dance at a meeting on January 20,1982,at 10:00 a.m.,in the office of the Alaska Power Authority.In the first week of January,I will forward for your review,a preliminary outline of project operations,impact issues,and mitigation options as prepared by our design team and the fish and wildlife mitigation technical core groups.I would appreciate receiving by January 30,1982,any written comments you may have regarding our approach,results, or evaluations to date.- Following the preparation of the Feasibility Report,which will contain more detailed information on project operations and our evaluation of these oper-.~ ations,an opportunity will be provided for you to perform a more thorough review. If you have any questions relating to this meeting or the.proposed functions of the review group,please contact Mr.Dave Wozniak of APA or myself at 716-853-7525. Sincerely, j:::e v '"1.y".I "'J I /"1 b Kevin Young Susitna Environmental Coordinator MG/jk ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED Con~ullmg Engineers The Lib(;rly Bank SuiJa,r.g.Il.ain at COLlrt Telex 91·6':22 ACRES aUF ) - ..... ,t .... December 18~1981 P5700 .11.91 T1364 Mr.Al Carson Division of Research &Development Department of Natural Resources 323 East Fourth Avenue Anchorage~Al aska 99501 Dear Mr.Carson: As a member of the groupestabl ished to review fish and wildl ife mitigation recommendations on the Susitna Hydroelectric Project,I request your atten- dance at a meet ing on January 20,1982~at 10:00 a.m.,in the office of the Alaska Power Authority.In the first week of January~I will forward for your review,a prel iminary outl ine of project operations,impact issues,and mitigation options as prepared by our design team and the fish and wildlife mitigat ion techn i cal core groups.I woul d apprec i ate recei v ing by January 30,1982,any written comments you may have regarding our approach,results, or eval uat ions to date. Following the preparation of the Feasibility Report,which will contain more detailed information on project operations and our evaluation of these oper- at ions,an opportunity wi 11 be prov ided for you to perform a more thorough review. If you have any questions relating to this meeting or the proposed functions of the review group,please contact Mr.Dave Wozniak of -APA or myself at 716-853-7525 . Sincerely~ Kevin Young Susitna Environmental Coordinator MG/jk ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED Cons~I1:"~E:og,r.eers T!1.:Lfberly e~~;.;e:",~!jn""9 r.~ain at Court. euf~alo.'.JewYor~'~202 December 18,1981 P5700.11.91 T1359 Mr.Michael Scott District Fisheries Biologist U.S.Bureau of Land Management 4700 East 72nd Street Anchorage,Alaska 99507 Dear Mt.Scott: As a member of the group establ ished :~o review fish and wildl ife mit igation recommendations on the Susitna Hydroelectric Project,I request your atten- dance at a meeting on January 20,1982,at 10:00 a.m.,in the office of the Al aska Power Authority.In the first week of January,I will forward for your review,a preliminary outline of project operations,impact issues,and mitigation options as prepared by our design team and the fish and wildlife mitigation technical core groups.I would appreciate receiving by January 30,1982,any written comments you may have regarding our approach,results, or evaluations to date. Following the preparation of the Feasibility Report,which will contain more detailed information on project operations and our evaluation of these oper- ations,an opportunity will be provided for you to perform a more thorough review. If you have any questions relating to this meeting or the proposed functions of the review group,please contact Mr.Dave Wozniak of APA or myself at 716-853-7525. Sincerely, Kevin Young Susitna Environmental Coordinator MG/jk ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED Con~Ulhng Engineers The Liberty eanl<BUilding ~J.ajn al Court 8u~falo.r,ew Yor~1~202 - Telex 91'6~23 ACRES BUr - II""'! I December 18,1981 P5700.11.91 T1362 Mr.Gary Stackhouse U.S.Fish &Wildlife Service 1011 East Tudor Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502 Dear Mr.Stackhouse: As a member of the group establ ished to review fish and wildl ife mitigation recommendations on the Susitna Hydroelectric Project,I request your atten- dance at a meet ing on January 20,1982,at 10:00 a.m.,in the office of the Alaska Power Authority.In the first week of January,I will forward for your review,a prel iminary outl ine of project operations,impact issues,and mitigation options as prepared.by our design team and the fish and wildlife mitigation technical core groups.I would appreciate receiving by January 30,1982,any written comments you may have regarding our approach,results, or evaluations to date. Following the preparation of the Feasibility Report,which will contain more deta i1 ed informat i on on project operat ions and our eva 1 uat ion of these oper- ations,an opportunity will be provided for you to perform a more thorough review. If you have any questions relating to this meeting or the proposed functions of the review group,please contact Mr.Dave Wozniak of APA or myself at 716-853-7525. Sincerely, {::z V I -..It-,.,.1J 1/"1 .(;, Kevi n Young Susitna Environmental Coordinator MG/jk ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED Cons\Jlt,ng Engineers The Liberly Bank Builclng.t.1ain at CCiurt eu'~alo.New YOfk"H202 Te!ephone 716·653·7525 Te'ex 91·6~23 ACRES eUF ro .......,..t"'."_"~"r ....L .........·.....An c·••,.~.,........0"C"_I ..:_...~,,...-"r...~"";.........,..,,,,,,,nr Busitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Review Group Meetin?, January 7.1982 P5700.".70 T.1395 Mr.Carl Yanagawa Regional Supervisor for Habitat Division Alaska Department of Fish &Game 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage ..Alaska 99502 Dear Hr.Yanagawa: Enclosed for your review: 1)Sus1tna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife f1it1gat1on Policy. 2)Draft Analysis of Hildl1fe i'1itiqation Options. 3)Draft Analysis of Fisheries Mitigation Options. These documents will be d1scus~ed at the Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Review Group Meeting to be beld at 9:00 a.m.(note change of time from letter of Decembar 13,lS81)on January ZQ,1932 at the office of the Alaska Power Authority,334 West 5th AvenUE.Anchorag~I hope you will be able to attend the meeting'. S'fncerely yours t Kevin R.Young Susitna Environmental Coordinator MHG/jmh Enclosures - - .., I - ""lI I October 6)1981 Mr.Eric P.Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 3334 West 5th Avenue Anchorage)Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Yould: , UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMEF=lCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Natior:.:::.:Ib.::'ine Fisheries Service P.O.Eo::::1668 Juneau~Alasr~99802 RECEIVEO OCT 15 1981 AlASKA POW~At)IW}~lf",. - Involvement of this agency with efforts by others to explore the potential for hydroelectric development on the Susitna River dates back to 1973.In 1974)we had contracted Environaid for a study titled "A Hydrologic Reconnaissance of the Susitna River Below Devil IS Canyon") and more recently we have been a participant on the Susitna Steering Committee. We appreciate the opportunity presented in your letter of September 25,1981 to extend our participation by becoming a member on the Susitna Fisheries Mitigation Task Force,Review Committee.I have directed Brad Smith of our Environmental Assessment Division (EAD})Anchorage Field Office to· represent National Marine Fisheries Service (~MFS)on this important com- mittee.Mr.Smith will fully participate on the Review Committee and be res pons ible for d ra ft i ng the recommended N!"lFS I pos it ion. Please continue to send official correspondence through our Regional Office.Delays in NMFS response time associated with our routing of your materials to and from the Anchorage EAD Field Office could be reduced if you would provide a courtesy copy of correspondence dir- ectly to Mr.Smith. Should you have further questions regarding Mr.Smith1s involvement) please contact Ron Morris,the supervisor of the Anchorage EAD Field Office: Bradl ey K.Smith and Ronald J.Morri s National Marine Fisheries Service Federal Building &U.S.Court House 701 C Street,Box 43 Anchorage,Alaska 99513 Phone:(907)271-5006 Sincerely) )Jl.0~V'N-V---at '\',(Robert W.tkVey Director)Alaska Region I I REPLY TO ATTENTION OF': NPAEN-PL-EN DEPARTMc..NT OF THE ARMY ALASKA DISTRICT.CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O.BOX 7002 ANCHORAGE.ALASKA 99510 1 3 OCT \98\ QC120 1981 - Mr.Eric P.Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 334 West 5th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear M~ul-d: This is in response to your letter of 25 September 1981 concerning Corps of Engineers participation in the Upper Susitna River Basin Fisheries Mitigation Review Committee. Unfortunately,the continued funding and manpower constraints under which we must operate make it necessary for me to decline your invitation.However,we will provide the reviews required for the issuance of per~its under our regulatory program. If I can be of further assistance,please contact me directly.If further details are desired by your staff,contact can be made with Mr.Harlan Moore, Chief,Engineering Division at 752-5135. 2"Z?~-""----- LEE R.NUNN Colonel.Corps of Engineers District Engineer John D.Lawrence December 4,1981 Page 2- If you have any questions regarding our comments contained here,please call us.We look forward to receiving the report on 1981 field work. Sincerely, Chip Dennelein Director ( ~ .Shaw ~ cc:Dr.E.James Dixon Curator of Archaeology University of Alaska Museum University of Alaska Fairbanks,Alaska 99701 Eric Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 W.4th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 DR:clk Officer ----_._.........-----------------------------'--, ,- December 9.1981 Eric Yould.,Ex~...utive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 west 4th Avenue.Sui te 31 Anchorage.M 99501 Dear Mr ..Yould: j Il!'!!!! '1 .1 / The fonnal coordinatio.'1 plan as proposed by Acres.has not been famall)'or infonv.a..lly discussed andrevi~with the agencies fran which tile P~r Authority requires responses.This is pro~ bab1y the IT';Qst sigrdficant objection we have Yith t..~approach of Acres.The contractor sent letters to heads of state and federal ag~-rCies requesting spei;ific cc;.-""i!1e.l1ts on detailed sbJdies ar,d reports associated with the Susitr~Hydroelectric Froj~t without having a cO&~lete understanding of the responsibilities and concerns of agencies. S~""ie of the reports 'Plhich agencies win be requested to fonr.a ny respond to win not be pr-ecee-derl by the reievant data and study fin4ings f~~ich t.he su:;;:;ary report and fonr.al aaency COI>FR-nts should be bas~.An obvious exa..r:;p1e is ti'.e revieW of the 1981 draft annual rePQ:rts is required 2 months after the draft feas1- bil1t,y report reyiew. 1. ; 1\. - I\ '2. -~IPGH- ENS SNT OWL-.--M R'V Several state and federal agencies.in recent weeks have been asked to ~ formally review and provide ~ts on several documents relating toC,the proposed SUsitna Hydroelectric Project..AlthDugh the Sus-itna Hydro-:- electric Steering Calmittee is an organization that is designed to pro- vide infQnna.l advice and~t on matters pertaining to the Susitna H.,Yl;iroelec.tric Project"JOOst o-f the steering c~ittee members ~ived the forml agency response ~t that was sent to the agency directors ar;1i camtlssior.ers by Acres.It is primarily because of that fact that the steering COGiitt..Ri!feels that it 15 a.ppropria.te and necessary to send -----.......,a letter to you at this time with res~-t to the Alaska Po\P:er Iwthorityls~A~~:~?~ER re-~uest for formal agency coordination and review on el~~the ~sitna I i SUSn:NA H.,ydroelectric Fower Project.. ,FILE P5700 As a result of CQncerns expressed by ~rs af trff!stei:ring ~ittee"we '.•1/convened a meeting on December 2.1981 of the steering Ccaftittee with ;.EQUENCE~.1~Qber;Mchna~Dave \!O.zniak of.the ,Alaska ~r.~;O~i~Y at~.ondin9. ,<3/8:;"At tins steerlng COfJinlttee ~tlng,we were pro."Qed Wlth aur first gli~se of how the Alaska Power Authority irrta'rds to conduct ti".e fon:;al consultation and coordination required for this p.roject.The formal <:oordination process that is proposed in t.~August.lt~1981 Acres docu:r~nt to &ic Yoo10.subjectOJ' 85usitna HYdroelectric Project FormaJ Coordination Plan-.is conceptually 1-=-::---1----'lapproprfab;but incomplete and deficient.The ronowing are probl~areas --j,:;r-..-I·--I"in the prOp<!sed fonr.al coordination plan as d.escribed above: i, I i~ , J i J I J , ~ 1 j ! )C j, ""'" ) J i 1 (, j' J i ~, ) J ) I 1.' ¥="'~M . , 3.The proposed fCniiil coordination plan.as described in the Au9ust 12,1981,c:loctment froiD Acres to APA does not accurately describeanthepartiesandagencies~should receive certafn doct.ee!\ts. The steer1r,g catBittee feels that the formal alnS1.l1taticn process should proceed in a EQre ccordinat-ad and organized fashion in order to avoid unnecessary consequences.caused by the problB!S 'We r!live identified alxM!.We affer--t,he following suggestions and c.cmaents: 1..we.recaEend that the APA t as soon as possible,c.omene a formal meeting with agerseies to establisn the schedule and t.~prot:eS5 for foreal c.oordini1tion for this project.In light o.f the proposal to have a Ct&Plete draft.feasibil it)'plan availahle tl1\Karch 15,.1982. we urge that the Power Authority convene this Q!eti~and get this IIII1.tter sorted out with the agencies before JanuaJ'Y 1,1982. 2.The formal coordir.ation list that win be used.fOo"this project needs to be reviewed and approved by ager.cy r'e9resentatives to ensure that it ;s ce.eplete and ca::prehensive.At+...ached to this letter please find a.series af additions to the B112/81 Acres list.. 3..R~view of the proposed F~E~R.C.regulations in voltS!!46 ~r 219 of the Federal Register dated 11/23/81 identified a list of inforaa- tion categories to be included in Exhibit E.Ctmparing these re- quirements to the S{iZ/Sl proposed coordination plant ~find the following agency review categories missing:. i).Socioecc.~ic studies 11}..AlteJT.ative dEsigns.locations and energy sources iii)Geo1ogical and soils studies We agree wit-I-)the APA approach of requesting early fot~l reviel ern!c:.onnents on policy related dCCL5ients that are required in oider to puttne project proposal together.For e~le.the ~uest for review <3f the fish and wild- life mitigation po1icy before the spedfic mitigation prp~sol for .the prpject is su1:mitted to agencies for review and cc:m.-.ent. In stm'!!"..ary.tr.e ~bers of the steering c .....~ittee found the proposed fon<oal coordination plan to be revealing ar.-d useful to better u~rstand ho'c!ll agencies win haye torespono in order to ineet the needs of APA.~are particularly encouraged to see that trl€instreaa fla1!'study plan is p1dflfied to be available for review and c~t by agem:ies in Oecer-ber of i98l~Sioce this is such a critical el~nt of the Susitr~Study Plan,this deserves attention and re- sponse from the agencies as so-~n as ~ssible. .. The steering COR!!ittee hopes that you will find the"';a.e caanents ar.d ~ tions u$eful and constructive ar.d 15 anxious to continue ta p~Yide informl review and ad-.ice to the Power Authority.. Sincerely yours, ru·~ A1 carson,Cha i nsan Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Ct8tittee AC:db cc:Steerir.g Coimit""....ee Reed Stoops Quentin Edson,Director.Division of Envil"'ClBental Anajysis~'F..£.R ..C.. A..Starker leopold • - I.:;1 J """I •l ~ l ~, ~ 1 ('C;:" I --- .12/9/81 ." Reccmnended additions to the 8/12/81 agency coordination list.for Susitna. Hydroelectric Project. water Quality and Use Alaska DHR~DF &G •DEC.'. U..S..A~9 Corps of Engineers .'EPA"HPS II.F &WS,GS ..8LH ~"NitS AEIDC '. Alaska OF &G ".DEC..O«R U.S~F &WS,.SS· "·~S~EPA •BLMAEIDC Hi stori ca 1 arid.Archeo logica1 Alaskaor~{~~po)~Df&G"•.OCRA u.s...HPS . •8tH AEIOC Recreation Alaska DNR,.OF &Gu.s.NPS •F"&WS,~~s Mat-Su BOrough AEIOC Aesthetics and Land Use Alaska DNR,OF &G U.S.BLM.F&WS,NPS eIRI AEIDC General OPOP,"00f,Governor's Office ··li:;£Ii=Il¥13n__=__..IIIII -.;iiiiiooo -..-.:.--~~,.-- "" ,- December 9,1981 P5700.l1.92 T.1338 I ..j " 'iJ • We will send future correspondence to Ms.Wendy Wolf at the Alaska Office of Coastal Management.Thank you for notifying us of change in personnel. We win send you copies of all future reports issued fonnally for agency review.My letter to you of November 24,1981 listed all recipients and the reports they will receive. This fonnal agency review process we are conducting is for several purposes.Although we have had many meetings with agency personnel,we have been 1nfonned their views do not necessarily represent those of their agencies.To insure concerns of the agencies are addressed and incorporated, where possible,into project planning and to receive'agency input on the studies,we have implemented this fonnal process whereby project reports are sent to agency Corrmiss1oners and/or Directors.In addition,the Federal Energy Regulatory Cambsion requires documentation of agency input into project planning andm1t1gation. 4)The Feasibility Report will be issued by the Alaska Power Authority (APA). By copy of this letter,I will request you be placed on the distribution list. Mr.David Haas te-Federal Assistance Coord1nat.r te of Alaska ce of the Governor s10n ofPo11cy Development d Planning hAW au,Alaska 99811 Mr.Haas:Susitna Hydroelectric Project i Fonnal AgencyCoordinat1on ~/;)./IC will hopefully address the issues raised in your letter of December 2, "'. eta Wll..I.ETT taWITTE SERRY l ff1 r1vi an I ,,-./7 I:OIlC..'/,- L.AMS t-"~ I.AWRENCe' 'SiNCLAIR A.r H &u ~~(,~jf,his/~981CAflL.sON FRETZ JEX ) LOWREY SINGH ~./'//J 1;(~vl v l ~) HUSTEAD SOVE ) CHASE \ ~~h ,1u.......;.., 5)The Environmental Impact Statement for this project will be prepared and issued by the Federal !gengy Regulatory Commission,on the basis of a license application to be submitted by APA,should a decision be made to do so by the state.If you wish to coordinwte mailing of this document,r suggest you contact Mr.Quentin Edson,Chief of the Environmental Division in Washington,D.C. 1'..:':iil 1 I'j lL r (" j't Mr.Dav1dHaas December 9,1981 page'2 I hope this clarifies matters.Ifyyou have f'urtherquest1ons,please call. ~ i I r I { r \~-- r f'liMGJJmh cc:E.Yould,.APA Sincerely..- ~ John D.lawrence Project Manager '\~. I / RECEIVE.D DEC 28 1981 ACRES AJiI£JlIliJU'JiiGu~fDRATen 1200 SIXTH AVENUE SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101 REPLY TO MIS 443AnNOf: u.S.EN V I RON MEN TAL PRO TEe T ION AGE N C Y REGION X DEC 211981 John D.Lawrence Acres American,Incorporated The Liberty Bank Buil di ng Ma in at Court Buffalo,New York 14202 -SUBJECT:Susitna Hydroelectric Project,Surrmary Annual Environmental Report-1980 and Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report Dear Mr.Lawrence: Thank you for sending us the above reports for our review.We have also received the Development Selection Report and will be forwarding our comments to you on th.at report before the end of December. A~~~~O~~;;'ER We appreciate the extensive coordination effort and the opportunity to SUSITNA review and comment on Susitna reports as they are prepared.I further ~--.----------~appreciateyour attempts to ensure that the views of the Agency are FILE P'5700 adequately reflected in this process.While we have been coordinating ~-=~====~with the Susitna Interagency Steering Committee,our budget restrictions SEQUE~CE NO.have limited our active participation more than I would like.In this P d.:J/regard,it would be extremely helpful to us if you could provide us an I"loverview of your consultation plan and the schedule for future reviews. z ~~~ThiS will better enable us to give you timely comprehensive comments ongL~£::~he ~arious segments of the study,with the overall project perspective c.i ~I 5 :=1n ml nd• ,_'JJ:-C~NI EPA is particularly interested in information on wetland mapping,water o J ~qual ity and water quantity model i ng and project altern at ives.The 1980~..5.~.D Environmental Report appropri ately points out the interrelationships and I J DG importance of these areas to wildl ife survival and downstream fish~J\':M --ecology.However,it does not cover EPA's areas of interest directly. -j'P3 We would like to review the reports on these subjects when they are --I PG H a vail ab 1e. ENS SNT -, _. i - r r { r ( r ( ~C I ' I l f""'\ 1, r ,... l r"'" I I r I 1"""': \ \ i 2 We support the emphasis in the Environmental Report and related studies on identifying ways to minimize the environmental impacts of the Susitna project.In particular~selection of the access route and type of access is an issue with long term environmental consequences which offers many opportunities for minimizing impacts.EPA supports the concept of minimizing impacts by use of a single corridor for both access and trans- mis.sion needs~as pointed out in ooth the Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report and the Environmental Report.We encourage you to incorporate these kinds of suggestions from agencies and the Steering Corrmittee into the project selection~construction and operation plans. Such commitments will certainly positively influence reviews of any FERC license application. We have some concerns with the conclusions about the Central Study area in the Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report.There appear to be different opinions on the environmental consequenc~s of selecting Corri- dor 1 versus Corridor 14.We feel that additional areas should be included in future studies of the central corridor.to prOVide a broader data base from which such conclusions can be drawn.More specifically~ in this area,Corridor One (ABCD),which roughly follows the south side of the SusitnaRiver,is the recommended corridor based on Acre1s techni- cal,economi c and environmental cri teri a.Corri dor 14 (AJCD)foll ows the. same route as Corridor 1 from Gold Creek to -Devils Canyon,.but crosses to the north side of the Susitna River for the section from Devils Canyon to the Watana dam site.Corridor 14 has technical and economic ratings as hi gh as Corridor 1 ~but was not recommended because of environmental and land use conflicts in segment CJ.On solely environmental grounds,it appears that an access route similar to Corridor 14 is preferred to Corridor 1 by both Terrestrial Environmental Specialists~Incorporated '(Environmental Report page 73 and 82)and the Susitna Hydroel ectri c Steering Committee (letter from Al Carson,Chairman~to 'Eric yould,dated November 5,1981.)Therefore~the areas of the central corridor to be further studied should include the north side of the river between Devils Canyon and the Watana dam site to encompass segment CJA as .well'as segment CSA. One reason for the different conclusions regarding the enVironmentally pref erab 1e route between Devi 1s Canyon and the Watan a Dam s He may be the Environmental Report's and the Steering Committee's identification of the most enVironmentally sensitive areas~which then have the highest priori- ty to be avoided.It may be desirable to use a similar approach during the more detailed route selection studies,especially in areas where wetlands must be crossed.Identifying and then avoiding primary and secondary impacts to the most val uabl e wetl and habitats shoul d be an important part of the more detailed studies of all three transmission study areas. 2,......... c .. i :I 3 We appreciate the opportunity to review this report.Please contact me or Judi Sc warz,of my staff,if you would like to discuss our comments. We can be eached at (206)442-1266 and (206)442-1096,respectively. Eric Yould~Alaska'Power Authority Carson,Department of Natural Resources -.! Dear Eric: December 21,1981 Mr.Eric P.Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 334 West 5th Avenue Anchorage,AX 99501 HECEIVI::O 'AlASKA POWER AUTHORITY JA Y S.HAM~~~R!'!J~1 .POUCH 0 -JUNEAU 19111 DEPT.OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION The Department of Environmental Conservation has been contacted by Acres American-requesting formal coordination and review on five Susitna Hydroelectric Project documents.These requests were received in October and November,1981.There apparently is some confusion as to what exactly was being requested.In his letter of November 16,1981,Mr.John D.Lawrence of Acres clarified the situation and extended the review period to 45 days.On December 2, 1981,the Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee met with Mr.Dave Wozniak of your staff.Dave presented-the Acres coordina- tion plan.This document,plus Dave Wozniak's briefing,provided a clearer understanding of what we must do to be responsive to the needs of APA for the Susitna project. As noted by the steering committee's letter to you on December 9, 1981,there are several problem areas with the formal coordination process outlined by Acres.We are particularly concerned that DEC was not inclutled in the water quality and use group.Since DEC sets State Water Quality Standards and regulates water quality throughout Alaska,I feel our inclusion on the water quality review group is necessary. Erns .Mueller Commissioner Review of the coordination plan leads me to recommend that it would be useful for APA and the appropriate agencies to design a single continuing process for review and comment on the Susitna Hydro- electric Project.Since we are dealing with a State-sponsored project,I believe it is appropriate and timely that the State agencies and APA also determine the funding and personnel needed for these efforts.Our contacts for this matter are Bob Martin or Steve Zrake of our Anchorage Regional Office.They can be reached by phone at 274-2533.f hl J ..,. :J ;i~l 'I l101 1 "I:.::..:.L Ir 15 DEC t~r:lt FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 1011 E.TUDOR RD. ANCHORAGE.ALASKA 99503 (907)276-3800 United States Department of the Interior ~ REC.EIVEO'i>ll';£jj DEC 21 1981 INREPL Y REFER TO: WAES ~'--- r-:-J~.'•'-,'-.•-7"( 1 --:-.",.\.Eric Yould ---""1)I..;.'I''-E~ecutive Director . ;-'/hJI-An.aska.Power Authority I.~1'-11}031~b=;a~~~~;:::99501 :;(.~I ~Drar Hr •.You1d, ~::;!u~e U.S.Fisb and WUd:ife.Service (FW~)bas been contacted by Acres American I ~'-,r~garding formal coord1nat1on of certa1n aspects of the feasibility study for j-r./_:/;tpe Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)license application for the t--:t--7"-~--Sllsitna Hydroelectric Project.To date four document;:packets.have been sub- :--:---:-mitted to uS for formal review.These are the 1980 Environmental Studies~__:_--·I_~-.A:hnual Reports,Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report,Development1---->~.!S~lection Report,and the Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy. i __=-:_01 L_I ~i !Initially,some confusion arose over these requests.In his letter of -.-1-._.>=~'\l~bvember 16,1981,Mr.John D.Lawrence (Acres)identified the sources of --;--~-'-J~bnfusion,explained which documents were to be reviewed and extended the --,--_~-1 cbmment period to 4S days.While we appreciate this clarification.we feel a :--.-•~J,~breformal and explicit plan for formal coordination of the Susitna Projec.t -~hst be developed.Mr.David D.Wozniak of your staff addressed the Susitna ,..'.~~:--.HYdroelectric Steering Committee on this subject at their meeting of;_--i--'~_----Becember 2.1981,and presented th~coordination plan developed by Acres I~~-~f!-l.4letter of August 12,1981.from John D.Lawrence to Eric Yould). r !'.V"'Mr'Wozniak's briefing was very beneficial to our understanding of this pro- -----cess;however~~efeel it is important that the Alaska Po~er Authority (APA) understand the position of the FWS on this issue.The FERC regulations (Federal Register Vol.46,No.219,November 13,1981)require a FERC license application to document coordination with federal resource agenci~s in the Exhibit E.These agencies must be afforded a minimum of 60 days for revieY and COlIlJDent.As such ye disagree with the 45-day comment period suggested by your contractor.Additionally,there are several deficiencies within the Acres coordination plan which concern us;the first of these being the fact that no formal discussion as to this coordination has occurred.Thus,the ~contractor arbitrarily decides which documents are of concern to a particular .,/..JJsr-'agency,and what level of coordination will take place.Formal contact should.l ;~work to insure that all agency concerns and consultations are met so as to .~dJJL comply with the intentions of the FERC regulations.With the exception ofL.W(t.'a4J I certain policy statements (e.g.Mitigation).the Acres plan calls for formal~~,(~~agency input before necessary background reports and data are available.An ~~)/obvious example of this is found in the formal coordination plan-product list ;eel hIe -----------------------~----------.-. f' -. (attached to the aforementioned letter dated August 12,1981)where the Draft Feasibility Report will be released for agency review two months prior to release of the 1981 Annual Reports.It is unrealistic to assume that m2aningful comment can be generated in the absence of such information.- I""" I i r I 'I r Q r ,- ! I nI r We believe a meeting should be arranged by your office to define the objec- tives of the required coordination and to develop a plan suitable to both the APA and the federal resource agencies.In the interim we wil attempt to respond in a timely manner to all appropriate project documents,but will withhold comment on those documents which must be supported or clarified by the results of other studies. Actin\! cc:FWS/ROES,WAES Quentin Edson,Director,Div.of Env.Analysis,FERC NMFS,EPA,NPS,BLM,.USGS,ADEC,ADF&G Carson/ADNR Lawrence/Acres American Iii DEC 3 11981 mSKA P9 WE fl AUTHORITY UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ,., National.Marine Fisheries Service . P.O.Boa;1668 Juneau..Al.aska 99802 .R EC ~1V Eo D '" Mr.Eric Yould,Executive Director Alaska'Power.Authority." 333'W.4th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 December 23 ,1981 Dear Mr.Yould: The'National Marine Fisheries Service has been contacted A!IOll!. by ACRES American regardingfor.mal coordination of certain aspects of the feasibility study for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commis- sion.(FERC)'license application of the Susitna Hydroelectric Project.To date four (4)'documents have been submitted to us for formal review.These are the 1980 Annual Reports,Transmission Line Corridor Screening Rep'ort,Development Selection Report and the Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy. ~ I Initially,some confusion arose over these requests.In his letter of November 16,1981,Mr.John D.Lawrence (ACRES) identified the sources of confusion,explained which documents were to be reviewed and extended the comment period to 45 days. While we appreciate this clarification,we feel a more formal and explicit pl~nfor formal coordination of the Susitna Project must be developed.Mr.David Wozniak of your staff addressed the Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee on this subject at their meeting of December 2,1981,and presented the coordination plan developed by ACRES (letter of August 12,1981,from John D.Lawrence to Eric Yould):Mr.Wozniak I s briefing.was very beneficial to - our understanding of this process,however we feel it is important that the Alaska Power Authority understands the position of the NMFS .on this issue.The FERC regulations require a FERC license application to document coordination with concerned federal agencies ~' under Exhibit E.Agencies must be afforded a minimum of 60 days for review and comment.18 CFR §4.41 (f)(46 FR 55926,55937; November 13,1981).We interpret this requirement to apply to each document submitted to us for consultation,including in particular the drafts of Exhibit E and the license application itself.Moreover,we expect that while there may be documents which can be reviewed by us in less than 60 days,there are very likely going to be instances where we will need more time than that in order to perform a thorough review. One reason·we expect to be accorded longer than 60 days for consultation in some instances,is that formal agency input is often to be sOlicited before necessary background reports and r r i r ( r 1 r \ r ( r r l nl I [\ I""i' I: 2 data are available.An obvious example of ,this is found 'in the formal coordination plan-product list,where the Draft Feasibility Report will be released for agency review two months prior'to release of the '1981 Annual Reports.It is unrealistic to assume that meaningful comment can be generated in the absence of such information. We are also concerned about another apparent deficiency in the proposed coordination plan.The decisions as to how coordination is to proceed are -left to ,the contractor,who has discretion to decide which documents are of concern to a particular agency,and what level of coordination will take place.This approach has the potential for having the concerns of some agencies overlooked,and we would urge that the contractor make a special effort to insure'that the consultations are as inclusive as possible. We believe a.meeting should be arranged by your office to define the objectives of the required·coordination and to develop a plan suitable to both the APA and the federal resource agencies.In the interim we will attempt to respond in a timely manner to all appropriate project docmnents,but will withhold comment on those documents which must be supported or clarified by the results of other studies. i _1 ., ',;~L--..:....-.,;,..'r" RECEIVED JAN 04 1982 ACR:-·'......j"I'u~LlURATED ""'!l,...- •.....-•.•wu..nu nr L7619{ARo-P):3 0 DEC 1981 --., ALASKA POWE~ AUTHORI~ Susln ;\ FILE P5700 -'-~ SEQUENCE'Ni .&'- Director~~.Eric Youlc,Executive Alaska Power Authority 33~~.fifth Avenue Ar~horages Al~ska 99501 It WQuld be helpful ttl thH r~,}.Jcr if an index could be included with each ,L r~pcrt or ~er~aps prepared sznarately for the entir~series of project rei ~ts~~ ~';fr look fcrv~ard te:t115 GP-porturt1ty to r'2vi~w subs~quent prc,jcct revorts.1.--C addition to t.eing inciud~d in the historical ant:archeolo!]ical,~nd rccrt:t1 "--1- 9ro~~s id(;i;~~fie.d for ~Qrr·},a,l coordination,this ~·]ency should perhaps als L¥!Fl~E~ i He IUdec \,hnin the lHe ter qU51 ity and use,~:;S th~ti cs and land usa grouf.'s ~a:Sne-'--i ar~1:1t:e:rcstcc in project r~latcc recreation iW:laCtS that wi i1 occur ¥.ithin aile beyond thE:project.hour;t!ary. Oear Nr.Yculd:z ~ 0\'c=J,<,-,0 I ., C';In response to a Hoveuober 16,1981 letter frc.~the Acres American Inc.P ~~'8 !~ f.imager,Mr.John D~La\1renCe,we have the followinfj ccmments concerning h :~_-:~ SusitJ1..l project reports.The reports reviewed include:19130 Efwironmcnt l!....,....I.lJC .",LS~1iH··j Report (ky 1981);TransMission Line Corridor Screening R~port {s Pt~--=-J~ 19;,;1);and.the Oevelopi1R'ot $.election Report (October 1981)._,j ~~,~,_ Prav;sian for cul tura 1 resc:urce i der.tifi cation and fficiia(Jf:rnEr:t aDPears to ~H .1- appropriate and adequate.;\ls0 1 it would appear that recreation"is being --I":J·;'~-i-. ad~quatcly addressed bj'the planning process.__'~"L __~_P~~L The-evaluation process described in tne DcveloPl'li:nt Selection Report apDe .r:....1_~N2...-!._. to be very adi:Ot.li~te.This a:1ency dCi?S not recm;mcnd a.p.articular basin p wqr S''H ~ 8:vttlopr:.-ent plan.~Ot~cYer.\'Ie de note on pa~e 8-26 that the tunilel scheR!lis-D~'il ;- recognizEd l;y t.h~report as be1nry f:nv1ro~entallj'superier.and yiould pre e '-e'M-R'Vj- Dany of t!le reSuiJrce values curr:::ntly assoc1at(':d with the Devil Cht1YOOo H RC~- IS!DOuglas G.~arnoci cc: ':0",::D.!.a\ln'::ice~;t.cres k'•.:licar.Inc ••901 Uberty ta.nk ~I.dlci~~g.;:;uffalo,~:::,w York If,?,!? / ./ DEPART :"'E~T OF FISII :\'0 G:\.In·: OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER "\ December 30)1981 ~..- Mr.John D.Lawrence Project Manager Acres American,Inc. The Liberty Bank Building,Main at Court Buffalo,New York 14202 Dear Mr.Lawrence: The Alaska Department of Fish and Game has reviewed the IlS us itna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy"dated November 1981 and has several comments to offer.The Department is drafting a mitigation policy approval we --.in end to use for all hydroelectric projects throughout the State.We :.ALA...SKA poappr~iate y.our.effort but feel our parallel effort is the alternative we select ;AUTHC':llb ta e.In the interim,however,I have provided comments to your document ,SUSI_.!...r:iflat..an be used to improve your policy as drafted. :FILE P57no I i .c ~_g~i!Fi c Comments \·4ir:QU~f,,;r=rH5-j \~,;...~·.:YI\'-:"Section 1 -Introduction r~;t'·S!";-~n thi~section which reads as follows,we recommend inclusion of the :::!(J 1';:'::underl 1 ned phrase.lj I ;'h'·.:lc{)'...:i-::;-~~,_i-=-I'A mandate of the Alaska Power Authority (APA)charter is to develop _1_;..:...·.;:j ;..'5uppl ies of el ectri ca 1 energy to meet the present and future needs of the I ~L"('ptate of Alaska.APA also recognizes the value of our natural resources ,-:·····,~·::-·:--~nd accepts the respons ibil ity of i nsuri n9 that the development of any new -;-'.'.-~-projects is.as .compatible as possible with the fish and wildlife resources ~~"~'1 .ad he habitat that sustains them)of the State and that the overall -I-'/~/)cts of any such projects will be beneficial to the State as a whole. """",-,..-..lIn this reg~rd APA has prep~red a.Fisheries an~Wildlif~~1itigation Policy '-_.....for the Susltna Hydroelectrlc Project as contalned hereln.lI ·-I-!·::·~:'.-Comment:The primary goal of mitigation is to avoid,minimize,rectify,--I '!:.'~.-,'-ireduce or compensate for impacts on fi sh and wi 1dl ife habitats. =1=,':'L--~-~ection 2 -Legal Mandates =1 '!~In thi~section v/hich reads as folloY/s,we suggest inclusion of the_I_l~1 ...:.:_unJerl 1 ned phrase: . I •~I~l--''I [I'''''&:r -1-1-i l-:-..·f'FliTI -i • I,. Mr.John D.Lawrence -2-December 30,1981 ..- I IIThere are numerous state and federal laws and regulations that specifically require mitigation planning.The mitigation policy and plans ~ contained within this document 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.1I Comment:Consideration of mitigation is not an end in itself,the implementation of mitigation is the eventual goal and obligation which the ~ APA must meet under the terms of State and Federal law and regulation. 3.Section 2 -Protection nf Fish and Game In the first paragraph,first sentence,that reads as follows,we suggest the underlined phrase be inserted: The Alaska state laws pertaining to the disturbance of streams important to anadromous fi sh address the need to reduce (or prevent)impacts on fi sh and game that may result from such action. Comment:Avoidance as well as minimization of impacts is also of concern to ADF&G. 5. 4.Section 2 -Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,2nd paragraph We suggest the paragraph include a statement which indicates measures of mitigation as well as facilities for mitigation be described.To describe only facilities suggests that only engineering solutions for mitigation are considered.It will be necessary to describe any measures for mitigation that may involve,for example,in-kind replacement of habitat or avoidance of impact alternatives. Comment:.•For this statement to be an accurate portrayal of FERC regulation,this addition is suggested. Section -3.3 Implementation of the Mitigation Plan In the first paragraph of this section.it is stated that,IIPrior to implementing the plan;an agreement will be reached as to the most efficient manner in which to execute the plan.1I Comment:It should be stated with whom this agreement is to be reached. Perhaps suggestions can be worked out with the Su Hydro Steering Co~mittee. Also it is stated in the second paragraph of this section,IIRealizing that a mitigation monitoring team will be necessary to insure the proper and successful execution of the mitigation plan,part of the plan will detail the structure and responsibil iti es of such a monitori ng body.II Comment:APA should be aware that this monitoring body or its functions will not supersede individual agency mandates. ~. Mr.John D.Lawrence -3-December 30,1981 rq r- i j r "---f""" 1 i n l' 6. T. Section 3.4 Modification of the Mitigation Plan In the second paragraph of this section which reads as follows,.we suggest the insertion of the underlined phrases: liThe mitigation plan will be sufficiently flexible so that if data secured during the monitoring of fish and wildlife populations and habitats indicate that the mitigation effort should be modified,the mitigation plan can be adjusted accordingly.This may involve an increased effort where impacts failed to materialize as predicted.Any modifications to the mitigation plan proposed by the monitoring team will not be implemented without consultation (and approval of)appropriate state and federal agencies and approval of APA.The need for continuing this monitoring will be reviewed periodically.The monitoring program will be tenninated when the need for further mitigation is considered unnecessary.1I Comment:APA approval alone does not supersede the mandates of state and federal agencies to assure that mitigation to be performed is prudent and feasible and in concert with what is known about project impacts. Section 4 -Approach to Developing the Fish and Wildlife Plans The third paragraph of this section reads as follows: IIFollowing the identification of impact issues,the Core Group will agree upon a logical order of priority for addressing the impact issues.This will include ranking reso'urces in order of their importance.The ranking will take into consideration a variety of factors such as ecological value, consumptive 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 wjll be given priority over impact issues where there is less confidence in the impacts actually occurring.The result of this dual prioritization will be the application of mitigation planning efforts in a logical and effective manner.The results of the prioritization process will be sent to appropriate state and federal resource agencies for review and comment.II Comment:The Department of Fish and Game does not consider what appears to be a subjective r'anking of resources in their "order of importance ll to be a satisfactory approach to addressing impact issues.There is no substitute for a factual assessment of data voids,studies to fill these voids,and a rational ?pproach to impact assessment based on factual evidence.Ranking as suggested here only supports this Oepartment1s long-time conviction that adequate information to make reasonable impact analysis and mitigation plan development cannot be done in the time frame established for the FERC license application by the Legislature and APA. The fifth paragraph of this section states: ;;.,......;,.~. Mr.John D.Lawrence -4- I December 30,1981 UMitigation 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,the evaluation will proceed to the next form.All options considered will be evaluated and documented.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.II ..; I ~( . Corrment:The statement in the second sentence of this paragraph,lI or in conflict with other project objectives,1I indicates equal consideration of fish and wildlife values would not be given in the mitigation planning effort conducted by Acres American,Terrestrial Environmental Services and APA.It is doubtful that any fish and wildlife impact issue would not be in confl ict with APA's primary objecti.ve to construct the Su Hydro Project, and automatically mitigation alternatives would generally fall into the compensatory realm of mitigation defined in Section 3.5.This Department will closely examine the products of the impact evaluation and mitigation planning effort to be sure equal consideration is given to fish and wildlife resource values and that sUr1ll1ary and arbitrary dismissal of fe'asible mitigation alternatives which may be in conflict with Jlproject objectives ll is not the primary factor in arriving at a mitigation plan. Paragraph 7 of this section states: II Additi ona 1 items that may be addressed by the Core Group i ncl ude an identification ·of organizations qualified to execute the mitigation plan and recommendations concerning the staffing,funding and responsibilities of the mitigation monitoring team.1I Comment:The Core Group may make its recommendations,but agencies such as this Dep~rtment with a direct responsibility for the management of fish and wildlife resources will in accord with its resource management and protection responsibilities,make its own recommendations to define staffing or funding levels and responsibilities for the mitigation monitoring team.It is our view that APA and its subcontractors do not have oversight on mitigation alternatives or means of implementation. Mitigation and the final approval of its acceptability lies with this Department and other resource agencies with similar mandates.It will be the obligation of APA to implement mitigation plans in accord with the approval of these agencies.In addition,it appears that the "mitigation review group"is responsible for "informal agency review and comment"on the proposed mitigation options.This informal review is "considered by APA and the Core Group prior to the preparation of ...mitigation plans." However,the option being reviewed (informally)by the mitigation review group are those developed by the Core group in Step 2.This needs to be clarified. In paragraph 8 of this section it states: -j ; )1 ~ i ""'...... Mr.John D.Lawrence -5- -~-~---~-~------------~--~--------~ December 30,1981 "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 monitoring team will ha.ve the responsibility of assuring that the agreed upon plan is properly executed by the designated organizations.The team will be provided with the results of ongoing monitoring efforts.This will enable 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.".. Comment:It should be resolved now as to who pays for the participation by agencies in the mitigation monitoring team.The APA should state its commitment to funding participation by agency team members or mitigation study groups. General Comments l.This Department does not believe adequate opportunity will be afforded the natural resource agencies to evaluate or review mitigation plans due to the accelerated nature of APA's schedule. To date,for example,the Fisheries Mitigation Task Force Review Group has not been afforded an opportunity to assess ongoing impact assessment and mitigation plans being developed by Terrestrial Environmental Services. Also,the Department has relayed to the APA on numerous occasions our concern that a more extended peri od of fi sheri es studi es needs to be performed before adequate impact analysis is made and thence feasible mitigation alternatives developed. 2.A section outlining the membership and relationships of the Mitigation Task Force,and Core Group will need to be included. I am interested in obtaining a copy of a plan that clearly sets out the schedules for formal review of specific products by appropriate agencies in order that this Department can adequately respond in a timely and responsible manner to APA. If you have questions,please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, ~..R na~d 9.SkoogIOmIDlS5'oner " FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 1011 E.TUDOR RD. ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99503 (907)276-3800 INREPLY REfER TO: ,WAES United States Department of the Interior RECEIVE~ JAN 12 1982 -, ACRES AiliRJC,UJ UlCOIPDlAl j Mr.Eric Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 W.4th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 9950~ 3 0 DEC 7981 Dear Mr.You1d: This letter responds to a request by John Lawrence of Acres American that the Fish and llildlife Service (FWS)review the Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy for the Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study~The request was made by letter dated November 19,1981.Our review of the Alaska Power Authority's - (APA)Policy Statement has been undertaken in light of the FWS Mitigation Policy (Federal Register Vol.46,No.15,January 23,1981).We have enclosed a copy of our Mitigation Policy and havepreviously transferred a copy to your subcontractor,Terrestrial Enviromental Specialists,Inc.(see enclosed letter dated 4 June 1981).By maximizing consistency bet'lileen the two policy _~-ptatements,avoidance of policy disagreements between the APA and the FIVS can ,LASKA POWER e accomplished.Long-term benefits would accrue throughout the process AUTHORITYSUSITNA 'ncluding when and if project mitigation monitoring is in place and modifica- --------__~ions to ongoing mitigation could be evaluated under one policy. :"lLE P5700. ,~~.~/~/==~~riefly,the Service's mitigation policy reflects the goal that the most :QUENCE NO.important fish and wildlife resources should receive the greatest level of ~~itigation when the environment of a particular area is changed.The FWS ...."-,....:''""-"~;;;:;,:;;':":;-:;..c..'-I..~policy divides the mitigation planning process into three components:(1) esource category determinations;(2)impact assessment;and (3)mitigation recommendations.By creating four resource categories,the FWS can vary the degree of mitigation it recommends according to the value and scarcity of the habitat at risk. Our resource category,.....determinatioDs will contain a technical rationale consistent with the designation criteria.The rationale will:(1)outline the reasons why the evaluation species were selected;(2)discuss the value of WH the habitats to the evaluation species;and (3)discuss and contrast the fJP-S--relative scarcity of the fish and w-ildlife resource on a national and ~"""_;:-;,'Gsl~-i__~ecoregion section basis."(F.R.Vol.46,No.15,p.7658).Special con- ~..sideration would be given to notable,-•••aquatic and terrestrial sites --__including legally designated or set-aside areas such as sanctuaries,fish and 5~r 'Io7i ldlife management areas,hatcheries,and refuges,and other aquatic sites OWl.such as floodplains,wetlandS,mudflats,vegetated shallows,coral reefs, -J~riffles and pools,aDd springs and seeps."(F.R.Vol.46,No.15,pp. liRC 7658-7659).In the aforementioned sites,the mitigation goal to which the Service would strive for is either no loss of existing habitat value (Resource ""-j'---i---1 Category 1)or no net loss of in-kind habi tat value (Resource Category 2). , -j'---I- '. ·l-1r.Eri c Yould Page 2 ,"'"'" t i : r ( The Service intends to recommend mitigation where a biological change constitutes an adverse impact.Our evaluation of project impacts and recommended mitigation would be based,to the extent applicable.on the Service's Habitat Evaluation Procedures and Instream Flow Incremental Methodology.Both of these methodologies have been suggested to ~A and its consultants on several occasions.It should be recognized that streamlining the mitigation process can be accomplished by conformance between the Service's and an applicant's impact assessment techniques.The larger the proposal,the greater the potential savings in time.This idea was a principal behind the formulation of our mitigation policy and adoption of official evaluation procedures. In accordance with our mitigation policy,"The Service may recommend support of projects or other proposals when the following criteria are met:(1)they are ecologically sound;(2)the least environmentally damaging reasonable alternative is selected;(3)every reasonable effort is made to avoid or minimize damages or loss of fish and wildlife resources and uses;(4)all important recommended means and measures have been adopted with guaranteed implementation to satisfactorily compensate for unavoidable damage or loss consistent with the appropriate mitigation goal;and (5)for wetlands and shallow water habitats.the proposed activity is clearly water dependent and there is a demonstrated public need."(F.R.Vol.46,No.15,p.7659). Specific comments: 1.0 Introduction:This section should include a discussion of the need to adequately assess the environmental resources of the study area to determine the environmental compatibility of a proposed project arid to evaluate mitigation to adequately reduce or avoid negative impacts to environmental resources.including fish and wildlife resourc~s,so that no net loss of habitat value occurs. 2.0 Legal Mandates:It should be recognized that the intent of the specified laws and regulations is that project-related adverse biological impacts be fully mitigated.In addition,that a plan be developed,acceptable to the resource agencies with mandated fish and wildlife management responsi- bilities,and implemented as a component of the proposal. 2.2 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA):It is the responsibility of the lead federal agency,the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC),to fully comply with NEPA. 2.3 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission:Regulations for,"Application for License for Major Unconstructed Projects and Major Hodified Projects," (F.R.Vol 46,No.219.November 13,1981)were adopted December 14,1981. References in your policy to FERC regulations should reflect this.It should be recognized that within the Exhibit E,"The applicant must provide a report that describes the fish,wildlife,and botanical resources in the vicinity of the proposed project;expected impacts of the project on these resources;and mitigation,enhancement,or protection measures proposed by the applicant.The report must be prepared in consultation with the state agency or agencies with responsibility for these resources.the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service.the National Marine Fisheries Service (if the proposed project oay affect anadromous. estuarine,or marine fish resources),and any state or federal agency with , ( -&. Mr.Eric Yould cc:FWS-ROES,WAES Quentin Edson,FERC NMFS,EPA,NPS,BLM,USGS,ADEC,ADF&G Carson/ADNR Lawrence/Acres American---- Page 5 .#;'482 4":04.,,,.----m RECEIVED JAN 041982 ACRES AMuUCAti lNCUit?URAUn -""II"'" December 31,1981 Mr.John D.Lawrence Acres American,Inc. 900 Liberty Bank Building Main at Court " Buffalo,New York 14202 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service P.O.Box 1668 Juneau,Alaska 99802 Realizing that Section 4,step 3,development of an acceptable mitigation plan,is to be completed by I~arch 1982,we assume that steps 1 and 2 of the same section are by now substantially completed. Yet,contrary to the second sentence of 3.2,"During the early stages of planning,representatives of state and federal agencies will be encouraged to consult with the applicant and the applicants representatives,as members of the Mitigation Task Force.", we have yet to be contacted regarding the status of this impor- tant element,and the Mitigation Task Force review committee has not met as of this date. 3.3 Implementation of the Mitigation Plan We are pleased to see the plan include provisions for post- construction monitoring of mitigation measur~J and opportunities. Dear Mr.Lawrence: 3.2"Consu1tatibn with Natural Resource Ag~ncies&the Public We have'received your 1etter of November 19,1981,requesti ng the comments of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)on the Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Having reviewed the statement we offer the following comments. The statement adequately reflects the intent of such a mitigation policy and presents an accurate overview of those legal mandates which require mitigation to be considered in designing hydroelectric projects.We have severai specific comments dealing with the operation of the proposed mitigation plan,which follow." 3.1 Basic Intent of the Applicant The 1ast paragraph states that thi s methodology outl ines a process for resolving conflict between the Power Authority and resource agencies.We do not feel this has been sati.sfactorily accomplished within the general policy statement (Sec.3)and suggest additional effort be made to establish such a conflict resolution methodology. ,1""'" i i ~( I i L.ALASKAl'ffilTE;R ,,".AUTHO'RITY 1;\susrTNA "I FILE P5700r-":•'(9/ ~, » J.JEQUENCE NO. "/,..-·s r"" I The applicant should note~however,that such a provision will be integral to the mitigation plan and the associated costs should be included with the license application~and not IIresolved through parties after the mitigation plan is complete.1I This is supported in the FERC regulations,4.41 (F)(3)(iv)(D),which require Exhibit E to contain an estimate of the costs of construction, operation,and maintenance of any proposed facilities or imple- mentation of any (mitigation)measures. 3.4 Modification of the Mitigation Plan The last sentence,dealing with termination,should state that termination of any mitigation measure stipulated in the FERC license will require an amendment to that license. 4 Approach to Developing the Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Plans Paragraph 3,sentence 6.Change 'will I to Imay'~as priority will be assigned both by the likelihood of impact and sensitivity of the resource. Paragraph 5,sentence 2.The fact that a form of mitigation is in conflict with project objectives or only partially effective should not prevent it from further consideration.Such a statement strains the term llreasonable alternatives"and does not comply with the spirit or intent of the National Environmental Policy Act. Paragraph 7.As outlined,no formal agency input into the mitigation plan wil1 occur prior to application to FERC.FERC regulations require Exhibit E to contain a report describing proposed mitigation measures~prepared in consultation with state and federal resource agencies.The process described here falls short of this required consultation.We suggest formal agency review of the draft fisheries and wildlife mitigation plans occur prior to license application. We appreciate this opportunity to comment. Sin<erely,..~...'~')~9;;...//~ ,,'",.,;J.r ROber,·W.McVey , I "Dir~ctor,Alaska Region I:/ V" - - December 31,1981 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE I\lational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National,Mazoine Fishez>ies Service P.o.Box 1668 Juneau,ALaska 99802 r Mr.John D.Lawrence,Project Manager ACRES American Incorporated . ConsUlting Engineers The Liberty Bank Building Main at Court Buffalo,New York 14202 Dear Mr.Lawrence: JAN 041982 ACR~.;,lIui{.l1iiil\N h1bUKYURATEIl ALASKA POWERrAUTHORrTY ~.,SUSITNA ..Ij ...,.;.------l FILE P5700,......N C;' l~QUENCE NO. ~)..:.?,(~. We have received the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Environmental Report prepared by Terrestrial Environmental Specialists (TES).We have limited our review of this series of documents to those concerning the fisheries studies,i.e.,the Summary Annual Report and Fish Ecology Annual Report. The presentation of 1980 work done by TES towards assessing the impacts of development and operations of the project on the fishery and proposing measures to minimize or mitigate adverse impacts was reviewed without substantial comment,as much of it was very preliminary.Also,no review was made of the 1980 fish ecology program due to delay in pub- lishing the detailed procedures manual.In addition to the lack of substantial information presented in these reports,we believe the timing of this review request mak~s an in-depth agency review inappropriate. The main benefit derived from this review would have been to allow changes or redirection of efforts to be made in the 1981 field studies.However, as of this date,the 1981 environmental studies have been completed . We look forward to receiving the 1981 Environmental Studies Annual Reports, as these documents should provide the basis for our review of the draft Feasibility Report. jn~.:t.1 Sincerely,!~j~i ~~·I __~~/~ [/'\-1--/~IJI_I~w.r ~~bert .McVey Region l,'"f-J J 0 8l't,\\'~/i Ir--.=JF;S I 1\.•I PG HIIj.---- r ENS------SNT-I-DWL·~_L _ i MRV-1-----_lH RC :--=1'r!t:'?)'f':"; f ,--,JL'q~~~/'I ._--,-/A~ l~i ~=, ; RECEIVE.D DEC 28 1981 1200 SIXTH AVENUE SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101 REPLY TO MIS 443AnNOf: U.S.EN V I RON MEN TAL PRO TEe T ION AGE N C Y REGION X DEC Z 1 1981 John D.Lawrence Acres American,Incorporated The Liberty Bank BUilding Main at Court BUffalo,New York 14202 ( SUBJECT:Susitna Hydroelectric Project,Summary Annual Environmental Report-1980 and Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report Dear Mr.Lawrence: Thank you for sending us the above reports for our review.We have also received the Development Selection Report and will be forwarding our comments to you on that report before the end of December. ALASKA POWER We appreciate the extensive coordination effort and the opportunity to AUTHORITYSUSITNA review and comment on Susitna reports as they are prepared.I further I---·-----lappreciate your attempts to ensure that the views of the Agency are FILE P5700 adequately ref1ected in thi s process.Whi le we have been coordinating -,."/0'/'with the Susitna Interagency Steering Committee,our budget restrictions SEQUE~CE NO.have limited our active participation more than I would like.In this ~.;)e"J!.regard,it would be extremely helpful to us if you could provide us an .joverview of your consultation plan and the scnedule for future reviews. Zl~~:t.IThis will better enable us to give you timely comprehensive comments ong~~l~he various segments of the stUdy,with the overall project perspective ~[...;;'-i :=1n m1nd. _1~C:'\~-I_'-EPA is particularly interested in information on wetland mapping,water l":"r)~:~I__quality and water quantity modeling and project alternatives.The 1980!I (:'.<)I.En vironmental Report appropri ate ly po ints out the i nterre 1at ionshi ps and -r:---··-;-;).~importance of these areas to wi1dlife survival and downstream fish -~V (.ecology.However,it .does not cover EPA's areas of interest directly. -'I-=l~~..(l We ~ould like to review the reports on these subjects when they are -,rPGHI ava11 able. -1-~r~Sl_____1__ ~..; r l;,';L !. />",..~ V ....,. ! .) :~ ,._------------------------------------_....-----------1 2 r I -I \'<. ( We support the emphasis in the Environmental Report and related studies on identifying ways to minimize the environmental impacts of the Susitna project.In particular,selection of the access route and type of access is an issue with long term environmental consequences wnich offers many opportunities for minimizing impacts.EPA supports tne concept of minimizing impacts by use of a single corridor for both access and trans- mission needs,as pointed out in Doth the Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report and the Environmental Report.We encourage you to incorporate tnese kinds of suggestions from agencies and the Steering Committee into the project selection,construction and operation plans. SUch commitments will certainly positively influence reviews of any FERC license application.. We have some concerns with the conclusions about the Central Study area in the Transmission Line Corridor Screening Report.There appear to be different opinions on the environmental consequences of selecting Corri- dor 1 versus Corridor 14.We feel that additional areasshoul d be inc 1uded in future studies of the central corri dor,to provi de a bro ader database from which such conclusions can be drawn.More specifically, in this area,Corridor One (ABCD),which roughly follows the soutn side of the SusitnaRiver,is the recommended corridor based on Acre1s techni- cal,economic and environmental criteri a.Corridor 14 (AJCD)follows the same route as Corridor 1 from Gold Creek to Devils Canyon,but crosses to tne north side of the Susitna River for the section from Devi ls Canyon to the Watana dam site.Corridor 14 nas tecnnical and economic ratings as hi gh as Corri dor 1,but was not recommended because of environmental and land use conflicts in segment CJ.On solely environmental grounds,it appears that an access route similar to Corridor 14 is preferred to Corridor 1 by both Terrestrial Environmental Specialists,Incorporated (Environmental Report page 73 and 82)and the Susitna Hydroel ectri c Steering Committee (letter from Al Carson,Chairman,to Eric Yould,dated November 5,1981.)Therefore,the areas of the central corri dor to be. further studied should include the north side of the river between Devils Canyon and the Watana dam site to encompass segment CJA as well as segment CSA. One reason for the different conclusions regarding the environmentally preferable route between Devil s Canyon and the Watana Dam site may be the Environmental Report1s and the Steering Committee1s identification of·the most environmentally sensitive areas,Which then have the highest priori- ty to be avoided.It may be desiranle to use a similar approach during the more detailed route ~election studies,especially in areas Where wetlands must be crossed.Identifying and then avoiding primary and secondary impacts to the most valuable wetland habitats should be an important part of the more detailed studies of all three transmission study areas. ( 3 We appreciate ttle opportunity to review this report.Please contact me or Judi Sc warz.of my staff,if you would like to discuss our comments. We can be eached at (206)442-1266 and (206)442-1096,respectively. Eric Yould,AlasKa Power Authority Al Carson,Department of Natural Resources ~lI - '. }! January 4,1981 P5700.11 .91 T.1390 ..~ 1.I am enclosing a description of our formal agency coordination plan~indicating which agencies will receive which reports. Regarding schedule,EPA will be receiving the following reports on or around the following dates: a)Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Options -January 1982 b)InstreamFlow Study Plan -February 1982 c)Susitna Feasibility Study -Narch 1982 Under separate cover you will be receiving an invitation to attend a meeting in P~chorage on January 21,1982 explaining our Formal Agency Coordinaaion Program. 2.Wetland mapping has been conducted as part of the study. For your information,I am enclosing the 1980 Plant Ecology SUlITI1ary Report'and a set of vegetation maps.All wetlands within the proposed impoundment zones (including a one half mile buffer)and within known borrow area were mapped~utilizing the new U.S.Fish and Hild11fe Service Classification (Cowardin et.a].1979)• Susitna Hydroelectric Project Formal A6encyCoordination k you for your letter of December 21,1981;your constructive estions are very much appreciated.I will attempt to respond he issues you raised: r Mr.Spencer; John R.Spencer onal Administrator Environmental Protection Agency on XoSixth Avenue ttle,Washington 98101 .I "'"} '( .!.WILLETT,WITTEi I ,BERRV ., t •,, egiIVlhAt.//</,-,j( G r /...."S. /I . • I LAMB ./I 0 l LAWRENCE a l ! SINCLAIR VANOER8URGH 1;..-J~~a .'~.' )...-"17 ·1 II f CARLSON lnan FRETZ 1""99IJEX [~LOWREV L~t SINGH I r~HUSTEAO I save I !r-. CHAse I _L )/',' L -:/;(A " , .' Mr.John R.Spencer January 4,1982 page 2 c· 3•.Project alternatives are discussed in the Development Selection Report which you have received and will be disDussed further in the Feasibility Study. 4.Water quality issues and water quantity modeling results will be found in the Feasib1'1ty Study. 5.Following selection of the access route,the transmission line corridor in the central study area has been expanded (as indicated on page 7-4 of the Transmission line Corridor Screening Report)to include a larger area on the north side of the Sus1tna River.This will result in a single corr4dor being used for both the access route and the transmission line corridor.This was done both to eeduce i.pacts via access and to avoid the large wetland areas on the south side of the Sus1tna River. 6.Transmission line routing studies are currently being conducted. Wetlands is a parameter in the selection process.I think you can appreciate,however,it will not be possible to avoid all wetlands in the area,simply because there are so many. Again,thank yod for your comments.If you have further questions,please let me know. Sincerely yours, ~'.~D.Lawrence Project Manager HMG/jh .cc:E.Yould,APA i.-·; ..A$you.·:are awa~~"Acres,American'h~S,on'behalf of the Al aska Power 'Authority;instituted a Formal Agency Coord ination Program for the Sus itna Hydroelectric.:p'roject,.This program has apparently resulted in some .confusion among various:agencies.as:to its';intent and scope. To resolve this,a meeting has been arranged for 10:00 a.m.on January 21, 1982'"at:the office:of the Alaska Power Authority,334 West 5th Avenu~, Anchorage:.The'purpose of this meeting will be to explain the rationale, intent~,scope",and reguJatory requ.irements,for this program. r I ,(""" I l f,r;<P: L'~:,.,-,January 8,1982 P5700 .11.92 T1420 yours, Susitna Hydroelectric Project Agency Coordination Program If you feel you could benefit from;this meeting,.your'attendance is welcome. Dear'Mr. As,.you are aware,Acres Amertcan has·,on behalf of the Alaska Power Authority,instituted a:FormaT Agency Coordination Program for the'Susitna HJdroe;lectric Project.This program.has apparently resulted in some . confusion among various agencies.as to its intent and scope. T:b resolve this,a meeting has been arranged for 10:00 a.m.on January 21, 1982';at the office of the Alaska Power Authority,334 West 5th Avenue,Jll'l!\, Anchorage.The'purpose of this meeting wi 11 be.to expl ain the rat ional e, intent,scope,."and regul atory requirements for this.program. Mr'.Robert Shaw State Historic Preservat ion Officer .Alaska Department of Natural Resources Oi v·is.ion of Parks 619>Warehouse Avenue,.Su.ite:210 Anchorage~Alaska 995Dl Program January 8,1982 P5700.11.91 T1411 As you.are'aware,.Acres:American'has,on behalf of the Al aska Power Authority,inst~ituted a Formal Agency Coordination Program for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project.This program has apparently resulted in some confusion among various agencies as to its intent and scope. To resolve-this,a meeting has been arranged for 10:00 a.m.on January 21, 1982,at the offic~of the Alaska Power Authority,334 West 5th Avenue, Anchorag~•.The purpose of this meeting will be·to explain the rationale', intent,-_,scope,.anck regu.l atory requirements for this pro.gram. from this;meeting"your attendance is welcome. is. ·'-'."'.' .;':,c.,';,'h,;'As Yo~are awarl:,Acres AmeriCan has"on behalf or the;Al aska.Power Authority,.institute<t a Formal Agency Coordination Program for the Susitna Hydroe:1ec.tric:Project'.'.Th:is:program,has apparently resul ted in some" confusJon:among;various:ag,enc..ies,as,to,its,intent.and,scope:• .ra,resolve'thfs:t'a mee.tinge has,been:arranged for'10:00 a.m.on January 21" 1982,at the offi ce af the,A1 ask a Power Author ity,334 West 5th Avenue~ Anchoragee.,.The purpose'of this meeting'will be to expl ain the rational e,. intent"scope,...,and;reguT atory requ irements;for th;s program_ is welcome. January 8~1982 P5700.11 Tl409 .fnC~~;' v~;'~..~':'L. As:~yol!are aware~"American has~behalf of the Al aska,Power 'AuthoJ;"ity~instituted,a Formal Agency Coordination Program for the Susitna 'Hydr'oelectric:Project.This.program has apparently resulted in some confusion among var ious agencies as to its intent and scope. To reso 1ve'this~a;meeting has been arranged for 10:00 a.m.on January 21~ .1982"at,the office:of the Alaska.Power Authority~.334 West 5th Avenue~ Anchorage.The purpose of this meeting will be-to explain the rationale~, <intent"scope",and regul atory.requirements for this,program. January 8~1982. P5700 .11.91 T1408 'As;you"areaware'~.Act-es:American has~on behalf of the Al aska Power .'Authority"inst-ituted.a Formal Agency Coordination Program for'the Susitna ~i,;Hydroelectric.Projec.t",This,program has apparently resulted in some .C"':;'confusion,among·var:ious agenc.ies,as·to.its.intent.and scope~ r is wel come. To,resolve this~.a;meeting.has been arranged for'10:00 a.m.on January 21~ .1982,.at:the·office of'the:A1 ask a,Power'Authority~334-West 5th Avenue~ Anchorage.,The:purpose of this:meeting wi 11 be to expl ain the rationale, intent,.scope~and';regul atory requirements.for this program~ \ \ 1 ; I; ! • Mr.John Rego Bureau of Land Management 701-C Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Rego: January 8,1982 P5700 .11.75 Tl413 Susitna Hydroelectric Project Formal Agency Coordination Program - As you are aware,Acres Authority,inst ituted a Hydroelectric Project. confusion among various American has,on behalf of the Alaska Power Formal Agency Coordination Program for the Susitna This program has apparently resulted in some agencies as to its intent and scope.- To resolve this,a meeting has been arranged for 10:00 a.m.on January 21, 1982,at the off i ce of the Alas k a Power Author i ty,334 Wes t 5th Aven ue, Anchorage.The purpose of this meeting will be to explain the rationale, intent,scope,and regulatory requirements for this program. If you feel you could benefit from this meet ing,your attendance is welcome. Sincerely yours, John o.Lawrence Project Manager MMG/jgk ,ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED ~:••~.~"1:!.r '.'.~_..4':;'.)' -. ~!. " . 1 •• I . •~.''...._ . ...r' -..,..._-~---,------- ~,.----~-.,..-_._--,._"'-_._, u.s.ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION REGION X 1200 SIXTH AVENUE SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101 AGENCY _~.,(-r:::'""R --r -'.Jr~~t-_i .~-;,-..._...~.--- FEB 8 1S8l ACRES AMERlW liiCORPOrJ.Td 4 FEB 1982 ,.... ,Kevi n R.Young Acres Ameri can Incorporated The Liberty Bank Bui lding Main at Court Buffa 10"NY 14202 SUbject:Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wi ldlife Mitigation Po licy and Draft Ana lyses of Mitigation Options . ~,POWERl,I I,.fORlTY ";ITNA- !""":ll£P5700 \'.II.9/f SEQUENCE NO.-r"l F~L/3 ai a: I- u) (5 "r o_c~J'i r A,--,r;:..~'/I'c "CAO =-JE .JYP ';>-Ic -r~J~2./1, JPS I ~-1_:-:-:+-~--1 S"'T Dear Mr.Young: Thank you for sending us copies of the above papers for our review.From conversations with Mike Grubb,of your staff,we understand that Acres American has decided that further work is necessary on the mitigation options pap~rs before agency comments will be solicited.Therefore,this letter will-address EPA's comments on the mitigation policy paper only. In general,we believe that the overall mitigation approach is good.In particular,the use of the CEQ definition of mitigation encourages the most satisfactory types of mitigation to be considered first.This is reflected in Figure 2,Option Analysis.The establishment of a long-term monitoring plan and acknm",ledgment that the mitigation plan will be changed if necessary is also commendable. We do have some concerns about implementation of this policy,especially over the next year while the mitigation plan for the FERC license appli- cation is still being developed.Some issues and mitigation measures must be incorporated into the preliminary engineering and design stages of the projects and,from our review of the Acres American reports,we are aware that this is being done.One good example is spillway design to avoid nitrogen supersaturation.However,there are a great many other issues where the agencies and the public do not have sufficient information yet on the impacts to judge either how much mitigation wi 11 be needed or what sort of mitigation might be successful.For example,EPA will not have any pre-and post-project water quality data unti 1 the feasibility study is circulated (letter from John D.Lawrence to John R.Spencer,January 4, 1982.)Development of an option analysis which reflects the possible suc- cessful mitigation measures for the entire range of potential impacts, including the worst case,appears to be a useful step at this time. HO\-Iever,the agencies and the public may have difficulty evaluating the ~~.__._. . i , adequacy of a mitigation plan until more impact information is available. EPA would have been faced with this situation in reviewing the fishery mitigation plan if Acres Pmerican had wanted our comments at this time. We have one other suggestion for your consideration.Because of the location and magnitude of the impacts,new mitigation methods or methods new to thi s region of Alaska may eventua 11y be i dent ified.Because it will be several years before the mitigation plan is finalized,it may be possible to test the feasibility of some of these ideas before mitigation itself must start.Such an approach may have long-term environmental and economic benefits. Some additional minor comments are presented in the attachment. We .100k forward to reviewing the option papers.If you would like to dis- cuss our corrrnents,Judi Schwarz of the Environmental Evaluation Branch may be contacted for more information.She can be reached at (20G)442-1096. Sf ncere ly,.~t ....Oq1J~~eal,Director Environmental Services Division "~. cc:Al Carson.DNR Dave Wozni ak,APA .- I - .- Susitna Fish and Wi ldlife Mitigation Policy Attachment FERC Regulations For your information~FERC published the new regulations on license applications on November 13~1981.The section of fish and wi ldlife mitigation can be found at 46 FR 55938.FERC has made some wording changes~but the substance is essentially unchanged. Definitions The policy statement refers to a Mitigation Task Force.a Mitigation Review Group~and a Core Group of the Mitigation Task Force.The com- position and method of selection of each group should be described. I'""'" i --_.-._---::--------------- Colonel lee R.Nunn Department of the Army Alaska District~Corps of Engineers P.O.Box 7002 Anchorage~AK 99510 Dear Colonel Nunn: ------...._------_.. February 19~1982 P5700.11 .92 T1519 Susitna Hydroelectric Project ·PlantEcology-Repott'·- -\ -. -I _. Thank you for your letter of February 1 regarding your review of the fo 11 owi ng reports:Envi ronmenta 1 Summary Annual Report -1980~Development Selection Report~and Transmission line Corridor Screening Close Out Report. As a result of your corrunent concerning wetlands~I am enclosing for your information a copy of the 1980 Plant Ecology Report which more specifically addresses the wetlands issue.Also enclosed is a copy of the vegetation and wetlands maps which are referred to in tftefr report. +1,c.J Thank you again for your letter.&-erel Y, John lawrence Project Manager MG:ccv Enclosures cc:E.Yould -APA ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED - _. February 23,1982 P5700.1l.9l T.1526 -~:... Sus itna Hyd roe 1ectric Proj ect Fish and Wildlife HitiQation Policy s~ John D.Lawrence Project ~!anager •Gary OINeal,Director vironmenta1 Services Division S.Environmental Protection Agency g10n X 00 Sixth Avenue attle,Washington 98101 arMr.Qlflea1: ank you for your letter of February 4,1982 regarding the Susitna sh and l~ildlife .Hitigation Policy. will be discussing Hit1gation further in early r1arch meetin§s with e Core and Review Groups and attempting to focus in on the major pact issues and define further studies necessary to develop adequate tigation.You will be invited to this meeting. ank you again for your comments~ WILLETT WITTE BERRY .... ..HAYDEN fir LAMB n SiNCLAlf'I t • VANDERBUFlGI-(e I"" Y,)V 11 t-.I'" 12 (.,....vhh V CARLSON FRETZ 1.1'= JEX '''''''LOWREY SiNGH ,h v p ~~P-1"~...r;.... .JSTEAD I'll::: BDVE th .:- ""'"111 CHASE "T \ ttrMG/jh cc:.E.Yould,APA J.Spencer,EPA lI!l!IiI I We agree that the tennination of any mitigation measure stipulated in the FERC license would require FERC approval.In regards to the mon- itoring program,we anticipate that the FERC license will allow for - - .("-..~'. ".--;i-r -~.~..-.- February 23,]982 P5700.11.91 T.1424 .. Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy nk you for your December 31,1981 response to our request for nts on the Susitna Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy.I have· nsed to your cQl'ilTlents in the order in which they were presented. pproach to resolving fish and wildlife mitigation conflicts between nd the.resource agenci€s is outlined in Step 3,Section 4,of the at10n Policy.As stated,it basically involves review and comment eFish and Wildlife Mitigation Review Group representing the rce agencies.In addition,although not specifically stated r policYt any draftrnitigat10n plans will be submitted to resource ies for fonnal cormtent and review prior to the submission of a license application.Our policy will be modified to include this. Consultation with Natural Resource AGencies and the Public .Basic Intent of the Applicant Mr.Robert W.McVey ctor~Alaska Region onal Marine Fisheries Service Box 1668 au,Alaska 99802 Mr.r>tcVey:. . on 4,.Step 3,Development of an Acceptable Hitigation Plan.\'o'i11 e completed by March of 1982.However,mitiqation options ~n1l sessed and preferred options to~ether with their technical feaxi- bility and potential effectiveness will be presented in the March 1982 Feasibility Report~ The first meeting of the Nitigation Review Group will occur in March.1982. An invitation will be sent to Bradley Smith as a representative of your agency.This meeting will provide the resource agencies with an opportunity to discuss,\llith the Hitigation Core Groups,the various mitigation options presently being considered.The details of a draft mitigation plan will be completed SUbsequent to the Feasibility Report and prior to the FERC license application. 3.4 -r·lodification of the ~11tiqat1on Plan I ire Wl\..L.ETT ati WITTE .D.BERRY ~une eaT y HAYDEN L.AMB J L.AWRENCE thaSINCL.AIR VANDERBURG""onme espo t.</:..)"010"',_.~-. .1 - CARLSON FRETZ .lEX ,-ur a LOWREY ~PA a SINGH :it >/.(/"1 C "'V;~V't }'th Z JE:!SOU ''',~c£.6 ..ouSTEAD: -SOVE d~enc F RC 2CHASE...- 5r-cti r t b hh as Mr.Robert W.McVey February 23,1982 page 2 r L r L - r I t - :""'",' i'I' the termination of the monitoring program when the need for further mitigation is considered unnecessary.We have modified the policy to state termination would be subject to FERC approval. 4.4 -Approach to Developing the Fish and Wildlife Mitigati6n'Plans Paragraph 3,sentence 6,refers to the functioning of the Mitigation Core Group which will be concentrating its efforts towards resources most 1 ike ly to be impacted.' Paragraph 5,sentence 2.This sentence is contained under Step 2 en- titled "Option Analysis Procedure".The intent of this procedure is to consider each impact issue and to review all practicable mi~igat;on options within the intent of the National Environmental Policy Act. If a mitigation option that avoids an impact is identified which is technically feasible,effective,and not in conflict with any other project objectives,the need to address other alternatives,was not considered necessary.The intent of sentence 2,paragraph 5,was to state that if such an option does not exist,we will proceed to evaluate other options."All options considered will be evaluated and documented. 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." The selection of which options are to be further considered in the de- velopment of an acceptable mitigation plan is addressed under Step 3. Pa~agraph 7.Mitigation options will be forwarded to the Fish and Wildlife ~1itigation Review Group allowing for agency review and comment. In addition,our mitigation policy will be modified to reflect our intent to have the draft mitigation plan formally reviewed by agencies p~ior to application to PERC. I appreciate your comments and trust our response satisfies the concern you have expressed. Sincerely, 6/)~~ John D.Lawrence Project Manager KRY/jmh ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED i I I JIll!! - February 23,1982 P5700.11.92 T.1521 - - - - 1 I ,. I Susitna Hydroelectric Project Comnents on Fish and Wi.ld11fe mtioation Policy . Nr.;Skoog: Ronald O.Skoog iss10ner ka Department of Fish and Game Box 3..2000 au,Alaska 99802 r4r.Skoog: ppreciate receiving your comments on the "S us itna Hydroelectric ect Fish and Wildlife H1tigation Pol icy"dated December 30,1981. ddition to addressing your comments in our revised edition of the cy,I have elected to respond directly to the concerns you have ed.MY comments are organized in the order presented in your mber 30 1etter. definition of fish and wildlife resources included the habitat which ains them but for clarification we will include the phrase !land the tat that sustains them"as you recorrmended. Section'l -Introduction To broaden the perxpective of the first sentence in the first paragraph we \'/111 substitute the word mit1 gate for reduce.The definition of mitigate in this context being avoid,minimize,re~tify,reduce or COrmJent:We accept the CEQ definition and priority sequence for mitigation. 2.Section 2-Legal ~mndates We accept that the implementation of mitigation is the eventual goal and will include the phrase "an d eventual implementation"as you reconlTIended. Comment:.APA is committed to implement appropriate mitigation plans. ·3.Section 2 -Protection'of Fish and Game WILLETT WITTE BERRY V r-'(.......~'"r. f"~_...HAYOEN LAMS t'las t-LAWRENCE p.O. SINCLAIR ",neVANOERBUFlGrt' V 't\(.I'{"..w 1'"l/T'oar 'J..-p~ CARLSON FRETZ JEX LOWREY L -=ar SINGH 1.1...a roj I- ,.J.n a ....STEAO ~liBavE,pis I ece CHASE . 'ur ust r abi ~ I Mr.Ronald O.Skoog compensate for impacts. February 23~1982 page 2 Comment:Avoidance of impacts will be the first mitigation option explored. 4.Section 2 -FederalEnergYRegulatorY·Commission~2nd·paragraph r-We will add the phrase "measures and"in the last line of this paragraph. Comment:This addition meets your request. 5.Section 3.3 -Implementation of the Mitigation Plan ...... I !"""" I It is our intent to reach an agreement~through FERC,with those resource agencies having the mandate to approve the mitigation plan and the implementation specific agencies have not been stated since it is not considered appropriate for APA to define other agencies mandates;-It is also considered inappropriate to discuss such agreements through an informal group such as the Susitna Hydro Steering Committee •. Comment:APA accepts that the proposed monitory body or its function would not supersede individual agency mandate.In fact such~monitoring may be conducted through agencies fulfilling their mandates.. 6.Section 3.4-Modificatio~oftha Mitigation Plan APA intends to work with the appropriate state and federal agencies during implementation of the plan~including any modifications.The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission must approve any modification to mitigation stipulation in the license.It is anticipated FERC would not approve these modifications without first consulti.ng with the appropriate agencies. Comment:It was not intended to implyAPA approval superseded the mandate of state and federal agencies. 7.Section 4 -Approach to Developing Fish and Wildlife Plans Third paragraph: The intent of the ranking of resources is "order of importance was to direct mitigation efforts towards those resources where~even without an extensive data base~it is predicted the greatest impacts would occur. As an example.the concentration of the fisheries mitigation efforts has been towards the anadromous fisheri~s between Talkeetna and Devil Canyon~as this is an important reserve and there is higher potential for impact in this section than further downstream. ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED ,I I -------------------------------- Mr.Ronald O.Skoog February 23,1982 page 3 I'----- Comment:The delay in the license application will permit a more detailed mitigation plan to be developed. Fifth paragraph: Comment:The intent of this procedure is to consider each impact issue and to review all practicable mitigation options within the intent of the National Environmental Policy Act.If a mitigation option that avoids an impact is identified which is technically feasible,effective and not in conflict with any other project objective,the need to address other alternatives was not considered necessary.The intent of sentence 2,paragraph 5 was to state that if such an option does not exist,we will pro- ceed to evaluate other options. No mitigation options will be arbitrarily dismissed.As stated in the policy,"ALL options will be evaluated and documented.1I The policy will be revised to make this clear. Paragraph Seven: Comment:FERC requires APA to prepare a mitigation plan prepared in consultation with appropriate resource agencies.This plan will be based on recommendations from the core groups and review and comment from the agencies via the Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Review Group and the formal agency review process. Subsequent to the FERC filing,the plans will be reviewed by FERC and other agencies and an acceptable plan finalized.It is not APA's iritent that the mitigation planning be in conflict in any way with the management and protection responsibility of any agencies. Paragraph Eight: Comment:The Susitna project is being prepared by a state agency.As such,it would be premature to commit funding for involvement of other agencies at this time. General Comments 1.The three month delay in the license application will permit agency review and input to the mitigation plan. 2.The Policy will be revised to include a description of purpose of the core and review groups.You w.ill be receiving a letter with the Feasibility Report outlining what reports will be sent to your department. ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED - Mr.Ronald O.Skoog February 23,1982 p,age 4 I"""" I I, ~ , We very much appreciate your comments on the policy and hope my responses are satisfactory.If you have any questions,please call. MMG/jh ACRES AMERICAN,INCORPORATED , I I ..._-_...._---~------ February 24,1982 P5700.11 .71 T.1528 .~.";~.~. -:",,",=:-" .-. - ...... I ...... -Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitiqation Po1i~Y •Melvin A.Monson t1ng Assistant Regional Director S.Fish and Wildlife Service 11 E.Tudor Road chorage,Alaska 99503 ar Mr.Manson: will attempt to nespond to each of your comments,numbered as in ur letter• o Introduction: / ank you for your letter of December 30,1981,commenting on the Fish d Wildlife Mitigation Policy for the Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility udy.We appreciated receiving a copy of the F&WS Mitigation Policy d your explanation of it. Th;s sect;on was purposefully kept short so that the policy \-roul d not be overbearing.He do not feel it necessary to discuss the issues you w~ntioned,as they are covered in detail in the Feasibility Report.At the suggestion of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. we have added the phrase Il~lisf:i and \'li1dlife resources of the state". 2.0 legal Mandate: The entire policy and particularly sections 3 and 4 explain that APA intends to develop and impler.~nt a mitigation plan in coordination with the agencies \'/ith mandated fish and wildlife mitigation responsibil ities.' 2.2 National Environmental Policy Act: Since FERC is a federal agency,they are covered by the sta~ement JJFederal agencies shall to the fullest extent possible~. WILLETT WITTE BERRY /I'i 1'1 -""']:jAYOEN U LAMB 1 1 '-~AWRENCE It SINCLAIR . VANDE"RBURGH n I.......}{.To'N/-,. '"r'",(~Y·S:~...., CARLSON T' FReTZ JEX \ol' LOWREY ~' SINGH ~ 1 ....{ .J.3TEAO'-l:'ove , Co ~o oV<j(f.J J CHASE 1 I Mr.Melvin A.Monson February 24,1982 page 2 .....2.3 Federal Energy Regulatory Corrmission The policy will reflect the fact these regulations were adopted. Exhibit E will be prepared as described in the regulations. 2.4 Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act ,-, I 3.1 Reference to FERC has been incorporated. Basic Intent of the Applicant The statement "The FERC will resol ve any di sputes which APA and the agencies cannot resolve"has.beenadded. r r I ,...... I 1"""\ [ \. 3.2 Consultation with Natural Resource Agencies and the Publ~c A section explaining the mechanism for coordination with the agencies has been added to the beginning of the policy.The agencies will be involved in the plan both prior and subsequent to FERC filing. 3.3 Implementation of the Mitigation Plan The implementation of the mitigation plan is recognized by APA to be its responsibility. 3.4 Modification of the Mitigation Plan Paragraph 2 It is recognized any modification to or termination of the mitigation efforts would be subject to FERC approval.It is assumed FERC would consult with the agencies during this process. 4.0 Approach to Developing the Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Plan Paragraph 3 The intent of this paragraph was to direct mitigation efforts towards those resources where,even without an,extensive data base,it is predict~d the greatest impacts would occur.As an example,the concentration of the fisheries mitigation efforts has been towards the anadromous fisheries between Devil Canyon and Talkeetna,as this is an important resource and there is a higher potential for impact in this section than further downstream. Paragraph 5 The intent of this procedure is to consider each impact issue and to review all practicable mitigation options within the intent of the National Environmental Policy Act.If a mitigation option is identified that avoids an impact,is technically feasible,effective and not in confl iet with any other project objectives,the need to address other alternatives was not considered necessary.The ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED , I I Mr.Melvin A.Monson February 24,1982 page 3 intent of sentence 2,paragraph 5 was to state that if such an option does not exist,we will proceed to evaluate other options. As stated in the policy,"All options will be evaluated and docu- mented.1I The pol icy will be revised to make this clear. Paragraph 7 This paragraph has been expanded to include the Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Review Group involvement in the plan's development. Paragraph 9 Your statement has been incorporated. Paragraph 10 We agree with your statement.The FERC must approve any modification to mitigation stipulations in the licenseo It is anticipated FERC would not approve the modifications without first consulting with the appropriate agencies. Thank you again for your time.If you have any questions regarding my responses,feel free to contact me. Sincerely yours, 4'Z?~~L..aoh;~wrence Project Manager MMG/jmh cc:E.Yould,APA K.Schreiner ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED r i r"'" ! ! ,.r~·r"" f .•~ .~1arch 1,1982 P5700.11 T.1425 Mr.Douglas G.Warnock Assistant Regional Director Alaska Region National Park Service 540 West Fifth Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Warnock:Susitna Hydroelectric Project "...... r-:, .r- I ,...,, ~ ! I 1 r il jl "\-- 1"""r \ I thank you for your December 30,1981 response to our request for. review and comment on Susitna project reports forwarded to your agency. I am pleased that you are satisfied to date with our cultural resource identification and management,recreation planning and Development Selection evaluation process. In regards to the review of subsequent reports we are receptive to including your agency in the water quality and use,aesthetics and land use groups if you consider this information beneficial in performing your formal review of project related recreation impacts.We are enclosing the 1980 Land Use Annual Report. h);i gere ly yours,.,.-7/.·h:?~~t~--?~<-~{~~riD.Lawrence Project Manager KRY/jmh Enclosure xc:Eric Yould,APA ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED -"':• : • -OO"'~• :';'''-:~:•"_..':4 .;•..:~.'.rO.::"~S S:..J F Dear Ms.McAnerney: i I I - _._-~.--~- February 25,19B2 P570D .11.9Z T .1533 Ms.Lee McAnerney Department of Com~unity and Regional Affairs Pouch B Juneau.Alaska 98111 Susitna Hydroelectric Project Agency Coordination Meetings ,~s an agency representative of the Historical and Archeological Group reviewing the Sus1tna Hydroelectric Project you are invited to a meeting on the morning of March 15,1982 in the offices of Acres American Inc •• 1577 uC n Street,Suite 305.Anchorage.Alaska.Tne purpose of this meeting will be to review the results of the Phase I archeological studies.assess mitigation options and discuss future study programs. If you have any questions relating to these meetings,please contact ~1r.Vern Smith of Acres:at (907)276-4388. j Sincerely, -! KRYI1Jr John O.Lawrence Project t4anager -- - r r r Fe~ruary ~5,1902 P5700.11.50 T .1537 Mr.Roy Huhndorf Pre:iident Cook Inlet Region,Incorporated P.O.Drawer 411 Anchorage,Alaska 99509 Dear Mr.Huhndorf:Sus1tna Hydroel ectr1c P"roject Azency Coordination~eetin9s As a member of the Aesthet1cs and land Use Group reviewing the Susitna Hydroelectric Project you are invited to a meeting on the afternoon 01 ~~arch 15,1932 fn the off1ces of Acres American Inc.,.1517 Me"Street. Suite 305,Anchorage,Alaska.The purpose of this meetfng wl1lbe to discuss the results of the Phase r studfes and to review the alt!!rnatfve and proposed recreation plans. If you have any questions relating to these ~eetfngs,please contact Hr.Vern Smith of Acres at (907)276-4388. Sincerely, I""'" f \-\ \ ~ r I \ KRY/1jr John D.lawrence Project r1anager i I I Dear Mr.Schreiner: February 25,1ge2 P5700.11.71 T .1537 Mr.Keith Schreiner Regional Director,Region 7 U.S.nsh and ~!l1dl1fe Service 1011 E~"Tudor Road Anchorage,Alaska 99503 Susftna Hydroelectric Project Agency Coordination Meet1nQs ~s a rn~rnbcr of the A~tthetfcs/land Use and Racreation Groups revf~1fng the Susftna Hydroelectric ?roject you are invited to a m~et1ng on the afternoon of March 15,1932 in theofffces of Acres Am~rican Inc.,1577 nCR Street, Suit!!305,~nchoralJe,.'!'laslca.The purpose of this meeting will be to discuss the results of the Phase r stucies and to review the alternative and pro- posed recreation plans. If you hllve any questions relating to these meetings,please contact r'.r.Vern Smith of Acres at (907)276-4.'388. Sincerely, -I KRY /1jr John D.la,"Irence Project Manager Mr.Ronald O.Skoog Commissioner State of Alaska Department of ffsh and Game Subpart Building Juneau.Alaska 99801 Dea r Hr.Skoog: ,.... ,..., i ~ I ,.... February 25.1982 P5700.11.92 T.1531 Susitna Hydroelectric Project Agency Coordination Meetings, As an agency representative of the Historical and Archeological Group reviewing the Susitna Hydroelectric Project you are invited to a meeting on the morning of ',1arch 15,1982 in the offices of Acres American Inc., 1577 nc u Street.Suite 305,Anchorage,Alaska.The purpose of this meeting will be to review the results of the Phase I archeological studies,assess mitigation options and discuss future study programs. As a member of the Recreation and Aesthetics/Land Use Groups you are also invited to a meeting at the same location on the afternoon of March 15,1982 to discuss the results of the PhZlse I studies and to review the alternative and proposed recreation plans.• If you have any questions relating to these meetings.please contact Mr.Vern Smith of Acres at (907)276-4888. Sincerely, ~. I, ,.... KRY/1jr cc:Mr.Thomas Trent State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game 2207 Spenard Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502 John O.Lawrence Proj ect Ma na ger February 25,19B2 P5700 .11.92 T .1535 ~'r.Robert McVey Director.Alaska Region National ~~rine Fisheries Service NOAA P.O.Box 1668 Juneau.Alaska 99802 OearMl"'.McVey:Susitna Hydroelectric Project Agency Coordination Meetings As a representative of the Recreation Group rev1ewfngthe Susitna Hydro e electric Project you are invited to a meeting on the afternoon af March IS, 19B2 in the offices of Acres American Inc.J 1517 nCR Street,Suite 305. Anchorage.Alaska.The purpose of this meeting will he to discuss the results of the Phase I studfas and to review the a't~rnat1ve and proposed recreation plans. If you have any questions relating to these meetings,please contact Mr.Vern Soith of Acres at (907)276-4888. Sincerely.. 'J1 ;) KRY/ljr John D.Lawrence Project Manager cc:Mr.Ron Morris Director.Anchorage Field Office National Harine Fisheries Service 701 Ile·Street Box 43 Anchorage,Alaska 99513 ""\. Mr.John E.Cook Acting Regional Director Ala5.ka Office National Park Service 540 West Fifth Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Cook: l .- r r .r"" I, r i ! r I ~ February 25,1982 P5700.1l.92 T.1532 Susftna Hydroelectric Project Aqency Coordination Meetings As an agency representative of the Histor1cal and Archeological Group reviewing the Susitna Hydroelectric Project you are invited to a meet1ng on the morning of March 15,1982 in the offices of Acres A~erican Inc., 1577 "C·Street.Su1te30S,Anchorage,Alaska.The purpose of this meeting will be to review the results of the Phase I archeological studies.assess mitigation optfonsand discuss future study programs. As a member of the Recreat10nan d Aesthetics/Land Use Groups you are also invited to a meeting at the same location on the afternoon of Poarch 15.19822 to discuss the results of the Phase I studies and to review the alternative and proposedrecreat1on plans. If you have any questions relating to these meetings,please contact Mr.Vern Smith of Acres at (907)276-4888. Sincerely, r- I ,c . KRY/ljr cc:Mr.larry Hright National Park Service lOllE.Tudor Road.Suite 297 Anchorage,1\1 aska 99503 John D.La\'1rence Project Manager February 26~1982 P5700.11.74 T.1539 Mr.Al Carson Division of Research &Development Department of Natural Resources 323 East Fourth Avenue Anchorage~Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Carson:Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation - As discussed through Vern Smith of our Anchorage office~meetings to re- view fish and wildlife mitigation efforts are scheduled for March 11 and 12~1982 in the offices of Acres American,1577 C Street,Suite 305, Anchorage,Alaska. As these meetings are expected to be .in the form of technical workshops, a ~omplete day on each of the topics of fish and wildlife is considered necessary.Proposed agendas are enclosed.I will also forward~within the week,updated information packets addressing fish and wildlife im- pact issues and mitigation options. As fisheries issues are being discussed on a separate day from wildlife issues,please feel free to have different technical personnel attend each of the meetings if you consider it appropriate. As we consider these meetings to be an important component in improving the coordination between your agency and our fish and wildlife mitigation core groups,your attendance is encouraged. If you have any questions relating to these meetings please contact my- self or Vern Smith (907-276-4888). Sincerely, Kevin Young Environmental Coordinator KRY:dlp Enclosures ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED r, r-- \ I \ ~':arch 2~1982 ;:';;700.11.92 T.1534 Mr.Ty Jil1iplane State Historic Preservation Officer Alaska Oepartlr.ant of Natural Resources Division of Parks 619 ~arehouseAvenue,Suite 210 Anchorage.Alaska 99501 Dea:-Hr.Shaw:$us1tna Hydroelectric Project Aoency C~rdir.ationr.~et1nqs r - fts an agency representative of the Historical and Archeologfcal Group reviewing the Susitna Hyuroelectric Project you are invited to a meeting on the monling af f<.arch 15.1982 in the offices of Acres .A~merican Inc., 1577 IIC"Street,"Suite ~05 ..,lL,nchorage.AlAska.The nllrnose of this meeting ~;11 be to review the results of the Phase I archeological studi~s.assess ii1itiqaticn options and.discuss future study pro!m~r.'.s. If you have any questions relating to these reetin!'ls~rleas~contact Mr~Vern Smi th of Acre5 at (9Dl)276-l.f-a3. Sincerely. John o.L;'1',Jrence Project l'l.ana1p.r KRY:dlp cc:Hr.Alen Cur~on Division of Research &Jpvelo~mGnt De~3rtmcnt of ;;atural Reso:Jrccs !'ouc!1 7-:105 Anchorage.Alas~a 995~1 r-., i APPENDIX B-2 FISH AND WILDLIFE MITIGATION REVIEW GROUP CORRESPONDENCE SUSITNA WILDLIFE MITIGATION TASK FORCE NOTES OF MEETING January 30,1981 Anchorage,Alaska t""I I, Carson asked what the relationship was between this meeting and the Steering Committee comments on the Task 7 Procedures Manuals.Dr. r-Jcid and Mr.Reed responded that,although mitigation planning was i nong the topics corrrnented upon by the Steering Corrunittee,th is Task Force had been planned prior to the Steering Corrmittee's comments and ~s not in response to the comments. .. r ~ J f ! '-f I Compiled by:Edward T.Reed Wildlife Ecology'Group Leader Terrestrial Environmental Specialists,Inc. :\ I ffme meeting was corrrnenced at 9:00 a.m. ~( 5 \ j Mr.Reed gave a brief introduction and requested that all participants!~ee attached list)introduce themselves and indicate the organization t Ihey represented.In his introduction,Mr.Reed identified the majorrproblemassociatedwiththedevelopmentofaSusitnawildlife ~~itigation program as the fact that in some cases data collection will J i ot be complete until after the submittal of a license application to ~t rtRC (July 1,1982).Thus the level of detail that can be incorporated into a program at the end of Phase I will vary among the various rJmponents of the wildlife studies,and in some cases there will be t.~sufficient data available to develop a finely~tuned mitigation plan. t1r.Wozniak explained some of the history that preceded this meeting, Gcluding the role of the Steering Committee and indicated that this L~eting represented a formal consultation between the Power Authority (including the Power Authority's representatives,i.e.Acres and TES)rd federal and state agencies as called for by the Fish and Wildl ife i:ordinat ion Act. i "I . I • I ."., I 11"""' It '.Reed presented a brief outline (attached)describing the 6rganization and functioning of the task force.At the request of Mr. l;'arson,the word "procedures"(Purpose of the Task Force,Item #1)was danged to "options". ! i'I'. I • - ... -2- ,~'-o dual role of Mr.Schneider as a representative of ADF&G was f :cuss ed by Schneider,.Trent,Reed,Lucid,Carson,and Wozniak.A concensus was reached that Mr.Schneider's participation in the core group was appropriate due to his technical participation on the $usitna study Team as leader of the big game studies.All official responses fromADF&G as a participant in the review group will be handled by Mr. Trent,who will consult with Mr.Schneider on technical matters.This arrangement was sat isfactory to the meet ing part ic ipants. There were no comnents concerning information on the outline pertaining to the Role of the Core Group,the Role of the Review Group,or the Role of th e Task Force Coord i nator. Mr.Carson raised the issue of whether or not members of the review group should be required to prepare a written discussion of concerns, issues and pol icy statements.Mr.Carson felt that it was the responsibility of TES to prepare such material for review and cOfllTlent by the review group.Following discussion of this issue,it was agreed that the Task Force Coordinator would draft a policy statement incorporating agency concerns and submit it to the review group for comment.It was suggested that agency concerns could be better identified through personal interviews with representatives of each agency.TES and Acres will consider this approach. ( /itr.Wozniak questioned whether or not all appropriate agencies were included in the mitigation task force.The involvement of the U.S. Corps of Engineers,the Environmental Protection Agency,and the ~ationaJ Marine Fisheries Service were raised.TES and Acres will keep ~ese agencies in mind as the task force proceeds,although Mr.Reed indicated that the part ic ipat i on of these agencies may be either premature at this point in time,or be more appropriately included in the fisheries mitigation effort.Mr.Wozniak also raised the question of involvement by special interest groups.Mr.Reed and Dr.Lucid responded that the cpncerns of special interest groups were more appropriately coordinated through the Power Authority's publ ic participation program.TES will prepare a list of agencies and/or groups that may be cons idered for consultat ion in the future if pertinent issues concerning such groups develop. fit was discussed,and generally agreed upon,that there are limitations to the level of detail of mitigation planning that can be performed within the Phase I time frame.Or.Lucid,Mr.Reed,and t1r.McMullen pointed out,nevertheless,that to comply with FERC regulations,the TTcense appl ication must represent a commitment on the part of the applicant and that identification of "options"may not be sufficient. .' j !I r '(t- r ., ; I t. ;;~ ~-; r.""", j • I ~~ U r" ~J .~ :-1 I- \ I "1 .'"-'1~ =".J.....,- :"11.35 decided that individual review group members will address all ~5pondence ~o the APA,with a copy being sent directly to Mr.Reed, I;':will back-channel'a copy to Mr.Young at Acres.Mr.Wozniak ,1 lrized the Task Force Coordinator (Mr.Reed)to represent the core ."..,upand correspond di reet ly with members of the rev i ew group ."Mr.·Lr.requested written confirmation of this authorization from Mr. rA ..g.Mr.Young indicated that Acres would provide the requested o:cumentat ion. f"'"'I following discussion,it was agreed that Mr.Reed would reevaluate the s~dule outlined on the handout.Mr.Carson requested that a meeting b{held following preparation of a pol icy statement and review by the review group members. m.Stackhouse indicated that the USFWS had recently (within the past week:)publ ished a statement of mitigation pol icy in the Federal f!ister.Mr.Reed thanked Mr.Stackhouse for th is informat ion and :LJicated that the pol icy statement would be reviewed at the earl iest possible date. r"""" t Follow;n,g discuss ion it was dec ided that the core group should first ~epare a mitigation policy,and following review,proceed with the }eparat ion of a mitigation plan." (~.Stackhouse stated that cost effectivenes~of mitigation plans is an I ( 'Hllportant conce rn of th e UsnJs. r~ !"h{.e question was raised by Or.Lucid as to whether the applicant had any respons ib il ity to enhance a resource,as opposed to avo i dance of ('mpacts or compensation.It was agreed that T£S,in its mitigationI'lanning,would "identify enhancement opportunities"and stop there. frhe subject of compensation of impact on one species (e.g.moose)by enhancement of another (e.g.salmon )was mentioned.No agreement was I"_reached on the validity of this concept. i ( The question of whether or not the review group should have a chairman ~was raised.Mr.Reed expressed concern that some details may be lost ,if one person was responsible for compil ing and possibly sumnarizing agency comnents.Mr.Carson also advised against the appointment of a chairman at this time.For the present time,the idea of a review group chairman was dropped: -Mr.Reed requested that a list be prepared with the name,mailing address,and phone number of all review group members.This list was _completed and is attached. The meeting was"adjourned at approximately 11:15 a.m • .. I" I, i I J C C .,f I i I. I I ' , ~I • I .:. .; ,- ...9'-- SUSITNA WILDLIFE MITIGATION TASK FORCE MEETING OF JANUARY 30,1981 ANCHORAGE,ALASKA LIST OF PARTICIPANTS PARTICIPANT REPRESENT!NG llilliam Collins ( ~, J Terrestrial Environmental Specialists~Inc. Terrestrial Environmental Specialists~Inc. Terrestrial Environmental Special ists~Inc. Terrestrial Environmental Specialists~Inc. Terrestrial Environmental Specialists~Inc. Un i vers ity of Alaska Un i vers ity of Alaska University of A1ask a University of Alaska Alaska Power Authority University of Alaska Alaska Department of Fish and Game Alaska Department of Fish and Game Acres American,Inc. Alaska Power Authority Joseph McMu 11 en Vincen t Luc id Edward Reed Robert Krogseng Richard Taber Steven McDona ld Brina Kessel Philip Gipson Kar 1 Schne i der Bruce Bed ard David Wozni ak ,~Thomas Trent Jay 1'1cKendrick ",.Ji i {, Al an Car son -~~.'Mike Scott ,;-. -~~~,_Gary Stackhouse ;lt~Bruce App le ~ Alaska Department of Natural Resources United States Bureau of land Management United States Fish and Wildlife Service United States Fish and Wildlife Service j i -i ! ..... I I j r-//"k:rE r rE 5 t rl a f ......~-~., '-"'--"'$r·1..Ii~~iif~nv I ron mEn l a ~~¥;f5pEciaH5ts,inc. ~~~~...;<zf .~-~..."..-,. R.O.,BOX 3BB P";OENIX.N.Y.'3'3513'5;595-7228 . RECt:JVED J UN 1 7 19B1 LAS;ItOA POWERALI!ORITY s~,""rTNA MEMO TO Members of the Susitna Wilalife Mitigation Task Force FROM:Edward T.Reed,Task For~e Coordinator DATE:June 16,1981;218.683 RE:Comments concerning the preliminary policy outline. r- Please review the comments made by other task force members and be +-......,...---t---f prepared to discuss possible adjustments to the pol icy statement.As i noted in my memo of May 8,1981,the next meeting of the mitigation 1.~-,,~---;task force will be held at 9:00 a_me on Monday,June 29th,in the Acres Anchorage Office.Hopefully a final version of the pollcy statement can be agreed upon during that meeting and we can move forward with a discussion of how best to develop a mitigation plan based upon the policy statement. ~~_L_'_I ~Enclosed please find another copy of the preliminary outline for the ;I ~o i'-...c./wildlife mitigation policy statement.I have inserted review comments -;-JDG V.I/.that have been received todate.The comments have been pl aCijd 1"",...<1-1 immediately following the appropriate item.In the case of those -'1 1 ~I~comments that pertain to an entire section,they follow the last item_J _,5_"1_of each section.In most cases,comments have been transcribed _t_I_P_G_H~~verbatum,although some comments had to be extracted from the; ~s correspondence and minor editorial changes were made~.--I ''IT -.- --"'-'--OWL It should be noted that this was a detailed outline and some of the ~~~-v~---~comments would have been unnecessary if a fleshed out text version was --Pt .~-C-I-available for review.It was impossible to totally explain all of the -I.,...:,)....;•.,fl~,"-.--:;,I'1--'-1 detail sand ramifi cat ions of each item with i n the context of an ·-I,-.·.....t.:.='--l...i--:-{o,....,---f,out 1i ne.;rA.'/.-?-/., ---I~ ~-r I I' ( WILDLIFE MITIGATION .A STATEMENT OF POLICY PRELIMINARY OUTLINE 1 -BACKGROUND 1.1 -The Need Included will be a general discussion of the value of the environment and why it is necessary to reduce or avoi~negative impacts while still permitting reasonable energy development. Comment USF&WS: This section should include a discussion of the need to adequately assess the environmental resources of the study area to determine the compatibility of the proposed project and to evaluate mitigation to adequately reduce or avoid negative .impacts to environmental resources,including fish and wildlife resources,so that no net loss of habitat value occurs. 1.2 -Legal Mandates The Federal Energy Regulatory Corrmission regulations,the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act,and the National Environmental Policy Act will be discussed,as well as a consideration of the role of state and federal natural resource agencies whose task it is to protect and manage wildlife resources. 1.3 -Definition of Mitigation This will be the 5 part NEPA definition. ..., -J.j. r ! - ,.... I ! '- 2 -GENERN POLICIES TO BE CARRIED OUT BY THE APPLICANT 2.1 -Basic Intent of the Applicant (a)The goal of the applicant is to strive,within the bounds of feasibility and reasonable costs,to minimize the negative impacts of the Susitna Project and compensate for unavoidable losses of wildlife and wildlife habitat. Comment USF&WS: The ~of the appl icant should be to develop a pl an to fully mitigate unavoidable impacts which would result from the construction and operation of the project with full compensation for unavoidable losses to fish and wildlife resources. (b)The success of the mitigation effort will be considered the difference between impacts without mitigation and impacts with mitigation.A "no net loss of habitat value"will serve as the benchmark for measuring both the success of the mitigation effort and project impacts. Comment USF&WS: Success of the mitigation effort should be assessed through comparison of habitat value of the study area with the project, including the mitigation plan,vs.without the project,over the project life.No net loss of habitat value,as determined by pre-and post-project studies is the goal.Acceptable habitat evaluation procedures (such as the Fish and Wildlife Serv~ce's Habitat Evaluation Procedures and Instream Flow Methodology) should be used to accomplish this goal. McMullen: IINo net loss of habitat value ll looks good,but it must be decided how to assess habitat value.Also,are with and/or without project scenarios going to be considered? Gipson: Good statement. (c)The applicant will provide assurances that the agreed upon mitigation plan will be a stipulated part of the construction and operation plans of the project and will be executed by either the applicant or any other organization charged with managing the project. Comment USF&WS: The mitigation plan should be developed by the applicant,in coordination with the state and federal resource agencies.The plan,as agreed upon by the coordinating agencies,should be submitted by the applicant to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)as a component of the application to be incorporated into the license. 2.2 -Input From Agencies and the Public (a)The applicant will provide opportunities for the review and evaluation of concerns and recommendations presented by the public as well as by federal and state agencies. Comment USF&WS: Additional review and evaluation of the project will be provided through formal agencies comments in response to state and/or federally administered licensing and permitting programs. (b)Agency comments and recommendations will be provided by those members of the Mitigation Task Force that represent agencies,while the COhcerns of the public and special interest groups will be coordinated through other means. ,-. I - - ( Corrment Gipson: You may wish to spell out how input will be obtained from the public and how to weight the recommendations from individuals, interest groups,and governmental agencies. McMullen: One of the corrrnents at the Steering Committee meeting was that the agency representatives in many instances cannot "officially" represent their agency. 2.3 -Avoidance and Reduction of Impacts (a)During the feasibility studies (prior to FERC license submittal)and the subsequent preparation of preliminary engineering specifications (following FERC license submittal),the applicant will take into consideration,and where practical (both from the standpoint of actual feasibility as well as cost),incorporate recommendations to avoid and/or reduce negative impacts on wildlife resources. Comment USF&WS: The project,including mitigation found to be acceptable to the state and federal resource agencies,should be evaluated in regard to reasonable cost;not with and without the mitigation plan.The total cost of mitigation then becomes part of the total project cost. ~(b) \ I' IT r r- \ \ (,- Also considered under this policy will be operation stipulations that can be implemented to reduce negative .impacts on the wildlife resource.Recommendations for operation stipulations will be provided to the design engineer during both the feasibility studies and the prel im;naryengi neeri og phase as appropri ate. Comment USF&WS: Construction and operating stipulations to reduce negative impacts to fish and wildlife resources should be evaluated during the feasibility studies.Stipulations found acceptable by the coordinating agencies should be incorporated into the mitigation plan submitted as part of the license application. 2.4 -Compensation for Unavoidable Losses of Wildlife Resources (a)Where biologically feasible and cost effective management techniques are available,the applicant will institute management efforts to compensate for unavoidable impacts. Comment USF&WS: Compensation for unavoidable losses to fish aQd wildlife resources should be in accordance with a plan developed by the applicant,in coordination with state and federal resource agencies.The plan,found acceptable to the coordinating agencies should be submitted to FERC for incorporation into the project license.The compensation plan,a component of the overall mitigation plan,should be the result of a habitat evaluation,utilizing a procedure judged acceptable to the state and federal agencies with primary responsibility for fish and wildlife resources. (b)Where possible,compensation will be of an in-kind nature. This applies to both wildlife species as well as habitats. Comment USF&WS: In-kind compensation where "possible";should be mutually Ideterminedbytheapplicant and the coordinating state and federal agencies,prior to licensing. ,;! ~ .} - """Ir 2.5 -Geographic :Coverage of the Wildlife Mitigation Policy (a)In reg~;r:d to both impact avoi dance and compensation,the mitigat::on policy will address all wildlife species -' utiliz;nQ9 the impoundment zone and other project related, areas (ee.g.,borrow sites),as well as the riparian zone downstre=am to Talkeetna. Comment USF&WS: Determination of the extent of impacts attributable to the project needs to be accomplished.Formulation of a mitigation plan cannot proceed until the extent of the impacts,both direct and indirect, has been identified. McMullen: If key or target species are used to evaluate habitat values then this may requf:re rewording. Gipson: What treatment will be given to access roads,power line rights- ~f-way,and possible buffer zones around the impoundments? (b)Downstream from Talkeetna to Cook Inlet the primary mitigation effort will be directed towards any impacts that might occur in regard to riparian habitats. Comment USF&WS: The mitigation effort should be directed at reducing impacts where they are identified,addressing all primary and secondary impact areas,for all project features. Taber: It seems probable that 100%mitigation above the dam will not be feasible,so mitigation below the dam may be one of the next best choices.If a broad view of what "below the dam"consists of is maintained,then more mitigation options will be available than if the view is narrow. , 2.6 -Establishment of Priorities (a)Although all wildlife species will be considered (including big game species,non-game species,and furbearers),it will be necessary to identify the "k ey "or "target"species and establish some order of priority in regard to the development of a mitigation plan. Comment McMull en: If key or target species are used to evaluate habitat values then this may require rewording. (b)In order to prepare a mitigation pl an that can be successfully implemented while at the same time placing mitigation efforts in perspective,certain wildlife species and/or habitats will be given priority in mitigation planning based on:1)importance of the species/habitat both to Alaskan residents and the ecosystem;(2)availability of practical mitigation measures;(3)species with special status,such as threatened or endangered;(4)estimated costs required to execute mitigation measures.This list of criteria is not organized in any priority order. Comment Gipson: Possibly something should be added to indicate that some ecological criteria will be used to establish priorities,in addi~ion to human values.For example,those species that contribute significantly to total energy flow through the system (small mammals and nesting birds)and/or those species that make up the bulk of animal biomass (again small mammals)should be considered important. McMull en: These criteria could be easily expanded to be utilized in the generation of relative value indicies. ~, r USF&WS:(pertains to 2.6 in general) Since all wildlife species are to be considered,"k ey ll species should be chosen so that they represent particular segments (guilds)of the community.Species which provide guild representation and are also considered Itimportantll by the resource agencies and/or public should be given priority.Species which are federally listed as threatened or endangered,or proposed for listing,must be handled separately in accordance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.The practical ity of the mitigation plan developed,in regard to the concerns of the applicant and coordi nati n9 agenci es,would be demonstrated through its acceptability to these agencies. 2.7 -Impact-Related Versus Non-Impact-Related Lands (a) ,...., It~\ r'(b) To the greatest extent possible,mitigation measures will be implemented on or immediately adjacent to the area where the impact takes place. Where this is not possible,priority will be given first to suitable areas as close as possible to the area of impact. (c)As a last resort,areas totally removed from the impact area will be considered for mitigation efforts. Comment (pertains to 2.7 in general) USF&WS: Statements apply to both direct and indirect impacts. Schneider: In sections 2.7 and 2.8,you emphasize mitigation close to the impact area even to the point of enhancement of a different species rather than move to a more distant area.The problem is in definition of such terms as "reasonable proximity".Users of wildlife are fairly mobile and tend to greatly favor one species over another.This,combi ned with practical consi derat ions.mi ght make it difficult to stick with the policy. I haven't given this a great deal of thought,but an alternate appr~-=~h might be to direct mitigation measures at the animal popu~~ion or subpopulation impacted when this is clearly feast~le. When :=he feasibility of this approach is in doubt,perhaps miti Sc5tion measures should be directed at user groups.A series of al~rnate mitigation masures could be drawn up and submitted for purblic review. The PC-l nt is th at the pub 1ic mi ght agree with your po 1icy,but .disagi=e with your plan when they see what it means in reality. Why net recognize that the issue is complex and subjective from the start? 2.8 -In-Ki~d Compensation Versus Availability of Areas Suitable For Mitic3tion.. (a)In the event that suitable areas for in-kind compensation for a particular species/habitat do not exist within reasonable proximity to the impact area,the first priority 'I'li 11 be to compensate for such loss by enhancement of a different species and/or habitat that is close to the impact area. (b)If compensation by means of a different species proves impractical or unacceptable,in-kind compensation in areas totally removed from the impact area will be considered. Comment (pertains to 2.8 in general) Schneider: See comment under 2.7. ) .l - l~ i ....... I )' r j I r " I"'" } '( 2.9 -Land Ownership (a)Interviews will be conducted with private owners as well as pertinent state and federal agencies to preliminarily identify land use policies or ownership that may act as constraints on mitigation efforts. (b)Where no land use constraints have been identified,the analysis of mitigation alternatives will proceed based on biological factors. (c)Following review by agencies and private landowners for· compatibility with land use policies,the mitigation plan will then be reassessed and adjusted as necessary in order to insure that proposed actions can be legally and practically executed.Where mitigation opportunities exist,the applicant will work closely with land management agencies to insure the successful implementation of the plan. 2.10 -Restoration of Disturbed Areas The applicant will consider various options (e.g.regrading and revegetation,permitting natural invasion and succession,etc.) in the reclamation of areas that will be disturbed by project activities such as borrow areas and construction camps. Comment USF&WS: Restoration of disturbed areas should be in accordance with a plan developed by the applicant,in coordination with the state and federal resource agencies.The plan,found acceptable to the coordinating agencies should be submitted to FERC for incorporation into the project license. L McKendrick: I would emphasize that the revegetation,etc.,of borrow areas be coordinated with land use policies of owners.Also,considering such areas as prospective browse production sites may be feasible, if there is any soil available after excavation.They may be considered potential sites to compensate for browse losses in the impoundment areas. Heavy grass seeding will probably retard natural succession of browse species.We really need to examine some of the myriads of highway and seismic disturbances to see if we can identify success i onal sequences and bypasses and develop some reasonabl e scheme in habitat formation for this region. 2.11 -Nuisance Animals In order to avoid altering the natural behavior of animals resident to the project area,rules designed to prevent,or reduce nuisance animal problems will be established.Procedures will also be formulated to relocate problem animals. Comment USF&WS: A plan,found acceptable to the coordination agencies,should be developed and submitted to FERC for incorporation into the project license. Schneider: Relocation is generally a poor policy as animals usually return or cause problems in other areas.Animals can be captured only under permits issues by the Commissioner of Fish and Game.He will set policy on this issues,not APA. Gipson: Other possibilities may be:1)strict garbage control and disposal,2)fencing of semi-permanent camps,3)education programs for workers to prevent feeding and harassing wild animals in order to reduce impacts and conflicts with people. -, ) .1 2.12 -Access (a)Since the potential impact of increased human access on wildlife is a major concern,measures will be considered and the most appropriate ones implemented to reduce impacts on wildlife as a result of improved access. - I""'" ) i t -, i '.-.' t (b)This will include access policies during both the construction and operation phases of .the project. Comment (pertains to 2.12 in general) USF&WS: A plan,found acceptable to the coordinating agencies,should be developed and submitted to FE'RC for incorporation into the project 1 i ce"nse. \ 2."13 -Hunt i ng (a)Acknowledging that sport hunting is an important component of the Alaskan lifestyle and economy,it will be incorporated as a major component in mitigation planning. (b)Hunting rules and/or recommendations to insure the safety of project personnel and the public will be considered. (c)For obvious reasons,any policy determination concerning hunting must be integrated with access policy and the applicant will consider both access and hunting policy in a coordinated manner. Comment (pertains to 2.13 in general) USF&WS: This section should be expanded to include other forms of wildlife recreation as well,e.g.,bird watching,photography.A plan, found acceptable to the coordinating agencies,should be developed and submitted to FERC for incorporation into the project license. ( Gipson: I would like for you to include trapping and fishing in this section if you feel they are appropriate for inclusion. Schnei der:. Replace "sport hunting"with "hunting and trapping".Many Alaskans would interpret your wording to exclude subsistence hunting.This issue is both difficult to define and highly emotional.There is no need to raise it here.Obviously~we want to preserve all legal hunting and trapping options. Any hunting rules or policies other than those instituted by an employer on their employees are the responsibility of the Board of Game.APA can make recommendations as can any group or individual,but it is up to the Board of Game to examine all factors and set regulations for dealing with problems. Reed: It maybe that this section is not appropriate at all for inclusion with a wildlife mitigation policy effort and may be better sui~ed for prime consideration under the recreation ,> planning portion of the Susitna study effort;although coordination between recreation planners and the wildlife mitigation group is certainly necessary. 2.14 -Responsibility For Implementation of the Mitigation Plan (a)Prior to the initiation of construction an agreement will be reached for determining responsibility for implementation of the mitigation plan. Comment USF&WS: Responsibility for implementation of the mitigation plan rests with the applicant.Any agreements entered into by the applicant for the delegation of direct implementation authority for the mitigation plan would need to include stipulations to prevent deviation from the accepted plan. - ""-(i, I Reed: Due to wording there is some confusion between 2.14 (a)and 2.1 (c).The intent of the wording in 2.1 (c)was to indicate that the applicant (APA)was ultimately responsible for seeing that the mitigation plan is executed as agreed upon.The purpose of 2.14 (c)was not to indicate that any organization other than the applicant would have ultimate responsibility,but to indicate that an agreement would have to be reached as to exactly who (ADF&G, USF&WS,TES,etc.)would actually execute the plan.A rewording, or further explanation is needed to prevent a misunderstanding between these two items. (b)Realizing that a mitigation monitoring team will be necessary to insure the proper and successful execution of the mitigation plan,part of the plan will detail the structure and responsibilities of such a monitoring body. Comment USF&WS: The mitigation monitoring team should include representatives of the applicant,FERC,and the state and federal agencies with des i gnated res pons i bil ity for fi sh and wil dl ife resources.The financing,composition,and plan of study should be agreed to by the prospective participants during the formulation of the mitigation plan as a component of the mitigation plan to be submitted to FERC for incorporation into the license. 2.15 -Modification of the Mitigation Plan (a)As part of the mitigation plan a monitoring program will be established,the purpose of which will be to monitor wildlife populations during the construction and operation of the project in order to determine the effectiveness of the plan as well as to identify problems that were not anticipated during the initial preparation of the plan. ( Comment USF&WS: See comments above (2.14.b). Gipson: This section,2.15 (a)is good. (b)The mitigation plan will be sufficiently flexible so that if adequate data secured during the monitoring of wildlife populations indicate that the mitigation 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 in some cases where impacts failed to materialize as predicted. Comment USF&WS: Any modification to the mitigation plan should be coordinated with,and agreeable to,the state and federal agencie~with designated responsibility for fish and wildlife resources. General Comments McKendrick: Bill Collins and I both received and read the Preliminary Outline. Generally,it appears acceptable and comprehensive. Wozniak: We have no comments relative to the version Of the Mitigation Policy outline transmitted to us by Ed Reed's memo of May 8,1981.(Note: The APA did review an earlier version and provided suggestions and comments that were incorporated into this review version). Gipson: This is a well written outline.You may want a section treating use of 4-wheel drive vehicles and snow machines. ~. , I i /lOlIlI, ~r I USF&WS: We appreciate the opportunity to review the preliminary outline "Wildlife Mitigation:A Statement of Policy".We have done so in light of the Fish and Wildlife Service's Mitigation Policy (copy attached)and have provided comments which are consistent with that policy. { " :rerrestrial nvironmental Specialists.inc. R.O.~BOX 388 PHOENIx..N.Y.13~3513~l5If1g5'7ZZ8 RECEIVED J UL 2 "I 190'\ MEMO TO:Members of the Sus.itria Wildlife Hitigation Task Force FROM:EdwardT.Reed,Task Force Coordinator DATE:July 24,1981;218.730 n"'."ru::.Meeting notes ,I ,- ,..~ <: (.-------- Enclosed please find a copy of the notes of the June 29,1981 meeting of the wildlife mitigation task force.I have compiled these notes based on my interpretation of the comments made during the meeting.If you feel that I missed any major items or misunderstood certain statements please let me know and I"will prepare a revised version of the noteso I am now moving forward with the preparation of a draft policy statement an~"'1'\'15-SK-A-P-O-WE-R-----"l development of a decision making methodology.You will be receivi 9 AUTHORITY cog,ies of these as they are completed.SUSlrNAIF1L~.P57JO 1 c' c ., ( ~ I \- --- r SUSITNA WILDLIFE MITIGATION TASK FORCE NOTES OF MEETING June 29,1981 Anchorage,Alaska Comp i 1ed by:Edward T.Reed Wildlife Ecology Group leader Terrestrial Environmental .Specialists,Inc. The meeting was commenced at 9:00 a.m.A 1 ist of participants is attached. Mr.Reed gave a brief introduction and descr.ipti on of what had taken pl ace since the 1ast meeti ng.He then asked if the parti ci pants waul d like to make any general comments concerning the policy outline prior to beginning a detailed discussion of the items contained within the outline. Mr.,Wozniak requested that the purpose of the meeting be to move towards a fi nal i zed stat ement as the next product. ~. Mr.Trent stated that although the policy addressed federal regul ations,·" _.,-':.~>.. there are state regulations concerning mitigation in draft form,and the··_•. ,'."'......~_. mitigati on effort shaul d stand prepared to .inc 1ude the intent.and ,'; approach presented in those state regulations.He also indicated that-l-,r;../~ the state regulations would use the five basic forms of mitigation as defined by NEPA,but will go further in stressing the priority of the forms.He indi cated that the new regul at;ons waul d be incorporated under Title 16 1 aw.Mr.Trent also suggested that a matrix type approach be developed to be used in reviewing the various forms of mitigation that might be used on the Susitna Project. ( \.. -2- Mr.Trent said that for the purpose of developing mitigation policy it would be advisable to involve the personnel responsible for the fisheries mitigation effort.Mr.Schneider agreed that the policy statements for both fish and wildlife should be basically the same.Mr. Wozniak also indicated that this would be preferable.Mr.Wozniak then. requested that Mr.Reed take the appropri ate steps to obtain the involvement of the fisheries group.Mr.Reed agreed to contact the appropriate fisheries personnel and request that they accelerate the "establishment of a fisheries mitigation task force and be provided with infonnation pertaining to the policy statement currently being prepared by the wildlife task force. A discussion took place concerning the level of mitigation planning that ,. would be available for inclusion with t.he FERC license application versus what will have to follow during Phase II.Mr.Wozniak warned that Phase II should not serve as a conveni ent excuse for not havi ng critical portions of the appl ication prepared for the projected submittal date.Mr.Carson indicated that a commitment to the process that would be used throughout the mitigation effort should be an important item for the appl ieati on.Since the di scussi on indicated that ~t a minimum,it will be possible to have prepared a policy statement, oln approach to mitigation,and an outline of the Dl~f1~.Mr.Reed asked representatives of the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Serv{ce if that level of effort would satisfy their review needs as stipulated under the Fish and Wildl i fe Coordi nation Act.Mr.Stackhouse repl i ed that in the absence of a complete,detailed mitigation plan,they (USF&WS)would not be able to make a final recommendation. Mr.Schnei der suggested that the next step shaul d be the development of a process,or methodology,to be used in making mitigation decisions. Thi s suggesti on was received favorably by the other parti ci pants. In reviewing the meeting to this point,Mr.Reed and Mr.Wozniak agreed that the next steps should be to expand the outline to a draft policy statement,prepare a decision making methodology,and develop an outl ine of the pl an. ..: ) \.- 1""'", ,'- I " ~I :..,., -5- 2.15 -Mr.Wozniak stated that the APA is in agreement with this item and has no problem with the wording. Mr.Carson expressed the opinion that the mitigation effort was going we 11 and he was pleased with the appro ach bei ng tak en so far'. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 11:30 a.m. ...~ ...~" ,. ( PARTICIPANT Edward Reed Leonard Carin Gary Stackhouse Davi d Wozn i ak Brina Kessel Thomas Trent Joseph McMull en Karl Schnei der Ph i 1iP Gi pson Alan Carson Robert Krogseng Jay McKendri ck SUSITNA WILDLIFE MiTIGATION TASK FORCE MEETING OF JUNE 29,1981 ANCHORAGE,ALASKA LIST OF PARTICIPANTS REPRESENTING Terrestrial Environmental Special ists,Inc.. United States Fish and Wildlife Service United States Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska Power Authority TES/University-of Alaska Alas0a Department of Fish and Game Terrestrial Environmental Specialists,Inc. Alaska Department of Fish and Game TES/University of Alaska Alaska Department of Natural Resources Terrestrial Environmental Specialists,Inc. TES/University of Alaska r"'- (~1r( \.: - ( \-...."'1 -3- At this point it was agreed to review the policy outline,item by item, commenting on the information and determining which items are appropri ate for a poli cy statement and which items might be more suitable for inclusion in other sections,The following notes are organ i zed by items co·rrespondinrcY--tt;-out l'i n\e. "-- Ll -Mr.Trent indicated that there is a need to study the resources and for the APA to .commi~,to mitigation.He suggested substituting "mitigatell for "reduce or avoid." 1.2 -Mr.Trent reiterated the need to take into consideration state policies and regulations.Mr.Carson suggested consideration of the ONR Instream Flow Si 11 and the Coasta.l Zone Management G.roup. 1.3 -Mr.Trent suggested that the remaining items discuss mitigation collectively rather than identifying only certain forms of mitigation. 2.1 (a)-Mr.Trent said that a compromise position is needed somewhere between the phrases "agreeable to all agencies"and "feasible and reasonab1e.1I Mr.Carson sugQested removing the phrase "feasible and -""----r"-~---.-"-~ reasonable."Mr.Trent suggested using a phrase such as,lito strive to mitigate the negative-'impacts."Mr.Schneider mentioned that reality should be kept in mind when defining the intent.· (b)-Mr.Wozniak indicated that there was no problem with this item but felt that it should be removed from the policy s~atement and incorporated at a different point in the mitigation plan.Mr.Carson agreed. (e)-Mr.Wozniak indicated that this item would be part of the license and indicated that an associ ated goal would be to reach an agreement between the resource agencies and the app1 icant. .' ..~\. '-/i . -4- . 2.2 -Mr.Carson discussed the roles of the APA and the resource agencies as they pertain to public input.The possibility of agency personnel being available at public workshops to prese~t the position of their respective agencies was discussed •Mr.Wozni ak 1 iked the idea of agency personnel being available during public meetings. 2.3 (a)-Mr.Carson reiterated a previously expressed concern about the wording of th;s~item •.Mr.Wozniak remarked that the agencies and the.'APA are polarized in regard to this item.Following discussion it was agreed that what is needed is a rewording that will provide the agencies with stronger assurances,while at the same time not totally committing the APA. (b)-It was agreed that this item is too specific for a policy statement and mi ght be more appr.opri ately incorporated into a "methodology"section. 2.4 -Mr.Trent suggested that the forms of mitigation be combined under a more general category.It was agreed that this section should be removed from the policy statement and placed elsewhere. 2.5 -Mr.Stackhouse expressed interest in how the coverage would be defined.It was agreed that this section may also be more appropriately covered in a subsequent portion of the mitigation plan. 2.6 thru 2.13 -It was agreed that these sections would also be more appropriately addressed in other portions of the mitigation plan. 2.14 -Mr.Wozniak indicated that the APA is in agreement with this item and has no problem with the wording.Mr.Carson felt that 2.14(b) should be reworded to include the word "funding Jl and suggested the following wording,"...part of the plan will detail the structure, funding,and responsibilities ..."Mr.Wozniak felt that this may be a problem at this time and indicated that funding arrangements are an itemthat would have to be negotiated at a later date.Mr.Wozniak also felt that is was a good idea for the agencies to provide a commitment to cooperate in this effort. -'. January 7,1982 P5700.11.91 T.1396 Ms.Judt Schwan Environmental Evaluation Branch U.S.Environmental PRotection Agency Region X 1200 Sixth Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101 Dear Ms.Schwan:Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife t41t1g!tion Review Grauo ~~etina1( ..... ,.... I i Enclosed"for your review: l)Susftna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife n1t1gat1on Policy. 2)Dauft Analysis of Wiidl1fe Hitigat10n Options • 3)Draft Anulysis of Fisheries Mitigation Options. These documents will be discussed at theF1sh and Wildlife M1tiQation Review Group Meeting to be bb1d ~t ~:OC a.M.(note chan~e of time from letter of December 18 t 1921)on J~muary ZO~1982 at the office of the Alaska Power Author1tYJ 33/~t':cst 5th Avenue,Anchorage.1 hope yeu will be able to attend thi Meet1n~. Sincerely yours~ Kevin R.Young Susitna Environmental Coordinator ftI.HG/jmh Enclosures January 7.1982 P5700.11.71 T.1394 Mr.Gary Stackhouse U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service 1011 East Tudor Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502 !I!'l!, Enclosed for your review: 1)Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy. 2)Draft Analysis of \']lldlife t11tigation Options. 3)Draft Analysis of Fisheries Mitigation Options. These documents \'till be discussed at the Fish and Wildlife H1tigat1on Review Group ~eeting to be held at 9:00 n.m.(note change of tim~from letter of December 1[:.1931)on January 2C,19C2 at the office of the Alaska Power Authority t 334 Hest 5th /I.venue t Anchorage.I hope you will be able to attend the meeting. Dear Mr.Stackhouse:Sus1tna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Review Group Meeting -I Sincerely yours, Kev1 n R.Young Sus1tna Environmental Coordinator MMG/jmh Enclosures ""'1'1 I ~I JanUD,.-y 7.1982 P5700.11 .75 T.1393 ~r.Michael Scott Oistrict F1sh~r1es Biologist U.S.Bureau of land }~nageMent 4700 East 72nd Street Anchora~e,Alaska 99507 ..- r Dear Mr.Scott:SusitnA Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wl1dlife H1t1ttation Review Grouo Meetinq - -! f!"'" , -1 r ! Enclosed for your review: 1)Susitna Hydroelectric P!"Oj~ct Fish and ~li1dllfe mtiqa'tion Policy. Z)Draft fl.7ialysis of H1idl1fe ~Htigation Dptions. 3)Draft Analysis of fisheries Hit1gat1onOptions. Th~se documents will be d1scu~sed at the r'sh and Wildlife ~1ti~~t1on Revi~~ Grou!,Meetinfj to be held at 9:00a.~.(note change of t1~c fron"12t+r.r of December 1S t 1981)on January 2lJ,1932 at the office of the ,a1~ska Pn\'fer Author1 ty,334 I-rest 5th Avenue t Anchorage.I hope you wi n be able to attend the meet;n/)_ Sincerely yours, Kevin R.Young Susitna Env1rom~ental Ccordinator t--~G/jmh Enolosures January 7.19£2 P5700.11.91 T.1392 Mr.Bradl ey Srrii th Environmental Assessment Division National Marine Fisheries Service Federal Building &U.S.Court House 701 "C~Street.Box 43 Anchorage.Alaska 99513 Dear Mr.Smith:Susitna ~ydroelectr1c Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Review Group Meeting Enclosed for your review: 1)Susitna nyC:roelectr1c Project Fish and ~{i1d1ffc n1t1gat1C'n Policy. 2)Draft Analysis of ~:ildlife t~itigat1on Options. 3)Draft Analysis of Fisheries Mitigation Options. These doct'r.!ents will be discus$cd at the Fis~and \!1ldl1fc r\~1t1i11S,".:ion Revie\"! Groufl r·\eeting to be held at 9:0C a.~.(~ote change of ti::e fror"-"letter of December 18,1981)on January 20,1982 at the office of the Alaska Power f~utl1ori ty,334 Hest 5th Avenue t Anchorage,I hope you will be able to attend the meeting. Sincerely yours, l(evin R.Younq Sus1tna Environmental Coordinator Ml1G/jmh EDclosures I;:~ ~ I -- r I I I""" i January 7.1982 P5700.11.74 1.1391 Mr.A1 Carsen Division of Research &Development Department of Natural Resources 323 East Fourth Avenue Anchorage.Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Carson:Sus1tna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Review Group Meeting ,..... I Enclosed for your review: 1)Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy. 2)Draft Analysis of ~Il1dl1fe ~11t1gat1on Options. 3)Draft Analysis of Fisheries K1t1gation Options. These documents will be discuss~d at the Fish and Wildlife Hitigat10n Review Group Heeting to be held at 9:00a.:r..(note chan9E!of time from letter of December 18.1931)on January 20,19~2 at the offfce of the Alaska PoworAuthority.334 West 5th Avenue.Anchorage.I hope you will be able to attend the meeting. Sincerely yours. K~vin R.Young Susitna Environmental Coordinator MHG/jmh Enclosures ,~~:_~,....:~-:~::.'C;~_, ~,~':.~~;~?i~~~*::~.~~'~ i Ms Judi Schwarz Environmental Evaluation Branch U.S.Environmental Protection Agency Region X 1200 Sixth Avenue Seattle,Washingto~98101 • February 26,1982 P5700~11.92 T.1544 - Dear Ms.Schwarz:Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation As discussed through Vern Smith of our Anchorage office,meetings to re-~ view fish and wildlife mitigation efforts are scheduled for March 11 and 12,1982 in the offices of Acres American,1577 C Street,Suite 305, Anchorage,Alaska.~ As these meetings are expected to be in the fonn of technical workshops, a complete day on each of the topics of fish and wildlife is considered necessary.Proposed agendas are enclosed.I will also forward,within the week,updated information packets addressing fish and wildlife im- pact issues and mitigation options. As fisheries issues are being discussed on a separate day from wildlife issues,please feel free to have different technical personnel attend each of the meetings if you consider it appropriate. As we consider these meetings to be an important component in improving the coordination between your agency and our fish and wildlife mitigation core groups,your attendance is encouraged.. If you have any questions relating to these meetings please contact my- self or Vern Smith (907-276-4888). "Sincerely, Kevin Young Environmental Coordinator KRY:dlp Enclosures - r Mr.Al Carson Division of Research &Development Department of Natural Resources 323 East Fourth Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 '.'..•.'.' February 26,1982 P5700.11.74 T.1539 Dear Mr.Carson:Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation -i - - As discussed through Vern Smith of our Anchorage office,·meetings to re- view fish and wildlife mitigation efforts are scheduled for March 11 and 12~1982 in the offices of Acres American~1577 C Street,Suite 305, Anchorage~Alaska. As these meetings are expected to be ,in the form of technical workshops~ a complete day on each of the topics of fish and wildlife is considered necessary.Proposed agendas are enclosed.I will also forward,within the week,updated information packets addressing fish and wildlife im- pact issues and mitigation options. As fisheries issues are being discussed on a separate day from wildlife issues,please feel free to have different technical personnel attend each of the meetings if you consider it appropriate. As we consider these meetings to be an important component in improving the coordination between your agency and our fish and,wildlife mitigation core groups,your attendance is encouraged. If you have any questions r~lating to these meetings please contact my-. self or Vern Smith (907-276-4888). Sincerely, Kevin Young E~vironmental Coordinator KRY:dlp Enclosures ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED Dear Mr.Scott: February 26,1982 P5700.11.75 T.1541 Mr.Michael Scott District Fisheries Ciologist U.S.Bureau of Land Management 4700 East 72nd Street Anchorage,Alaska 99507 Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation As discussed through Vern Smith of our Anchorage office,meetings to re- view fish and wildlife mitigation efforts are scheduled for March 11 and 12,1982 in the offices of Acres American,1577 C Street,Suite 305, Anchorage,Alaska. As these meetings are expected to be in the form of technical workshops, a complete day on each of the topics of fish and wildlife is considered necessary.Proposed agendas are enclosed.I wi 11 also forward,within the week,updated "information packets addressing fish and wildlife im- pact issues and mitigation options. As fisheries issues are being discussed~.on a separate day from wildlife issues,please feel free to have different technical personnel attend each of the meetings if you consider it appropriate. As we consider these meetings to be an important component in improving the coordination between your agency and our fish and wildlife mitigation core groups,your attendance is encouraged.' If you have any questions relating to these meetings please contact my- self or Vern Smith (907-276-4888). Sincerely, Kevin Young Environmental Coordinator KRY:dlp Enclosures - I )-, Dear Mr.Yanagawa: r .... r February 26,1982 P5700.1l.70 T.1543 Mr.Carl Yanagawa Regional Supervisor for Habitat Division Alaska Department of Fish &Game 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502 Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife-Mitigation As discussed through Vern Smith of our Anchorage office,meetings to re- view fish and wildlife mitigation efforts are scheduled for March 11 and 12,1982 in the offices of Acres American,1577 C Street,Suite 305, Anchorage,Al aska.. As tflese meetings are expected to be in the fonn of technical workshops, a iomplete day on each of the topics of fish and wildlife is considered necessary.Proposed agendas are enclosed.I will also forward,within the week,updated information packets addressing fish and wildlife im- pact issues and mitigation options.. As fisheries issues are being discussed on a separate day from wildl ife issues,please feel free to have different technical personnel attend each of the meetings if you consider it appropriate. As we consider these meetings to be an important component in improving the coordination between your agency and our fish and wildlife mitigation core groups,your attendance is encouraged. If you have any questions relating to these meetings please contact my- se 1f or Vern Smi th (907-276-4888). Sincerely, Kevin Young Environmental Coordinator KRY:dlp Enclosures Dear Mr.Stackhouse: February 26,1982 P5700.11.71 T.1542 Mr.Gary Stackhouse U.S.Fis~&Wildlife Service 1011 East Tudor Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502 Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation As discussed through Vern Smith of our Anchorage office,meetings to re- view fish and wildlife mitigation efforts are scheduled for March 11 and 12,1982 in the offices of Acres American,1577 C Street,Suite 305, Anchorage,Alaska.. As these meetings are expected to be in the form of technical workshops, a complete day on each of the topics of fish and wildlife is considered necessary.Proposed agendas are enclosed.I will also forward,within the week,updated information packets addressing fish and wildlife im- pact issues and miti gation options.. As fisheries issues are being discussed on a separate day from wildlife issues,please feel free to have different technical personnel attend each "of t~e meetings if you consider it appropriate. ·As we consider these meetings to be an important component in improving the coordination between your agency and our fish,and wildlife mitigation core groups,your attendance is encouraged. If you have any questions relating to these meetings please contact my- self or Vern Smith (907-276-4888).• Sincerely, Kevin Young Environmental Coordinator KRY:dlp Enclosures - February 26,1982 ·P5700.11.91 T.1540 Mr.Bradley Smith Environmental Assessment Division National Marine Fisheries Service Federal Building &U.S.Court House 701 C Street,Box 43 Anchorage,Alaska 99513 Dear Mr.Smith: "... F'" ! • Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation f'As discussed through Vern Smith of our Anchorage office,meetings to re- view fish and wildlife mitigation efforts are scheduled for March 11 and 12,1982;n the offices of Acres American,1577 C Street,Suite 305, Anchorage,Alaska. As these meetings are expected to be in the form of technical workshops, a complete day on each of the topics of fish and wildlife is considered necessary.Proposed agendas are enclosed.I will also forward,within the week,updated information packets addressing fish and wildlife im- pact issues and mitigation options.. As fisheries issues are being discussed on a separate day from wildlife issues,please feel free to have different technical personnel attend r each of the meetings if you consider ito-appropriate. l . As we consider these meetings to be an important component in improving the coordinati on between your agency and our fi sh and wil dl i fe mi ti gat;-on core groups,your attendance is encouraged. If you have any questions relating to these meetings please contact my- self or Vern Smith (907-276~4888). ,..., Ii i Sincerely, ~ I Kevin Young Environmental Coordinator KRY:d1p Enclosures tAarch ?.1~82 P5700.11.74 !-1r-.A1 Ca rson Division of Resl~arch ,~Oeve1o!"lt'ent C'2~urtr1e:1t 0 f Hatura1 Resources Pouch 7-005 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Carson:Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Revf e\'t Group t'.eet1 "9 t:r:c1oserl for you,.1nfor.Mt1on are: 1.The Susitna Hydroelectric Proj~ct Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy (R'!v1sed) 2.Wfldlif~Hitiqat10n Options (Revised) 3.Fisheries ~1tigation Options (Revised) Please review tnese docun~nts pri,r to the meeting of the Fish and N11ctl1fe t-11ti<'!l'lt1cn Reviel~Groun"on f-4arch la,1982 at 8:30 am i~the af~1ccs of Acres American t 1577 C Street~ Anchorat;e.We will discuss the Policy and Wildl ife ~~itiga t10n Options on the 10th and the Fisheries Mitigation Op- tiolls on tile 11th,as referred to in the invitation letter of February 26~1982. Tnank you very much. S1ncerelY9 Kevin raung Sus1tna Environmental Coordinator KRY:dlp Enclosures - - -, ,J ;'.'- ~·l·" " "".arch 2.1982 P5700.11.91 T.1549 ~1r.BradleySm1th' Environmental Assessment Diviston !Uational f-!arine Fisheries Service Federal Buildfng &U.S.CourtHouse 701 C Streett Box 43 Anchorage.Alaska 99513 Dear Mr.Smith:Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish ~nd Wildlife Mitigation Review Group Meeting "... i -. ! Enclosed for your tnformat10nare: 1.The Susitna Hydroelectrtc Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy (Revised) 2.~!l1d1ffe Hitigation Options (Revised) 3.Ffsheries Mitigation Options (Revised) Please review these documents prior to the meeting of the Fish and Wildlife Nitigation Review Group on f~arch la,19::!2 at 8:30 am in the offices of Acres I'.merican,1577 C ~t!""eet, Anchorage.~1eH111 aiscuss the I'olicy and Wildl ife mtiga- tion Options en the lOth and the Fisheries !'11t1gation Op- tions on the 11th~as referred to in th~invitation letter of February 26 t •1982. Thank you very much. Sfncercly, Ktv1n Youn'] Susitna Enviro~m~ntal Coordinator KRY:dlp Enclosures Dear Mr.·Scott: Harch 2,1982 P5700.l1.75 T.1550 r ~w.Michael Scott District Fisheries Biologist U.S.Bureau of Land Managenent 4700 East 72nd Street Anchorage,Alaska 99507 Sus1tna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife ~1ti9at1on Review Group Meetin~ Enclosed for your information are: 1.The Sus1tna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy (Revised) .2.~ildlife Mitigation Options (Revised) 3.Fisheries Mitigation Options (Revised) Ple~se revie,:!these documents prior to the meetinq of the Fish and Wildlife ~~itiqat1Qn Revie\'i Group on ~arch 10,1982 at 8:30 am in the offices of Acres American,1577 C Street. Anchoraqe.We will d15CUSS the Policy and Wildlife '~1tilJa ticn Options on the lOt~and the F1sheri~s ~it1gation O~ ticns on the 11th,as referred to in the 1nv1tation letter of February 26.198Z. Thank you very MUch. Sincerely, K'1vin Young S:;sitU:3 En'lirot)'::er:tal Coordinator KRY:dlp Enclosures .- - ~J March 2,1982 P5700.l1.70 T.1552 Hr~Carl Yanagawa Regional Supervisor for Habitat Division Alaska Denartment of Fish ~Game &33 Raspberry Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502 DearMY-.Yanagawa:Sus1tna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Review Group Meeting l . n•I Enclosed for your information are: 1.The Susftna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy (Revised) 2.Wildlife M1t1q~t1on Options (Revised) 3.Fisheries Mitigation Options (Revised) Please reV1el'f these?docul'1erts prior to the meetina of the Fish and Hildl1fe i~ltio{it1on Rev1~M Group 011 ~~rch 10~lqR2 at 8:30 <lr.1 in the off;ccs of Acr~s A~ri can t 1577 C Street, Anchorage.We \·Jill d1scU55 thePol1cy and Wildlife ~1t1a~ ticn Options on the 10th ~,d t~e Fisheries Mitigation np_ ti~ns on the 11th,as referred to in the invitation l~tter of Februarj 25,1982. Ttllmk you very lruch. S1ncem'Yt ~~evi n Yoanf1 Sus1 t!lC\Envi rnnn~nf~o i CooNli natGr KRV:dlp Enclosures Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife M1tigation Review Group ~~et1nq March 2 ~-1982 P5700.11.92 T.1553 MS.'Judi Schwarz Environmental Evaluation Branch' t'~li1 Stop 443 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency Region X 1200 Sixth Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101 Dear Ms.Schwarz: Enclosed for your 1nfcrmat1on arc: 1.The Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy (Revised) 2.Ul1dl1fe Mitigation Opt1ons (~ev1sed) 3.Fisheries mtigation Options (ReVised) Pl~ase revi~~th~$e doc~ments prior to the meeting of the Fish and Wildlife N1ti0~t1on Review Grouo on ~~r~h lQ,1~02 at 8:30 am in t!1e offices of f~.cres A!i~rican,1577 C )tr,~~t, Anchorage.1'!t!will discuss the Pel icy and Wildlife r.';fti r.3- tion Options on the 10th and the Fisheries mtiqation Op- tions on the 11th,as referred to in th~invitaticn lettsr of February 25.1932. Thank you very mucr.. Sincerely. Kevin Your."1 Susitnc tnvirQn~?ntal Coordinator KRY:dlp Enclosures ... i ~, ~I ,".. ",.. ~~rch 2,1982 P5700.11.71 1.1-551 Mr.Gary Stackhouse U.s.Fish &.~Jf1dl1fe Serv1ct! 1011 East Tudor Road Anchorage.Alaska 99502 Dear Mr.Stackhouse:Sus1tna Hydroelectric P~jeet Fish andW11dl1fe Mitigation Review Group Meet1nq .- - Enclosed for your information are: 1.The Susitna Hydroelectric Project Ff!h and Wildlife Mitigation Policy (Revised) 2.Wildlife r'~itigation Options (Revised) 3.Fisheries HitifJation Options (Revised) Please review these documents pr'for to the meeting of the Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Review Group on ~~rch 10,1982 at 8:30 ar.1 in the offices of Acres American,1577 C Street~ Anchorage.~e \,..'{11 discuss the Policy and ~lfld1ife Mitiga- tion Options on t~e 10th and the Fisheries Mit1ryation On- tions on the 11th,as referred to in the invitation lette~ of February 26,1932. Thank you very much. Sincerely, !{ev1n 'foUl'11 Susitna Environnental Coordinator KRY:dlp Enclosures .- SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FISH AND WILDLIFE MITIGATION REVIEW.GROUP MEETING· March 10,1982 Held at the Offices of Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage Attendees:See attached list. The meeting followed the attached agenda.The revised Fish and Wild~ife Mitigation Pol icy was discussed.Agreement was reached on all areas where further revisions were suggested.The policy will be modified and circulated to the review group members by April 15,1982. Ed Reed and Karl Schneider presented the results of the wildlife baseline studies and impacts prediction.Attendees were provided with the sections of the Feasibility Report addressing these issues. General mitigation options were discussed.HEP was not dismissed but questioned as to its validity to big game species in Alaska.It was agreed some kind of habitat evaluation,in addition to population studies would have to be conducted.TES has developed a habitat analysis method (used on the access road studies)and this may be modified and used.The question of land set aside was also discussed but no decision reached. Ed Reed suggested,for discussion purposes,the option of APA funding a permanent research station in the Upper Susitna Basin.It was agreed this was an option but should be considered only if other options (avoid,reduce, etc.)fail,i.e.it would be used on out-of-kind compensation. Studies for Phase II to quantify impacts and for mitigation planning were reviewed with Attachment A forming the basis for discussion.The BlM burn in the Alphabet Hills may not proceed dur to lack of burn plan being written and possible requirement for an archaeological clearance.APA may contact BlM to determine how a go decision could be reached. - Fl5 1 'r -..J '\.v \/4 }I re fit 1/I i'I.v G (~oJ P __.__...__-.-----=-3/J4J-?:.~t1/~~1i7;/;~/1.#T~";~G __--:-.__ --------- ----------_..---.-._.-"--'-. ------------_..--'--"---'.' r Egi\S2 S,M en-\..f'J.Mbf~·~.·-'--'---~---'---~'--A.-\~f\.....:..,....:vS~·'<:)"_1-.---"----_f\_K .~_ ~Datv EaI!af(S ~~ob·.KlfaCLsel-?C'T £5 {--.----fY1~h ,5'-0*'BL ((j .._ ._~~e.,-~c.~\~U~~U-:>~ .~J!::)a.sf.--L S [O..C"'.)~JAO.J£.>ot1S"'-"'e...~·,_.-.-----,U,"--·=-S-,-f_'1N_5 _ .._..Jl1L=4.~.G r u .h h'.de '{e ~.Lt.",f'I'\'c "(~....____._ r __~fu;_k__OA_&E1£L.o /fAN(J,.Iff&_!l'f§p¢I/l'7§s -T£~_C:PN>gCPWZ !.__(~XM//M-~A '/1J2F d <f-. ,.....___/Ow,A)(~JV ~j;,IJ Q£-;.6 ..__..~_ ~-·~-d/~__.......,...-~/-,--1S~5=--"__. _ 1 .._.~£1'11.11 ~~I...£.N -r.$> ?lot:.4.J-It..$..__.__ r--------------~------- i • H -----------------1 ----------_.._-._-----~--I ._--_._------------------------ ------------------------_.r t -----------------------~------_._- ~'---------------------------I . ."----_...._--_._----._-_._......-------------...-..-..__._---_.._. _. , .."-."---.---------"'-'---~---~----------_.-._--.-_.-------- --~J ))) ATTACHMENT A --~'),-1 ,__J 1 Susitna Hydroelectric Project Wildlife Mitigation High Priority Issues Studies Under Consideration for 4/82 Through 6/8] ~antify Impacts for Mitigation PlanningIssueNo. 6 8 9 20 Wildlife Affected Upper basin moose Brown bear Wolf Upstream furbearers ans big game except Dall sheep. Impact Habitat loss Spring foraging habitat loss. Ilabitat loss.food base reduction. Increased human activity from access road and construction camps. Mitigation Options Compensation via habitat managemen t;burn i ng, crushing.logging.land set aside. Out-of-kind.land set aside. Maintain food base. land set as ide.00 nothing. Construction period: Prohibit pUblic access, prohibit worker off-site activity.restrict traffi c. Post-construction period:Restrict public access,prohibit ATV traffic,monitor wildlife populations. Browse availability, prOductivity,and utili- zation,winter census of impoundment lone. Spring census of impound- ment lone.Census of salmon feeding bears, Dev il Canyon to Talkeetna. Territory mapping of pac~s in immediate project area. Assessment of 8lH experi- mental burn.Identify downstream and upstream areas for habitat manage- ment. --4 )---].-...-1 J l }1 -$ Issue No. 2 Wildlife Affected Pine marten. Impact Ilabitat loss. Susitna Uydroelectric Project Wildlife Mitigation Mediulll Priority Issues tlitigation Options Out-of-kind for other furbearers.Land set as ide. Studies U~der Consideration for 4/82 Through 6/83 To Quantify Impacts for Mitigation Planning Population estimate. 3 4 7 11 12 Cliff-nesting raptors. Bald eagle. Black bear. Caribou. OownstreillU beaver. Nesting habitat loss. feeding habitat loss, nes ti ng habitat loss. Habitat loss. Migratory route interference. Reduction in slough habitat. Recreation planning, clearing operation scheduling,air traffic restrictions,artifici~l nest platforms. Preservation of tall trees,artificial nest platfonns,reservoir stocking. Out-of-kind to moose, out-of-kind to other species,land set aside. Mon ito r mov emen t s, protect new calving grounds. Operation. Downstream survey. Population estimate of impoundloent zonei census of sa 1ilion feeding bea rs.Dev 11 Canyon to Talkeetna. Continued monitoring of movements. Downstream habitat utilization surveys. 13 Downstream moose.Uabitat alteration via change in plant succession,reduction in winter browse . llabHat manipulation.Winter surveys of down- stream popuJatlons. Identify areas appropriate for habitat manipulation. .c·o-~,_r~" • ,.0.4V ,,"''\N''_."'"A'.",:J>W _,,"c .',~.."iJ~-U ~-l\ "_"'').iI"""",,:jl.'oa ,.,;.~.J t'-l>.~",'5J,~~_,.\,i\,""','lc "'"J> Vdii>~~f"\,0.;\'~f.'~ ,p .,t\\J..v'f~">·'iJ·,%~,\\Y"" Wildlife Mitigation Medium Priority IS!jues (con.!.l )]"C~--C--1 1 ) Issue tlo. 15 17 n 23 Wildlife Affected Caribou. furbearers,birds.and small mamlllals,big galile except Oa It sheep. Upper basin wildlife. 8ig game.raptors. swans. Impac::t Watana clearing - migration interference. Habitat loss due to access roads.borrow areas.construction camps. Unauthorized f1res. Air traffic disturbance. Mitigation Options Clearing schedule.uncut travel Janes. Camp design.restoration and revegetation.ne~t boxes. Worker education.fire fighting faciifties. Altitudnal restrictions. seasonal restrictions. Studfes Under Cons ideration for 4/02 Through 6/63 To Quantify Impacts for Mitigation Planning ~---1 ..._~)J ____l -J ))I ) illue No. 5 Wildlife Affected Mink and river otter. forest and riverine bird and small mammals. !!!!pac t lIabitat loss. llabitat loss. Susitna Hydroelectrid Project Wildlife Mitigiltion low Priority Issues Mitigation 0elions Out-of-kind.stocking of reservoir. land set aside. Studies Under Consideration for 4/02 Through 6/83 To Quantify Impacts for Mitigation Planning 10 14 16 Hi 19 21 Oall sheep. Upstream big game. Red fox.wolf.black bear.brown bear. Upstream big game except Dall sheep. Moose and caribou. Red fox,and wolf. Partial inundation of mineral lick. Disturbance from clearing operations. Illegal feeding and improper garbaoe disposa 1. HaM tat loss from borrow areas. Vehicle collision. Rabies introduction. feral dog packs. Monitor use,replace lick. Schedule of clearing operations. Worker education.camp design. Restoration and re- vegation. Worker education,road design (pullouts). temporal driving res tri clions. Prohibition of dogs. regulation of dogs. APPENDIX B-3 STEERING COMMITTEE CORRESPONDENCE -- ..- \ ! !. ; .-. ----~---- ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY- June 3,1980 The Honorable Lee HcAnerney Commissioner Department.of Community and Regional Affairs Pouch B Juneau,Alaska 99811 Dear CQfIIllissionerMcAnerney: The Alaska POwer Authority through its consultant,Acres American Incorporated,isio the early stages of a 30-month feasibility study of the proposed Sus1tna Hydroelectric Project.Because of the magnitude of this study ,effective interagency coordination w111 be best accomplished through formation of a Sus1tna Hydroelectl"icSteer1ng COll'lll1ttee.The fURction of this cOlmlitteg would be to provide_'Coord1nated exchanges of information between the Alaska Power Authority and interested resource management agencies. Through thfsexcnange,the concerns of all agencies involved would be identified early and hopefully prevent unnecessary delays in the progress of the feasi- bility study.application for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license to construct,and Environmental Impact Statement review. As proposed,the Steering COll1Jlittee would be composed of representatives of resource agencies with respons1b111t1es pertaining to the Susitna Hydro- electric Feasibility Studies and/or the project's environmental consequences. We therefore invite your agencyts participation. The committee would provide for interagency coordination through joint review of project related materials and development of more informed and uniform positions representing all resource interests.We believe this will provide a more efficient process of information exchange. Proposed objectives for this committee are to: 1.Review and comment on study approaches throughout each phase of the planning process; 2.Insure that the biological and related environmental studies,their timing.and technical adequacy are planned,implemented,and conducted to provide the quantitative and qualitative data necessary to: (a)assess the potential impacts to fish and wildlife resources,and (b)provide the basis for mitigation and compensation of resource losses Which will result from the project; -~ I ...)(. /\ .1M; ...~ 3.Provide a forum for continued project reviett of all aspects of the studies,for a timely exchange of information,and for recommendation of study redirection,should the accomplishment of specific objectives be in jeopardy;~ 4.Monitor compliance of the studiesw1th all state and federal laws, regulations.Executives Orders,and mandates as they apply to fish and .-,. wildlife resources;and 5.Provide unified agency comments from the committee to the Power Authority. Should your agency elect to participate in the committee,we recommend that your representative have a technical background enabling him to conment on the adequacy and approach of ongoing and future feasibility studies.and be able to speak knowledgeably on the policies and procedures of your agency with respect to the review of the Federal Energy Regulatory COJm1ission license application for the project and the subsequent Environmental Statement (E5). 'Corrmissioner;Lee f'iCAnety June 3.198"t Page·Two The first Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee meeting will be held at the Alaska Power Authority,333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31,Anchorage, Alaska on June 12th at 9:00 AM.Attached is a sheet with a description of the agenda for this first meeting.Your attendance is encouraged. Sincerely, Eric P.Yould Executive Director Attachment: as noted 8.12.J 1.•III .; r :e -"-"-------".-~----'---...~~----~'------. ALASkA POWtR AUTHORITY June 3,1980 - /""".. I ~1r.Harry HUI sing District Chief Department of the Interioru.S.Geological Survey Water Resources Division 218 "E II Street Anchorage.Alaska 99501 Dear r~r.Hulsing: The Alaska Power Authority through its consultant,Acres American Incorporated,is in the early stages of a 3D-month feasibility study of the proposed Sus1tna Hydroelectric Project.Because of the magnitude of this study,effective interagency coordination will be best accomplished through formation of a Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee.The function of this committee would be to provide coordinated exchanges of information between the Alaska Power Authority and interested resource management agencies. Through this exchange,the concerns of all agencies involved \'1ould be identified early and hopefully prevent unnecessary delays in the progress of the feasi- bility studYt application for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license to construct,and Environmental Impact Statement review. As proposed,the Steering Committee would be composed of representatives of resource agencies withresponsibi11t1es pertaining to the Susitna Hydro- electric Feasibility Studies and/or the project 1 s environmental consequences. We therefore invite your agency·s participation. The committee would provide for interagency coordination through joint revievJ of project related materials and development of more informed and uniform positions representing all resource interests.He believe this will provide a more efficient process of information exchange. Proposed objectives for this committee are to: 1.Review and comment on study approaches throughout each phase of the planning process; 2.Insure that the biological and related environmental studies,their timing,and technical adequatY are planned t implemented,and conducted to proVide the quantitative and qualitative data necessary to: (a)assess the potential impacts to fish and wildlife resources.and (b)provide the basis for mitigation and compensation of resource losses which wi"result from the project; r -. /" ~~c.-? ;~':Harrjll1U l5 i ng June 3 t 1980 Page Two 3.Provide a forum far continued project review of all aspects of the studies.for a timely exchange of information t and ror recommendation of study red1rect1on t should the accomplishment of specific objectives be in jeor~rdYi 4.Monitor compliance of the studies with all state and federal laws, regulations,Executives Orders.and mandates as they apply to fish and wildlife resources;and 5.Provid~unified agency comments from the committee to the Power Authority. Should your agency elect to participate in the committee.we recommend that your representative have a technical background enabl1ng him to coment on the adequacy and approach of ongoing and future feasibil1ty studies.and be able to speak knowledgeably on the policies and procedures of your agency with respect to the review of the Federal Energy Regulatory C0l11'l1iss1on license application for the project and the subsequent Environmental Statement (E5). The first Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee meeting will be held at the Alaska Power Authority,333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31,Anchorage, Alaska on June 12th at 9:00 At~.Attached is a sheet with a description of the agenda for this first meeting.Your attendance is encouraged. Sincerely, Eric P.You'ld Executive Director Attachment: as noted "-'-) J ~. ?~IIlWllllIl181!1iIlil1ilIibIliHiiilll.lIiilll!l&1l11b .aa:IIIIIII --"-...._-:...:...iI... - -, I ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY June 3~1980 Colonel Lee R.Nunn U.S.Army Corps of ~ngfneers Alaska District Pas t Office Box 7003 Anchorage,Alaska 99510 Dear Colonel Nunn: The Alaska Power Authority through its consultant,Acres American Incorporated.is in the early stages of a 30-month feasibility study of the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Because of the magnitude of this study,effective interagency coordination will be best accomplished through formation of a Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee.The function of this committee would be to provide coordinated exchanges of information between the Alaska Power Authority and interested resource management agencies. Through this exchange,the concerns of all agencies involved would be identified early and hopefully prevent unnecessary delays in the progress of the feasi- bility study,application for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license to construct,and Environmental Impact Statement reviel. As proposed~the Steering Committee would be composed of representatives of resource agencies w1th responsibilities pertaining to the Susitna Hydro- electric Feasibil1ty Studies and/or the project's environmental consequences. We therefore invite your agency1s participation. The comnittee would provide for interagency coordination through joint review of project related materials and development of more informed and uniform positions representing all resource interests.\ole believe this will provide a more efficient process of information exchange. Proposed objectives for this committee are to: 1.Review and comment on study approaches throughout each phase of the planning process; 2.Insure that the biological and related environmental studies,their timing,and technical adequacy are planned,implemented.and conducted to provide the quantitative and qualitative data necessary to: (a)assess the potential impacts to fish and wildlife resources,and (b)provide the basis for mitigation and compensation of resource losses which will result from the project; '--..... •c:!~,.",._;,;,vi,. Colonel Lee R.Nunn- June 3,1980 Page Two 3.Provide a forum for continued project review of all aspects of the studies,for a timely exchange of 1nformation,and for recommendation of study redirection,should the accomp1ishment of specific obJectives be in jeopardy; 4.Monitor compliance of the studies with all state and federal laws, regulatiL '5,Executives Orders,and mandates as they apply to fish and wildlife resources;and --'------ 5.Provide unified agency corrments .from the corrrnfttee to the Power Authority'. Should your agency elect to participate in the committee,we recommend that your representative have a technical background enabling him to comment on the adequacy and approach of ongoing and future feasibility studies,and be able to speak knowledgeably on the policies and procedures of your agency with respect to the review of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license application for the project and the subsequent Environmental Statement (£5). The first Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee meeting will be held at the Alaska Power Authority,333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31.Anchorage, Alaska on June 12th at 9:00 ~1.Attached is a sheet with a description of the agenda for this first meeting.Your attendance is encouraged. Sincerely, Eric P.Yotlld Executive Director Attachment: as noted """\ I Ei ,r~ ,:4 Hi.-4R ... '''''~..... 'Al.),SKA POWER AUTHORITY I '""" I,., JI "'"II June 3,1980 /k.Bob Bowker U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service 733 West 4th Avenue Anchorage •.Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Bowker: The Alaska Power Authority through its consu Ha nt,Acres Ameri can Incorporated.is in the early stages of a 3D-month feas ibl11ty study of the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Because of the magnitude of this study,effective interagency coordination wi',be best accomplished through fOi-mQt1on of a Sus1tna Hydroelectric Steering Committee.The function of this committee vJOuld be to provide coord1natedexchanges of infonnation between the Alaska Power Authority and interested resource management agencies. Through this exchange,.the concerns of all agencies involved y~u1d be identified eatlyand hopefully prevent unnecessary delays1n the progress of the feasi- bility study,application for the Federal Energy Regulatory Cornission license to construct,and Environmental Impact Statement revie'tI. As proposed,the Steering COrml1ttee vlOuld be composed of representatives of resource agencies with responsibilities pertaining to the Susitna Hydro- electric Feasibility Studies and/or the project's environmental consequences. He therefore invite your agency's participation. The committee would provide for interagency coordination through joint reVie\1 of project related materials and development of more informed and uniform posit1ons representing all resource interests.We believe this will provide a lIloreefficient process of information exchange. Proposed objectives for this committee are to: 1.Revi ew and conw.ent on study approaches throughout each phase of the planning process; 2.Insure that'the biological and related environmenta1 studies.their timing,and technical adequacy are planned.implemented,and conducted to p"ovide the quantitative and qual1tative data necessary to: (a)assess the potential impacts to fish and wildlife resources,and (b)provide the basis for mitigation and compensation of resource losses which wl1 1 result from the project; II .:..,.,:." lH'1 --"-~- -.•••-- JUne 3,1980 Page Two 3.Provide a forum for continued project revie\~of an aspects of the studies.for a timely exchange of information,and for recommendation of study redirection,should the accomplishment of specific objectives be in jeopardy; 4.MDn1tor compliance of the studies with all state and federal laws. regulations,Executives Orders.and mandates as they apply to fish and wildlife resources;and 5.Provide unified agency comments from the committee to the Power Authority. Shoul d your agency el ect to participate in the corrrnHtee.I;le recommend that your representative have a technical background enabling him to comment on the adequacy and approach of ongoing and future feasibllity studies,and be able to speak knO'flledgeably on the policies and procedures of your agency with respect to the review of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license application for the project and the subsequent EnlJironInl:!:ntal Statement (E5). The first Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee meeting \'1111 be held at the Alaska Power Authority,333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31,Anchorage. Alaska on June 12th at 9:00 AM.Attached is a sheet with a description of the agenda for this first meeting.Your attendance is encouraged. Sincerely. Eric P.Yould Executive Director Attachment: as noted "1, ""iI·e ,.:<>:.-;":~'...,, - --( ------:---------,.-----,-:-.--.-, ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY •.'- ..''~.'~.,.- (' I ' I ~ r- ;i, "L June 3,1980 !~r.John Rego Energy Specialist Bureau of Land Management 4700 East 72nd Avenue _ Anchorage.Alaska 99507 Dear Hr.Rego: The Alaska Power AuthoY'ity through its consultant,Acres American Incor?orated.1s in the early stages of a 3D-month feasibility study of the proposed Susftna Hydroelectric Project.Because of the magnitude of this study,effective interagency coordination will be best accompli shed through fOitnZltion of a Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Corrm1ttee.The function of this committee would be to provide coordinated exchanges of information betvJeen the Alas ka Power Author1 ty and lnterested resource management agencies. Through this exchange.the concerns of all agencies involved would be identified early and hopefully prevent unnecessary delays in the progress of the feasi- bility study,application for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission l1cense to construct~and Envil·onmental Impact Statement reviev!. As proposed,the Steering Committee would be composed of representatives of resource agencies ~'1ithresponsibnities pertaining to the Susitna Hydro- .electric Feasibility Studies and/or the projectls environmental consequences. \:Ie therefore invite your agency·S participation. The COlllffiittee vJould provide for interagency coordination through joint revie"'f of project related materials and development of more 'informed and uniform positions representing all resource interests.\~e bel ieve thi s vii 11 provide a more efficient process of information exchange. Proposed objectives for this committee are to: 1.Rev 1ew and comment on study approaches throughout each phase of the planning process; 2.Insure that the biological a.nd related environmental studies.their t1ming.and technical adequacy are planned.fmpl emented ,and conducted to provide the quantitative and qualitative data necessary to: (a)assess the potential impacts to fish and wildlife resou~ces.and (b)provide the basis for mitigation and compensation of resource losses which will result from the project; _.•.,.-:' .,--.:_,-~'.,"~'. ~.--~.-""'.f¥f~ Provide a forum for cont1nued project review of all aspects of the studies.for a timely exchange of 1nfonr.ation,nnd for recommendation of study re{j1rection.should the accompli shment of specific objectives be in jeopardYi 3. ~ YffUurie·-.3 t 1980 tPage T\'/o 4.Monitor compliance of the studies with ail state and federal laws, regulations,Executives Orders.and mandates as they apply to f1sh and wildl1fe resources;and 5.Prov1 de uni fied agency ccmrnents from the commHtee to the PO\'IE~,r Pluthori ty. - Should your agency elect to participate in the committee.we recommend that your representlltive have a techn1cQl background enabling him to comment on the adequacy and approach of ongoing and future feasibility studies,and ~ be able to speak kn~/ledgeably on the policies and procedures of your agency with respect to the review of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license application for the project and the subsequent Env1ronmental Statement (£5). The first $usitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee meet1ng will be held at the Alaska Po\'Ser Authority,333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31,Anchorage. Alaska on June 12th at 9:00 M1.Attach~d is q sheet with a description of the agenda for this first meeting.Your attendance 15 encouraged. Sincerely, Eric P.Yould Executive Director ~, Attachment: as noted - 1 1 & f'\ 1 I<:,) r"'\ ~I -' I F"'- ! ) ~ ( l ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY June 3,1980 The Honorable Robe~t E.LeResche Commissioner Department of Natural Resources Pouch M Juneau~Alaska 99811 Deat COllJTJissioner LeResche: The Alaska Power Authority through its consultant,Acres American Incorporated.is in the early stages of a 30-month feasibility study of the proposed Sus1tna Hydroelectric Project.Because of the ll'.agnitude of this study,effective interagency coordination will be best accomplished through formation of a Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee.The function of this committee 't'lould be to provide coordinated exchanges of information betv/een the Alaska Power Authority and interested resource management agencies. Through this exchange,the concerns of all agencies involved would befdentified early and hopefully prevent unnecessary delays in the progress of the feasi- bility study,application for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license to construct.and Environmental Impact Statement review. As proposed.the Steering Committee would be composed of representatives of resource agencies with responsibilities pertaining to the Sus1tna Hydro- e1ectric Feasibility Studies and/or the project's environmental consequences. We therefore invite your agency's participation. The committee would provide for interagency coordination through joint r'eview of project related materials and development of more informed and uniform positions representing all resource interests.We believe this will provide a more efficient process of information exchange. Proposed objectives for this cornmitteeare to: 1.Review and comment on study approaches throughout each phase of the planning process; 2.Insure that the biological and related environmental studies~their timing,and technical adequacy are planned,implemented,and conducted to provide the quantitative and qualitative data necessary to: (a)assess the potential impacts to fish and wildlife resources~and (b)provide the basis for mitigation and compensation of resource losses which will result from the project; / :~rc....' 3.Provide a forum for continued project review of all aspects of the studies,for a timely exchange of information,and for recommendation of study redirection,should the accomplishment of specific objectives be in jeopardy; ~Commissioner Robert E.LeResche /June 3,1980 .A. I Page Two .. "! / 4.Monitor compliance of the studies with all state and federal laws, regulations',Executives Orders,and mandates as they apply to fish and wildlife resources;and 5.Provide unified agency comments from the committee to the Power Authority.~ Should your agency elect to participate in the committee,we recommend that your representative have a technical background enabling him to comment on the adequacy and approach of ongoing and future feasibility studies,and be able to speak knowledgeably on the policies and procedures of your agency with respect to the review of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license application for the project and the subsequent Environmental Stat~~nt (E5). The first Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee meeting will be held at the Alaska Power Authority.333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31.Anchorage, Alaska on June 12th at 9:00 AM.Attached is a sheet with a description of the agenda for this f1rst meeting.Your attendance is encouraged. S1ncerel'y~ /~ \ Eric P.Yould Executive Director A.ttachment: as noted -. cc:Al Carson .' -.••0 -i hZA;_..44&&l!Pi,*• .....- I ,I""" ........ I I . June 3,1980 Mrs.Frances A.Ulmer Director Division of Policy Development and Planning Office of the Governor Pouch AD Juneau,Alaska 99811 Dear f>1rs.Ulmer: The Alaska Power Authority through its consultant,Acres American Incorporated,is in the early stages of a 30-month feasibility study of the proposed Sus1tna Hydroelectric Project.Because of the magnitude of this study,effective interagency coordination will be best accomplished through forwation of a Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee.The function of thiscowmittee would be to provide coordinated exchanges of information between the Alaska Power Author1tyandinterested resource management agencies. Through this exchange,the concerns of all agencies involved wotlld be identified early and hopefully prevent unnecessary delays in the progress of the feasi- bility study~application for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license to construct~and Environmental Impact Statement revie\'I. As proposed,the Steering Conmittee would be composed of representatives of resource agencies with respons1bil i ties pertaining to the Susitna Hydro- electric Feasibility ~tudies and/or the project's environmental consequences. iJe therefore invite your agency's participation. The cOmITlittee would provide for interagency coordination through joint review of project related materials and development of more informed and uniform positions representing all resource interests.He believe this vl111 provide a more efficient process of information exchange. Proposed objectives for this committee are to: 1.Review and COlmlent on study approaches throughout each phase of the planning process; 2.Insure that the biological and related environmental studies,their timing,and technical adequacy are planned,implemented,and conducted to provide the quantitative and qualitative data necessary to: (a)assess the potential impacts to fish and wildlife resources~and (b)provid~the basis for mitigation and compensation of resource losses which will result from the project; '-. Mrs.Frances A.Ulmer ~ June J,1980 W' ~age Two ~3.Provide a forum forcont1nued project review of all aspects of the studies,for a timely exchange of information,and fer recommendation of study redirection,should the accomplishment of specific objectives be in jeopardy; 4.Monitor compliance of the studies with all state and federal laws, regulations,Executives Ol~ers,and mandates as they apply to fish and wildlife resources;and 5.Provide unified agency COlmlents from the committee to the Power Authority. Should your agency elect to participate in the committee,we recommend that your representative have a technical background enabling him to conment on the adequacy and approach of ongoing and future feasibility studies,and be able to speak knowledgeably on the policies and procedures of your agency with respect to the review of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license application for the project and the subsequent Environmental Statement (ES). The first Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Corrrnittee rr.eet1ng will be held at the Alaska Power Authority,333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31,Anchorage, Alaska on June 12th at 9:00 AM.Attached is a sheet with a description of the agenda for this first meeting.Your attendance is encouraged. Sincerely, Eric P.Yould Executive Director f1.ttachment: as noted cc:Office of Coastal Hanagement ,, i;~ ..~ 444 .1.= r ! ----_...-------._,~~-.-------_.-.-----------~~-------------------_.-~------'..::.,. ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY .June 3,1980 The Honorablr Ronald O.Skoog Commissioner Department of Fish and Game Subport Building Juneau,Alaska 99801 Dear Comntissioner Skoog: The Alaska Power Author1ty through its consultant,Acres American Incorporated.is in the early stages of a 30-month feasibility study of the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Because of the magnitude of this study,effective interagency coordination will be best accomplished through formation of a Sus1tna Hydroelectric Steering Committee.The function of this committee would be to provide coordinated exchanges of information between the Alaska Power Authority and interested resource management agencies. Through this exchange.the Concerns of all agencies involved would be identified early and hopefully prevent unnecessa1"ydelays in the pro~rress of the feasi- bil ity study,appl ication for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission l1cense to construct,and Environmental Impact Statement ~eview. As proposed,the Steering Committee would be composed of representatives of resource agencies t1ith responsibil Hies pertaining to the Susitna Hydro- electric Feasibllity Studies and/or the project's environmental consequences. \ie therefore invite your agency1s participation. The committee would provide for interagency coordination through joint review of project related materials and development of more informed and uniform positions representing all ~esource interests.We believe this will provide a more efficient process of information exchange. Proposed objectives for this cOTl111ittee are to: 1.Review and comment on study approaches throughout each phase of the planning process; 2.Insure that the biological and related environmental studies s their timing,and technical adequacy are planned,1mplemented,and conducted to provide the quantitative and qualitative data necessary to: (a)assess the potential impacts to fish and wildlife resources s and (b).provide the basis for mitigation and compensation of resource losses which will result from the project; 3.Provide a forum for continued project review of all aspects of the studies.for it timely exchange of information,and for recommendation of study redirection,should the accomplishment of specific objectives be ~ 1n jeopardy; 4.1-1onitor compliance of the studies \'1ith all state and federal laws, regulations.Executives Orders,and mandates as they apply to fish and wildlife resources;and 5.Provide unified agency comments from the committee to the Power Authority..~ Should your agency elect to participate in the committee,we recommend that your representative have a technical background enabling him to comment on the adequacy and approach of ongoing and future feasibility studies.and be able to speak knowledgeably on thepolic1es and procedures of your agency with respect to the review of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license application for the project and the subsequent Environmental Statement (E5). The first Sus1tna Hydroelectric Steering Committee w~eting will be held at the Alaska Power Authority,333 Hest 4th Avenue,Suite 31,Anchorage. Alaska on June 12th at 9:00 AM.Attached is a sheet with a description of the agenda for this first meeting.Your attendance is encouraged. Sfncere1y. Edc P.Yould Executive Director Attachment: as noted cc:Tom Trent CONCUR: RA~1 8-\' TJM-Ii\n:,1OWBlI.Ii-,I 0'/ (,) t \ 1!111!'\, - .!!I!'I__I!!Il!'!.'!!'!!----------=====-=--=--=_--=-~---------::ij1!!A;~__L __!#MI ...._";;e;;,¥._.__L .L_ ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY r- J June 3,1980 Insure that the biological and related environmental studfes~their timing,and technical adequacy are planned,implementedtand conducted to provide the quantitative and qualftative data necessary to: (a)assess the potential impacts to fish and wildlife resources,and (b)provide the basis for mitigation and compensation of resource losses which will result from the project; Mr.Lee A.Wyatt Planning Director ~~tanuska-Susitna Borough Box B Palmer,Alaska 99645 Dear Mr.~lyatt: The Alaska Power Authority through its consultant.Acres American Incorporated,is in the early stages of a 30-month feasibility study of the proposed Susftna Hydroelectric Project.Because of the magnitude of this study,effective interagency coordination will be best accomplished through fonnation of a Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee.The funct10n of this committee would be to provide coordinated exchanges of fnformati.on between the Alaska Power Authority and interested resource management agencies. Through this exchange,the concerns of all agencies involved would be identified early and hopefully prevent unnecessary delays in the progress of the feasi- bility study ,application for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license to construct t and Environmental Impact Statement review. As proposed,the Steering Committee \'lOuld be composed of representatives of resource agencles with responsibilities pertaining to the Sus1tna Hydro- electric Feasibility Studies and/or the project's environmental consequences. We therefore invite your agency's participation. The conmittee \-lOuld provide for interagency coordination through joint 1"'evie\1 of pro,'-:ct relatedmater1als and development of more informed and uniform positions representing all resource interests.We believe this will provide a more efficient process of information exchange. Proposed objectives for this cot'mrfttee are to: Review and coment on study approaches throughout each phase of the planning process; ("'", J,• .r"2. r 1 r r' J ' 1!iLJ& 3.Provide a forum for continued project review of all aspects of the studies t for a timely exchange of lnformation~and for recommendation of study redirection,should the accomplishment of specific objectives be in jeopardy; ,--~.. .."""! 4.Monitor compliance of the studies with all state and federal laws, regulations,Executives Orders,and mandates as they apply to fish and wildlife resourceSi and 5.Provide unified agency comments from the committee to the Power Authority. Should your agency elect to participate in the committee,we recommend that your representative have a technical background enabling him to comment on the adequacy and approach of ongoing and future feasibility studies,and be able to speak knowledgeably on the policies and procedures of your agency with respect to the review of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license application for the project and the subsequent Environmental Statement (E5). The first Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee meeting will be held at the Alaska Power Author1tYt 333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31,Anchorage. Alaska on June 12th at 9:00 AM.Attached is a sheet with a description of the agenda frr'this first meeting.Your attendance is encouraged. Sincerely, Eric P.Vculd Executive Director Attachment: as noted .~ ;~;':'1',"'!( 4.8 .v CAa c*- .r ~ r ( '\ ,J' - ,- I ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY June 3,1980 The Honorable Ernst ~J.~1ueller Commissioner Department of Environmental Conservation Pouch 0 Juneau,Alaska 99811 Dear COlIiilissioner Mueller: The Alaska Power Authority through its consultant,Acres American Incorporated,is in the early stages of a 30-month feasibility study of the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project~Because of the magnitude of this StUdY1 effec~1ve interagency coordination will be best accomplished through formation of d.Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Corrmittee.The function of this committee would be to provide coordinated exchanges of information between the Alaska Power Authority and interested resource management agencies. Through this exchange,the concerns of all agencies involved \10uld be identified early and hopefully prevent unnecessary delays in the progress of the feasi- bii itystudy,application for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 1icense to construct.and Environmental Impact Statement review. As proposed,the Steering Committee would be composed of representatives of resource agencies \1ith respons1bil ities pertaining to the Susitna Hydro- electric Feasibility Studies and/or the project's environmental consequences. We therefore invite your agency's participation. The corrnnittee\1ould provide for interagency coordination through joint revie\oJ of project related materials and development of more infonned and uniform positions representing all resource interests.We believe this will provide a more efficient process of information exchange. Proposed objectives for this committee are to: 1.Review and comment on study approaches throughout each phase of the planning process; 2.Insure that the biological and related environmental studies,their timing,and technical adequacy are planned,implemented,and conducted to provide the quantitative and qualitative data necessary to: (a)assess the potential impacts to fish and wildlife resources,and (b)provide the basis for mitigation and compensation ofrescurce losses which will result from the project; ~--------Ernst ~J.Mueller---------- Provide a forum for continued project review of all asoects of the studies.for a timely exchange of information,and for'recommendation of study red1~ection.should the accomplishment of specific objectives be 1n jeopardy; 4.Monitor compliance of the studies with all state and federal laws, regulations,Executives Orders,and mandates as they apply to fish and wildlife resources;and 5.Provide unified agency comments from the committee to the Power Authority. Should your agency elect to participate in the committee~we recommend that your representative have a technical background enabling him to comment on the adequacy and approach of ongoing and future feasibility studies,and be able to speak knowledgeably on the policies and procedures of your agency with respect to the review of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license application for the project and the subsequent Environmental Statement (£5). The first Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee meeting will be held at the A1as ka Power Author;ty..~:l3 W~~t ~~;I "venue,~u1'te 31 t Anchorage, Alaska on June 12th at 9:00 AM.Attached is a sheet with a rtescription of the agenda for this first meeting.Your attendance is encouraged. Sincerely, Erk P.Yould Executive Director Attachment: as noted cc:Dave Sturdevant -,",-- i .--'. """ ~, I"""" I 1 ,~.... .-. ,r ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY June 3,1980 Mr~Ronald Morris National Marine Fishery Service 701 "C"Street Box 43 Anchorage,Alaska 99513 Dear Mr.Morris: The Alaska Power Authority through its consultant~Acres American Incorporated,1s in the early stages of a 30-month feasibility study of the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Because of the magnitude of this study,effective interagency coordination will be best accomplished through formation of a Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee.The function of this committee would be to provide coordinated exchanges of information between the Alaska Power Authority and interested resource management agencies. Through this exchange,the concerns of all agencies involved would be identified early and hopefully prevent unnecessary delays in the progress of the feasi- bility study,application for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license to construct~and Environmental Impact Statement revfet'l. As proposed,the Steering Committee would be composed of representatives of resource agencies vlUh responsibilities pertaining to the Susitna Hydro- electric Feasibility Studies and/or the project's env1ronw~ntal consequences. kJe thel'efore invi te your agency's participation. The committee would provide for interagency coordination through joint review of project related ll'.aterials and development of more inforned and uniform positions representing all resource interests.We helieve this will provide a more efficient process of information exchange. Proposed objectives for this committee are to: 1.Review and comment on study approaches throughout each phase of the planning process; 2.Insure that the biological and related environmental studies,their timing i and technical adequacy are planned.implemented,and conducted to provide the quantitative and qualitative data necessary to: (a)assess the potential impacts to fish and wildlife resources,and (b)provide the basis for mitigation and compensation of resource losses which will result from the project; J'L a - Provide a forum for continued project revfel<'l of all aspects of the studies,for a timely exchange of information,and for recommendation of study redirection,should the accomplishment of specific objectives be in jeopardy; ··Ronald Morris \'I/lJ~e 3~1980 .;jlpage Two j ./' I""I 3., ,;/ :1 4.~1onitor compliance of the studies with all state and federal laws t regulations,Executives Orders,and mandates as they apply to fish and wildlife resources;and 5.Provide unified agency comments from the committee to the Power Authority. Should your agency elect to participate in the corrmittee t \'Je recommend that your representative have a technical background enabling him to comment on the adequacy and approach of ongoing and future feasibility studies,and be able to speak knm'iledgeably on the policies and procedu\"es of your agency with respect to the rev1ew of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license application for the project and the subsequent Environmental Statement (ES).~\ The firstSusitna Hydroelectric Steering Corrnnittee meeting will be held at the Alaska Power Authority,333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31,Anchorage,~, Alaska on June 12th at 9~OO AM.Attached is a sheet with a description of the agenda for this first meeting.Your attendance is encouraged. Sincerely, Eric P.Yould Executive Director Attachment: as noted -I ~, I, 9~&&&J =hGL..JIiIi.IiI.IIIL&1._el!l!l'l!lIII·"Wi'IlIIlIi'1!_"'.YSS.....--......-...-....-.....---.......------ =- ,June 3~1980 ,-, I 1 Nr.Dave Hickok,Director Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center University of Alaska 707 A Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Hickok: The Alaska Power Authority through its consultant.Acres American Incorporated~is in the early stages of a 3D-month feasibility study of the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Because of the magnitude of this study,effective 1nteragency coordination will be best accomplished through formation ofaSus1tna Hydroelectric Steering Committee.The function of thi s committee \liould be to provide coordinated exchanges of information beu1een the Alaska Power Authority and interested resource management agencies. Through this exchange,the concerns of al1 agencies involved \'/ould be identified early and hopefully prevent unnecessary delays in the progress of the feasi- bility study,application for the Federal Energy Regulatory Corrmission Hcense to construct.and Environmental Impact Statement reviffi~. As proposed,the Steering Committee would be composed of representatives of resource agencies with responsibi1ities pertaining to the Susitna Hydro- electric Feasibility Studies ar~/or the projectls environmental consequences. He therefore invite your agency's participation. The committee would provide for interagency coordination through joint review of project related materials and development of mare informed and uniform positions representing all resource interests.We believe this will provide a more efficient process of information exchange. Proposed objectives for this committee are to~ Review and comment on study approaches throughout each phase of the planning process; Insure that the biological and related environmental studies,their timing,and technical adequacy are planned.implemented,and conducted to proviae the quantitative and qua1itat1ve data necessary to: (a)assess the potential impacts to fish and wildlife resources,and {b}provide the basis for mitigation and compensation of resource losses which will result from the project; ,... l. r-2. r- d .....l"l'-..l.}QYt:n 1 ~~.;"'O~ June 3.1980 Page 1\'10 ....\ ;:.V 3.Provide a forum for continued project review of all aspects of the studies.for a timely exchange of information,and for recommendation of study redirection,should the accomplishment of specific objectives be in jeopardy; 4.Monitor compliance of the studies with all state and federal laws, regulations,Executives Orders,and mandates as they apply to fish and wildlife resources;and 5.Provide unified agency comments from the committee to the Pcwler Authority. Should your agency elect to participate in the committee.we recommend that your representative have a technical background enabling him to comment on the adequacy and approach of ongoing and future feasibility studies,and be able to speak knowledgeably on the policies and procedures of your agency with respect to the review of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license application far the project and the subsequent Environmental Statement (ES). The first Sus1tna Hydroelectric Steering Committee meeting will be held at the Alaska Power Authority.333 West 4th Avenue.Suite 31.Anchorage, Alaska on Jun r 12th at 9:00 AM.Attached is a sheet with n description of the agenda for this first meeting.Your attendance is encouraged. Sincerely, Eric 'Po Yould Executive Director f'\ttachment: as noted ~I .all I _. - .-..."""1 ...£2&.:1 iQI8lItIIMJJ -,,-------...-----.---':'-~,,~--:--"~_.""""--~-'----.- ...Env i ronmentaL..Rr.atPAt:..~. ,f""'·..~·-J-'-""''''''·~'-(t ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY (~ r June 4~1980 Director Environmental Protection Agency U.S.Department of Energy Alaska Operations Office 701 ne"Street Anchorage.Alaska 99513 Dear Sir: - The Alaska Power Authority through its consultant.Acres American Incorporated.is in the early stages of a 30-month feasibility study of the proposed SusHna Hydroelectric Project.Because of the magnitude of this study,effective interagency coordination will be best acco.rnpl1shed through formation of a Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee •.The function of this committee would be to provide coordinated exchanges of 1nfonnat1on be~Jeen the Alaska Power Authority and interested resource management agencies. Through this exchange.the concerns of all agencies involved ~/ouldbe identified early and hopefully prevent unnecessary delays in the progress of the fe~s1 bility study.application for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license to construct,and Environmental Impact Statement revi&~. As proposed,the Steering COll1llittee \',ould be composed of representatives of resource agencies \'1ith responsibilities pertaining to the Susitna Hydro- electric Feasibility Studies and/or the project's environmental consequences. We therefore invite your agency's participation. The committee \J'/ould provide for interagency coordination through joint review of project related materials and development of more informed and uniform positions representing all resource interests.We believe this will provide a more efficient process of information exchange. Proposed objectives for this committee are to: 1.Review and comment on study approaches throughout each phase of the planning process; ..- 2.Insure that the biological and related environmental studies.their timing.and technical adequacy are planned.1mplemented.and conducted to provide the quantitative and qualitative data necessary to: (a)assess the potential impacts to fish and wildlife re50urces.and (b)provide the basis for mitigation and compensation of resource losses which will result from the project; , ,/ ~ ....,-~~?'~'·-lrorllr.ania1 Protection Agenc{ 4.1980 I,/age Two./ J !3.Provide a forum for continued project review of all aspects of the studies.for a timely exchange of information,and for recommendation of study redirection.should the accomplishment of specific objectives be in jeopardy; j 4.f'lonitor compliance of the studies with all state and federal 10\'#5, regulat1ons.Executives Orders s and mandates as they apply to fish and wildlife resources;and 5.Provide unified agency conments from the committee to the Power Authority. Should your agency elect to participate in the committee.we recommend that your representative have a technical background enabling him to comment on the adequacy and approach of ongoing and future feasibility studies,and be able to speak knowledgeably on the policies and procedures of your agency with respect to the review of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license application for the project and the subsequent Environmental Statement (£5). The first Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee meeting will be held at the Alaska Power Authority,333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31,Anchorage, Alaska on June 12th at 9:00 Af~.Attached is a sheet with a description of the agenda for this first meeting.Your attendance is encouraged. Sincerely, Eric P.You1d Executive Director Attachment: as noted -I - IM1S'uilift.XCi&tattiliMiWSL2bZ :ua """'}i r ,.... ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY June 4,1980 Area Director Heritage Con$ervation & Recreation Service Department of the Interfor 1011 East Tudor Road Anchorage.A1aska 99507 Dear Sir: The Alaska Power Authority through its consultant,Acres American Incorporated,is in the early stages ofa 30-month feasibility study of the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Because of the magnitude of this study,effective interagency coordination \'1111 behest accomplished through formation of a Susitna Hydroelectrie Steering Committee.The function of this committee would be to provide coordinated exchanges of information bet'tleen the Alaska PO\....er Authority and interested resource management agencies. Through this exchange.the concerns of all agencies involved would be identified early and bopeful1y prevent unnecessary delays in the progress of the feasi- bility study~application for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license to construct,and Environmental Impact Statement review. As proposed.the Steering C0tm11ttce would be composed of representatives of resource agencies with responsibilities pertaining to the Susitna Hydro- e1ectric Feasibility Studies and/or the project's environmental consequences. ~Jetherefore lnv;te your agency's participation. The committee would provide for interagency coordination through joint review of project related materials and development of more informed and uniform positions representing all resource interests.He believe this will provide a more efficient process of information exchange. Proposed objectives for this committee are to: 1.Review and comment on study approaches throughout each phase of the planning process; 2.Insure that the biological and related environmental studies,their timing,and techn1caladequacy are planned.implemented~and conducted to provide the quantitative and qualitative data necessary to: (a)ass~ss the potential impacts to fish and 'tdldlife resources,and (b)provide the basis for mitigation and compensation of resource losses which will result from the project; r-'.. ?&!!Jii&C &a aa L Sid S&.. Provide a forum for continued project review of all aspects of the studies~for a timely exchange of information,and for recommendation of study redirection,should the accomplishment of specific objectives be in jeopardy; 3. o • 11IOI\ 4.Monitor compliance of the studies with all state and federal laws, regulations,Executives Orders,and mandates as they apply to fish and wildlife resources;and 5.Provide unified agency comments from the committee to the Power Authority. Should your agency elect to participate in the cOtmlittee,we reconmend that your representative have a technical background enabling him to comment on the adequacy and approach of ongoing and future feasibility studies,and be able to speak knowledgeably on the policies and procedures of your agency with respect to the review of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license application for the project and the subsequent Environmental Statement (ES). The first Sus1tna Hydroelectric Steering Ccmn1ttce meeting will be held at the Alaska Power Authority.333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31.Anchorage. Alaska on June 12th at 9:00 AM.Attached is a sheet with a description of the agenda for this first meeting.Your attendance is encouraged. Sincerely, Eric P.Yould Executive Director Attachment: as noted ,-,,'. J" RECEIVED N.ASKA POWER AUTHORITY Sincere~~ MES P.FERO Lt Colonel,Corps of Engineers Acting District Engineer --DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ALASKA DISTRICT.CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.o.80X7002 ANCHORAGE.ALASKA 99510 If I can be of any further assistance,please do not hesitate to contact me direct1y.If further details are desired by your staff, Mr.Harlan Moore,Chief,Engineering Division,can be contacted at 752-5135. Dear Mr.Yould: Should funds and personpower become available at a later time we will reconsider your kind Offer.However,we will continue to provide the necessary reviews requireo for the issuance of permits under our regu1atory program. Eric Yould,Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 W.4th Ave.,Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 1 refer to your invitation to participate in the Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee expressed in your 3 June 1980 letter.At the present time we are unable to participate in the committee due to severe funding and personpower constraints.I envision that the committee,to properly perform its objective,will in fact have to delve in detail into many complex engineering and environmental concerns.This would require a considerable effort of a senior staff member with possible adVisory action by others in the District. -I [ i - .....REPLY '0 ATTENT,·.;N OF, NPADE 1 2 .lIP!1980 - '~.'.....'...., SUSITNJ\HYDRO STE[IUilG CQi.WliTfIE (·1U:TI:iC TIME:9:00 AM - DATE : PLI~CE : I\GENDA: June 1.2,1980 Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31 Anchorage.A1Jska 99501 - J. \"t. 5. A discussion and outlining of the purpose and objectives of the Susitna Hydro Steering Con,~ittec. /i review by Acres American of the procedural uspects of the FERC license application,the ES review processes,and their perspectives on the procedural mileposts for this project. A discussion of the proposed FERC license appliCJtion and ES review ;:Jrocess by the Stcuirs Committi2e and an ilSSc:;s::1ent of the ilgencies vie\,s and mandates to review and comment upon the proposed project. ;\rev 1e\'i of the S.us itna Hydro fcas ibi 1 Hy tllsks by {lues !\mcri can \'Iith discussion of FEEe's possible rcquirrments for study,technical standards.and land 01"environ:ncntal study subjects I'ihich :lil:St be: cG,phasized. A discussion by the Steering Committee of the c~oss study task Or i nt er dis ci p1 i nur y i\S Pe C t S 0 f the Sus i t na l!y d)'0 r:C il sib i 1i t y stu die s . J 6.Steering Cormn;ttee discussion of ()proposed a~1i:nda for the July meeting involving re~resentatives of FERC. e: .. "..,",-"":-:1', (./5 Fv-I $ Q/,,\-Ti .LA::..C /J j)/I//(~ ""'-,I:.) I""'"j , r L r.·..,....l_:., IT ""I,·~i .'/l"';". t"';-I • .,L"/.'-',,\~-~'!"-c'4"";'.:~.(••,1..-/ :-' ..,/~ I ~,r (>."J';~';-~r',;,...',r/,(':~.-'~J;'.~" /:..?v~S /!?nJJv;.ca:;' C'\(-_~.r .;---,i 'i : '.•,'.';,r./:~.,('"J -..).•.J /7 .Il_I ,.lA.\.J"v"",VlJ ,..-(.,"··'-Clr~J\.~.i,v·.l\J L..-e,.'V\/~ frL....~,~.m"G;a;_IlII....IIIIlilI Ri2t__••_!:IIi.._.t.I ..._ June 13,1980 t4r.Ron Corso Federal En~rgy Regulutory Cnmmtssion 400 1st Street,H.W. Washington,D.C.20427 Dear Hr.Corso: Pursuant to pre-dous d1sctlss1on ~/ith Hr.Quinton Edson.we request FERC pre$cnce in Anchorage to discuss various 1icensing aspects of the Sus1tna Hydroelectl"ic Project.This visit could be in conjunction with your staff's plans far v is 1ti ng the.Tyee La ka s1 te. The need for the meeting is evfdence~by the strong ur91ng for such a session by the state and federal agencies who have an interest in the project. rt 1~the consensus of all involved that a fuce-to-facc meeting with FERC is needed at this early stage of the study process to insure that proper work effort 1s planned especially in the environmental and fisheries programs. The rr.eet1ng wl1l constitute the second convening.of the Susitna Interagency Steer1n9 Corenllttee.Acres American will be represented and rrepared to discuss the fisheries and in-stream flm1 study programs 1n detail.In our opinion, the tit:1ing for a i7;e~ting with your staff fs ideal. lie \;fQuld like to plan on l!two-day session either before or after your stJff's visit to Tyee lake.We a~ait your response and recommended meeting dates.We will adjust to your schedule. Th ....nk you for your continued 8ssistnncc in guidiot]us at this early but crltlcal ~tage of project planning. Slncerely, FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Robert 1\.r'~ohn Director of Engineering cc:John lawrence Cen UT": P1 - JA Y S.HAMMOND,Governor POUCH AD JUNEAU,ALASKA 99811 PHONE:465-3512 CD / { I j i ,/ DIVISION OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING , ,f, •~lFl'1~1f~r,W~,.fM~10~~(j!~~J Uu U i.2::J \~I u LJlj L::J!J J \:::.)u \_\U \1 OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ... ~ I - June 17,1980..... , !'""'1 : i i I ,...., I I i ' Mr.Eric P.Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 f-'RECEIVED QJfn JUN 201980 'I oj , :.~POWER AUiHORITY {~-).~)I ' Dear Mr '~)\~Jll d: Thank you for the noti ficati on regardi n9 the formati on of a Sus itna Hydroelectric Steering Committee.As you know Division of Policy Development and Planning (DPOP)has an interest in the many facets and implications of a project like the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project. I appreciate the opportunity to be involved with the resource management concerns through participation on the Steering Committee. nIi, As the Office of Coastal Management (OCM)has the most direct resource management responsibilities \'/ithin DPDP,lam requesting OCH be this agencyJs representative on the Steering Committee. I be 1 i eve ocr~will be ab 1e to keep you informed about the c~ta 1 management consistency process and how it might effect the Susitna Project.Murray Walsh,Coordinator of OeM and Bill Ross,Deputy Coordinator,will be the contact persons for OeM/DPOP.As telephoned to your office on June 10,1980, no one was able to attend the first meeting of the Steering Committee but I ask that you keep OCM informed of any subsequent meetings. ~ I Thank you for your invitation to DPOP to be a member of the Steering Committee. 5i rycrrely, ();7 A ,/1 W;'''jFranUlmer Di rector cc~Murray Walsh,OCM 01-A3LH Lb._ • Mr.Lee A.Wyatt Planning Dieector tmtanuska-Susitna Borough Box B Plamer~Alaska 99645 Dear Mr..Wyatt: July 7,1980 • -.~ The Alaska Power Author;ty.act;og on behalf of the resource management agencies t would like to inform you of the second Susitna Hydro Steering Committee meeting<At the request of the various agencies, we have rr.a/"arrange:ll"tents for representa ti ves of the Federal Energy Regulatory t.:ommission to be present at the meeting in order to answer technical questions.The subject of the first day of this two day session will consist of a discussion of the general technical aspec~s of the FERC and state licensing process whereas the second day will specifically address the Susitna fisheries and in-stream flow studies programs. In additfon to the above topics.an election of a committee chairman wiH tak.e place (please be thinking of prospective candidates for nomination). and the guidelines for the committee's organization will be established. The first days session of the second Susitna Hydro Steering Committee meeting will be held at the ACe Lucy Cuddy Center on July 17th at 3:00 a.m. The second dayls session will be held at the Federal Building,Room C-l05 on July 18th at 8:30 a.m.Attached is a sheet with a description of the meet i 119 agenda.Your partid pation is encouraged < Sincerely, Erie P.Youl d Executive Director Attachment Concur: EPY TJM~ RA~1--r.- ~ Additional identical letters sent to the following people (see attached list): .,-_0 ••~"#ibi#&§¥Z_A,MALLU.UN (n!')?):;77.761\\ (:IOl)2(6·2715 "l\I~J.\Slil\1~~)\,rnSUi l\~J'I'Dn~pn~~ri'l{,;/ j .... Jf' ~w£sr .""AVE"U,.SUITE )1 -J' july J,lC)HO '"'"'Mr.Ronald Morris National Harlnc Fis!ll'I"Y SCl'vice 70'\"e"Street Anchorage,Alaska 99513 Dc~r Mr.Morris: The i\laska flowC'!"!\uthority,ileting on [JVhdl;01 th:i'(";Ol~!'U: mana Semcllt agencies,"lOuld like to inform you :If \h0.sr.conc:')lISitl~a Hvdro Steering Committee meeting.i\t the rcqu,·,~~t.of the vd'ious c\(Jcnci(::::, ''"'~hc.ve made arrangements for representatives l)f thc:iede;",l![I;c:r'gy Eegulatory Commission to be present tit the mecl.ir\(]in oreler to (lnj"lp'r technical Questions.The subject of the first.dt"of this l\'i()day s es s ~()n vii lie 0 n sis t 0 f a.dis cvss ion 0 f t h1::9 r.ncr il 1 tr.ch 11 i C (~!1 J S P f:C t s 0 f the FERC and state licensing process wherells th(~sQcond Oi\j I"lill specifiCr111y addre5s the Su~itnd f~sher~es and in-stream flOl'i studies progl'illris. In addition to the above topics,an election of a committee chilirr:io:.;f\ will t a k e pIa ce (p 1 e ase bet h ink i n9 0 f pro s pee ti vee c1 ndid J t e 5 for"no ID ina t ion), and the guidelines for t:le committee's organization will be est.ablished. ,:110'-, The first days session of.,the second Susitna dyc1ro Steering Committee: meet~ng ~ill be held at the~ACC Lucy Cuddy Center on July l7tllat 8:00 a.m. The secorid day1s session w11t/~e held at the Feder"l building,Room (.·105 on July 18th at 8:30 a.m.'·',Attached is'a sheet ".lith :)desci1ptioil of thf: meeting~~enda.Your particfp5tion is encouraged. Sincerely, L\~~~ Er fer.Yo l:1d EY.ecutivp.Director I\t tachment r • July 8,1980 r·lr.Ron Corso Federa i Energy Regu1atory Commission 400 1st Street.N.W. Washington,D.C.20427 Dear r·'r.Corso: To follow up on the discussions which have transpired over the last few weeKS bet\'leen members of your staff,Acres Amer1 can Incorporated ~ and the Alaska Pm'ler Authority,we have attached a copy of the agenda for the July 17th and 18th meeting of the Susftna Hydro Steering Committee. It is our understanding that Mark Robinson and Dean Shur;wmy of your staff will be available for this meeting,and \'/ill be able to discuss those aspects of the licensing process that relate to their area of expertice.They need not attend the 8:00 a.m.to 9:30 a.m.session on the first day and need not stay for the full duration of the second day. ~!e understand that Acres 1s arranging a field trip to the Susitna River for them on July 16th. He hope that the attached agenda meets \'1ith your approval and look forward to seeing Mark and Dean in Anchorage later this month. 51 ncerely, .-j ..<><~//~~' Robert A.Monri' Director of Engineering Attachment C\:llilcur EPUl--TJM J - - - -, ."""-_.-' ... - =:""•• "... 'i I MH10 TO: FROM: John, John Lawrence Pl'oject Manager Acres American Incorporated The Liberty Bank Building Main at Court Buffalo,New York /14202 i Donald W.Baxter,{P.E.. Project Engi neer t .j , A1as ka Power Auth ri~."~'/_. 333 West 4th A~.en e ,I,u r:t~ Anchorage,Alaska-,./5,~, ......:.... DATE:July 8,1980 SUBJECT:Sus i tna Hydro Steering Committee IT Attached for your information is a copy of a letter sent toMr:Ronald Morris of the National Marine Fisheries Service announcing the second Susitna f~dro Steering Committee meeting.Identical letters were sent to the following agencies: U.S.Fish &Wildlife Service,(Bob Bowker) Department of Fish &Game (The Honorable Ronald O.Skoog,Commissioner) Bureau of Land Management,(John Rego,Energy Specialist) U.S.Geological Survey,(Harry Hu1sing,District Chief) U.S.Heritage Conservation &Recreation Services,(Bill \'felch) Corps of Engineers,(Colonel Lee R.Nunn) Environmental Protection Agency,(Director) Department of Natural Resources,(The Honorable Robert E.LeResche, Commissioner) Department of Environmental Conservation,(The Honorable Ernst W.~\ueller,Commissioner) Office of Costal Management,DPOP,(Murray Walsh,Coordinator) Department of Community and Regional Affairs,(The Honorable Lee McAnerney,Commissioner) University of Alaska/Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center.(Dave Hickok;Director) Matanuska Susitna Borough.(Lee Wyatt,Planning Director) Division of Economic Enterprise,(Dick Eakins,Director) This entire effort has been coordinated with members of your staff, the FERC,and us.The public has been invited to attend the first day's session and a copy of the associated newspaper advertisement is also attached. ..;/ r / <' We feel optimistic that as a result of this meeting many of the questions that have arisen among the various resource management agencies will be answered.Hopefully a clearer definition of the course of action to be taken with respect to the in-stream flow studies program will also be obtained. cc: Jim Gi 11 John Hayden Kevin Young - - A _ WALASliA poniEn:.i\{ITHOJ.:.lJTl.' SUSITNA HYDRO STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING ~tf i l'- -~}n" I ? 1s t DC!y DJ te: Time: Place: 2nd Day Date: Time: Place: AGEHOi~ July 17,1980 8:00o..m. ACe Lucy Cuddy Center July 18,1980 3:30 a.m. redel-a 1 Ilu i 1ct i n0,Room C-105 -) r- I 1 s t Da y Top i cs R:OO a,m.-9:30 a.m. o Election of a conmittE~chairman I Discussion of the committee's organization •Any other items of concern 9 :30 a,m.-5:00 p.m. Q Gener~1 technical overview of FERC licensing process o Discussion of general technical license requirements for hyroelectric projects (both FERC and State) il Disc uss ion 0 f Sus it na spec i fie techn i cal -I ice nse requirements (both rERC and State) 2nd [Jay Topics ,..... 1 r 8:30 a.m. B o iii o I) -5:00 p.m. Potential changes in Susitna River hydrology due to hydroelectric development Details of hydrology -water quality monitoring program Details of the AOF&G fisheries pro0ram Development of fisheries impact predictions and mitigation plan Modifications incorporated into the study program in order to accomodate the in-stream flow studies Discussion of details on in-stream flov.f st',loies SUSITNA HYDRO STEERI NG CO~1MITTEE t<1EETING July 17th &18th,1980 PERSONS NOTIFIED OF THE MEETING Jtl Carson Sob Lamke 8;11 Hil son 8i 11 Wel ch Pat Beck1ey John Rego Bob BO"'lker Rickki Fowler Gary Stackhouse Lee ~Iya tt Jim Sweeney Heinz Noonan Dave Sturdevant Dick Eakins Iljurray Walsh larry Kimball Department of Natural Resources U.S.G.S.-W.R.D. AEIDC-University of Alaska Heritage Conservation &Rec. BU1 BlM u.S.Fi sh &Wil d1 He Environmental Conservation U.S.Fish &Wildlife Service r~at-Su Borough Environmental Protection Agency (US) Energy &Power Development Environmental Conservation Div.of Economic Enterprise (send twix via 277-1936) Office of Coastal Management CQmm.&R~g.Affairs (Div.of Comm.i-'lannlng) 279-5577 271-4138 279-4523 277-1666 344-9661 g44-9661 271-4575 274-5527 276-3800 745-4801 271-5083 276-0508 465-2636 465-2018 465-3540 279-8636 -, J /•...r-,./\/-"-"". ---C00.0r ../ {5,'II w .{.>-.<7- C l...."<Ie f""'rt..,J 11 ..c.f,·,['.,Jl~",",<~r;t .I~P:...~'\f"-(~&A ,J ;]:JAr&/.. c;...,"~r,,__(u.f /:J It:) ---,-._---_....•,-----._.--~._------_.._-------_.-.-----y_.~>..._'-'~.._..~------_.-_._..-...._.._'.----...,. - ~'r....s ....>l (c I I 7"~~-~( D.ap J.£h ~CJ"'"~r~Do.v-t 5fuA..d.4v A...,1 '1 bS"-2~J b c.~<.m..~ /0:.h.tu.:Fo w l.tA.:J.7 (.1 -s_r <.7 (So(d'hce~tr~I J2."'/(fI\,,16tH'U) Pcsuc..h 0 .:ru..N CL.U-;A k '1'1 ~II -,ivlc/(~-131j.i .---. 3 J,!'DLn,,~'51.;,0.1\"i r I ..-~."'-"",,"\''\...."~ "I ~'..,\,...).\ ~-.\.:....'-\'\,) \'",\ \'\\, ,t,.',->)-.;- 8~w..t.'i ~/#Jma.o::..",,,'"TA.we );O;-c1Y ~/s7?--lC.r 0rrl '''' .</7 <J7:>£'72 N I ;:ttl '< P.Nc);AI(75"~"?.. Johlll \<e~ 344 -1(,6/I'..??" ,...\-\.l\'\\~,~J \\~jNl ~\'i.\..:t(\~\S 10 \C'..~,Go f..l\~ ,...~<.A.l ,,\qs\S ~n\J\c\.. 1S~l;\v ~,,"-\ -~o .......\\'\~Q\l..\.'>- '2.+\·-50Q6 '"-',,",.j\..-\,~~'..-i"l ~-~r',i ~t !~_i..(--\\.f...~t.,,- i:~_I.,,,'\\.(':r I ,':""-"e cE I I \,-,'-l t r'-.'\..;\..\...'I •I--------------'-~ ~4~'~~""-"".~~\o._::::.=~;-=·;:.::.",--",=:;-_~=".r_=~==--==-""--,......,... .(). , l.,~_",_ !9rJn 7J~v:,J C -141HN D.LA vJnrs NC C ) 'A,.D ~C,.~~<i:C1'$.. L.IE tZ9..'Ti':8I9NK 3,;H.:;IN~ .sVlnr q~{) Ml'f/rJ AI C,"L.i 'Snt;;&7' "t31oiFT=,qL,.t)I NY 6.(6)'S3 -75)5'" i_'....-i !.) -.-'.'..--;/17/8 (3 4~~</br;t. '--" ff\CV,\ --z;;;.:.SJ C Ct r S~"'-. \~-'~.'~--c,\,-'l~.-I I'~ ~-\\-(-~- i"~ f V i 0 ,-. I ! ,.... I :r N\~,KRob;i\.s.an D~"L.~ l)\;'U~d~· E6b K/?oc.s e)./c:. G~v-y S-rJk;.-kfJovsc.. f1L o CD L/)JA J/).L \ ·£-:R..~V S t'I \\\-\ fEi?C F612~ TE5 US FtJS lEJ 4b~-L~3 6 (7/G,)853-75.;]5 2.0 2./~7 ltJ -'1 0 ,( :A02.-:5719 -)90'1 b &:;5"-7 z.-1.-8 3i')/_ftt 3d ~7{,-Sosy c?7r;-38co 0r97 /&>S ,')--/5 (13 Joj~'I<(}O r\f~~ J I fl'\~L.Pt NO fl"IA N LorQV'!~kr ".....\,,,-,\~~c 1-\,,E!:. Hc...\hj.~_\/,;,,~'~(:C',l'_ll~N ji ._4--L _,ALA &a.,-& ./'/,;...1;/'.//(/(//'::'r./;··,'/"'r "7'/«('//~/ A.C71G'5 A..fY1~;{(AIV ~leO -4~88 c::~""i'~::-~",~~6;j<~~~ys ;~t-~~~'i- r'\.::?",U fCC;Ylrn ·~_r'.C(..J Q;u ~~1\J'1 (>t t~he~·s:·/{'?D(.u"t·Dt\...~·.,$.;P'I::~~t-2'7 6-=..~:3?~CI(S1- e e· l\.LASliA POWER AUTHORITY SUSITNA HYDRO STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING 2nd Day Date: Time: Place: AGENDA July 18,1980 '8:30 AM Federal Building,Room C-105 2nd Day Topics 8:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m. •Potential changes in Susitna River hydrology due to ~ hydroelectric development •Detai1s of hydrology -water quality monitoring program ,Details of the ADF&G fisheries program •Development of fisheries impact predictions and mitigation plan •Modifications incorporated into the study program in order to accomodate the in-stream flow studies •Discussion of details on in-stream flow studies ., I '......~-, •_.•••••+--.- -rGS ,: \C=S ~I /(/:;/\!- r6Re FER-c f1=(~c.. [)N~ ·If{}-Pt-G lY!"",'['rj '--\Zc\ -g~P\$5f\\\TH ~13L:.k?'T·/'I/l~ rt f""'!. I G [.. r: 4" r'-:"-.'.'.:".'C,cc.. c- r r: U.S.EN V [Ra MEN TAL PRO TEe T ION A~N C Y -The Alaska Operations Office has scheduled a retreat with the Alaska, Department of Envi ronmenta 1 Conservation staff and will be unab1 e to have an individual ,from our staff attend the Susitna Hydro Steering Committee meeting.~~e are very interested in the project and sorry we are unable to attend. REC.EI"VJ;Q; JU L 1 '.1980 f- ALAsKA POWER AUTHOR~ 16 JUt.1980 ALASKA OPERATIONS OFFICE Room E535,Federal Building 701 C Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 De arM r.You 1d: Mr.Eric P.You1d Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Please notify our office of the next scheduled meeting and send,if available,the minutes of the July 17 and 18 sessions. ~~ w:Jam/es Sweeney () 01 rb:-tor ' REPLY TO ATTN OF: .., July 28,1980 .~.:.. '. <.. Mr.W.James Sweeney,Director U.S.Environmental Protection Agency Room E535,Federal Building 701 "e'"Street Anchorage,Al aska .99501 Dear Hr.S\'/eeny: Thank you for your letter regarding the Susitna Hydro Steering Committee meeting of July 17 and 18.I am sorry to hear you were unable to attend as it was a very informative meeting.The Steering Committee has,as a result of the meeting,evolved into an organization independent of the Power Authority and acting in a reVie\11 and advisory capacity to the PO\</er Authority.It is now run \'Jhol1y by the various State and Federal agencies.Al Carson of the Al aska Department of Natural Resources has taken the responsibility of chairman for the cOii~ittee and Tom Trent of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game is acting as his assistant.I lrodl1 see to it that your agency is retained ~on the mailing list for the con~1ttee.Unfortunately,no meeting minutes ~:ere taken although a tape recording is aval1able at the Power Authority. I appreciate your continued interest in the committee and encourage your participation at future meetings. Sincerely, \!.' \.f \_._".1 Eric P.'{ould Executive Director r"'i I Augus t 21,1980 P5700.11 T.375 .REC~PJED, Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99503 Attention:.Eric You1d Dear Eric: AlASKA PQvVER.AUTHORlni .~--..."~ Susitna Hydroelectric Project Distribution of TES Procedures Manuals Enclosed please find copies of the TES Procedure Manuals as requested .. by yourselves and the Susitna Steering Committee.A distribution list is attached. Since Mr.A1 Carson,Chairman of the Steering Committee is out of town until August 27,the distribution list for the committee is based on the key contact list as supplied by Don Baxter on July 18,1980.Please advise if any changes are made in distribution. Sincerely, - J: KY:pg Enclosures J.O.Lawrence Project Manager .--.'-,-...~., -DISTRIBUTION: Copies of all procedure manuals to: Copies of Manuals for Subtasks 7.05,7.06,7.07 &7.08: HeRS -Larry Wright ---.. MEMORA~DUM DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF RESEARCH &DEVELOPMENT o State of Alaska TO: SUSITNA HYDRO ELECTRIC STEERING CO~mITTEE MEMBERS (See Distribution List) DATE: FILE NO: September 4,1980 FROM: TELEPHONE NO -...~.'""~nIii.;;.C \;;.I V l:.L)SUBJECT Steering Committee Chairman The purpose of this letter is two-fold: 279-5577 Summary of 7/17 and 18 Meetings and Review of Procedures Manuals 1. 2. To summarize the major points discussed in the July 17 &18 meeting or the Susitna Hydro Electric Steering Committee. To transmit to you copies of the Acres American contractor's field manuals which describe in detail how they will conduct studies during the 1980 and 1981 field season. The first item of business on July 17 was discussions and decisions leading to the appointment of a chairman.Those in attendance agreed that Al Carson,Department of Natural Resources,would serve as chairman of the Steering Committee with Tom Trent,Department of Fish and Game,serving as Assistant Chairman.There were two representatives from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC),Mr.rrean Shumway and Mark Robinson.A considerable amount of time was spent by Messrs.Shumway and Robertson explaining the role of FERC in the proposed Susitna Hydro Electric Project.The rest of the morning meeting was devoted to contractor briefings about the studies included under Task VII (environmental studies) for the Susitna plan of study.Two significant items were identified by this review.First,it was obvious from the comments from the agency representatives,contractors.and subcontractors present that the agencies were unable to provide a detailed critique of the plan of study.This is because the widely circulated plan of study did not have adequate detail regarding methodology,approach,or scope of the proposed studies to enable the reviewer to make reasoned or useful comments on these matters.Acres American and their subcontractors stated that this level of detail would be found in their yet to be published field manuals which describe in detail the work that the contractors will be doing in the 1980 and 1981 field seasons.The Steering Committee members will be provided with copies of these field manuals for their review when they are available.The significance of this is that the studies that are being accomplished under the Susitna plan of study for the field year of 1980 are being carried out without benefit of review, comments,or approval by the various state and federal agencies. Second,was a concern regarding how the socia-economic studies being conducted under the Susitna plan of study related to the fish Q2-00 lA(Rey.l01191 -} Susitna Hydro _~ctric '0';: 2 ...,JSeptember 4,1980 -I ..- I and game impact concerns identified by agency representatives.It was agreed that the Steering Committee will meet with the socia economic consultants to learn how these studies relate. The meeting on July 18 was devoted exclusively to reviewing in detail and discussing the studies that are necessary in the FERC filing concerning fisheries,hydrology,and instream flow.The most significant issue which appeared from these discussions was the need to insure that mitigation for fish,wildlife and other environmental values are integrated into the project designs,etc. rather than being an add-on or appendage at a later date. The second purpose of this letter concerns review of the field manuals.Accompanying to this letter you will find copies of the field manuals to be used by the Acres American subcontractors for carrying out various studies as discussed in a general way within the Susitna plan of study documents.Please carefully review these manuals giving proper emphasis to those studies which are included within your field of expertise and your agency's authority and responsibility.The intent is to have all the Steering Committee members review these manuals and forward your review comments to me.I will then synthesize these comments into a draft letter from the Steering Committe.e to APA.Then we will meet to review and finalize the letter.For the sake of convenience.and saving time in synthesizing comments,please place your comments and concerns within the appropriate framework as discussed here:The reviev;of the field manuals is intended to detail problems or concerns within the following six areas: 1.What is the appropriateness and utility of the studies,i.e., do the studies attempt to answer the question~that need answering in light of the proposed Susitna Dam? 2.The scope of the studies,i.e.,is the methodology approach and techniques properly formulated to provide valid and germane answer(s)which will apply directly to the proposed Susitna Dam? 3.The study approach and methodology,Le.,does the approach and methodology discussed in the manuals result in findings and recommendations which are or will be scientifically valid? 4.HOI';do the subtasks of the studies "hang together"to give a comprehensive picture of the impact of the project? 5.How do tbe various disciplines (e.g.,fisheries,seismology, engineering,recreation)study findings and recommendations affect the other disciplines?The answer to this question will identify the hierarchy of values that will be attached to various components of the project when the "trade offs"decisions are made. 4·.....Susitna Hydro f.\ectric•'C> 3 September 4,1980• 6.\~at other issues and concerns did you discover while reviewing these manuals that need the attention of the Steering Committee? Please provide me your \.Jri t ten revie,.comments no later than close of business,Friday,September 26,1980.If you have questions, comments or revisions on the matters discussed in this letter, please contact me at 279-5577. cc:E.Yould,APA Distribution List Don HcKay U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service 733 W.4th,Suite 101 Anchorage,AK 99501 Torn Trent Alaska Dept.of Fish and Game 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,AK 99502 Ai Carson Alaska Dept.of Natural Resources 323 E.4th Avenue Anchorage,AK 99501 John Rego Bureau of Land Management Anchorage Di~trict Office 4700 E.72nd 'Avenue Anchorage,AK 99502 Boo Lamke U.S.Geological Survey Water Resources 733 West 4th Avenue,Suite 400 Anchorage,AK 99501 Bill Wilson or Chuck Evans Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center (D of AK) 707 "AI'Street Anchorage,AK 99501 - - - - j Dave Sturdevant Department of Environmental Conservation Pouch "0 11 Juneau,AK 99811-) Susitna Hydro 4t)ctric .~ 4 September 4,1980 ".... I I ( r 1. Larry Wright or Bill Welch Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service 1011 East Tudor Road,Suite 297 Anchorage,AK 99503 Brad Smith or Ron Horris National Marine Fisheries Service 701 "e"Street,Box 43 Anchorage,AK 99513 ii:i!iiMMMi n I.A5 •w •= • Septer.her 3.1980 Suaitna Hydro Steer:i.ng Conrnittee c/o Al C&.-scn Alaska Departr.:ent of biatural Resources 323 East:4d1 Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear AI: Last week we forwarded to you for di..'"3trlbutioo.to the Susitna Hydro St:erri.ng Carrmittee,copies of the emdronmzntal procedures rmnuals applicable to PaS 'Task 7,as prepared by Terrestrial &i.v:U:Ol.ll1SLtal Sped 81 i sts,L"1C.('rES).These manuals should 8I1S"il&'m:ny of the questions relating to the details of our Plan of Study.1jJe v."Uuld appreciate it if your ~ttee would review and cannent on these 1iBluals at its earliest convarlence.vie will then prepare written responses to iny cc.u:mx:rnts re- ceived.If:in follav1ng this process there are still outstandmg questions that require detailed techni cal msponses,~'1C Hill be pleased to h.s.ve tl'.e appropriate principal i.."1'V'IaStigators mah:e.a pres:entation to your.ca!ffiittee. T.E.S ......~hes to Imintain positi"Qe control mrer ~~ese manua.ls.and \,'C would.like to facilitate that wish.TIle attached fonrs might be use- ful to you towards t.r,at goal. Trusting this procedure lmets with your approval. Sincerely, Robert A.Hohn Director of Engi.1'1.eering cc:J.I..m."rence J.Gill E.."1Closures :As stated V;-J:et CONCIJR: ,(r"j \.JEPY.i.,!.~\// TJM:/' rM: r -, ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY RECORD OF RECEIPT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROCEDURE MANUALS COPIES ASSIGNED TO ___ SUBTASK TITLE COpy # 7.05 Socioeconomic Analysis . 7.06 Cultural Resources Investigation . 7.07 Land Use Analysis . 7.08 Recreation Planning . 7.10 Fish Ecology -Impact Assessment and Mitigation ... 7.11 Wil dl ife Ecology -Furbearers .. 7.11 Wildlife Ecology -Big Game Impact Assessment and t4itigation . 7.11 Wildlife Ecology -Birds and Non-Game Mammals ..... 7.12 Pl ant Ecology . 7.14 Access Road Ana 1ysi s . - ClltSUSITNA STEERING COMMITTEE ~ Record Of Distribution Of Environmental Procedure Manuals RECIPIENT COpy if ~-----LaJI------- I,.~/I ~., ROAD !\IIAL '{S:S SUB- TASK TlTLERECIPIENT COpy 113 i1/4 -+1----------1\ I I I/v IOG1IHP"C J ASSESSI~ENT AND :'1!T1 GA TI all PLANNING J- CK TITLE~,, )5 SOCIO-1;0 7.11 vJILDLlFE )J ECONOMIC til I ECOLOGY IZANALYSIS-FURBEARERS113I n /4-/4- I ;(,1<) Iq 1.>5' /9 /9 2/2/ 2&2Z J5 CULTURAL 9 7.11 WILDLIFE q RESOURCES /0 ECOLOGY -/0INVESTI-BIG GAME GATIONS !Z IMPACT .2-- 14-ASSESSMENT /3ANDMITI- J)GATTON Ir' /&-PLANNING /~ /'7 17 /8 /8 1'7 /9 G7 LAND USE /0 7.n ~IILDLI FE II ANALYSIS II ECOLOGY -/z !8IRDS AND I)e..NON-GAME /4-I /1-I MAMMALS /0 I~17 11 ~/9 i 21 12 Z, )8 RECREATION I/O 7.12 PLANT /3 PLANNING /2.ECOLOGY Hfl1/3 /4- /~\~i I/C; /7 If~1)/8 i2~I I I;0 FISH tCOl-//I 7.14 ,~,CC2SS ' .S--i tt -,.... I 1 r t [/fa i-,! ,;7 !!~---------I i Ie,i t \/')'!I i ....3 ;!..;..! , f?r:~/.,../;~l)/-j~>'I'-?'~'4r ,- ...... I - (:,.~.~~ ~;~df "-':".;I V E 011'-1..1- OC1 30 1980 'IJ-b..SKA POWel<Au~{-',ORITY October 23,1980 ."""'. -, - .- (! ...... -I ~I;; r'" I Susitna Hydroelectric Project Meeting with Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee Dear Member of the Susitna Steering Committee: A meeting has been arranged for the afternoon of November 5,1980 where we will have an opportunity to discuss 50me of the preliminary aspects of our planning studies.To promote as productive a meeting as possible, I have enclosed information we have developed to date.As this information is in a preliminary form I expect that some inconsistency exists. However,I feel your input can be best utilized at this early stage when concerns and recorrmendations can be easily incorporated. I encourage your constructive criticism and would appreciate it if you would jot your ideas down on the enclosed forms prior to our meeting. I look forward to seeing you on November 5. Si ncerely,/2:/fJ ~,'ifj,///.r;.......'-':.;'~.~.__'::':'7~a//J:-v '~c-'~.j..--- Kevin YoungV G Environmental Coordinator ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED C.J113U~~lng -E:1g1ne'ers 7:ie :_laert'i Sank 8u;laH~g.0,t~l.!n at Court Sui!alo.New Yo-rk "14202 -~u&~'~@~ DIVISION OF RESEARCH &DEVELOPMEfIfT November 21,1980 fa / /fA r £HAI/IIIII/D,GOVEII/D. /323 E.4TH A VENUE ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 279-5577 Eric Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 W.4th Avenue,Suite 31 Anchorage,AK 99501 Dear Mr.Yould: ru::'C2IVED 1!('\/2~.1980\,u·. ~ \ The purpose of this letter is to provide you with the Susitna Hydro Steering Committee review comments regarding the procedures manuals which dBscribe the Task 7 studies being done under the contract between APA and Acres American.As you know the Susitna Hydro Steering Committee is composed of representatives from state and federal agencies and the University of Alaska.Function of this committee is to provide co~rdinated exchanges of information between APA and the interested resource management agencies. The Steering Committee met with representatives from Acres American and its subcontractors on July 17 and 18,1980.The purpose of this meeting was to review the environmental studies portion of the contract with Acres American and their subcontractors.It soon became apparent that the subcontractors were unable to provide the Steering Committee members with an adequate level of detail concerning the scope and methodology which would be used to carry these studies out.The Acres American representative stated that the level of detail that we were looking for would be found in their yet to be published procedures manuals.We agreed that it would be appropriate for Acres American to provide copies of these procedures manuals to members of the Steering Committee for their review and comments.The following procedures manuals were provided by Acres American for our review: Suhtask 7.05 Socioeconomic Analysis Subtask 7.06 Cultural Resources Investigation Suhtask 7.07 Land Use Analysis Subtask 7.08 Recreation Planning -r Subtask 7.10 Fish Ecology Impact Assessment and Mitigation Planning Eric Yould 2 Ncalmber 21,1920 - - Subtask 7.11 Wildlife Ecology (Big Game Impact Assessment and Mitigation Planning,Fur Bearers,and Birds and Non-Game Mammals) Subtask 7.12 Plant Ecology Subtask 7.14 Access Road Analysis The following agencies were provided copies of the procedures manuals and have responded with review comments:Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation,Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Alaska Department of Natural Resources.U.S.Geological Survey,National Marine Fishery Service,Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service,U.S.Fish and Wild life Service.and the Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center.The following is a synthesis of the comments from these agencies.Appended to this letter are copies of the written comments which were received from those agencies identified above. SUBTASK 7.05 SOCIOECONOMIC ANALYSIS Review of the procedures manuals indicates that this study may not address the indirect but highly significant impact of construction and operation of the project on residents living in the region.The boom that occurred during the construction of the Trans-Alaska Oil Pipeline (TAPS)gives us an insight into the sorts of impacts that may be expected.For example,traffic congestion,strip development of small communities,stores out of necessary goods and materials because of accelerated demand by construction.In order that the socioeconomic impact studies may be more comprehensive and address these sorts of impacts we make the following seven recommendations: 1.Local and regional recreational facilities and opportunities should be assessed to determine the ability of those facilities to handle additional users in light of increased demand. 2.The study should address the probability of additional industrialization of the region as a result of power from the project.Then the study needs to assess the impacts and socioecomomic implications of industrialization scenarios that would be driven by this project. 3.The study should address the cost and availability of products and services.This should also address the inflationary impacts that are usually associated with a boom type cyclical expansion such as construction of a project of this magnitude may cause. 4.The study should address the cultural opportunities and how they may be affected in both positive and negative ways by the proposed project. Eric Yould 3 '\ N~~mber 21,1980 5. 6. 7. The study needs to address the implications of the project on a composition of the people who live in the region.An obvious first step would be to establish baseline survey data in the preconstruction era so that we know what the population composition is in this area before construction begins. An assessment of the changes in the sociopolitical structure of the region that could be expected result from the change in the economy as a result of construction an operation and subsequent developments that would be driven by this project. The analysis does not address the impacts of ,the project on users of fish and wildlife resources.I refer you here specifically to memos included in the Department of Fish and Game review submittal which indicate that Acres and others deemed it inappropriate for the Department of Fish and Game to carry these studies out. However,in our review of all the studies identified above we find that neither Acres American nor any of other of the sub- contractors have included this important issue in their plan of work.The scope of the analysis does not include any work designed to mitigate the project impacts on fish and wildlife. ~ I _. SUBTASK 7.06 CULTURAL RESOURCES INVESTIGATION Although this study was not formatted or laid out in a way similar to the others the review comments indicate that the approach in the scope and methodology proposed is appropriate and sufficient for the task at hand. SUBTASK 7.07 LAND USE ANALYSIS Tne following comments were made: 1. 2. 3. The scope of the land use analysis needs to be expanded so that the downstream impacts all the way to salt water are adequately addressed.As an example of a downstream impact YJhich is not included but needs to be addressed is the issue of navigability on the Susitna River below the proposed dam. There is no apparent linkage or coordination between the land use analysis and the socioeconomic and recreational studies. APA should seriously reconsider the decision that has been made to delay future land use analysis.The contractors state that data from other disciplines may be needed to "fine tune"this study.However,we can assume most of these values or issues and get on with one of the most critical studies that could prOVide data to be used in making the decision as to whether Susitna should be built or not.It is recommended that APA consider the use of scenarios to describe future land use with and without the project. - A recommended way to begin addressing downstream impacts is to become informed about the work currently being done in this area by local~state.and federal agencies.This will help to eliminate any duplication of work.Once APA is aware of what studies agencies have done the APA contractors can be tasked to synthesize the existing studies and complete only additional studies needed to complete the scenarios. Eric Yould 4 NJilmber 2l~1980 SUBTASK 7.08 RECREATION PLANNING Scope of the recreation planning appears to be incomplete.The total thrust of the study appears to focus on recreational opportunities in the impoundment area with the obvious underlying assumption that Susitna Dam will be built.What is absent is any sort of assessment of the proposed project impacts on existing recreation navigation and land use in the river valley above.within,and below the proposed project.There is no question that we have to carefully plan for reservoir recreation development assuming there is a project.It is also obvious that the compelling need that needs to be met today is a valid and accurate determination of existing recreational values so that this decision can be factored into the ultimate decision as to whether Susitna should be built or not.An equally important result would be identification of those values for mitigation which will be required if the project is built. 2.This study needs to include a documentation of the flowing water resources and uses that would be impacted by the project. 3.This study needs to document the existing upstream uses of Susitna. SUBTASK 7.10 FISH ECOLOGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION PLANNING-! - 1. 2. It is acknowledged that none of the reviewers had a comprehensive picture of how this task will be carried out.The reason is the Department of Fish and Game will be actually doing much of this work as a subcontractor to Acres American and has not had the staff or the resources necessary to put together its procedures manual for this facet of the work.The comments given below should be qualified with acknowledgement of this fact. The-.contractors need to broaden their scope of mitigation concepts th8.are included in the studies.There are other options available for mitigation planning above and beyond what is included in the procedures manual as it is now ~rritten.I refer you to the detailed comments made by ADF&G. 3.We recommend that an assessment of effectiveness of mitigation used on other projects to reduce impacts also be studied before we determine what sorts of mitigation techniques will be applied to the proposed Susitna project.The reason for recommending this is to enhance the probability that the mitigation ~ve apply to the Susitna project will be successful. Table 2 should be amended to identify the issue of the effect of the project on rearing.fish passage and egg incubation in the Susitna River from its mouth upstream to the proposed darn site. Eric YouId 4. 5 ;\ N~mber 21,1980 '"""I 5.The mitigation alternatives should include a cost benefit analysis in phase 2. 6.There is a lack of adequate participation by resource management agencies in the impact assessment or mitigation planning as proposed in this procedures manual. SUBTASK 7.11 WILDLIFE ECOLOGY 7.The water quality subtask within this study needs further review regarding the extent of data required and details about timing of the data collection. -A.Big Game Assessment and Mitigation Planning 1.This study does not describe the methodology that will be used for assessing impacts to be mitigated.The procedures manual discussion of formation of a mitigation team and a series of meetings and conferences as a methodology is inadequate. - ~I 2.The scope of mitigation concepts needs to be broadened in this study.The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) defines mitigation in five different ways: a.Avoiding impact all together by not taking a certain action of parts ~f an action. b. c. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation. Rectifiying the impact by repairing,rehabilitating,or restoring the effected environment. d.Reducing or limiting the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action. e.Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources for environments. Since the Sustina project will be subject to an environmental impact statement the Alaska Power Authority should assure that the contractors preparing the application adequately address all aspects of mitigation in order that the submittal will be adequate for the E.l.S. - -.;,;,~"" ""he' d'-'~' Eric You,ld 6 No~mber 21,1980 r r- I i; B.Wildlife Ecology -Fur Bearers 1.Scope of these studies needs to be ext ended'to sal t wa te r. The reason is the proposed Susitnahydropower project will have impacts all the way to salt water. 2.This manual does not acknowledge the need for mitigation for these living resources.It is recommended that the procedures manual be revised to reflect the need for mitigation for fur bearers. 3.The manual describes surveys which will be done only in the winter.The seasonality of this approach will result in certain data biases and lack of data for the intervening months. 4.The studies state that radio collaring of animals will be done.How will the radio collar data be used? C.Wildlife Ecology -Birds and Non-game Mammals 1.The scope of these studies needs to extend to salt water. 2.The procedures manual fails to acknowledge the need for mitigation of birds and non-game animals.It is recommended that the procedures manuals be revised to reflect this need. General comments on wildlife ecology procedures manuals. There is a compelling need to integrate the \yildlife and the plant ecology studies so that the end results are meaningful and useful to the decisions which will be made.Each of these study elements should apply appropriate quantitative methodologies to evaluate animal habitats.The methodology used may depend on the characteristics of the species or group of species they are dealing with.Whatever method is adopted,it must be biologically justifiable and provide a relative estimate of the habitat value per area unit for the study area. SUBTASK 7.12 PLANT ECOLOGY The scope of these studies needs to be expanded from the dam site all the way to salt water.The reason for this is that construction and operation of the dam will impact vegetation to that extent. 2.There needs to be a high level of integration and coordination between the plant ecology,hydrology,and the wildlife impact assessment studies.This is because a great part of the wildlife impact mitigation will be based on vegetation. The definition of wetlands used for classifying habitats should be compatible with data already collected in the Susltna Basin by the cooperative study underway with ONR,ADF&G,and SCS.We recommend that the classification system developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and described in "Classification of Hetlands and Deep Water Habitats of the United States"(FWS/OBS79/31) be considered as the wetland classification for these studies. Eric Yould 3. 7 ~~mber 21,1980 SUBTASK 7.14 ACCESS ROAD ANALYSIS 1. 2. 3. The analysis of alternatives does not indicate whether stream crossings will be reviewed to determine extent of icing and adverse environmental impact as a result of crossing these streams. Stream crossing and structures should be designed to avoid creating icing and erosion problems. This analysis should include assessing the effects of an increase in fishing due to newly opened road access as part of its scope of work. There is an obvious linkage between access roads for this project and land use/fish and wildlife studies.Review of the manuals does not indicate that the appropriate process or mechanism is in place to see that this occurs. - GENERAL COMMENTS It is the consensus of the Steering Committee that each study task procedures manual should include two maps: 1.A map that delineates the boundaries of the specific study tasks described in the respective manual. 2.A second map delineating the overall study area,ie from the mouth of the Susitna River to the Denali Highway. SUMMARY In conclusion,the above comments should be considered as summary comments designed to flag the most significant and compelling issues which require correction or rectification in order to assure that the procedures and approaches used in the studies will yield the answers necessary to make the most informed and best decision regarding the proposed Susitna project.The Steering Committee members believe the most compelling need is for a well-conceived process to improve the linkage and coordination of the various studies.This is particularly true in several of these studies where one element is dependent upon findings of other studies.An example is the need for fisheries impact mitigation to be built upon the assessment of the existing fishery resources and the instream flOW/hydrology studies.The recognition of the sequential nature of this process is lacking in the procedures manuals reviewed. ;j Eric Yould 8 Nflmber 21,1980 -" r I (j. l ~ .~~. "J He also would like to emphasize the importance of the relationship between the ultimate design of the procedural manuals and a particular study product;that product being identification of and development of mitigation measures for the human and natural resources being studied. We have recommended several times above that mitigation be added or broadened in scope on a resource by resource basis.This concern is based on our collective experience in assessing the adequacy of the mitigative features of countless environmental statements;they are often very weak in this critical area.As the mitigation efforts may be a key to assessing the feasibility of this project and a key to the success of the environmental statement that may follow,we urge you to integrate Ilmitigation"into all systems designed to assess human and natural resource impacts. Sincerely, ru~ Al Carson Chairman Susitna Hydro Steering Committee cc:Steering Committee Members Reed Stoops MEMORANtbUM TO SUSITNA HYDRO ELECTRIC STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS (See Distribution List) QL FROM:Al CARSON Steering Committee Chairman Stat'of Alaska DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF RESEARCH &DEVELOPMENT DATE:October 29,1980 FILE NO: TELEPHONE NO: SUBJECT November 5,1980 Meet;ng !"""!\,' )1 There wi11 be a meeting of the Steering Committee at 8:30 A.M.on Wednesday,"""', November 5,1980 at the University of Alaska Anchorage Campus Center Executive Conference Room.The Campus Center is located approximately 3 blocks east of the corner of 36th Avenue and Lake Otis off Providence. Attached is a sketch showing the location of the conference room on the lower level. The purpose of this meeting is: (1)To finalize Steering Committee review comments on the procedures manuals used by ACRES and their contractors. (2)To comment upon ACRES approach to identification of power alternatives in the rail belt.Attached please find a packet of information for your review before the meeting. (3)To identify any other tasks or actions that the members of the steering committee wish. The 8:30 A.M.to Noon session will be devoted to items 1 and 3.The 1:00 to 5:00 P.M.session will address item 2. Please give this meeting your highest priority for 11/5/80.Your partic- ipation is vital if our effort is to be successful. DISTRIBUTION LIST ~ Don McKay U.S.Fish &Wildlife Service 733 W.4th Ave.,Suite 101 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Tom Trent AK Dept.of Fish &Game 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502 John Rego Bureau of Land Management Anchorage District Office 4700 E.72nd Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99502 02 ·00 1 A(Rev.l 0/79) OCT 30 1980 f~SKA POWER AU1HUkifY "","", -- - r i "SUSITNA HYDRO ELECTRIC STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS DISTRIBUTION LIST CONTINUED Bob Lamke U.S.Geological Survey Water Resources 733 W.4th Ave.,Suite 400 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Bill Wilson or Chuck Evans Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center (U of A) 707 "A"Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dave Sturdevant Dept.of Environmental Conservation Pouch liD" Juneau,Alaska 99811 Larry viright or Bill Welch Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service 1011 E.Tudor Rdad,Suite 297 Anchorage,Alaska 99503 Brad Smith or Ron 'Morris National Marine Fisheries Service 701 "e'Street,Box 43 Anchorage,Alaska 99513 Attachments bee:R.Stoops -R&D O.Wozniak -A.P.A. October 29,1980 Page 2 "]1 '-1 .~l ]._']·1 J,'·1 -····1 1 1 ) rj 1'''<VT'Y<l~~;EL«:, STlJO€N T CON"::":j MEC~AN leAL-READING ROOM ROOMt.OUN be I IJ -ifl d =------r '\\J~, .'"~~'" ,Q....l':'€!1' •PuB lIIJlI o lo<IT'-'llE N 4J r~ CE) rAn,·. t;VVIQubf" RAMP ... III Z E~==:l:t ~ ~. ZUGI Providence Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99504 t IJt I I II ) HANI/Ic:.AP AC<:.j;;:i> DooR ,~(!t!t~~'_ CAMPUS CENTER L Idel'lIulle;26J-1216 .LOWER LEVfL l ;.~:'.".;.~ APA /l /I! /l Drr}c- l /J I=:'!t"c,---/ AOICf-6 ~fJJV f\ CE)Yhm:~~ AA. ~;i-J:~ t/5GS-t1uek~ ADK -SNU /lefs \, "2 I G -7C4-/ 27;-7&,j2- J'Ii-o s '// ,;27#-3c.2 ( 3 i (L/-QS4'( )1<:t-S5i1 II '2.1 {-Soo G '2.76 -~~.z g ..341-5t;f;/ B.'ftf -'166/ J 6)-.L/:~::/.' ((((((.((C C ((c (,.c c c( W'1 ~v-o ~tt~';"J Ji/S/8o ~It ~b¢)""-~r I. 'Z7(-f/38 4b~-2..b ~L. J ~?-I'" DA"-t II>bNo-z..I,i J ~L l3r [//£/;?)jr'!J~;?D /!4~1 SC /f/Je/A,... n .', 'I/;/..J -:Lllv0-- C'h,fI5tOFf.-IC{{,E's TE::': A(Lt\v"So~ ,,-,~,-~,,:.',.,. ",." .-,.. rg~e~~itq~ .e£.".,tii&JikS..Ha 1 2&&&£ ,~~;c ..'.':~"-- .. ,e November 14,1980 P5700.11 .74 T.546 Mr.Al Carson Cha i nnan,Sus i tna Hydro Steeri ng Commi ttee Department of Natural Resources 619 Warehouse Drive Sui te 210 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Al:Susi tna Hydroel ectric Project Steering Committee Review of Potential Hydroelectric Development Sites Thank you for the opportunity of meeting with the Steering Committee on November 5,1980.I personally found it disappointing that my objective of establishing a workshop atmosphere where the members of_ the Steering Committee could have a positive input into our selection of candidate hydro sites did not materialize.However,I realize that our objectives for this component of the Susitna studies may not have been adequately explained.In this regard I have attached a further explanation of our objectives as prepared by Robert Mohn of APA. I have accepted your suggestion that the most efficient means of obtaining input from the Steeri ng Committee is to 1)i denti fy in-house the short list of candidate sites we propose for further study;2)present this list to the Steering Committee for review and comment,and 3)incorporate these comments into our final selection and review. Presented on Table 1 is our short list of candidate sites proposed for further study.As mentioned on November 5 it is essential for planning purposes to retain 4-6 sites within each of the size categories listed. These sites were selected from the list presented on Table 2.Table 2 represents sites that have passed through our rough economic and environmental screening.Although I realize that the Steering Committee disagreed with our rough screening criteria it is my opinion that using this criteria allowed us to eliminate the least environmentally acceptable schemes. ~~~'::'':''.~""....':~~.: -' .:.:.:~..'..~"." -..~.~'".",."~,.~,.-~::~-:::.."0-': ..., -' Mr.Al Carson Chairman,Susitna Hydro Steering Committee November 14,1980 page 2 - r I would appreciate recelvlng the Steering Comnittee1s review and corrments on the sites presented in Table 1.If for any reason you find that any of these sites are totally unacceptable,I request that you recommend a replacement of similar size from the sites listed in Table 2.This replacement is essential so that we can retain 4-6 candidate sites in each size category.Information relating to location and design para- meters for each site was included in the infonnation packets distributed prior to our November 5 meeting. Trusting this approach meets with your approval. Coordinator KRY/jmh Attachments ALASKA POWER AUTIIORITY MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Susitna Steering Committee Members -~/Robert A.Mohn /v·Y:o/ Director of Engineering Alaska Power Authority DATE: SUBJECT: November 25,1980 Environmental screening of hydroelectric sites -, There has been some measure of frustration and disappointment on all sides associated with the attempt by Acres American to solicit input from the Steering Committee at the committee's last meeting.It seems to me that an important factor in the lack of success may stem from misunderstanding or uncertainty about this exercise in relation to an "a lternatives studyll. As you probably remember,the original Acres plan of study (POS)called for a study of alternatives to Susitna as the primary element of Task 1.Information about alternatives was to be developed,a screening mechanism was to be employed to narrow the range of acceptable opti ons,and the Sus i tna project was to be compared against the preferred alternative.This work was to be conducted in parallel with the detailed studies of the Susitna project,and its goal was to formulate several optimized "without Susitna ll plans.In other words,Task 1 was meant to be a thorough search for a plan that would be preferable to Susitna development.. The Power Authority requested supplemental funding to adequately fund Task 1 after some early criticism of the funding level and study scope.The requested $1.3 million was appropriated but with the caveat that the alternatives study would be performed by someone other than Acres.The Governor's 4-person policy review committee (Ulmer,Lehr,Quinlan and Conway)selected Battelle to do the work. The elimination of Task 1 from our study plan left a significant hole. This was the case because information that was to be developed in Task 1 was critical to the formulation of the preferred Susitna basin development plan and to the economic evaluation of the Susitna plan.River basin planners cannot formulate an optimal Susitna plan without knowing what the remainder of the Railbelt power system components are likely to be,and the economic analysts cannot evaluate benefits and costs without having a II without Susitna ll plan to compare to. So,the Power Authority and Acres responded to the termination of Task 1 by augmenting the design development work in Task 6~This permitted .the Susitna study to stay on track by incorporating that portion of Task 1 needed for Susitna plan formulation.The objective of this work is not to formulate an optimal set of alternatives;that is being done by Battelle.Instead the purpose is to gather information about likely components of a future Railbelt power system as a frame of reference for Susitna project formulation. J j - I"I!I!l, r ....... ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY MEMORANDUM TO:Susitna Steering Committee Members DATE:November 25,1980 It is in this gathering of information about likely system components and in establishing the frame of reference that your assistance has been sought.To reiterate,the exercise is in support of Susitna project formulation;it is not meant to replace the Battelle alternatives study or be the final word on alter- natives. •ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY November 25,1980 John D.La\'Jrence Project ~fanager Acres American.Inc. 900 Liberty Bank Building Hain at Court Buffalo.New York 14202 Attn;Mr.Kevin Young Dear Kevin; Reference is made to your letter of November 14.1980 to the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Steering Committee about hydro sites. We concur with your approach of corresponding directly with Mr.Carson. He will both distribute the listing and collate any findings thereto. l'k.~fohn prepared the additional explanation of the task 6.32-$.36 objectives and it was forwarded to the Steering Co~m1ttes with your letter.lam attaching a copy of that explanation to your files.If Nr.Carson chooses to respond directly to you it would be appreciated if you would provide us with copies of his responses. Sincerely. David Wozniak Project Engineer Attachments:As stated cc:J.Gill CONCUR: RM1 - - -Ii .J -I - ALASKA pm~ER AUTHOR ITY ~ii .. November 26,1980 ~1r.Al Carson State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources 323 E.4th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Al: Thank you for your efforts in pulling together the Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee review of the Task 7 Procedures Manuals.I have formally fOr'darded "'he comnents to Acres American,Inc.,""ith instructions to act prompt- lyon the h~co!llJ1endations.I anticipate the vast majority It/ill be considered by the end of the year,with the remainder addressed shortly thereafter.I am planning on giving a report on their disposition at the next convening of the committee,which lam assuming will be in February,1981. r- I Once again,thanks to you and your coomittee members~ Sincerely, FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR David Hozn;ak Project Engineer cc:Don HcKay U.S.Fi sh &Wi ldlife Service 733 yL 4th Ave.,Suite 101 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Tom TrentrAlaskaDepartment of Fish &Game I 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502 1'. John Rega Bureau of Land Management Anchorage District Office 4700 E.72nd Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99502 Bob LCL'nke U.S.Geological Survey Hater Resources 733 W.4th Ave ••Suite 400 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Bill Wilson or ChUCK Evans Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center (U of A) 707 leAn Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 CONCUR RM1 Mr.fl.1 Carson November 26~1980 Page 2 Dave Sturdevant Department of Environ~ental Conservation Pouch lIOIl JWleau~Alaska 99811 larry Wright or Bill Welch Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service 1011 E.Tudor Road,Suite 297 Anchorage,Alaska 99503 Brad Smith or Ron Harris National Marine Fisheries Studies 701 "C li Street,Box 43 Anchorages Alaska 99513 -, II!O!IIl I .~ ALASKA,POWER AUTHORITY r November 26,1980 ,Nr ~John Lawrence Attn:Kevin Young Acres Jtrnerican •Inc. 900 Liberty Bank Building f<'ain @ Court Buffalo,New York 14202 Dear Kevin~ Attached is the finished version of the Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Com- mittee findings to the Task 7 Procedures Manuals.Awork1ng draft was presented to us during the November 5,1980 meeting;this version incorporates ccmnents made at that meeting.AS you will see,it differs from that \'rorfdng draft in minor detail only.Also attached are agency source documents~resources previously un- available to us. r As I surrmarized to the Steering Committee at the flovember 5 meeting,the POv-ler Authority considers the majority of the comments to be reasonable~help- ful.and worthyof immediate incorporation.He accordingly solicit your posi- tive approach to accorr.modation of the Steering committee comments and rec~~end ations. I suggest we very quickly address the acceptable recommendations and then move on to focus our energies on those that require detailed evaluation.To insure we are in agreements I suggest you advise us on a point by point basis those comments you reco:nmend a.ccepting,'tiith narrative as to method of incorporation.In separate correspondence~advise us of those CrnTh~nts for which you have reservations~and your recc.'1lffiendations thereto.In view of the fact that we have been privy to the- SteelAing Correnittee thinking since early November,you should be able to do this \'tel1 before the Christmas Ho11days.Such a timetable \'i111 hopefully facil Hate early resolution of all the comments in time for a report to the Steering COirnnit- tee at their next convening. r'Sincerely, FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR RAM CONCUR Da'/;d Hozn1 ak Project Engineer Attachment:As noted cc:J.Haydel.-Acres Buffalo wlo attachment J.Gill.Acres.Anchorage.w/o atta.chment A.Carson,Department of Natural ~esources~Anchorage,wlo attachment Hark Robinson.FERC,.825 N.Capitol St..,NE,Washington,o.C.20426 MFR:Next convening tentatively scheduled for Februrary,1981. r- t I r-- II,- ........ I't . ~ I I r ..I I DE~'IIT~IENT 0 ..'NATUR.~I~RESOURC~S , !'-- ..-"::i ;:''';~~.~~L.=: / i JAr.t HAIlMoItO.&0'1£1110' ! Ij, /323 E.4TH A VENUE DIVISION OF RESEARCH &DEVELOPMENT j ANCHORAGE.ALASKA 99501 279-5577 December 11,1980 ( Don McKay U.S.Fish &Wildlife Service 733 W.4th Ave.,Suite 101 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.McKay: Enclosures Sincerely, cc:Eric Yould -A.P.A. Kevin Young -ACRES Al Carson,Chairman Susitna Hydro Steering Committee Enclosed please find a 11/14/80 letter from Kevin Young of Acres American concerning review of potential hydroelectric sites.You will recall that we discussed this with Mr.Young during our afternoon session on November 5,1980.~ There is al so a memorandum from Robert Mohn of the Al aska Power Authpri\t;'S~hfl3iM!R-.ij describes why A.P.A.has contracted ACRES to do this task.I A:':THMfTY,/'- ;SUS/TNA '~I Please review the documents as explained in Mr.Young's letter and ~;;;~~-;S7~O 't: your comments to me either in writing or by phone by December 31,19;80.-.'.L\.74,.,'1'''1 ~~,!.i)~i,:;.~i;:·i:io~·"! ./-:"./~, -...~.~""1"--""."-"""-"-~ "I 'I~'~'··:f~t~!I". r '.-:;...';..::)_!-:~;'::g I ~:" I i-i-cc:-.:;!i-.;...·j~ :~./.\!~·.~.!-.o>.-..I .••. '..:~~ji' , .!'--I'~ !;x.c.:..:'-':i '/If':'" !--.-"-.~'1- :.'"'C ;";:-:L=':)j)-<"...'..--'.''-"_.q.!.~_.@-.','..'.;.l.'!dl?J1 ---,'.:;-~':<_.:...J..', ..3 ;.:'~~r-;i( ~;-~:~~i ;/.'!. -.-:---..----~ ;I !\4 ~\j I 1-;-;-U-;,lT;"-;,,-ix2-:':-:~':"iJ1f1:~,--,-·~g.Y.i Ir-:'3-':_~4.:~s~!t;j?~f ig~,!_.i !-1;..."O:....'fi~_.Li'11~· ;-;-,:-1-1 ) ___-.-:._;_~_;I J)EP~'RTlnENT 0 ..'NATURAI~R~SOURCES -..-_....,-.-...---, .t Ii.r " ...- - .'I' i :~ ,.'--"....'-'.'!,, -.--....,...J.~n ,'~,i,J\ ;-.;_~~~:_,.~:.\:,U\~~~ I /, I JAr So HAMI/OND.GDrlINO'I ! I, DIVISION OF RESEARCH &DEVELOPMENT ;'i December 11,1980 Tom Trent AK Department of Fish &Game 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,Alaska 99502 Dear Mr.Trent: 323 E.4TH A VENUE ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 279 ..5577 I~! -, Enclosed please find a 11/14/80 letter from Kevin Young of Acres American concerning review of potential hydroelectric sites.You will recall that we discussed this with Mr.Young during our afternoon session on November 5,1980. There is also a memorandum from Robert Mohn of the Alaska Power Authority which describes why A.P.A.has contracted ACRES to do this task. Please review the documents as explained in Mr.Yo.ung1s letter and forward your comments to me either in writing or by phone by December 31,1980. Sincerely, ~~ Al Carson,Chairman Susitna Hydro Steering Committee Enclosures cc:Eric Yould -A.P.A. Kevin Young -ACRES 323 E.4TH A VENUE ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 ...i I DHPAHT~'ENT 0 ..'NATURAl..R":SOURCES DIVISION OF RESEARCH &DEVELOPMENT !: / / i / 1 ! I, i i JA r .t HAIIMOIIO,SOrclIlO' c December 11,1980 John Rego Bureau of Land Management Anchorage District Office 4700 E.72nd Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99502 Dear Mr.Rego: Enclosed please find a 11/14/80 letter from Kevin Young of Acres American concerning review of potential hydroelectric sites.You will recall that we discussed this with Mr.Young during our afternoon session on November 5,1980. There is also a memorandum from Robert Mohn of the Alaska Power Authority which describes why A.P.A.has contracted ACRES to do this task. Please review the documents as explained in Mr.Young1s letter and forward your comments to me either in writing or by phone by December 31,1980. Sincerely, QQ~ Al Carson,Chairman Susitna Hydro Steering Committee Enclosures cc:Eric Yould -A.P.A. Kevin Young -ACRES I r ItEPl\.IlTlt-IENTO ..·NATURAl..Rt:SOURCES DIVISION OF RESEARCH &DEVELOPMENT December 11,1980 Bob Lamke U.S.Geological Survey Water Resources 733 W.4th Ave.,Suite 400 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Lamke: ! I /JAY.s:HAMMDItD.GOYE'ItOl /323 e.4TH A VENUEjANCHORAGE.ALASKA 99507 279-5577 Enclosed please find a 11/14/80 letter from Kevin Young of Acres American concerning review of potential hydroelectric sites.You will recall that we discussed this with Mr.Young during our afternoon session on November 5,1980. There is also a memorandum from Robert Mohn of the Alaska Power Authority which describes why A.P.A.has contracted ACRES to do this task. Please review the documents as explained in Mr.Young1s letter and forward your comments to me either in writing or by phone by December 31,1980. Sincerely, (}l~ Al Carson,Chairman Susitna Hydro Steering Committee Enclosures cc:Eric Yould -A.P.A. Kevin Young -ACRES J)EI·~\.IlT~IENT 0.'NATURAl..RESOURCES / /JAr.t HAMMOND.SOVEINO' j / i /323 E.4TH A VENUE DIVISION OF RESEARCH &DEVELOPMENT!ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 279-5577 December 11,1980 Bill Wilson or Chuck Evans Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center (U of A) 707 "A II Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Messrs.Wilson &Evans: Enclosed please find a 11/14/80 letter from Kevin Young of Acres American concerning review of potential hydroelectric sites.You will recall that we discussed this with Mr.Young during our afternoon session on November 5,1980. There is also a memorandum from Robert Mohn of the Alaska Power Authority which describes why A.P .A.has contracted ACRES to do this task. Please review the documents'as explained in Mr.Young's letter and forward your comments to me either in writing or by phone by December 31,1980. Sincerely, ~~ Al Carson,Chairman Susitna Hydro Steering Committee Enclosures cc:Eric Yould -A.P.A. Kevin Young -ACRES - -I 1"'1'\ I JAr .t HAMMDltD.GDYEINO' -I r UHPAHTIUENT 0 ..'NATURAl..RESOURCES DIVISION OF RESEARCH &DEVELOPMENT December 11,1980 Dave Sturdevant Department of Environmental .Conservation Pouch 110" Juneau,Alaska 99811 Dear Mr.Sturdevant: ! i j / ! ,/ I 323 E.4TH A VENUE I ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 279-5577 Enclosed please find a 11/14/80 letter from Kevin Young of Acres American concerning review of potential hydroelectric sites.You will recall that we discussed this with Mr.Young during our afternoon session on November 5~1980. There is also a memorandum from Robert Mohn of the Alaska Power Authority which describes why A.P.A.has contracted ACRES to do this task. Please review the documents as explained in Mr.Young's letter and forward your comments to me either in writing or by phone by December 31,1980. Sincerely, CU·~ ~Al Carson,Chairman Susitna Hydro Steering Committee Enclosures cc:Eric Yould -A.P.A. r-Kevi n Young -ACRES C' DIVISION OF RESEARCH &DEVELOPMENT December 11,1980 Larry Wright or Bill Welch Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service 1011 E.Tudor Road,Suite 297 Anchorage,Alaska 99503 !t J JA r .£HAMMOND.SO'IE'ItO'i , /323 E.4TH AVENUE ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 279-5577 ..... Dear Messrs.Wright &Welch: Enclosed please find a 11/14/80 letter from Kevin Young of Acres American concerning review of potential hydroelectric sites.You will recall that we discussed this with Mr.Young during our afternoon session on November 5,1980. There is also a memorandum from Robert Mohn of the Alaska Power Authority which describes why A.P.A.has contracted ACRES to do this task. Please review the documents as explained in Mr.Young's letter and forward your comments to me either in writing or by phone by December 31,1980. Sincerely, Oi~ Al Carson,Chairman Susitna Hydro Steering Committee Enclosures cc:Eric Yould -A.P.A. Kevin Young -ACRES ,. DIVISION OF RESEARCH &DEVELOPMENT f)HI~\11T~.ENT 0 ..'NATURAl..R.:SOURCES r f\n-I~.,<:::J ;~if ~ I ;.\j I !!\,\\!j'((;'\' •,\,!'i"\'"',.\.,J f.J \j ~;~..•..\~-\f·-!-\ uul5Lt-U0 UUUu .i 1!JAY S.HAMMOND.GDYEINO' /323 E.4TH A VENUEIANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 279-5577 December 11,1980 Brad Smith or Ron Morris National Marine Fisheries Service 701 lie"Stree-t,Box 43 Anchorage,Alaska 99513 Dear Messrs.Smith &Morris: Enclosed please find a 11/14/80 letter from Kevin Young of Acres American concerning review of potential hydroelectric sites.You will recall that we discussed this with Mr.Young during our afternoon session on November 5,1980. There is also a memorandum from Robert Mohn of the Alaska Power Authority which describes why A.P.A.has contracted ACRES to do this task. Please review the documents as explained in Mr.Young1s letter and forward your comments to me either in writing or by phone by December 31,1980. Sincerely, ~~ Al Carson,Chairman Susitna Hydro Steering Committee Enclosures cc:Eric Yould -A.P.A. Kevin Young -ACRES ...~..; .,-'~ ..::1 .•;~~.,.....;..U.-----. November 14,1980 P5700.11 .74 T.546 c Mr.A1 Carson Chairman,Susitna Hydro Steering Committee Department of Natural Resources 619 Warehouse Dri ve Sui te 210 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear A1:Susitna Hydroelectric Project Steering Committee Review of Potential Hydroelectric Development Sites - Thank you for the opportuni ty of meeti ng wi th the Steeri ng Comm;ttee on November 5,1980.I personally found it disappointing that my objective of establishing a workshop atmosphere where the members of. the Steering Committee could have a positive input into our selection of candidate hydro sites did not materialize.However,I realize that our objectives for this component of the Susitna studies may not have been adequately explained.In this regard I have attached a further explanation of our objectives as prepared by Robert Mohn of ~ APA. I have accepted your suggestion that the most efficient means of obtaining ~ input from the Steering Committee is to 1)identify in-house the short list of candidate sites we propose for further study;2)present this list to the Steering Committee for review and comment,and 3)incorporate these comments into our final selection and review. Presented on Table 1 is our short list of candidate sites proposed for further study.As mentioned on November 5 it is essential for planning ~, purposes to retain 4-6 sites within each of the size categories listed. These sites were selected from the list presented on Table 2.Table 2 represents sites that have passed through our r.ough economic and environmental screening.Although I realize that the Steering Committee disagreed with our rough screening criteria it is my opinion that using this criteria allowed us to eliminate the least environmentally acceptable schemes. -:-';.,..;"~.:..":.' ':'....:.," I~••n "-.:,"... ::--;,,;"_.- ~...'4 Mr.Al Carson Chainnan,Susitna Hydro Steering Committee November 14,1980 page 2 -It,.... I would appreciate recelvlng the Steering Committee's review and comnents on the sites presented in Table 1.If for any reason you find that any of these sites are totally unacceptable,1 request that you recommend a replacement of similar size from the sites listed in Table 2.This replacement is essential so that we can retain 4-6 candidate si tes in each size category.Infonnation relating to location and design para- meters for each site was included in the infonnation packets distributed pr;o~to our November 5 meeting. Trusting this approach meets with your approval. Coord i na tor KRY/jmhrAttachments I r-, ! - I~ I I ._. Table I Candidate Sites for Future Study Size <25 MW 25-100 MW >100 MW Tustumena Snow Chakachamna Allison Creek Hicks Johnson Silver Lake Cache Browne Strandl ine Lake Keetna Land Talkeetna-2 Toktchitna lower Chulitna ~..•t •••.. .' Tabl e 2 Sites Passing Rough Scteening Size-<25 MW 25-100-MW >100 MW Strandline L. Lower Beluga Lower Lake Cr. All i son Cr. Grant Lake McCl ure Bay Upper Nellie Juan Power Creek Silver Lake Solomon Gulch Tustumena Whiskers Coal Chulitna Ohio Lower Chu 1i tna Cache Greenstone Talkeetna 2 Granite Gorge Keetna Sheep Creek Skwentna Talachulitna Snow Kenai Lower Gerstle Tanana R. Bruskasna Kanti shna R. Upper Beluga Coffee Gul kana R. Klutina Bradl ey Lake Hick's Site Lowe Lane Tokichitna Yentna Cathedral Bluffs Johnson Browne Tazi 1na Kenai Lake Chakachamna ,. .,:"..~, January 2,1981 ,-. i t -\ e- \ .-. r i ( r ·'"Robert E~LeResche.Coom1ss1oner Alish Department of Natural Resources R6uch'M (Mail Stop lOCO) ~uneau.Alaska 99811 Oear.Ccmn1ssioner LeResche: ·.,.;,~,"I~Your oJ"9anizat1on has been cooperating extens1 ve 1y with the Power Authority 1nassess1ng:tha potential effl!Cts of ny<lroelectric development of the Upper Su:" s1tna'River.'Basin;:.Several:d1fferent veh1 cl es have been used;meetings,corres~ poi\dence.:aIld Sus1tnaHydroelectric Project Steering COO1JIittee act1v1 ties.We feel that the results reflect close consultation and coordination between our or- ga~izat1ons. As the study has progressed.more and more items requiring consultation have emerged.and the future win require a still higher level of involvement.This anticipated level of activity.plus the fact that the Federal Energy Regulatory Coomi ssion (FERC)and the Fish and \rIndl He Coordination Act requi re documentation of such consultations.suggests it is now appropriate to be more formal in our ex- changes.Accordingly,we advance this suggested procedure to you for your concur- rence and/or suggestions for modification. ~ In general,~e propose a two step process.The first sfep will consist of consultation with the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Steering Coimtittee.That body will perform evaluations and structure recommendations.The Power Authority will consider these recemnendat10ns and fonnulllte a position.Upon completion of these actions,the results w111 be processed through your agency for formal con- currence.' Thi~represents a slight expansion of the original concept under which the Steering Committee was structured;the Committee was to act primarily as an ad- visory bOl"to the study team while secondarily facilitating agency involvement in the study effort.Member agencies were to be represented by senior-staffers of skills appropriate to the matters under consideration.This was considered to be ad~antageous as it ~uld facilitate responsiveness by virtue of being relatively independent of procedural impediments.while still reflecting to d substantial de- gree the agency'viewpoint. This proposal hopefully preserves those advantages within an expanded role by pennitting attainment of interagency concensus with a relatively low level of in- put and a h1gh degree of flexibility.It also penn1ts the various agencies to tailor their participation to the specific needs.Finally,the second step of re- ferra 1 of Steeri 09 Corrmi ttee deli berati ons for formal agency concurrence meets regu- 1atory and statutory requirements. Eric P.Yould Executive Director January 2.1981 ."<~. '.' .:'":. I ~--,'• II ., .....' :.)l.",\~?:b:?':·trances·!A.·~.Ulmer;'01 rector' '';:i\~:S'",~''''>(cifffce\/of,'the<'Goven,or i .r',l ;::i:~;~j.~\\~··;~'!~~~'tifvfS1o·n~'of'"po 1icy 'Dave 1opment 'and Pl ann1ng """i::~;':.·,j··<crpoUChJAD·'(Ma~1;'Sthp·0164)1".' . •::;:y~1il11~~m~!~:~cr;,;11\'•+.f:::"i,~,,'" ..:;':··:~.{~~;~~T~{:Jne~r~f;.;~*;~r~.ty:;1~.is.tti~~ng a~p.a~sess1ng the potential effects of hydro~i ':<;~Jectric'oovelopment'Ofthe~.Upper Sus1~River Bas tn.Accomplishment of that, :::.,.'tisli)\'necess1t.i~s··::consultat'ton :and coordination ~ith various Federa1,State and 10-.~··::'~!-cag:p~rganfZat1on$:k1nClud1"'g'yotirs.';·~".......~Tri~:';·{:·~r:~··;·:;'..:!-··:Io ,.J..,!:.:'J~"<".q,.~~t\~.jr:~'I',·.,~·\~~'.,>",\~~:,!':.,,'7<",~,;~,\.>'f~-l Jot~.1~,~~~~~t /,:.'.;(,v~~~:>(f.\,"'1 ~:'I ";J~L ',::_~~;.i':=~'·~,i~s.the:·stUdy 'nas'?'pi'Og~s~e~rl!Ore anq,l'ROre items requiring consu1tat10n have "..,'~:,·\.emeiged;"'and ,:the:;.:rtitUM!;"'111 "rema1rEL 'a,still higher level of involvement.This ."; ~~:,;antic1pate~trevetr9~V4~t,yHY$;pl~$:'~he.:'f~~t that the federal Energy Regulatory·,.~ "..,<~.iss1,6n:Jf:ER,~b!!l9,.·t.~r~:E~.~~h.~~J411~HJ~Coord1na~1~Act req~1re docume-ntatio~ •....-"of-:'~uch';consultat1Qr1s,,'sugqests;:,ft1s nowappropr1ate to establish a fonnal pro- ':cetfuTe for:;'our(cbntict~l\:':Accc)rtf1ngl y,'.mf advance the fall Ot,,1 n9 plan to you for, .~"your:'concurre'nce,an~Vor:luggestlons'for;mod1 f1cat1on. . .-~,;",",·"';::::f/t:;,:;i'-!;':'l;r)(;~:~:i~~~~i ;'.r;·,.~fti(~<';d.~)~J;ij~.i ..)1.,':.' :'.:':.In'genSr~1 ~t'we:!prOMseJ'.::tW(ji~tepfR~ess.The first step will cons 1sto1'·:~:'.; ..~:..cO-nsu1tat1oo ..w1th 1l'tie:;Sui'tna )iYdroelilc·tT,1c Project Ste~ring Canm1ttee.That";,;A>;r .'.r·.'·:..:em·~~~~1~pr~~~!~~·~1W~~~¥~A;~~~~~~n~bt~~6~.T~~o~~~~~i~:1 ~,~~~~, ..-',:.',.~·:"~thesa ~act1 Ons ;'tthe~'re~fil ts t:"",,t bit~~s'sed through the appropr1 ate organ1zatf'tin:f..,"f "'''1 1~.'.."""""",-'.1,"'<"""""\'''''''.''''......,'..:~:'.:or .orma "conCUl"rence:.",:,C i·ii'l ::".",.'i ',',(.:."",.,:,<::':',J;~,'.(..(,~;.~:;,';":i~':'~':.,;,,..".' "'>'-1 request·yQur.'wr1tten~cO'ncurrence:with this proposal,oro if you have other "thoughts"on;'thG'~'tte~~:;we::.'ire 'anx1ous:ti;l e>tplore them 'with you •.:,,:'..,.:,...·'>:\<1 \:"i':\·i~:,.~.~t)~;',:::·"":::!. .'1/,,;i<",.Sincerely ,~.'~.•~_:"'1 ,. '.. ':'.:::.:'<,:/'....'-...)J 0 I '".;,.,...'._._':--\,.'-\./I: ,I"'"•\ :.~:.:.;.:"~ .... cc:·811 , .We 1ch I"U.',S..HCRS '<''. "Larry 'Wr~9.h~L"U,"'S~.:·~H¢RS;~.<.'. ,Jim Thomson~'U~.s.,.·HfRS ::~.'...-.,;,..[~''.'Sent to:'.'.,;'"'.' Alaska Department of Community and,Regional Affairs AlaskaDe~artment of Commerte &'Economic Development Office of the Gov~rnor,Division of Policy Development and Planning Matanuska-Susitna Borough Environmental Protection ~gency,Region 10 Alaska'Distr;ct,Cof.PS of'Engineers "U.S.Geological Survey:<:;<'. ,. DW : RAM EpV'. .-' "9 ". ";,."1-~ ..',.~.':~.-: r -I ( r ........ RESPONSE SW~t~l\RY Agency Respond?Comment ';:'ADC&RA Yes AbstainADC&ED Yes ConcurDPOPYesSuggest A-95 ProceduresEPAYesConcurw/option preservedCOEYesDoesnotviishtoparticipaUSGSYesConcurMAT-SU No ADF&G Yes Concur.AOEe Yes ConcurADNRNo .•NMFS Yes Concur,wioption preserved·BLM Yes Concur,w/option preservedHCRSYesConcur.'USFWS Yes Concur,wjoption preserved Attachment #3 -.' --,---- RECEIVED -:: ALASKA POWER AUTH"I~ e ··'·'\~:;~ .' fISH AND WILDLIFE SEN.VICE Western Alaska Ecological Services 733 W.4th Avenue,Suite 101 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 (907)271-4575 United States Department of the Interior -~._--_._-------_._-_._---------------.---------- IN REPLY REFER TO, Eric -P.You Id Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 W.4th,Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 1 (::-.t ~I I L V !981 Dear Mr-.Yould: The U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)has received your letter of 2 January 1981 proposing that the agencies comprising the Susitna Hydro- electric Steering Committee provide formal concurrence to positions developed by the Alaska Power Authority (APA)in response to committee recommendations.We concur with your proposal.However,in the event that we disagree with APA1s position,we reserve the option of providing a formal response indicating what is required for F\.JS concurrence. Sincerely,- Field Supervisor cc:AOES .'or - ,-. ! i ~~&~~0®~&~&~~&7j/ j DEPT.OF COMMUNITY &REGION.t\.1...AFFAIRS f ,I I OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIQNER January 20,1981 JAY S.HAMMOND,Conrnot POUCH 8 JUNEAU,ALASKA 9981 I PHONE:(907)4654700 """1 Mr.EricP.Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 We,'5t 4t..'1 Avenue,Suite 31 Anchorage,JI..laska 99501 D2ar~~ld: RECEIVED Ji\N 26 1981 ;.J.ASKA POWER AUTHORITY - /"'" I I,. r I""'" ! I "....- ;.J' Thank you for your letter of January 2 regarding hydroelectric developuent of the upper Susitna River Basin. I have no additional carments on this project at this tirre.I do wish the Alaska Power Authority much success in the Susit..'1a Hydroele:::tric Project and all otherproje:::ts APA is involved witL"l.. Please accepts my regrets - I ali'Jays seen to have conflicts at APA meetings. Sincerely, Lee McAnerney COmnissioner I am in receipt of your letter dated January 2 requesting a response from me on your proposed procedures for consulta- tl0n.Please be advised that I concur with the two step process presented in your letter to me. I Sincerely, I - JA Y S.HAMMOMD.GOVERNOR POUCH 0 JUNEAU.ALASKA 99811 Phone:465·2500 Mr.Eric Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 RECEIVED Dear Eric: January 21,1981 IH·:I·:\n'I'.,".~NT 0.'('O'l'l:ltl-:R('g.:4"- .~(·O~O·U 1(:OIEV.:LOP"'I<:N1' OFFICE Of THE COMUISS/ONER /I /11.L [I{<'·l .__._. , I ,- Charles R.Webber Commissioner CRW/mh3/20 08·H2LH .."._.....:..:......--------------~ JA r S.HAMMOND,GOVERNOR UEI)I\itT 'U~NT Ol~FISH :\~n f~:\JU: OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER / /1 i " SUBPORT BUILDING "JUNEAU,ALASKA 99801 January 22,1981 Mr.Eric P.Yould,Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Yould: r'"' i ,I ~ I I l The Alaska Department of Fish and Game has considered your January 2 proposal for an agency consultation process by the Alaska Power Authority (APA)through the Susitna Hydro Steering Commi tt(~e.Tlle process for evaluation and recommendation by staff of:this 2gency,and the f:orm~l agen~y concurrence action of APAts developed p0sition is acceptable to this Department. I suggest APA work further with the Steering Committee to finalize the details of the implementation of your propos~d coordination/consultation process at their next meeting.The Steerir.g Committee should be able to do much in the future to eliminate dupJication of coordination and consultation effort,on both our parts,for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project. SincGZ'J~_ Ronald o.Skoog Conunissioner (907)465-4100 cc:A.Carson ~"Il,I "~ '"f ,." I ",, ~ J j l.. ~r\ ------,,-------- UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR G EOLOG leAL SU RVEY Water Resources Division 733 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 400 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 -;":::) January 26,1981 Eri c P.You 1d Executive Di rector Alaska Power Authority 333 West Fourth Avenue,Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 /-~.:....,-..--",,;y "'"'}. j; li~ Dear Eri c: We concur with the two-step process of interagency consultation and coordination in studying the potential effects of the proposed hydro- power Geve10pment of the upper Susitna River basin outlined in your letter of January 2,1981. The Water 'Resources Division has no regulatory functions,so formal concurrence with your agencies actions is not within our field of authority.However,we can assist in advisory capacities.The Geologic Division expertise may also be available for consultation.The Conservation Division is the only Geological Survey division with regulatory authority and they have a section that handles hydropower developments. Sincerely yours, ~ ~:~,;:,<iii',,):' ~ ~ l;,.,;;; *t~t~ nL:C~!VED r I .),:)1.9 81.:..J _ -----_..-----._--------_._--------_._-----------"-_._-_.._----.- ,-5'-';0:" United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Anchorage District Office 4700 East 72nd Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99507 t"",t-lr.Eric Yould Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Ave.,Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99504 Dear Nr.Yould: This is in reply to your letter dated January 2,1981,questioning the official nature of the suggestions given during meetings with the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Steering Committee. All statements made at these meetings with the Steering Committee are at a working level and are not to be construed as nLM's official stand or policy. All official Bureau policy and positions c.oncernlng the Susitna Project will originate from this office in 'Nciting '",ith my sip:ncttlJre or the signa- turQ of an acting District Manager. r; ,~IlI ~ceJ~ Richard W.Tindall District Manager ----------~-~------~-------------~---- :;J;)'i':\;i::;j: ,"""DEPARTMENT OF THE AKi:"ify ALASKA DISTRICT,CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O.BOX 7002 ANCHORAGE.ALASKA 99510 AEPL Y TO ATTENTION OF: NPAEN-PL-EN r·1r.Er i c P.You 1d Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 RECEIVED FEB L;1981 FE BOG 1981 -. i gJ(... Dear rUld: This is in response to your letter of 2 ,January 1981 concerning consultation with the Corps of Engineers on your study of the Upper Susitna River Basin. As stated in our letter to you of 12 June 1980,,'Ie are unable to partie ipate in the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Steering Committee because of funding and manpower constraints,and 'tIe ':Jill only be able to conduct the necessary reviews required for the issuance of permits under our regulatory program. I would suggest that the scoping process prescribed in the regulations of the Counei 1 on Environmental Qual ity (see 40 CFR 1501.7)be initiated. This process,which would involve the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC),would help to define the seope of issues to be e.ddressed and to identify the siglificant issues to be ana1yzed in depth in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).1he Corps could participate in the scoping process and,possibly,become a cooperating agency with FERC in the preparation of the EIS. If further details are desired by your staff,Mr.tlarlan t1oore,Chief, Engineering Division,can be contacted at 752-5135. Sincerely, ~. LEE R.NUNN Colonel,Corps of Engineers District Engineer ',. HEfU1'AGE CONSERVATION AND RECREATION SERVICE ALASKA AREA OFFICE 1011 E.Tudor,Suite 297 Anchorage,Alaska 99503 Tcle.(907)277·J 666 --. l·_'i~d States Department ofr:'-t.i;~(Interior ==~--~-----_... A800 l201-03a RP IN REPLY REFER TO, ,- I i. FEB 4 1931 .-Mr.Eric P.Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 RECEIVED !C3 6 1981 ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY Dear Mr.Yould: t.Je concur with your recommendation of January 2,1981,concerning the expanded role of the Susistna Hydroelectic Project Steering Committee. However,we would remind you that we also have <1 separate coordination and review function associated with the license application Exhibit R. Thank you for the opportunity to consider and comment on the proposal. Sincerely, \-'-janet McCabe Regional Director F">. ! I I r \ r ----------------------.---~----- ----4 u.S. 1200 SIXTH AVENUE R E C HIM!i 0:,WAS H I N G TaN 9 B ] 0 1 FEB 05 1981 Eric ~.YOUld,Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4 Avenue,Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Suoject:Susitna Hydroelectric Project Coordination ~rocedures Dear Mr.Yould: Tnank you for your letter proposing a two-step process tor the coordina- tion required under the Federal Energy r{egulatory Commission regulatlons and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act.We baslcally concur with your proposals.However,we may have further comments on the issues dealt with in this coordination process once more intormation on each subject is available and the comnined etfects of tne project become more visible. It is our understanding that so far the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Steering Committee has worked on the procedures manual for the 1981 fle1d studies and is now in the process of starting up a subcommittee to deal with possible mitigation for wildlife impacts.Other issues,lncluding possible mitigation for fisheries impacts,are to be deait with iater when more information on the resources to be affected wlll be avai lable. We would I ike to be kept informed of both the steering committee and subcommittee meetings and agendas so that we can participate more actively when items affecting tPA's areas of responsibility or expertise will be considered.For now,most of our involvement will have to oe by 1etter and te i epnone due to personnel and travel constral nts.Wi thl n our limitations,we will try to be as responsive and nelpful as possible. tPAis coordinator for this project wil I continue to be Judi Schwarz,of my staff.She can be reached at (2u6)442-12~5. - \~e look fOr\1ard to working with you in the future. assistance,please do not hesitate to ask. Sincerely yours, a0:,~Wi.Cr.dy- El1zabetn Corbyn,Chief Environmental Evaluation eranch .--.... .•~_~_.._.-_..:.-.._....e___.._,__.__~_"",___,_,~__~__, It 'tIe can be of ;/ f / ....... U.S.DEPARTMEiV'-,~,COMMERCE National Oceanicb...J.Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service P.O.Box 1868,Juneau,Alaska 99802 Fll::CEIVEO ., ~:. Mr.Eric P.Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 Wes~4th Ave.Suite 31 Anchora9~,A1aska 99501 Dear Mr.You1d: :r.~.~1 ()1981 We have received your letter of January 2,1981,regarding the involvement of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)in the planning and study of the proposed Susitna River Hydroelectric Project. We recognize the need for a "highel'level of involvement"on the part of our agency,not only due to certain procedural requirements but the fact that the proposal has reached a more advanced stage of study.To this end we have been participating as a member of the Steering Committee since July,1980.We feel this involvement affords us the opportuni ty to eva 1uate project studies and provide any input we may feel is necessary. Regardless of our status with the Steering Committee,we feel formal agency concurrence with all policy matters and deliberations should be obtained and therefore,agree with the_process you have suggested; Si.ncere\y~/\..'~' ,_.-:/:--./'7 "20 (~!L J/",_..--....._//C-;A! Robe.t W.McVey .'----:::") Dire tor,Alaska .gion /I / I • I I illila ,- -'" DIVISION OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING POUCH AD JUNEAU,ALASKA 99811 PHONE:455·3573 01 ..A3-LH February 19,1981 '.,\..\'I.:0I._v,,;,...- ,-r 8 20'1951\'c.. - . Mr.Eric Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 West Fourth Avenue Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Eric: On Jdnuary 3,you sent a letter referring to consultation and coordination with various federal,State and local organizations in the study and assess- ment of potential effects of hydroelectric development in the Upper Susitna River Basin.Your letter requested my concurrence with your plan or suggestions for its improvement. Frankly Eric,the paragraph in your letter that describes your plan is somewhat brief and general,making concurrence rather difficult at this time. I agree,however,that the study being undertaken is one that should have a very high level of involvement by interested State and federal agencies as well as potentially affected local co~nunities. I suggest that a more detailed description of the workings of the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Steering Committee be provided.What may also be appropriate is the use of your public participation staff to serve a state government coordination as well as a public involvement function.The staff could document and disseminate the proceedings of the steering committee to a wider governmental audience.Such communication could occur prior to formal Authority position formulation and smooth the process of required formal concurrence with such positions. As for meaningful involvement of State and federal agencies in your assessment, I am enclosing a copy of Administrative Order No.55,describing the Major Project Review (MPR)process.This process might be appropriate for the Steeri ng Corrmittee.The process descri bed can be used by .:tny unit of State government and is designed to ensure that appropriate State agencies are involved in analyses from the outset and that each assessment is highly issue oriented.The technique can be used to involve federal agencies and the public as well. 3i+W&i!a _± The MPR questions can be modified as needed and a schedule can be prepared that indicates points at which cooperators are to tie in to the process.We generally include a public review draft in the time line for an analysis. We have also found that it is essential to the success of the MPR process for the lead unit to be able to sufficiently detach itself from its own project goals and objectives to administer the analysis in a neutral and objective fashion.One solution is,of course,to have the analysis administered by a separate agency. Eric,I hope that at least some of these ideas are useful to you.From your letter,we are not too certain as to what involvement process you had in mind. --~-------------------------------------------"/-, I / Mr.Eric Yould -2-__February 19,1981 r I I, r -.,. Please let me know if we can be of any assistance. Sincerely, Frances A.Ulmer Enclosure ~---------------- SU.LC of Alask.a e.,:,c.:::'nis-traLive Order Ko.:e Sl1bject:State Major Project Revie~?rocess Li <l C e r the a l1 the::i t y of J..r t.I I I ,Sec t i 0:;s 1 2.;l d 2 <;0 £:L {-,e ':'.1 c s }:..to Cor:.s t i - Lutlon,and AS 44.19.880,and ~iven tne need for tiDel;,consistent,and t~arough evaluation of proposed ~2jor projects or cCLivities,I order that tt falloYing revieu process be instituted: 1.Certain projects,because of their st2te~ide OT regio;l2l significance \..'ill be desig"ateo by me 25 wajor projects subject to 2.l~jc:r Project Revie\.1. .... 2. ,). Any state agency to ~~lcn I assign the lead responsibili:y for conducting a Major Project Revie~shall prepare and sl1bmit to me t:'1e infOrDaLio<l COuLaineci on tne ?roject .':'n21~'sis SU:::r;J2r:.'S!leet (.L.ttachment ;.)~'"ithin 10 Gays of i::ne 2ssigrsent . By the assigneq GaLe,!.::e le2G 2gency s:"'lc.l ~?Tep2.re and sub::it to me c.prelii:.i~c.ry ?rojec:~!l~nal:~si.s "\;;-llcn 2CCrf;.:-,ses 'Lone e~";2.1uc:tion factors specified b)1 ~e (At~ach~ent 3). /..;,1~:i7ieGi,~tely upon fece.i;::'L.of t~:e ~':reliJ;"":'-:-:c:-Y ?:-oiect ~'SiS,the. Di\:ision of Policy DEvelo?~en~~n~?l~~~ing (~~D?)~Offic~of the Governor,sh2.l1 fO=-~'a:!:"d i":0:-::2.t10"21 eepies L.D ECcei!cf£ecL.ec or 4, interestec govern.iH?nt2.1 2ge.T1C;'.,:,\~~rle 2.5sig::ec Cc.'L.cS e2c:--i 2.gency s~211 SUD2it ~o D?D?i:s re~iE~2~C CO~Dent. During the period of agency revie~0:L.he pre!imin2ry Proiect .L."2.1ysis,tne Public :oruiJ or DPJ?,in consu},c,tion vii::'n c'ne le2d agency.s~2ll conduct one or Gore public ~eEL.ings in the affected c.rea(s)for the purpose of recei'\'i"g public Cc.78ei'HS on (he project or actions. By i::he assigned date,D?DP shell sub:::it in \..-:iti.!ls to the leao 2.gency.2.SU1:?,:D2!")',of the revie;..·along '~'ith reco2Denc2tions for the fin2.l Pro~ect Anzlysis. I.By.the 2ssigne O o aete l t:"e leGe 2gET:CYI iii.cOrljunc'L.:o::....-..!..~n D?DP'l shall prepare 2~d suorr,it to me,in '-7iti"g 2:lG verbally,2.final ...rersion of 'tite Project .':'.nE.l'\·si.s.Tile Project .:o.T12.1ysis s;-,2.11 include dissenting vie'\..,'ls'l rEcc=::::e:lG2.tioilS :or IUT'Lr!e:2.ctio!1 2nd,"'-.-':lere "-,..; - -c::..;;;,.:"'.'..:_.:OT"'!C --~..;-i .....--.:r"!""\cpprop __CLe _?ec.l..L.l.~~Oi'lC-'L';'1._o~L._L_eGL.l.u ..1:?,e2SUres necessary for 5 t.a.t e 2.p p::-ov 21 0 £t h €?i:"0 j e c tor 2 eLi 0n 0 ~. "',I 80 ~o designated ~ajor projec~or EC:~C~~ill be 2??:o\'ed prio7 to ~he co:.:pletion of the }::'ocess cescri"ued Z80\'e,u"less 2.prier ·~'Titte71 ~ai,'er of necessi~y has been ob:2i~ed fro~me. 9,lne revie~specified in this Gures co~tE.i~eci in ~s 46,:5, Act r and o:~er SIEIe revie~ order 5~211 be coordinated ~ltn proce- ~nvi~o~~E~t21 ?roceciure Coordi;l2tion prOCEoses,2.5 2?Dlic2ble. -1- -. I r .j ./ To"is cccer Leke S{IGlJ fI ' •• ?:-oiecr Title DeSCTi'::tion 3riei'ciesc!"iptio<1 of scope,nature,and objeccivEs of D!'ojec.0;:ac.'CJ.OD, incluii~S location of project,estiG2ted scart and cc~vletion care, es::i-.::zted cost of project,scate in,eres;:in project.~, Stzte Action R~cuesteci/Recuired ?E.:-=,,-i:s sougnt,by agency;resources neCE.5Sc:-;'; co~s~~ucted;Qine~al or other righLs,:o~t~cc~S, ~~Dlic f2c:li~ies lez.ses,etc. :'0 be L€2.C ;.c;:.ency LE~ci A~Ency responsibilit)·,inclu~ing d~si~~2ie~PE:S2~:es~on5i~le for ?rojec~A~al~'sis. O~~e:~gencies ~nd individuals assignE~~D :~~?:ojEC:2nalysis effort 2nc :heir respo~sibiliLiEs.?rcposec cC~~~cc~~~l c~~~S:E~ce. y Agency c~d ?~Dlic Revie~ Si.l::;::;2.':'Y ?'EPOn:)""""', GO\lernor l s c.ssig!"'.:.!Jenr~, PTeli2iuc~:?Toject Ar ?reli~in2ry Project Analysis (days-----.~.ge:1cy 2nd Public Revie,,'(cc:ys Su;:",::Jary Report:(---dc:ys :ir-;a1 ?roject ;"r;c.lysis (---Gc)'s , J,; r /./ I~~. I i 1.\·i hetc hen gE S \'.'0 u I d De g ~ne r ct e G 1 n r:==i I:i ::r c ::D i ;:c p e ,s 0 nc.1 income for current resident Alc.sk~ns over ~he life of the project (construction end oper~tione1 pncses)? result frD~the prDject? 2..hlhc.t proportion of jobs Co,C ~Xp!:ctE(:'0 'De occupied 'uy current Alc.sk2.ns? :Does the project contribute :0 lon~~~un 2conC~lC s~~bili~y? ~hEt ~hDrt or long-~erm pr~c~effects ~rEExpect~d to result 7rom ~he project? ~What edministretive roedblocks £xist WG1Cn ~Juld ~ffec~the economic fecsibility of c project? n !I '.:) 1 . I·!h etc h 1:n 9 e s are or 2. conn i c ts 3.\';nc t i GCe I populction end 'r"'-70 I c.l.o_ S c':,..-"'I -,...- --'-1':':.....r',-':"";:'c·'I'~,:0 ~c''rl r.':r ~;-,I c'"."i'".::'~~~~c"t.~~7.~':~rl c ....';::J;,;:J ....II,....tlt \"'1 w·...:'/1 ....._...__\.J:l-,-'~-~_ ---,-=-_..._--_._-~._------------ t.-:..Pi en' . '..?proposeo proJec~. FisCcl \·:h2.t effect \'.'ouid the project ha\'2 Oi,the r,:::,b~ic.nce of state -and local expenditures versus revEnues OVE~ti~~? 2.,.-C.1"'1 _o.piicit or cSSDc1cted 'n'ith the project?If so,\·:hc.t is th=Ex:.e;:t of sJch s\.:::sidies? ?eS8~rc=Utilizction or other rESourCE valUES? re:ource co~i~~e;,ts? 2.the Droiect.~~ffec~fish ~nd \~~ldlife ps~~l~t~o~s Dr their subsistence orcis!oce.tion,-.07 SP::Cl~S,losschengesinmigrationpctterns, availability changes Expected? Will the project historic:w~tershed,recre~tio~~1 D~scenic ~re~s? the prcj ect effect designated or sDecificc.lly .. .- 2.70; end que.lity con~rol?- -2- "'loes t'prOject involveL· or ~con0~icfcctor$'"tecr-nologlcc.l,envlrc-"-"'I::.n-L'_::.11 ,-.•--iincnc1C.', ~hich havE 2 high degree of unce~t~in:Y or -:I c~f_ 2.extent is c.bove questions? the existing Gc'tc be.S e cOEOU::+C I ...........to c.ns'r.'c:r the 3.Are there externo'fectors (e.g.,nction21 or inl.ern2.tione.l) which figure prominently in the SUCCESS or failure of the prbject~ Are there econo~icc.lly fE~sible enG SOCi2/iy cccept2ble ~ltErnetiv~s for cccomplishing ~n~objectives of the Droi~ct? 2.the ~.."., j;;;D 11Ce.'Clons of Is the proposed project or cctien cD~pct~ble with pl2.ns or policies? 10C2.1 r"""I I {:i 2. .:J. Whet permits,licenses 2nd/or government:.l (Stc.t2>10cc.l end/or feder21)2.pprov21s ere necessary? whet is ~ne timetcble for vcrious Stcg2S of the proj~c~?How flexibie is this schedule? ~;hct ~itig~t~on m~~sures or stiP~I~:iDns Cen ~~iG~~t~7~ed to minimize the conf1~cts or pro~iE~s idEn~ified EbJve? f;. -3- ·;.1 " Mr.Eric P.Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue Suite 31' Anchorag~,Alaska 99501 Attention:Dave Wozniak MAR ?1981 February 24,1981 P5700.11 T.730 Dear Dave:Susitna Hydroelectric Project Steering Committee Comments Enclosed is Acres response to the Susitna Hydro Steering Committee comments. Please review and identify if further clarification is required.We are presently in the process of reviewing potential program modifications. Areas under consideration include: - a lower Susitna Boater User/Navigation Survey -estuary studies -advancement of Phase II socioeconomic studies -Lower Susitna vegetation,moose,furbearer studies _recreation components of Subtask 7.05,7.07,7.08, 7.10,7.11 and 7.14 -sociocultural studies We \'''ill submit our recommendations with support documentation in the near future. KRY/ljr Enclosure ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED !';"'.',\1'<·t. .\,',:," Sincerely, //, I/,/', f (,/~/J.,/c,t:.'.r L ··L ,.",'/\../'".. '/John D.La\'i re n ce Project Manager 1 / ;"':' ,...' -;- '~'" "':~~-; -[ 1 r"'1 j In response to the Susitna Hydro SteerinC]Committee's reVle'lJ of the TES pro- cedure manuals we submit the following: Introduction We appreciate the time and effort expended by all the members of the Steering Committee in their revievJ of our procedure manuals.In general our responses are d'irected towards each of the specific comments as presented in the sythesis prepared by Mr.Al Carson.Comments presented in the intrOduction and conclusion are addressed first As appropriate our response to some comments are combined to present a clarification regarding subtask interactions. General Comments 1)In defense of our subcontractors it was not our understandino that the purpose of July 17,1980 meeting was to review the environmental studies but rather to compare the requirements of FERC to other federal and state government permitting agencies.In this context an overview of our environmental program was presented.We concur that in SDme of the more controversial areas i.e.socioeconomics,adequate study details were not available. The offer was then extended,and agreed to by the Steeri ng Cor!lf!1i ttee,that procedure manuals be made available for review. r-. ! ~ !, 2)As the Steering Committee have stated lithe most compell ihg need is for a well-conceived process to improve linkage and coordination of the various studies,"\~e concur that this is essenti(ll and have e;<pended considerable effort in this direction.Some misunderstanding may have precipitated from the review of the procedure manuals as these manuals were prepared as practical subtnsk -specific documents designed for (1)exchange of program design details (2)control of adhei'ence to the study program (3)and assurance of continuity in the event of changes in project per- sonne 1. Our coordination efforts will concentrate on the following areas: r'" , i 1) 2) 3) 4) interaction among study participants informal interaction with government agencies to acqujre insight into concerns and general policies formal interaction with government agencies to al1o\-J input and review of study design,development selection,project design and mitigation planning interaction with the public in the form of information supply and input into the decision makin0 process Documentation of coordination to date will be included in the environmental annual reports to be available in April 1981.In addition we have requested TES to prepare an outline of their coordination process which will be supple- mented by Acres and supplied to the Steerin0 Committee for revie'tl if desired. 1 3)An area of primary concern appears to be the extent of effort directed towards studying the Lower Susitna Basin between Talkeetna and Coak Inlet during the Phase I period. Our approach to date as outl ined under Subtask 3.10 of our POS is "to estimate the flow regime,sediment regime and morphological characteristics of the lower Susitna River under natural conditions and (prepare)a preliminary determination of morphological impacts which could result from flow regulation and sediment trapping at the Susitna Project." "A preliminary evaluation of the potential morphological changes,and impact on the river characteristics due to flow regulation will be made during the early part of 1981.If considered necessary at this stage,an expanded field data collection and study program aimed at evaluating impacts in more detail will be developed in conjunction with the DNR and presented for consideration to APA." It is our opinion that the results of this study are necessary before the merits of any detailed downstream studies can be fully assessed. It is obvious that we require a more comprehensive understandin0 of the resource agencies concerns,the reasons for these concerns and ihe study approach they would like us to adopt.To facilitate this TES during the month of March 1981 will contact the respective agencies directly,to discuss these and any other concerns that ~ay exist. 2 ~I - - .8-:.- 7.05 Socioeconomic AlthoUQh major projects like the Trans-Alaska Oil Pipeline provide justification for th~need of adequate preproject soicoeconcmic analysis,care must be taken in making direct comparison as to the types of impacts associatec with a large centralized project such as Susitna vs a transient type construction associated with a pipeline.Susitna should produce a relatively self contained,controlled, centralized work camp established for a 10 -15 year period.For this reason a first step in our socioeconomic program,through a review of other similar type projects,is to identify the most probable types of impacts to be antic- ipated.Our studies will then concentrate on these areas of most probable impact. We have,however,for some time been considering the need to advance some of the Phase II socioeconomic studies into Phase I.The extent of changes in scope and timing of our studies will be discussed in more detail with the Steering Committee and FERC following their review of these responses. To present a clarification as to the comprehensiveness of our socioeconomic program a listing of categories and variables being incorporated into our socioeconomic profiles is attached {Exhibit 1).This listing is refered to in our response to the seven Steering Committee comments. Comment 1: Local and regional recreational facilities and opportunities should be assessed to determine the ability of those facilities to handle additional users in light of increased demand. R.esponse: Recreational facilities will be addressed on two fronts within the context of the Socioeconomic Analysis during Phase I.Work Package 2 entails development of a detailed socioeconomic profile,the methodology for which is described on pages 7-10 in the Procedures Manual. '...The profiles will include ..,public facilities,availability, adequacy,and cost ...".This includes public recreation facilities.To the extent applicable in Phase I,this analysis will address the "ability of those facilities"at local and regional levels to handle additional users"as suggested by t:.e Steering Committee. Additic-:lally,\tIe have become aware of a special study current:y unden-/ay .~y Mat-Ju Borough,the results of which will be considered as an aid in our analysis.Recreational categories and variables to he investigated are shown in Section VIIIExhibit 1. Comment 2: The study should address the probability of additional industrialization of the region as a result of power from the project.Then the study needs to assess the impacts and socioeconomic implications of indus- trialization scenarios that would be driven by this project. 3 ~\;,,~; Response: In our evaluation of the economic base we will be developing a profile oftre'major basic industry components.(Exhibit I section V)yJe viill review potential incentives for industrial develop~ent created by stable energy availability and assess the socioeconomic implications of having these incentives materialize. Comment 3: The study should address the cost and availability of products and services.This should also address the inflationary i~pacts that are usually associated with a boom type cyclical expansion such as con- struction of a project of this magnitude may cause. Response: The availability of products will be addressed under the headings of ~ vJholesale trade,retail trade,services etc.as indicated in Exhibit I section V.The cost and relationship of cost to income will be addressed through our assessment of the Consumer Price Index,income and employment patterns (Exhibit I section VI). Comment 4: The study should address the cultural opportunities and how they may be affected in both positive and negative ways by the proposed project. Response: Our present study addresses cultural opportunities under the categories of: 1)Community organizations,social interaction,entertainment etc.(Exhibit I section II) 2)Public services -parks,recreation,libraries,education. (Exhibit I section IV) 3)Recreation -Exhibit I section IV) We do appreci ate,hO\l/ever,through your comments and comments from the genera 1 public that cultural aspects,especially at the local level,are not being fully I""'l addressed.We are preparing the details of a program to respond to this and will present it to the Steering Committee an outline of our scope as Soon as it is available.~ Comment 5: The study needs to address the implications of the project on a com- position of the people who live in the region.An obvious first step would be to establish baseline survey data in the preconstruction era so that we know what the population composition is in this area before construction begins. ~, 4 ..... r ~ ! r l -! I r l r I Response: As stated in the procedure manual,a purpose of Phase I ~ocioeconomic studies is to "identify and describe the existing socioeconomic conditions and to detemine which are most likely to be impacted by the Susitna Hydroelectric Project".Sections 1 and II of Exhibit I identify the categories for which secondary data on the composition of the people who live in the region will be collected.The adequacy of this data base will be reviewed prior to making any decisions regarding program modi- fications. Comr:len t 6: An assessment of the changes in the sociopolitical structure of the region that caul d be expected (to)resu It frofll the change in the economy as a result of construction ...(and)operation and subsequent developments that would be driven by this project. Response: Our study efforts are directed towards an assessment of the socioeconomic changes that could result from the project.In this context we ~ill be assessing impacts on local government serv~ces,revenues and expenditures. In our opinion,however,an assessment as to changes in the sociopolitical structure of the region resulting from these socioeconomic changes wou1d be very speculative,not cost effective and beyond the requirements for a license application. Comment 7: (a)The analysis does not address the impacts of the project en users of fish and wildlife resources. (b)I refer you here specifically to memos inc1uded in the Department of Fish MdGame review submittal which indicate that Acres and others deemed it inappropriate for the Department of Fish and Game to carry these studies out. (c)However,in our review of all the studies identified above we find that neither Acres Ameri can nor any of other of (s i c)the subcont ractors have included this important issue in their plan of work. (d)The scope of the analysis does not include any work designed to mitigate the project impacts on fish and wildlife. Response: (1)Due to the sequential nature of our studies the analysis of the impacts of the project on users of fish and wildlife ~esources cannot be accom- plished until the impacts on the resources themselves have been identified. As indicated in the procedure manual,\llOrk packages 8 and 9 dealing 'tlith these topics wi 11 be performed in deta il duri ng Phase 11. (2)We did deem it inappropriate that ADF&G,or any other permitting agency conduct the impact assessment and mitigation planning components of our study.To do otherwise would have compt"omised the legitimacy of agency objectivity during license review.However under all the components of our study we intend to provide a format for reviE~'1 and consideration of all potential concerns from appropriate State and Federal agencies 5 ~ \.-~:' (3)Refer to response 1. (4)Fish and wildlife mitigation is not considered as a socioeconomic com- ponent of our study but is addressed in detail under Subtasks 7:10 and 7:11 as indicated in the procedure manuals. Subtask 7.06 Cultural Resources Investigation Comment: Although this study If/as not formatted or laid out in a \;iay SllnJlar to the others the review comments indicate that the approach in the scope and methodology proposed is appropriate and sufficient for the task at hand. Response: No comment. Subtask 7.07 land Use Analysis Comment 1:-j (a) (b) The scope of the land use analysis needs to be expanded so that the downstream impacts all the way to salt water are adequately addressed. As an examDle of a downstream impact which is not included but needs to be address~d is the issue of navigability on the Susitna River below the proposed dam. Response: (a)As stated in our procedure manual our study area for land use is con- centrated in the Upper Susitna Basin and extends downstream as far as Gold Creek.In our opinion the majority of land use impacts directly related to a Susitna development will occur in this area.Certain land use components outside this study area are being addressed as part of our socioeconomic,fisheries and wildlife studies. (b)As you are aware concern has been raised regarding recreationa1 navigation, and riverine based recreational/land use activities in the section of the river between Talkeetna and Cook Inlet.We are in the process of assessing these concerns and foresee the possibility ~S an extension to our fisheries and hydrology studies a program to identify:1)access to the river by water,air and land and 2)movement within the river itself.Any such study would provide input into the land use,recreation, socioeconomic and fish/wildlife resource utilization components of our study.The details of any such _program modification wTll be submitted to the Steering committee for review as soon as available. Comment 2: There 1 s no apparent linkage or coordination betlt/een the land use analysls and the socioeconomic and recreational studies. 6 :J """I " - - .... nI:r I nj ! L i n if I (!-I ~, i I l i 1_i Response: There is a definite linkage and coordination between land use,socio- economic,recreation,hydrology,and fish and wildlife components of our study.Although this coordination exists at the study team level it is bvious that a lack of communication does exist between the study team and the resource agencies . Throughout the remainder of the Susitna studies we will be exerting considerable effort to bridge this gap and ~Iill be soliciting your advice on means of establishing efficient avenues of communication. Comment 3: APA should seriously reconsider the decision that has been made to delay future land use analysis.The contractors state that data from other discipl ines may be needed to "fine tune"this study.However, we can assume most of these values or issues and get on with one of the most critical studies that could provide data to be used in making the decision as to whether Susitna should be built or not.It is recommended that APA consider the use of scenarios to describe future land use with ano\'/ithout the project.A recommended way to begin addressing down- stream impacts is to become informed about the work currently being done in this area by local,state,and federal agencies.This will help to eliminate any duplication of work.Once APA is aware of what studies agencies have done the APA contractors can be tasked to synethesize the existing studies and complete only additional studies needed to comolete the scenarios.. Response: \.Je accept the Steering Committee's recommendation that vie review and synthesize the information available from existing studies being con- ducted by local,state and federal agencies.This has been accomplished to some extent by our socioeconomic,land use and recreation consultants however,we will ensure,through additional contact,that all available information has been acquired.Once obtained we will assess the applica- bility of these studies to the Susitna Project,incorporate the infor- mation into our studies as appropriate and determine if additional studies during Phase II are required. We do,however,identify the need for a recognition of the differences in objectives and scope between a Susitna Project Environmental Assess- ment study and studies conducted by agencies under their mandate of overall Susitna Basin Resource Management. Subtask 7.08 Recreation Planning Comments: 1.Scope of the recreation planning appears to be incomplete.The total thrust of the study appears to focus on recreational opportunities in the impoundment area with the obvious underlying assumption that Susitna 7 ·~; Dam will be built.What is absent is any sort of assessment of the proposed project impacts on existing recreation navigation and land use in the river valley above,within)and below the proposed project. There is no question that we have to carefully plan for reservoir rec- reation development assuming there is a project.It is also obvious tha t the campen i ng need that needs to be met today is a val id and accurate determination of existing recreational values so that this decision can be factored into the ultimate decision as to whether Susitna should be built or not.An equally important result would be identification of those values for mitigation which will be required if the project is built. 2.This study needs to include a documentation of the flowing water resources and uses that would be impacted by the project. 3.This study needs to document the existing upstream uses of Susitna. Response: We have made a clear distinction between 1)FERC requirements for the deve 1opment of a recreat i on plan withi n the project bounda ri es and 2)an overall assessment of recreation resources and impacts on these resources. Subtask 7:08 responds directly to FERC requirements and is directed towards a reservoir recreation plan that would be i~plemented if a Susitna development is approved.Thus the study focus is on recreational opportunities in the impoundment and surrounding area and does assume that the plan would only be implemented if the Susitna dam is built. T!.f ..~~~~h'.Ie assessment 0 eXlstlngt\re~reation resources"and t,e lfnpacts upon them are addressed under appropriate subtasks,specifically 7:07 - Land Use Analysis and 7:05 Socioeconomic. Subtask 7:10 Fish Ecology Impact Assessment and Mitigation Planning COnlllen t 1: It is acknowl edged that none of the revi ewers had a cOJ:lprehens i ve picture of how this task will be carried out.The reason is the Department of Fish and Game will be actually doing much of this work as a subcontractor to Acres American and has not had the staff or the resources necessary to put together its procedures manual for this facet of the work.The comments given below should be qualified with ac- knowl~dgment of this fact. Response: ADF&G have made substantial progress in their fisheries data collection program.The present emphasis is to establish the basis of their program and to implement the field studies.rollowing this,detailed procedure manuals will be prepared and should be available for Steering Committee review by April 1981. 8 """ """ 1""', r I \ I""'" i l r I i r I I"'"" L I, Comment 2: The contractors need to broaden their scope of mitigation concepts that are included in the studies.There are other options available for mitigation planning above and beyond what is included in the Procedures Manual as it is now written.I refer you to the detailed comments made by ADF&G. Response: We view mitigation planning as a dynamic process and are prepared to consider any addition.al options available.As a means of obtaining agency'input and review we plan to establish a fisheries mitigation task force similar to that organized under Subtask 7.11. Comment 3: We recommend that an assessment of effectiveness of mitiaation used on other projects to reduce impacts also be studied befo~e we deter- mine what sorts of mitigation techniques will be applied to the proposed Susitna project.The reason for recommending this is to enhance the probability that the mitigation we apply to the Susitna project will be successful. Response: The intent of our review and evaluation of mitigation measures used on other projects is to assess their effectiveness and to determine their applicability to the Susitna Project. Comment 4: Table 2 should be amended to identify the issue of the effect of the project on rearing,fish passage and egg incubation in the Susitna River from its mouth upstream to the proposed dam site. Response: It is our intent to address these issues and Table 2 will be ammended accordingly. Comment 5: Themi~igation alternatives should include a cost benefit analysis 1n Phase II. Response: The costs associated with recommended mitigation ,,/in be identified in Phase I with actuaT cost-benefit analysis considered in Phase II. 9 -. Comment 6: There is a lack of adequate participation by resource management agencies in the impact assessment or mitigation planning as proposed in this Procedures Manual. Response: See response to comment 2. Comment 7: The water quality subtask within this study needs further review regarding the extent of data required and details about timing of the data collection. Response: R&M Consultants has prepared a Procedures Manual for the water quality program.Review of this document may provide the required details about timing and data collection. Subtask 7.11 Wildlife Ecology A.Big Game A.ssessment and Mitigation Plann~ Comment 1: This study does not describe the methodology that will be used for assessing impacts to be mitigated.The Procedures Manual discussion of formation of a mitigation team and a series of meetings and conferences ""'i as a methodology is inadequate. Response: The methodology for impact assessment and mitigation was not developed in detail because it was believed that a more effective program could be prepared following the collection of data in 1980.Rather than develop more than a general approach,it was considered to be preferable first to gain an understanding of the relative population levels of various species and also identify critical habitat types.In this manner a detailed approach to impact assessment and mitigation will be prepared based on at least a preliminary understanding of the wild- life/habitat realtionships operative in the project area.The Procedures Manual will be amended as soon as approach details are finalized. 10 - -) IIIIIl!!I I - ..... rI \ r I Comment 2: The scope of mitigation concepts needs to be broadened in this study. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)defines ~itigation in five different 'days: Avoiding impact all together by not taking a certain action ...(or) parts of an action. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation. Rectifying the impact by repairing,rehabilitating,or restoring the ...(affected)environment. Reducing or limiting the impact over time by preservation and main- tenance operations during the life of the action. Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources •..(or)environments. Since the Susitna project will be subject to an environmental impact statement the Alaska Power Authority should assure that the contractors preparing the application adequately address all aspects of mitigation in order that the submittal will be adequate for the E.I.S. Response: To date we have concentrated our mitigation efforts on approaches a)and b)(avoiding or minimizing impacts)through prOViding environmental input into development selection and preliminary design.This approach \'1111 be expanded to include approaches c,d and e follm--ling developrr:ent selection. B.Wildlife Ecology -Furbearers Comment 1: Scope of these studies needs to be extended to salt water.The reason is the proposed Susitna hydropower project will have impacts all the way to salt water. Response: The scope of the furbearer studies that concern aquatic furbearers (e.g.muskrats,beaver,and river otters)have already been extended on a limited basis downstream to the Delta Islands.At the present time there does not appear to be justification for extending the study effort any further downstream.Should the results of Phase I indicate that further extension is in order,it will be proposed for Phase II. COffi'l1ent 2: This manual does not acknowledge the need for mitigation for these 1iving reSQUl-ces.It is recommended that the Procedures t1anua 1 be revised to reflect the need for mitigation for furbearers. 11 Response: .- -,....-, Although mitigation was not mentioned in the Procedures Manual,it will certainly be addressed in the furbearer studies.In order to strengthen the interdisciplinary coordination concerning mitigation,the Principal Investigator of the furbearer studies has been added to the mitigation task force as described in the Big Game Procedures Manual.~ Comment 3: The manual describes surveys which will be done only in the winter.The seasonality of this approach will result in certain data biases and lack of data for the intervening months. Response: ~, As indicated on page 12 of the Furbearer Procedures Manual,field ~ activities will be conducted throughout the year and are not restr'icted to the winter months.Some of the survey activities that are being conducted during the non-winter months include locating fox dens,~ collecting furbearer scats,and monitoring of radio-collared animals. Comment 4: The studies state that radio collaring of animals It/ill be done.How will the radio collar data be used; Response: Radio telemetry data will be used to determine the home range size of key furbearers.This information,in conjunction with the vegetation maps,will enable the generation of an estimate of how many animals the area can normally support.The radio telemetry data are also being used to determine seasonal distribution and habitat utilization of key furbearers. Note Concerning Furbearer Procedures t~anual: Since Jt was impossible,prior to the initiation of these studies, to est.blish specitlc techniques that would be highly effective in sampling the furbearers,many of the techniques outlined in the Procedures Manual have been modified following the first field season.An amend- ment to the furbearer manual \'1i11 be prod~!ced in spring,1981,and will reflect the refined approach that is now being used. C.\~ildlife Ecology -Birds and Non-game Mammals Comment 1: The scope of these studies needs to extend to salt water. 12 -I J II!l!l!l I r r"'. I' r II r r t r I l .'. Response: At the present time,bird and non-game mammal studies are being conducted as far downstream as Sherman.With the exception of a bald eagle nest survey,there are no studies planned for this discipline downstream of Talkeetna.Insufficient data exist to support the conclusion that major terrestrial impacts will take place downstream from Talkeetna.At the present time,the expenditure of funds to study birds and non-game mammals in this area does not appear warranted.Should the resu1ts of the Phase I hydrology 'studies indicate that major changes in terrestrial habitat are likely to occur,an intensive Phase II program will be imple- mented.. Comment 2: The Procedures Manual fails to acknowledge the need for mitigation of bi rds and non-game an i rna 1s.It is recomme~ded that the Procedures Manuals be revised to reflect this need. Response: Although mitigation was not mentioned in the Procedures Manual,it will certainly be addressed in the birds and non-game mammal studies.In order to strengthen the interdisciplinary coordination concerning mitigationi the Principal Investigator for bird and non-game mammal studies has been added to the mitigation task force as described in the Big Game Procedures i~anua 1. General Comments on 'vJildlife [col092'Procedures Manuals Comment: There is a compelling need to integrate the wildlife and the plant ecology studies so that the end results are meaningful and useful to the decisions which will be made.Each of these study elements should apply appropriate quantitative methodologies to evaluate animal habitats.The methodology used may depend on the characteristics of the species or group of species they are dealing with.Whatever method is adopted,it must be biologicallY justifiable and provide a relative estimate of the habitat value per area unit for the study area. Response: The assessment of impacts will be based to a very large degree on project-related disturbance of wildlife habitat.Although the inter- relationships between the plant ecolngy studies and the various wildlife studies were not emphasized in the Procedures Manuals,there has been, and will continue to be,a highly coordinated effort between Subtasks 7.11 and 7.12. 13 Subtask 7.12 Plant Ecology Comment 1: The scope of these studies needs to be expanded from the dam site all the ~ way to salt water.The reason for this is that construction and operation of the dam will impact vegetation to that extent. Response: Under Phase I,the present intent is to extend certain of the plant ecology studies downstream to Delta Islands.The degree and extent of impact downstream,especially below Delta Islands,has not as yet been defined.The impact downstream will depend,to a considerable degree, on the facility design and hydrological information \tlhich is not currently available or not finalized.For this reason,it was initially decided that it would be best to wait until the extent of hydrologic impact is known below the Delta Islands,before.specific vegetation studies are performed for this region.If studies are warranted below Delta Islands,then they would be proposed for Phase II. Comment 2: There needs to be a high level of integration and coordination between the plant ecology,hydrology,and the wildlife impact assessment studies. This is because a great part of the wildlife impact mitigation will be based on vegetation. Response: We agree that a high level of integration and coordination between the plant ecology,hydrology,and the wildlife impact assessment studies is needed.The need for this integration and coordination is stated in several places in the Plant Ecology Procedures Manual.There is a major section entitled "Input Required From Other Sources 'l in Itlhich subsections entitled "Hydrology"and "Wildlife Information"are included.The need for coordination among disciplines is also stated in several of the Wildlife Procedures Manuals and was discussed in detail under the response to the general comments under Subtask 7.11 Wildlife Ecology.In summary, we believe that the need for coordination has been recognized from the outset.We feel that we have fulfilled this need to date and plan to continue to do so throughout the study. Comment 3: The definition of wetlands used for classifying habitats should be compatible with data already collected in the Susitna Basin by the cooperative study underway with ONR,AOF&G,and SCS.We recommend that the classification system developed by the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service and described in "Classification of ~Jetlands and DeeD Water Service Habi tats of the United States"(F\~S/OBS79/3l)be cons i dered as the wetland classification for these stUdies. 14 ""'"'] -J - rIII'!l ! I"'"'" 1 r I {! n!: "! j,: r, r I \ Response: The classification system developed by the USF&WS for wetlands and deepwater habitats will be used for the wetlands mapping effort.There has been some coord i nat i on with the SCS concern i ng I'let 1ands and there are p):ns for additional coordination with AOF&G and DNR. Subtask 7.14 Access Road Analysis Comment 1: The analysis of alternativei does not indicate whether stream crossings will be reviewed to determine extent of icing and adverse environmental impact as a result of crossing these streams.Stream crossing and structures should be designed to avoid creating icing and erosion problems. Response: Stream crossings are an important part of the access route environmental analysis and will definitely be considered in routing and later in impact and mitigation planning for the selected route.Included in impact assessment and mitigation planning will be analysis of designs to avoid potential ice dam problems during break-up,and associated erosion problems.Consideration will also be given to minimizing erosion problems.Consideration will also be given to minimizing impacts associated with actual construction of bridge facilities and culverts, i.e.habitat disturbance and erosion potential. Comment 2: This analysis should include assessing the effects of an increase in fishing due to newly opened road access as part of its scope of work. Response: The analysis will include assessing the effects of an increase in fishing d~e to newly opened road access.The potential impacts on the fish community and habitat from a biological standpoint win be addressed under Subtask 7.10,Fish Ecology Studies,and the recreational impacts or conditions resulting from increased access to this area will be handled under Subtask 7.07,Land Use Analysis.In like manner,other environmental subtasks (e.g.vegetation,cultural resources,wildlife) will deal with increased access as it affects these specific disciplines. Comment 3: There is an obvious linkage between access roads for this project and land use/fish and wildlife studies.Review of the manuals does not indicate that the appropriate process or mechanism is in place to see that this occurs. 1 S ~ I Response:_ I Subtask 7.14 (Access Road Environmental Analysis)is essentially a coordination subtask for this specific project component since it has obviously far-reaching impacts.The Procedures Manual sta:es that the actual analysis is to be done by Principal Investigators within each environmental subtask.A major coordination effort was felt to be necessary due to the interplay of roles between APA,Acres,R&M,TES,~ ADF&G ~nd the various environmental subcontractors.To this end, correspondence exchange and maps and information exchange has occurred since April,1980.In November,a meeting was held in Anchorage at ."""!Ij which time representatives of APA,Acres,R&M,TES,AOF&G,and other environmental subcontractors discussed various alternative routes. Information exchange continues on a daily basis,and will continue through route selection and preparation of the FERC application. General Comments Comment: It is the consensus of tte Steering Committee that each study task Pl~ocedures Manual should include two maps: A map that delineates the boundaries of the specific study tasks described in the respective manual. 2.A second map delineating the overall study area,i.e.,from the mouth of the Susitna River to the Denali Highway. Response: , J..Maps of specific study areas would certainly be useful.In several subtasks,part of the work performed during the first year was a determination of the appropriate study area.Such maps are thus planned for the 1980 Annual Reports and will be incorporated into the respective Procedures Manuals with the next required amendment to each manual.- 2.A composite map showing the relationship of specific study areas \'Jill be presented in our summary annual report. 16 - ~i - .'y;'." 1'.", / .-...t_ \', I.POPULC,TION A.Population levels 1.His"torical 2.Present 3.Proj ected 4.Component of Change (births,deaths, in-out miaration) 8.Ethnicity,Culture,Religion r- i I r ( c.Population Distribution (city,borough, state)by: 1:Age 2.Sex 3.Race 4.Occupation (general) 5.Education a.Retired,\~age,salary b.Sector,activity c.Emp 1oyment I""" ! D.Population Density r I ,.... i r ( ~ Co • F. F"am i 1y /H0 use h 0 1d Ch ar ac t er i 5 tic s 1 Extent 2.Mar ita 1 S tat us 3.Migration patterns a.mobility/stability b.point of origin c.out/in migration 4.length of Residence a.in house b.in com:nun i ty c.in state 5.Place of work (commuting distance) Attitudes Toward Change/Economic D2velopment G.Projections Each of these categories and variables will be addressed to the extent hat data and information allow and to the extent that they are relevant or the purposes of this analysis. i 11. ,-, \ci...J A.Historical Info (growth rate) B.Type 1.Sinale familv J J 2.t"lu 1ti ~f am i 1y 3.Mobile home 4.Recreation Facilities 5.Transient Facilities Variables to be consid2red for above a.number of units b.quality c.cost/prices d.vacancy rate - C.Vacancy Rate D. c.... F. G. H. T J.• Status 1.Rent i ng 2.Buyi ng 3.Own 4.Other Land availability Zoning/Building Regulations (&patterns) Financial Climate (incentives/disincentives) Real Estate Activity 1.Sa1es 2.Construction 3.P laos P.'Jjections I V.?UBL IC S:?\'ICES &GO':EP';;;·'1:1H REVElilJ: I""" I ( A. B. Government Structure/Organization L TOylns 2.Cities 3.Soroughs Government Services *Variables to be considered for above r (i n I ' I '\' L 2. ~ ..J • 4. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. lL 12. 13. 14. Water Supply and Treatment Waste Water Treatment Solid Waste Disposal Police Protection Legal System (courts,retention facilities) Fire Protection Health Care (including Social Services) Parks and Recreation Libraries Education (day care,vocational,others) Public Transportation Roads and Highway System Telephone Service/Communication Electric Power Service I""" I I1i r IIi r \. C. a.Service area b.Usage figures c.Dep 1oyment patterns (di s Lances/response times) d.Capacity figures e.Condition/quality f.Relevant standards g.Occurrence rates h.Plans for expansion i.Government expenditures Tax Base and Revenues 1.Taxes a.personal i.rates i i .bas e b.industry i.rates ii.base c.Sales i.rates ii.hase d.other 'I'./. '/ 1\1 l •.., r- i....(cant.) 2.Other revenue sources 3.Government debt (borrowing ccpacity) O.Projections ih4&SU:t:;;:;:t Z! -i I!.. A.General Description (History and Area Trends) 8.Tota 1 Work Force C.Employment r~ultiplier D.Output Multiplier r r-. I ( E.Major Basic Industry Description 1.Cons tructi on 2.Hining 3.Agriculture 4.Timber and related products 5~Manufacturing 6.Fishery 7.Oil and gas 8.Transportation i.Ra i1 ii.Air iii.Motor transport iv.tlrarin~ 9.Public Utilities 10.Co~unications 11.Wholesale trade 12.Retail trade 13.Finance,insurance,real estate 14.Services 15.Public Administration (Federal,State,Local) 16.Tourism *Variables to be considered for above a.history b.st at i st i cs (present sales,prod.,etc.) c.employment l.labor force ['2.percent of tota 1 work force f 3.p ayro 11\ 4.average wage rate,....d.resource base (1and use)I I e.service area f.usage figures g.capacity h.condition/quality i.product value j.filarketing patterns k.relative to state and U.S. l.future outlook v.(CGfiL) ""r . G. Conclusions Proj ect ions -, '""""1., ,....""",_~.~.~,..,_A/I -'"'or &:ir"''''''''''\;"';...,;t·.,-'~l r.:.,)vur...\...~l.!.-':'U ...1i.-'..)iIIC I A.Historical Labor Ch~nges r l f""" I \ B.Ef'1ployment 1.Present Pr0file (ei.1plo~ent by sector) a.absolute b.percentage 2.i1ul tipl iers a.basic industry to b.export tr ade sector C.services 3.Length of work week 4.Seasonality C.Occupational Staffing Patterns by 1.Sector/Industry 2.Ethnicity 3.Sex 4.Unemployment 5.Percentaae of work force 6.\-f ages (selected occupations) O.Working Conditions and Absenteeism E.Union Presence F.Unemployment for Area 1.Age 2.Sex 3.Race G.Income 1.History 2.Per Capita Income a.General b.Sex c.Ethnicity 3.Source a.Wages/salaries b.Social Security 4.Subsistence income (moderate standard of living) 5.Consumer Price Index (Cpr) H.Projections Historica1/Genera1 B.Land Tenure (ownership) C.Existing 1.Fares try 2.AQricu1ture 3.t1i n i ng 4.Timber 5.Native ~ands 6.Federal 7.State 8.Parks 9.Oil and Gas 10.Unexploited Natural Resources 11.Industry/Co~ercial 12.Urban 13.Rural 14.Residential IS.t1il Hary 16.Transportation *Variables to be considered for above a.acres b.value c.ownership d.management plans e.historical trends f.percentage of total D.Population Density E.Land Use Plans and Cantrol 1.Public 2.Private 3;11un i c i pal it i es 4.Borough 5.Flood plains F.Projections - ,..., , A.Utilizing Fish &Wildlife ~esources 1.Sport Fishery a.All species 2.~;ildlife a.Caribou b.~·1oose c.Slack Bear d.6rown Sear e.r·jountain Goats f.Sheep g.Wolverine i.Waterfowl.Birds j.Other Furbearers *Variables to be considered for above 1.Historical 2.Present a.area (acres and location) b.effort (visitor days/#07 visitors)- c.Success (harvest) d.Resident (pt.of origin/%of total) e.Non-Resident (gen.geo.pt.07 origin/ %of total) f.3pecies (stats relative to State) .g.Subsistence (personal consumption/ business) h.Trophy i.Management Plans .i.Reoulations ii.Re~enues (total/relative to state/flow of money) iii.Enforcement (ways/numbers/capacity) B.Not Related to Fish &Wildlife Reserves 1.Water Sports (canoe.kayak,rafting) a.Historical b.Area 1.effort 2.resident/non-resident pt.of origin 2.Land Sports (hiking,picnicing,climbing) a.Historical b.Area 1.effort 2.resident/non-resident pt.of origin c.Other D.Reiated Business 1.Guides (#/5) 2.Air Taxi ODeratars (#/$) 3.Lodae Owne~s (#/5) 4.Land O',mers (#) • - - .$i!.!!!iSCSU!leLa.£1 E.Projections ~, March 2,1981 \': i:J 'c.,:'\-- Mr.Eric P.Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue,Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 ~lr&lT~v @w m~[o\~~[o\~'/~n~M~ND.GDVERNO' D~PT.01"EN\'UION~lf~NT1\I.l CONSRlfC\','\,'I'ION / /' /POUCH 0 -JUNEAU 9Uff f Dear Mr.Yould: Your letter of January 2,1981 proposes to expand the function of the Susitna Steering Committee from that of an advisory body to the study team to one of performing evaluations and structuring recommendations.I am happy to offer the resources of this agency to serve in that capacity to a reasonable extent. ""'"I ,I It is not clear to us,however,precisely what may constitute' "items requiring consultation,"as the only substantive matters to come before the Steering Committee have been review of the field procedures manuals regarding Task 7 of the Plan of Study,and review of the preliminary screening of poten~ial hydro sites.Apparently 1 a more direct link with the Power Authority is anticipated,rather than simply with the study team,since your letter indicates that Steering Committee recommendations will be considered by the Power Authority.We will look forward to additional information, at an appropriate time;,concerning matters that rnay be brought before the Steering Committee,and the action requested of the committee. Bob Martin will be the representative of this agency to the Steering Committee as of this date.Bob is the new supervisor of ADEC's SouthcentralcRegional Office.'Bob will receive whatever support he needs from Dave StQLqevant,who has been our representative in the past apd-Who wiU---CElJ::!tinue as Bob IS al terna te.(\\r,:><---...~cer~~~_../...//~--t---~,'l0[ubc----- "/l/'-__---t--, ...J<'Er.!l§.!;_JL-'MNe 11 e r Commissioner cc:Deena Henkins,EQM Bob Martin,SCRO JAY S.HAMMOND,GOrfRNO' , !.:j 279-5577 323 E.4TH A VENUE ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 9950101VISIONOFRESEARCH&DEVELOPMENT March 24,1981 Eric Yould.Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 W.4th Avenue.Suite 31 Ancnorage,AK 99501 -~~&~~@~~~~~~& ..- Dear Mr.Yould: The purpose of this letter is to call to your attention the lack of response from Alaska Power Authority (A.P.A.)to detailed review comments that theSusitna Hydro Steering Committee made on the Susitna Hydro Project plans of study.These comments and recommendations were transmitted in a letter dated November 21,1980.I request a response from A.P.A.which identifies when the Steering Committee will have an opportunity to review the modifications that will be made in studies to meet the concerns that were raised in our November 21,1980 letter. With the 1981 field season beginning very soon,changes in the plans of study will have to be accomplished quickly. Sincerely yours, OJ~ Al Carson,Chairman Susitna Hydro Steering Committee cc:Susitna Hydro Steering Committee Members R.E.LeResche Reed Stoops -ALASKA ?OWERAUTHORITY r Mr.Al Carson Chairman,Susitna Hyaro Steering Committee Alaska Department of r~atura1 Resourc~s 323 East 4th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska·99501 Dear Mr.Carson: .:.."'~ -I ,"'"i \ i"""•. .I regret that it has tak~n so long to react to the Steering Committee~s suggestions on improving the Sus1tna hydroelectric project environmental plan of study.It took a number of months for Acres and its subcontractors to de- velop and transmit their set of responses and plan of action.The Power Authority received that transmittal on ~wTch 2,1981.We have not been able to make any final decisions on scope changes,however,for tt"o reasons.First, Acres has not yet provided the program modification suggestions 1n any detail of scope or cos t.Secondly,the Power Authori ty has had to \rla 1t for other program components (such as Tasks 4 and 5)to be evaluated for necessary scope changes.Itis only in revi~ing the entire first year program that we can identify area;s forfmprovement,assess their cost 1mpact~levaluate their rela- tive merit and established priorities among the myriad comp~ting needs. The Power Authori ty will have prepared 1ts set of recommended scope changes and resultant Stipp 1ementarJ budqet request by April 3,1981.It remains to be seen whether all,nonear a portion of the supplemental funds will be forthcom- ing. I have requested previously that you organize a Ste~rfng Committee meeting for either April 13,·14,or 15.At this meet1n;h we will present our proposed program lroolficat1ons,which I trust you wi 11 find go a long way toward satisfy- i og the Committee's concerns.In preparation for that fr'.eet1n~h I have attached a copy of the Acres response to the Steering Corrmittee COTi1l!lents.The detailed re- cOI1';l'!':endations~while not contained in the attachtnent~will be presented at the Steering Cmnm1ttee meeting. Sincerely .. FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Robert J\.}~ohn Director of Engineering .!\ttachIl1ent;As stated r-- I !cc:Sus i tna Hydro Steeri ng Com:ni ttee i'lembers wi th attaChl<'1ent nt.:I'AUTIUENT 01'NATIJIl.\I.Ilt:SOIJllf;I-:S DIVISION OF RESEARCH &DEVEL~MEfIrT March 26.1981 ALASKA POWBit AUTHORITY SUSITN;\.r--------t Eric Yould I FILE P5~J.J.E.xecutive Director i .If./'/k.a hIAlasPowerAut ority iSEQUENCE NO•.333 West 4th,Suite 31IFJ[i 7,:k Anchorage,AI<99501 Dear Mr.You+d: 6 i981 JAr s.HAMMOND.'OYflliOl 323 E.4TH A VENUE ANCHORAGE.ALASKA 99501 279-5577 nr::CiIV[D ..!.Cl~~2?1981 ~ JJ.}SY.A POW;'R ;.,.U1HORliY 1.The Steering Committee representatives recommend coordination between the decision about access road routes and transmission line routes.Until this issue was raised by a Steering Committee member at the March 20 meeting there had been little discussion. The documents reviewed indicate that this was not a criterion for establishing potential access routes. 2.There needs to be a systematic decision-making process explicitly laid out for determining an access route for the Susitna dams. This decision-making process should be straight forward so that agency participants can understand and effectively participate in establishing proposed access routes.There needs to be a broad range of criteria established for determining the acceptability or nonacceptibility of various route alternatives.Information provided by Acres and their subcontractors to date indicates that Eric Yould 2 March 26,1981 .-. I - 3. 4. 5. the criteria used to determine access.roads were eight in number .and are roadway and railroad technical design parameters exclusively. It is the recommendation of the Steering Committee members that there are numerous other criteria which are critical and neea consideration along with the technical road and railroad design parameters.I would refer you to an attached document entitled "S u itability for Haul Roads"to give you an example of a more comprehensive lists of criteria that need to be incorporated in any decision with respect to access to the dam sites • There needs to be a clearer explanation and understanding of the decisions regarding the timing of building access roads vs.FERC approval for the project.We were advised by subcontractors that the timing depends on which access mode and route 1s determined. The time of construction and design of these routes varies from one to three years.The agencies on the Steering Committee need to have a better understanding of how these facts and assumptions interrelate to each other in order to make informed recommendations to APA. There are numerous specific decisions that will be required regardless of which access mode and route is ultimately determined the most appropriate.The location and development of these facilities could significantly affect the preference and recommendations from agencies.For example,identification of gravel sites, spoil sites,stream crossings;construction camp service and maintenance facilities will be needed.The members of the Susitna Hydro Steering Committee unanimously felt that it was important and necessary for APA to provide an understanding of how these decisions will be made and how a quality control system will be in effect to ensure :that tasks are accomplished in accordance with approvals and designs. The Susitna Hydro Steering Committee members in reviewing the March 6 and 20 meetings and discussing with subcontractors have determined that data gathering planned for this summer should be carried out on several access routes in order to make the final decision as to which one is most acceptable.To make a determination on a specific route with the lack of data/Information that we are currently dealing with and then send researchers and data gatherers into the field this summer to gather site specific data on only one route is of questionable utility and logic.The primary reason why this is questionable 1s because unless comparable data on several of the prime routes is provided,the agencies will be unable to provide comments as to which route is most acceptable. In summary,we see the gathering and analysis of data on several proposed routes as the rational basis for making a determination as to which access route should be ultimately chosen. .- I In summary.the Steering Comm1ttee wishes to ~phas1ze that it is willing and anxious to work cooperatively and expeditiously with APA in identifying and resolving the numerous questions which need to be Eric Yould 3 March 26,1981 •t.'~"".__. .!L:;;';;~:::" "1"'-~:_""" ~ ;.t..:._ :.;" .:.:...~ ;: ~it-_ " i~- "., ":: :...:.:.:..~. ::-..-.....':. "I, f ~ {:.=-O'_ ;.:." ,~':··-':':·:::~tr.~.j:i· ;':-r::'. •0: answered in order to make rational decisions with respect to access to Susitna Hydro sites.Once you and your staff have had an opportunity to review this letter,I would appreciate an opportunity to sit down and discuss the specifics of these comments in further detail • Sincerely yours, Al Carson,Chairman Susitna Hydro Steering Committee cc:Susitna Hydro Steering Committee Members R.E.LeResche Reed Stoops - ... .r-. .,-..- l\.LASliAPOlVEI{i\,U'l"••()RI'I'Y 333 WEST 4th AVENUE -SUITE 31 -ANCHORAGE.ALASKA 99501 Phone:(907)277-7641 (907)276-2715 ,f~pri 1 8,1981 Hr.Al Carson Alaska Department of Natural Resources 323 E.4th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dea r A1: This letter is addressed to you in your capacity as Chairman of the Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee.I \'iant to provide the Committee \'l1th some in- formation,and solicit Committee approval of a recommendation. To recap some past events and discussions last year,a reassessment of the Steering Committee role was performed.A proposal to slightly alter the Commit- tee charter emerged from that reassessment and 'das sent to a,number of resource management agencies.Due to differences between the agencies,an abbreviated version was sent to some.Copies of both letters are attached. Of 14 agencies contacted,12 answered,4 basically agreed with the proposal, 5 agreed with emphasis on the option to formally comment separately from the Steering Committee route,one posed an alternative,and tvlO in essence abstained. From this,I conclude acceptability of the proposal to slightly alter the Steeri"g Committee role.NOVI,to close the loop,I 'dould like to ask the Committee proper to move to =ncorporate the change. I would appreciate it if you would include this subject as an agenda item for the April 13,1981 Cammi ttee meeti ng. FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 15 Attachments: 1.APA Letters (2) 2.Response Summary Sheet 3.Response Letters (12) Si?1 re1Y ,~1/1 n IJpv-/!dJ~~ {David D.Wozniak \ Project Engineer - cc:Phi1 Hoover,Acres-Col umbi a w/attachments 1. AGENDA Susitna Hydro Steering CO.J.mittee Heeting April 13,1981 Response to November 1980 Steering Committee comnlcnL:s on Task 7 studies;APA,Acres,and subcontractors. -- 2.Response to March 26,1981 Steering Committee cow~ents to APA on access roads;APA,Acres,and subcontractors. 3.Role of Stee.ring Committee;APA and committee members. 4.Alternative power study and Steering Committee;committee.members. 5.Other items;COffiluittee members. r"" I I r r"'" j' ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY April 15,1981 ~1r.Bi i1 La~"i -'nee Anchorage Operations Office Environmental Protection Agency 710 C Stl"'eet J\nehorage,Alaska 99510 Dear l'1r.Lawrence: Attached is a mid-point report on Susitna Hydroelectric Project.It is forwarded for your information in response to your earlier expression of in- terest within the context of the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Steering COnr.llttee. I have asked Mr.Allan Carson.the Chairman of that committee,to forward meeting minutes to you and to ensure that you are advised of scheduled meetings. Sincerely, FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR David D.t-Iozn1ak Project Engineer Attachment:As noted cc:Allan Carson w/o attachment CONCUR: OW RAl<l ALASKA I·OlVEU AUTUOUITY MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: \.For the Record David D.Wozniak ~ DATE: SUBJECT: May 1,1981 Steering Committee Mailings -,·-olf)'/'-,/-._; On Apri 1 23,1981,copi es of the APA mid-;efr report and the Pl an of Study I'Jere hand carried to USGS and AEIDC.Copies of the mid-year report were earlier mailed to other members of the Steering Committee.With this action,all member of the Steering Committee either possess or have access to both documents.~ - I""" i 1, r I, _.'_._.~--.-.,_._..._-----'--....- ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY April 15,1981 lAr.Gary Stackhouseu.S.Fish &Wildlife Ser/icc 1101 E.Tudor Road Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Gary: Attached is a copy of our report to tl~e Legislature as promised by me earlier this week.I am also sending n copy to Bruce Apple. Bruce tells me he has a copy of the Plan of Study.Since these are an endangered species.r would appreciate it if you would shal"'e his copy as you structure your shopping list of areas of concern. Sincerely, FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR David D.Hozniak Project Engineer Attachment:As noted CONCUR: D\tl RAM - ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY April 15 ~1981 1:15.Judy Schwartz Environmental Evaluation Branch Hail Stop 443 Regi on 10.EPA 1200 6th Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101 Dear Ms.Schwartz: Attached is a mid-point report on Susitna Hydroelectric Project.It is for#arded for your information in ·response to your earlier expression of in- terest within the context of the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Steering Committee. I have asked Mr.,ll.llan Carson~the Chairman of that cnmnittee,to fort<!ard meeting minutes to you and to ensure that yeu are advised of scheduled meetings. Sincerely~ FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR David D..Hozniak Project Engineer Attachment:As noted cc;Allan Carson w/o attach~nt CONCUR: OW RAM - May 4,1981 P5700.11.74 T.871 Sus1tna Hydroelectnc Project Access Road Studies Mr.Al Carson.Chairman usitna Hydro Steering Com1ttee laska Department of Natural Resources 23 East 4th Avenue Anchorage.AK 99502 Dear Hr.Carson: acknowledge receipt of your letter of March 26,1981.to Eric ould,APA.Presently,I am in the process of reviewing your com- ments and reCOGll1l!'ndat1ons.1 a.ppreciate the Steering CoJrmittee's i111ngness to wrk cooperatively with APA in 1dentifying and resol ving the numerous questions relating to access roads and other spects of the Sus1tna studies. e are presently developing a systematic decision-U'.aJdng process that can be utilized for access road selection and for other major decisions that will be made as part of the Susitna studies. The decision hAS been made to obtain air photos on all three major access corridors.thus.eliminating the necessity of an arly decision for a preferred corridor. Our decision as to which corridor or corridors will receive detal1ed study will not be made until we complete our evaluation of overall objectives.selection criteria,and data base.The Steering Committee will be given the opportunity to review our selection process and recommendations prior to us making a final decision. Trusting this meets with your approval. Sincerely. [:WILLETT SWITTE ~LAMB -I A 1;0 ....J:>€N-Y /1 3J...!jl ""BERRY 1,.--~ ~(.... ,~.: I [~c.."HI)......,.-7-;('/ GILL /"-'1"'1'IiLOWAEVY~v"-"IETZ ~~'I ,W'.I HUSTEAD ""'"sove aI.'!WI 1 .CHAse C I.-.el,~7/1 h·' Kevin R.Young KRY:db -i 1 f, .. ::.~;.,...~--:.::.....:;:. ,'-", -r DIVISION OF RESEARCH &DEVELOPMENT Hay 8,1981 Eric Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 W.4th Avenue,Suite 31 Anchorage,AK 99501 Dear Eric: {I I JAY s.HAMMOND,SO'([INOfi I / / 323 E.4TH A VENUE ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 279-5577 i1/1 Qn1I_t'...Ji,},!:. /.lASKA POWeR AUTHORlW The Susitna Hydro Steering Committee has reviewed the Alaska Power Authority's March 1981 Mid Report to Governor Hammond and the Alaska Legislature.Specific comments from the Steering Committe members regarding this report are provided below.In general,however,the Committee was disappointed that APA did not pernit our review of this report prior to its circulation,as several members have discovered factual errors in several locations in the text,and most have reservations about conclusions reached by APA regarding environmental feasibility. Dave Wozniak has assured me that,in the future,the Steering Committee will be included as reviewers of all APA documents of this nature on the Susitna Project,and in particular I have been assured that the Steering Committee members will be provided an opportunity to comment upon the draft of the final feasibility report to the Governor and Legislature scheduled for March,1982. The following are specific comments on the 1981 Mid Report: 1.There appears to be a great deal of misunderstanding on the part of the External Review Panel (and perhaps others associated with this project)regarding both the scope and the completion date for the feasibility studies.The feasibility studies currently underway will not,as we understand it,terminate in mid-1982 when the Application for License is filed ~rith FERC (assuming the decision is made to file).Feasibility studies will in fact continue for several more years in order to gather sufficient environmental or other information with which a reasoned decision can finally be made whether or not to construct (FERC staff alone will require a great deal more information than will be available in 1982 with ~lich they can prepare a draft environmental impact statement). The March 20,1981 letter signed by five members of the External Review Panel refers to "feasibility studies ... completion in April,1982"and"present studies,supplemented by appropriate additional investigations,to their 1982 completion date.II While "Phase I'·may end in 1982,"Phase -...~"..c: ".:>" Eric Yould 2 Ma "'1981-.4,., ~i 2. 3. 11'1 will continue for several more years,as we perceive it. We suggest you make this point clear both with the External Review Panel and with the Governor and Legislature.We also suggest that,via your public participation activities,the public be fully and accurately informed about the length of time required to (a)determine whether or not to apply for a FERC license,(b)finally determine project feasibility,and (c)obtain a FERC license and actually begin construction. The Steering Committee is of the opinion that the report is too much of a "sales document Tl rather than a balanced assessment of what is known to date regarding Susitna feasibility.For example,it is stated on page 7-6 Tlwhether positive or negative the overall change in the Cook Inlet salmon fishery will probably be slight."Recognizing the paucity of supporting data the committee feels this conclusion,and others like it in the Environmental Implications chapter,are premature. Individual Steering Committee members have found technical errors in various places in this report.Rather than enumerate these detailed comments at this time,you may expect comments from individual Steering Committee members or their agencies in the near future. -( -! r r- ) \, Finally,I have been informed that the External Revie\.v Panel plans to convene in Alaska in the near future.I request an opportunity for the Steering Committee to meet with the Panel,perhaps when they are briefed on this year's field studies.Also,in order to keep members of this External Review Panel appraised of future Steering Committee concerns and technical comments on the Susitna studies,we feel it appropriate to circulate to Panel members letters,memoranda,etc. generated from the Steering Committee.We believe the Panel members would benefit from Steering Committee comments,particularly since they might not otherwise have an opportunity to gain insights into state and federal agency scientific/technical,regulatory,and public interest concerns. I hope you find these comments constructive.We will provide Mr.Wozniak a detailed outline of steering committee interests and concerns regarding the Plan of Study at our May 28 meeting. Sincerely, Al Carson Chairman cc:Dave Wozniak Steering Committee Members ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY June 2.1981 Mr.Ai Carson Chainnan Susi tna Hydroelectric Steering, Conmittee Department of Natural Resources 323 E.4th Avenue. Anchorage ..Alaska 99501 Dear Al: Thank you for your letter dated fil.ay 8 ..1981 concerning the 1981 ~11d Report and associated matters.Regretfully,heavy travel commitments within the office have slatted this response snmewhat.Nonetheless!,it is important that the points raised by your letter be addressed. Our current schedule calls for the publishing of a very well developed draft of the final feasibility study report by March i5.1982.!reaffinn our cOlmlitment to provide this draft to you and fellrn>t members of the Steel 'og Committee for review.I think there is some confusion.h~Never. concerning other documents to be revi~red.In principle?the Power Authority welcomes the Steering COlmlittee l"eview of (Jur '/arious effm"ts. Unfortunately,we have not yet agreed as to the items ,lOr-thy of Steering ConiJJ1ttee review.As I have noted to you on several occasions.we \lIQuId 1i ka to interact with the CoomittEe rather than continue the 1ntennitt.ent, smf~wbat adversary contacts that have cbaracterized our past discussions. If we are to be truly interactive,your contr-ibl.ltion to def1nhl9 the areas of interaction is essential.To that ob,iective,let me repeat my suggestion that the Steering Cor.mittee.u.tHiz1ng the Plan of ::;tudy as its guidel ine, identify specific areas andior events and the assodati'd degree of depth \l4ith whi ch they wish to be involved.Given a clear understanding of expected areas of interaction,the problem of Steering Committee review or nonrev1ew of the Mid Report might not have occurred. Insofar as future project ml1estones are concerned,the effort currently in progress,variously called.II Feasibilfty Study"and/or IIPhase I"..has as major objectives ..determining the technical and economic feasibility of the proposal,and,if feasible.generating the data n-ecessary for a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)license application.This step is bounded by a Power Authority contract \~1tl1 Acres American,Inc~'> a contract which terminates in mid-19B2.That date is consistent with a -I, f""I1l I ~,' I -! r- .1- Il ., r ~, I, -1i' I r-'\ \ 1 r-, I \..:' / / I p/ ./ 1egislatively mandated Po~~r Authority recommendation to the Goverp~r and Legislature by April,198~on project continuation or abandonment. The underlying assumption is that sufficient information \1111 be available by tilat time to rnake a reasoned and reasonable judgment on whether or not to submit the license application.(Please note that this is !!Ql a decision to ubuild>l or "not bui1d ll ,a point I wi 11 address further on.) Strictly speaking then.the ufeasibil i ty StudyU 'l/ill in fact tenninate: in mid-1982,by virtue of the contract terminating. If the mid-1982 decision is to continue wit.h the Susitna Hydroe'!ecb4 i<: Project proposal.we will enter a period frequently referred to as Phase II.It would be characterized by submittal of the FERC license application.commenceu1ent of detailed engineering development,and contin- uance of a substantial amount ,of investigations of the project area. including such subjects as fish resources.By mid-1984.it is anticipated the license application,as su plemented and modified b the continuin invest;ations,will be approv •G yen RC approva and a number ot other,esser regulatory approvals).the question of build or not build will then be referred to the State government,where Ii decision on con- struction will eu~rge through ,the political process. Recent discussions with the Ex'ternal Review Panel suggests that they are very clear on this sequence 01'events,and this same concept,.(although trorded slightly differently)was advanced in the Mid Report.Accordingly, I must conclude that both the panel and the public have been fully and accurately informed about the project flO't'I.Certainly it there was no intent to be anything less than accurate.and int1m.ltions to that effect:\'Iarrant strong objection. I regret your letter arrived too late to accommodate a joint convening of the Steering Comittee and th~External Review Panel.As a partial accom- fu~ation to your request for such a joint convening.please let me note that the meetings of June 3-5 •.1981 are open to the public,a.nd me:nbers of the Steering Committee are more than welcome to observe the proceedings, (The Committee ~ias made aware of thls1ast week.)We agree 1,11th your suggestion that the External Review Panel be kept appraised of Steering Coornittee concerns and technical comnents.and have no objection l;'(l'latsoever to circulating letters,tnemor~nda9 etc.t generated by the Steering Comittee. However,a revi~1 of such material indicates the only data generated by the comnittee to date are comments to the procedures.manuals,a letter concerning the access proposal,S,and your ~~ay 8,1981 letter.Finally. with respect toa joint convening.we are certainly agreeable.I think \'1e need further discussion to define format and attendance;for example.. lam not sure that our geotechnical representative ltfould gain greatlY from comments advanced by L~natural sciences community.Perhaps we will want to focus our efforts on the environmental representative.Or.Leopold. Further.tote efficient {substantial expense is inVOlved 1n bringing the Sincerely, David O.Hozn1ak Project r"anager ALASKA,POWER J!,UTIlORITf panel memhers to Alaska and paying their per diem)as \il:'ell i1SP~ft$ 1 mn Sl..lY'e you ,-,;1 1 want to give some thought to the structuring'~Jm content of your fo~~l presen~at1ons.I would ~~1~~continued 01,ai(~~~;~ on this subject. V~ii"'"iO._ Page Three " CONCUR:RAt" EPY DI VISION OF RESEARCH &DEVELOPMEflfT r\ /JAr S."""0II1J.<Orr.NO' .,1 323 E.4TH A VENUE ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 I~~&u~ I £ /nEI·~\nT-"IENT 011"~ATURAlt U1ESOIJUcClES June 5,1981 279-5577 ;RECEIVED JU~J -9 1981 Eric Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 W.4th Avenue,Suite 31 Anchorage,AK 99501 .~,LASKA POWER AU:~ORITY Dear ~1r.Yould: The purpose of this letter is to transmit to you a proposed revision in your June 3,1980 letter stating the role and objectives of the Susitna Hydro Steering Committee.The Steering Committee members feel the following more accurately describes the role and function of the Commi:.tee. "The Alaska Power Authority through its consultant,Acres American Incorporated,is carryi;lg out a 3D-month feasibility study of the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Because of the magnitude of this study,effective interagency coordination will be best accom- plished through formation of a Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee. The function of this committee 'Nould be to provide coordinated exchanges of information between the Alaska Power Authority and interested resource management agencies.Through this exchange,the concerns of all agencies involved would be identified early and hopefully prevent unnecessary delays in the progress of these feasibility study,appli- cation for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license to construct, and Environmental Impact Statement review. As proposed,the Steering Committee 'Nould be composed of representatives of resource agencies with responsibilities pertaining to the Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Studies and/or the project's environmental consequences.We therefore invite your agency's participation. The committee would provide for interagency coordination through joint review of project related materials and development of more informed and uniform positions representing all resource interests.We believe this will provide a more efficient process of information exchange. Proposed objectives for this committee are to: lt:· 1.Review and comment on study a?proaches throughout each phase of the plauuing process; aLll& Eric Yould 2 J~5,1981 2. 3. 4. Provide a forum for continued project review of all aspects of the studies,for a timely exchange of information,and for recom- mendation of study redirection,should the accomplishment of specific objectives be'in jeopardy; Comment on compliance of the studies with state and federal laws, regulations,Executives Orders,and mandates as they apply to fish and wildlife resources;and Provide unified steering committee comments to the Power Authority. Should your agency elect to participate in the committtee,we recommend that your representative have a technical background enabling him to comment on the adequacy and approach of ongoing and future feasibility studies,and be able to speak knowledgeably on the policies and procedures of your agency with respect to the review of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license application for the project and the subsequent Environmental Statement (ES)." If you have Comments or suggestions concerning these proposed revisions, please advise. Sincerely, Al Carson Chainnan Susitna Hydro Steering Committee cc:Steering Committee j !J-i r-, .l ~ ! f""; \ I e ALASKA pmiER AUTHORITY June 18,1981 Dear SusitnaHydro Steering Committee nember~ Enclosed is a copy of the Draft Development Selection Report for the pro- posed Sus1tna Hydroelectric Project.The primary purpose of the studies sU:mJlarized in the report was to formulate the optimal Susitna Basin plan of development.Acres has concluded that the ~Jatana-Devi1 Canyon ttlo-dam plan is the preferred approach for developing the basints hydroelectric potential. Further,Acres recommends that planning and engineering studies be continued on this u1o-dam development concept. We are soliciting your co~~nts on the evaluation process used by Acres,on their delineation of relative plan impacts,and on their conclusion that the Watana-Dev11 Canyon plan is the preferred basin alternative~The parts of the report addressing economic comparisons with a thermal plan are not pertinent to the formulation of an optimal basin plan"and they can be ignored for the time being.The issue of economic feasibH ity will be addressed more co,r.prehensively in the draft fcasibi1 it,Y report scheduled for Harch 1982 and in the Battelle \'{l)rk. The Power Authority places a high value on the Steering COlauittee input. Please take the time to review this very crucial and significant report~ and prev;de us 1<fi th your comments.r deal!y)there i1i11 be a carom;ttee meeting in July wherein unified committee comments can be formally trans- mitted.Om"ever.if a meeting doesn'tmaterialize.comments by August 3. i9S1 are solicited. Sincerely. David D.Wozniak Project Engineer Enc1osure:as noted cc:Ward Swift,Battelle (w/attach) Phil Hoover~Acres,Columbia (w/o attachl John La\'!rence,Acres.Buffalo (\'ljo attach) MFR:Same letter sent to attached list SUSITNA HYDRO STEERING COMMITTEE Bob Lamke U.S.Geological Survey \.oia ter Resources 733 W.4th Avenue,Suite 400 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 271-4138 John Rego Bureau of Land Management Anchorage District Office 4700 E.72nd Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99502 344-9661 Brad Smith National Marine Fisheries Studies 701 lie"Street,Box 43 Anchorage,Alaska 99513 271-5006 William J.Wilson Arctic Environmental Information & Data Center,(U of A) 707 A Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 279-4523 Al Carson State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources 323 E.4th Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 279-5577 Tom Trent Alaska Department of Fish and Game 2207 Spenard Road Anchorage,Alaska 99503 274-7583 Larry I-Jright Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service 1011 E.Tudor Road,Su i te 297 Anchorage,Alaska 99503 276-1666 Lenny Corin U.S.Fish and I-Jildlife Service 733 W.4th Avenue,Suite 101 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 271-4575 Gary Stackhouse u.S.Fish &Wi 1d1ife Se rv ice 1011 E.Tudor Road Anchorage,Alaska 99501 276-3800 Bob ~1art in Department of Environmental Conservation 437 E Street Anchorage,Alaska 99501 274-2533 Mr.Bill Lawrence Anchorage Operations Office Environmental Protection Agency 701 C Street Anchorage ,Al as ka 99513 271-5083 Judy Sch~"a rz. Environmental Evaluation Branch Mail Stop 443 Region X,EPA 1200 6th Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101 (206)442-1285 ~ ,, 4.It ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY June 18,19B1 _ Al Carson,Chairman Susitna Hydro Steering Committee Oepart:ment of Natura1 Resources D1 vision of Ras-earch &.De.velopment 323 E.4th Avenue ft.n c.ho rage ,Alas ka 99501 Dear A1: The .vJord1ngof the proposed revision to the Sl!s1tna Hydro Steering COlrmittee role and objectives advanced in your letter of June 5,1981 is finc~I wou 1d new 1ike to see it formally adopted by the Steeri ng COlmIi ttee.Sub- sequently,I wi 11 !:c1ose the loopu with the various agencies or1gina11y involveu by issuing to than the revised i1ord1ng. On a related issue,more work needs to be done by the committee on its composition.Not on1y is it cL.ltlbersome to have a large inactive membership, that sort of situation has a high potential for errors of ammission and embarrassW'.ent.I again urge a concensus on establishment of an active membership.plus some accor.modation for the inactive members.. S1ncerely~ Davi d D.~Jozniak Project Engineer (1)Attacr.ment: Al Carson letter,June 5,1981 cc:Phil Hoover Acres/Coltrwbia (w/attach) Kevin Young Acres/Buffalo (w/attach) CONCUR:RAM ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY-=-, ~'.. ':':..>"' July 28,1981 Hr.Sob Lamkeu.S.Geological Survey Water Resources 733 W.4th Avenue,Suite 400 Anchorage~Alaskd 99501 Dear Nr.Lamke: It would appear that we will not have a formal Susftna Hydroelectric Steering Committee meeting prior to August 3,1981,the target date for your comments on the Development Selection Report (my letter of .June 18, 1981,copy attached).Accordingly,I would very much appreciate it if you \'iould send me your comments by August 7,1981 at the latest. Sincerely, FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR David D.Wozniak Project Engineer Attachment:as noted .-----------,..-,~-.-' I~IEMORANDUM State of Alaska TO;Dave Wozniak Project Engineer Alaska Power Authority 333 W.4th Avenue,Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 OAT~ FILE NO TELEPHONE NO. July 29,1981 02-1-81-ADF&G-7.0 02-V-Acres-l.0 ~KA POWER AUTHORITY FROM:Thomas W.Trent R E eEl V ED SUBJECT: Aquatic Studies Coordinator Su Hydro Aquatic Studies /\:.18 4 1981 Anchorage Review of Draft Development Selection Report -Su Hydro Project (- r ,~,,, -i r I've reviewed the draft Development Selection Report for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project and my comments are as follows: Page 1-4 (g)Ta~k 7 -Environmental Studies Comment:I recommend the words in the last sentence i.e.,large game be changed to ~game. Page 8-26 Environmental Comparison -2nd paragraph -a statement regarding enhancement potential for anadromous fish and,the statement on page 8- 27 Environmental Comparison,2nd paragraph. Comment:A general observation addressed to these specific sections,is that development of the environmental comparisons has undoubtedly been a subjective process.The statements made really don't provide any detailing of the hows,whys,and rationale for the conclusions drawn.I believe we can accept a subjective process for evaluating the environmental merits or deficiencies of a particular dam scheme,but it would have been a helpful process for Acres to involve ADF&G,USFWS and others in such an analysis to discuss alternative positive/negative impact possibilities. I think this would have led to a healthy exchange of ideas.The exposure of the fish and wildlife or other resource agencies to the same design or operational schemes laid out to the Acres environmental review team may have led to conclusions which were the same or potentially quite different from the Acres analysis of the situation. To sum up,we can1t argue with Acres report since we don1t know the background information used to support their rationalizations or the experience of the individuals involved in the report preparation that drew the conclusions on fisheries. cc:S.Zrake -DEC B.Wilson -AEIDC G.Stackhouse -USFWS R.Lamke -USGS A.Carson -ADNR I ••onmenIQI Informotion and Data Center 707 A Street Anchorage.Alaska 99501 PHONE 19071 279.452~ UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA August 4,1981 Dave Wozniak Alaska Power Authority 333 W.4th AVenue,Suite 31 Anchorage,AK 99501 Dear Dave: RECEIVED ,"\t ,,....C'1981:..,....J ..J ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY .--. ! (~. Per your request to the members of the Susitna Steering Committee,I have quickly reviewed the Development Selection Report prepared by Acres.In general I found it logical in approach and complete in re- gards to the relevant factors one should evaluate when reducing multiple options. I have only the following specific comments:-1.The location and environmental effects of developing borrow material sites is not well documented and incorporated into the first part of the report.Enormous qunatities would be required for most of the dams,and the removal,stockpiling, and transport of this material could be a significant factor influencing the decision-making process. 2.Significant efforts are currently being expended in environ- mental study of this region,the results of which are not yet available.Factoring this new knowledge into the decision- making process could have influenced the nature of the final scheme;or is the current environmental study effort geared only toward the effects of the "selected plan (page 9-1)"and not for input to the overall selection process?In general I found the environmental effects of the alternative options addressed very superficially. I hope my comments are of interest. Sincerely,I,.,Ji ~(L <-.-5;).)/,~L /,<,--- William J.Wilson Supervisor,Resource and Science Services Division Senior Research Analyst in Fisheries w:m/g cc:Al Carson ______________,...-.---••-----.----••----•n •~__•••_ I I l i i 437 E Street Second Floor Anchorage,AK 9951 r-I».:!~T.01<'I<:~"!no~!Hi<:::'\"lf AIL 4 ·a~::-.i ~FEIi~~·/~Tnd~~~; I ' I: SOUTIIC1II'18/.1 m r;.'r";.;...;i;.! ~.,~i'!'D r.-:.-'-.,- i / .1 i PO.Bo~1207 Soldotna.Alaska 99669 (907)262 "1210 P.O.Box i064 WasiJla,Alaska 99687 (907)376·5038 r f Dave Wozniak Project Engi.neer Alaska Power Authority 333 W.4th Avenue,Suite 31 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Wozniak: August 14,1981 We have reviewed sections 7 and 8 of the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Development Selection Report (second draft June 1981).We find that the plan selection methodology used in section 8 meets the objectives of determining an optimum Susitna Basin Development Plan and of making a preliminary assessment of a selected plan by an alternatives comparison. The increased emphasis over previous analyses of the environmental acceptability of the alternatives is good. At this timet this Department does not endorse any particular plan.We would,however,recommend the Steering Committee openly discuss the Watana Dam -Tunnel option because of its reduced environmental and aesthetic impact. Thank you for the opportunity to review this document.We appreciate your effort in soliciting Su-Hydro Steering Committee involvement.If you have any questions regarding these comments please contact Steven Zrake of this office. Sincerely, fi#;YJ11;~=- Bob H,;:J,rt in Regional Environmental Supervisor cc:Steve Zrake Dave Studevant Al Carson -DNR BH!SZ!mn ~E ~t!'f Aii~~tf.t ~-y;&~"u_~.a i'9?=~i'lii3.ID·- "1 r Jllt~~'_J ..."Wo.i. t~~~~e OJ"~~i-5 le"tte-~~Zi to t~~t to ~~Alaska.p~~-tt'1JMt¥ {~~A)~ts f~~the Sgs"ftf:=a H:.r~~lec:tric Sb~il~;~1tte:(St~C)~:. o:=nrfr~p~;~~~-::sals f~acc.es$to "ti~;:~;!=:!~SttsiU~~i¥(!r c--=s 51~.. ~1-....--~~.....-"..:::-e;.t"=-=t!l€"r-_!=~...-.l!:..p~~~~se t:!_=:"~:"5-.a~.1::~~~e "to InfOrmalel'~l prc~lC~:I ~1oS~~l ~C;(i B.~,-~:2 rc~te 8i=-:?''ti-ng'S 1i1't:n fiPA ~~~tt~ir-crmtr-~'Ctul5:~rni ~~~~~ti ~~~~by Af~A. c~tra:ctors and di~u=i~~=d duri~~~~~;;;c"tir.:~;&s~~t ~fictober 20£.1981 ~:;"tii19 p$A ~::r~~5;iS(;($-p~4:S~tsbJ ~y~-6~l~r:>~~~~c ~ii1"Jrecia~s t!1e fact tnat ~-PA c~!ti~=d de~il~.CQr:side~ti¥n ~~studies ¥f ~~~aI ~~~$~ t.,\~.f~.,:.",,-i••~~l ~.~.h Vi-..a ......1 ~J~·sn~i~tift£d tA,ree ~g·.H~ide4L Those ~re~ "'~~~~LE ~ij ti:~s~th side.of tJ~-:e Susitr~~Riv~T~~DeY~ls C~n'y~ttJ tt=e p~~=os-cd ~Ur~d~slU... In ~a~Udtlf~.~~,~o:~s:s ~~~elect.i{.~_P~~~~S5:i£~ert?~~~ty.j tne liPA a~ its contractors,.t.1'le ~tee.rlr~1.·c ;es·1tt.ee q-tl~t1Gr1S tt1f!validity of tri@ ~i!r-G:l- j:ti~i:!r 1'007 -it ..'!:~t~;,,-:!,::r......:i"ttr.!i~?~~-f-~"!.""i:"'"-=".",)..-~...A b ~........~. ii ls.z~llH."J~""::a ....:l~i.&c~~!i~iit~-i.:"C:1'lr;~..~.¥e-§-Uk 1.0 i.30'l'rry up ~rp::l yJL 111 C1 TUiiQ t¥~t tJ"~~993 ~rlljn.e~anu~ch app~~rs~~€;U~tlY ~vatlabTe F~Jr~ ~4 'ti~briefih-gs received ~-y -~SYsitr~It.t4re-~I~:tr\c Steerin9 ~.m1ttL~ili~ OCUber ~f1 'j@"!La ~irrt i:L.~r=d t.r~nECe5s1tv of a ~iGneer rc~..d t{;i1S"b~~j..~:'=.t--=-t'1~"":iL -;.~!-_~;-~.-;:__..._~~..r_}-_.-;.,J ~_~_~~U i -r~l !L\r::li.2:;:is gri!nteQ.or selectIon of a-n ~p~~rt!ntly E!,vlrQ~rrtaJly' urracc~:Jtatle ~~lt Higr-~iy aCi~s ro~~e% H¥e iiiCC::SS$~referef:tCe~~l1ress:ed tEl~p-::rtain to the QB:<42ht1 lQ~tt(.-ns ~ite-:i forr tbe COl~ridcrs aid are based UOOfl t.'1e envirth~~l ~t4 i!r-~Wf:~lLh Sii;=i1S conti1ir~~~-i:,"1'"'"","en.,iro~til ~t.s prepared for St..ibUSk l..liJ • .Ao~c~s Rodd k»es~.,t,.I~~m;lt,regn:sent wi t::i'~.,}~'·"St:mei't 01 a ~rt.1~lar l~ile ~de ~z·~doT~as p¥esente-d.. !he sr;sc ~~i~~·tt~Terrestria.l Envi~t41 Spec:i$li-Sts,.lriC._pQ:S:l- ti~"ti=.at ~a:es..s yi~~Al~~~nrca4 to Gold Cr~k is e.mdF,.~nilienb.ny p~ f~..lila.hi!["~~ccess to at least ~i1 CilnYOi"t VilJuld ilieria'te t.~need for !-!:t-.~1n9 area B"t So-14~~~aa~t:~c~~"t ;e&riltj cctivit1,ta..-,d ~.fuel "''''''...~in £:::aM ....""'~iji1f'_¥~'+'_.>C """'!~!-&~-.:1·~'-.a.~ilt..........~...-.,~..:7a.11 ffi~+~~~...-il'b'":v~":"~~-F7 ~~V~..-_-=-;a;.t.Ii.-:ll.o.W5if',.~.o=.~~t"'!ii.L ~:I "~t1 ...."-......'II"!'-~~~~~i ::-=r'=-, ~I"eii at ~n ~'!OO ~ld te i'"eQUired 1~@-Y ~s.-~,.11E aSe-~tens iti"""S.as t.~ tef'm!~S flf a ra11~~TSc ~~ke @ ~~t deai ¥f .ser;Se...~it~~..a-n1!!~ t~I ~'t tiie~"tb ~ide ~e ;£~~id ~~to ~H ~is ~fer'~l~ ~ince ~tTaH al~exists:~.fna ~l ~"'J:,~Ui BaUr.a1<~~~;~a. -"..'-"-,.,L"-~-_.~-~~jc~n.-...."3'l -1:lQ"t._..0rou~~~ncrt..i"J S~'Io;lI¥01""...."!'!:~-Si:~~'ier+n.j,,!d~v.....~dol....t..-....~~~f~ ~~;;as jafm~.i bY ~2 ~'t14 ~zn1~k of !t.PA ~:t:~-e ~~{£} :a.~~..~t'::i·!'r""l r-;otlP-t"~4 _:-rp.~..D.~;'r:~.,.16 +~1"n-F 10'''Tf fa:u:-ihle ~..~"_"~.-.'iai......,~1!E1._.:.a_.lE~1i\,F!;&.1iirW"./~~"":E.'\,H""J~~~~~.....t 4"11JJt:""'";..,:r~"""'~"'...~...., era!11 prefer .a nIl ~of 4C~S to-~~tE'iin tr.e ~~t site. 2~T~~u:crossir~tt~Irtdlan ~i~;:r and thn:~h ~"tlar~s to !.4ie ra~s fHS~Y~ ~""~1 utilities ai~~t app~chin9 wilsL-u.ctiun of ~P:'uject th-e ~gnitl~ uf $~$itr~i~lS~j as a foregQn~Ci}ft~lysion a~i ar-~~kirrg COtrt1reJ~~~ney ~11dns to D::;et j-qujeetE-G ~~~r nE':~-d.s.l.Gas a::~c.oa.l ~~~atE:d ~~~r G-ptions are bein~ ~~"?~~~~).;;;~;~i:~b~~~~;~i ~:rj $;;i ~A~:~_',~~~~~~J P>;~di ~~~:;;;-:;~~1Fi c t=.t!l~~Ili~~t-:..;~~1f"!:.!~Tt--~g~#T:-~11:~~.::11-~~lT :;;%~~t!ib....P~r AT+~....,..~ti7~~t.ua}:sr:~~!d f_-_,·'.•.:_::........_·_,~..~~i__:_-._:~_e~,~.__j~~;h~:;:~~ri~;:;_~~~:~;4,~..~~_:~~_.,A~~d'"~~!i~'~t~~~;~:-~~·s;;~ih:~~y nD~=t;~b~;a"t fir-m ~ci i~~rative&Th.us "tl~~~~~C !j~'}es not t~lie¥e tti@ 1953 G~d1ii:::E .st~uld c:on~train -_._.J.......:::...!:".._;...~..=-J."'--_'•.'J.AA~~-l-r"'l.e -_:.-i .....--~----.=._..1 .ii..!rl 'r"'!~~...Z'-..,.....J""Ol---_-_-Z'_='='~.W_-~~.~.(-- ----&.i.~'k!~l:'Ufi-;;1€l~iii~¥i~~~~i&rr-~w"1;:G~-at::f}j ¥iv~r~~.Uf ~~j f\1\.t~:r~!.1iC~ on PiUj~=t fESSjbj1it)~~f.a sn~'"rc~ital ;~pacts~Per~~ritt"in9 ~rid ~C-llrc.e ~=g~r-~ie~l ~n~}uU1f:~f£RCt-~t;~~d be:Et..l=~c.ted to !i"nk a pioneer road to Y1~ overall pruj~~t~ -... f, ~ ll1"" I I,.f, !.-[ F ~, ",. "......,...~---_.-....~--- P"ubJ1c at4~s to the da.-n sites ann t.br-ougo the Upper Susitna Valley is canpl~ef'1d a controversial suPject.ami -we believe this issue ~hauld be 9~\ten toorough evaiuat1an in the rQute ~e)ect1ofi process.How Ctlti~tructloo"'f"elated access is o1u~loed to 11 qreat ext.ent determines t~project-re"fated wildiife ~rtl1 soc1~il;.1ifl1.;i1CtS..The APA has ~sn ~oHc1ting thevie-ws of local residents (T111keetna.Trapper treek_etG,)in T'eg-"rd to the ~ccess que~ticn.The rMjoritjl of resfdi;nts '&l3nt to minimize i~cts to both theit'COimumity and the U~~ Susitna hHey_The APA t'..as SQlicited the views of t.hf:·state c2r.d federal reSOl.lFCe ~9'enCieS6 It has:been the.p:vdominant V1~of these agencies",wIllCh represent pUblic int.eres:t~on a state or n~tional ie-Cia 1 ~that proj~t~rela:t&1 ~ildl tfe impaet.s should be Hiitited to the-sxt~extent Draet.icable.In ildditiort ..theAPAr~s expressed the desire ~~iErtz~the options for fu~re public access. ~e·belieYE that these \flews mesh~phn~i.r:iri9 imgact.s and mximlLi nq options for future publ it ~CC~$S can be i!chit.ved by m~ickir'97 to tr.e t".xtefrt ?Gssibley the status quo.for e:<~)C ~to P\'"O'lt'i de fu 11 pub 11 c &CttS s throug h a read s1s tem I fo~loses th~future option of maintaining the existing character of the Upper Susitna Yaney .. U~e OT ran as the access mde increases the Pi-iterrtial for mana9~nt and control of s~cioecon~ic and environmenta1 iudJacts~~ii'iiized rail use provides for ~~fol1c-giny advantages over road i!CC~S; l~~~ntatns a ~ximum range of tuture d~cision options. 2.Prov;;d~~fet"control of ~rk~\""impacts on loc~l c~mltles .and wild- life" Briefly th~land within ~~e l~st yCdr~ that r~ve b~~n brought flJCli~on 7 en?>i f'll',an Susiw~a HJdTGsl€~Lric Steer,ng Cc~i~tP,~ -.1 1 """\ \ status of the proj€Ct area has not changed significant1y There are sg"era\~omplex problems CQnc.~rnir.9 iand status tJJ your attent-ton by BUL ~rse51;:S t.~~:}tential of haz.ar-cous ~~terii51 spil 1.s due 'to adverse ~~~~r conditions and ~ltip1e handling~ Di~t acc:ef.S i"i9ht-or-WdY r<:Ia"te4 habitat losses can tr~s~9ni ficantly 1 1ml tcu .. Disturbance to ~tldiife adjac~nt to ~~route can be ~re easily co,nt'ro 11 t~. ~....o. Thank ¥uU fur the opportunity to:~e:l1iew and cGu.,rent un tht:AC~:;f=~S ?~~~d ;"sscssm..cnt dCC~~fitS..~e look fO~urrj ta rc.~ej '/1 R'~the fin.if ver.'iitm of thesE docUffi~n~Jfter ftOV&Dber 15,1991~and anticipdt~proYldir~addltfo~al r~om ~m:fations into this dedsl0fl-IT1akins ?\ocetS~ cC;D.~lnic~~ftYA Steerj r4 Cc;rnd ttee ~-"E:tTIt~i·S R.5t;;~j}:k .. ! -I ' AGENDA SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC STEERING COMMITTEE Date: Time: December 2,1981 1:00 p.m. Place:Alaska Department of Natural Resources Conference Room 1.1:00 -2:30 p.m.S.H.S.C.response to ACRES request for formal agency comments on elements of Susitna hydroelectric proposal. SHSC and.D.Wozniak,A.P.A. 2.2:45 -3:30 p.m.S.H.S.C.response to information request from Birch,Norton,Bittner,and Monroe.SHSC and J.Lowenfels. 3.3:30-4:00 p.m.Other SHSC business. e ~u&u[@~~~~~~~ DIVISION OF RESEARCH &DEVELOPMENT December 9;1981 Mr.David Wozniak Alaska Power Authority 334 West 5th Avenue,2nd Floor Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Wozniak: It /fA r ~HAMIIOI/O.'OrEII/Ol /323 E.4TH A VENUE J ANCH04fG.Ei~1,~f'S.KA,,99501 The Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee (SHSC)would like to receive additional information from your office regarding the status and progress of the Mitigation Task Force.As you know,preparation of an adequate Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)license application requires that Exhibit E identify the proposed measures to mitigate impacts or to protect and en- hance the resources.We believe coordination of this vital study item should occur early and on a continuing basis.I am aware that the APA has also recognized this need by creating two Mitigation Task Force core groups composed of principal investigators and a Mitigation Review Committee com- posed of representatives of various concerned agencies.While several mem- bers of the Review Committee sit on the SHSC,they have received no informa- tion on the progress of either core group.Additionally,the Fish and Wild- life Mitigation Policy recently developed by APA for the Susitna Hydroelec- tric Project stresses the need for close coordination.Although no time schedule is established in this mitigation plan,it is obvious that steps 1 and 2 (identification of impacts,ranking of impacts and identification and review of mitigative alternatives)should be substantially completed by now if step 3 (development of an acceptable mitigation plan)is to be achieved by the March 15,1982 draft feasibility report deadline. Therefore,I am requesting that you provide any applicable information regarding the Mitigation Task Force groups and their progress to date.The minutes from past meetings would be particularly helpful here.As the SHSC is eager to discuss these concerns,I believe a short briefing may be most effective.I will be contacting you to arrange for such a meeting,hopefully during the week of 12/13/81. Sincerely, C~~ Ai Carson Chairman,Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee AC:db cc:Steering Committee R.Stoops Quentin Edson,F.E.~.C. - - ALASKA POWER AUTII()RITYr334WEST5thAVENUE·ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 Mr.AI Carson Alaska Departrrent of Natural Resources Research and Developrent 555 Cordova Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Al: Phone:(907)277·7641 (907)276-0001 December 10 ,1981 RE:CE-'VED DEC 14 1981 L-· r ' i,; t i -1i.ALASKA POWER L.AUTIiORITY SUSITNA I "I FILE P5700b.IJ t :;EQUENCE NO. o F d/75". I I f"'=ai~':;.I~~a:::iII,0 f- t,'.;',;i ~J~I~ I,':I :['':.v ILl ~'~-j 1 i CAJ '-[-1--'-n tX'6 .:~j '; j .,-J7":----!l._Vj_~'.y~_ I J o·~ ---f--I]I:!1 P:;H )ll,"=1 E~~S '_ I s:~T j l,~-I"-D~LI I I I .., l 1--I i<1 R'V-!-- --1-.._--' .~-R"In·--l'-"~I-II----j-'.-._J_._ n--'I_I_. I 'I '1,---1'-,1' I""'r'71iL~--,' I !' In late November,1981 you approached Ire with sane concerns relative our on-going effort to solicit fonral coordination on various asp:cts of the Susitna Hydroelectric Project.This led to a series of rreetings between ourselves and the Susima Hydroelectric Project Steering Comnittee.To broadly sunmarize those events: 1.Acres AIrerican Incorporated,acting for the PCNler Authority I has camrnenced circulation for formal coordination certain building blocks of the studies that will form the basis for a project licensing recommendation. 2.In rrost instances the agency heads (addressees of the formal requests for coordination)referred.the request to staff for analysis.Alrrost without exception the staff involved also had been serving on the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Steering Camnittee.Largely due to this relationship,the individual agency staff m=:rrbers elected to use the Steering Corrrnittee structure as a vehicle to discuss their formal coordination concerns.As a result of multiple interactions between the Steering Corrrnittee and the PONer Authority I a number of issues have been clarified and options for agency resr;:onse to the Acres request for formal coordination have been identified. The Steering Comnittee has sUlTl:1'arized its concerns as follCNls: 1.In sane cases I the doct:llreI1tation of field study results is not available coincident with the request for agency ccrnrent on aspects of the project. 2.There has been no decision rrade yet by the Po,ver Imthority I the State legislature and the administration as to whether there will be an application to the FERC for the construction of the project. Mr.AI Carson December 10,1081 Page 2 3.sane of the agencies are concerned about responding to bits and pieces of the proposed proj ect without being able to evaluate the entire proposal. -;r /) To clarify the PaYer Authority intentions relative the request for fornal ccordination ,it·is appropriate to look to basic intentions and objectives.The present and prq::osed PERC regulations clearly encourage pre-application coordination;First,to assure that the project planning process has taken into account policies and guidelines of local,state and federal agencies,and second,to assure that the applicant has so1icited agency ca:rnents and concerns and has attenpted to address them.Specifically,the proposed PERC regulations (anticipated to be in effect by tine of license application,July 1, 1982)require a request for for.mal coordination from agencies,provision ""'lofuptoofsixty(60)days response tine to those agencies,and inclusion of applicant response to agency fomal caments in the license application.Therefore,one major purpose for the request currently circulating is to canply with FERC regulations. The Paver Authority is anxious to accarro:date agencies and the Steering Ccmnittee in the decision process.We have derronstrated this in the past and wish to continue that policy.Our requests for fomal coordination are vert much intended to accamodate consideration of agency comrents in the fonnulation of the proj ect and in the decision process leading to the Pewer Auth:Jrity project licensing recamendation. Clearly,our ability to use comrents in this fashion is very much a function of when we receive them. . In response to regulatory require.rrents,and to our best judgerrent of when agency corrm:mt will be rrost prcductive we perforce must persist' in our requests for formal coordination.We hasten to add,hONf>Ver,.., that we willingly accept interim ccmrent,inforrral corrm::::nt,or any other variant that gets the information to us in a tirrely fashion.Beanwhile, we will attenpt to make available pertinent do::u:rrentation of field studies as early as possible so as to assist yaur review. I hope this sumnary assists you and your colleagues in deciding hew -; to respond to our requests for fornal coordination.If other facets to this action errerge,I would welcare an oPFOrtunity to further discuss them with you. , FOR THE EXECUl'IVE DIRECTOR cc:John LavJreWTlce,Acres American,Buffalo ])::Vtt/~Dav~d D.vJo::niak ) ProJect Engll1eer ,:J;J Phone:(907)277·7641 (907)276-0001 ALASKA POWER AUTIIORITY RECEIVED DEC 21198i 334 WEST 5th AVENUE·ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 r .... I l ACRt;)nlll uti blue linaJxrO RATED December 15,1981 r'"'" I L """I., Mr.Al Carson Departrrent of Natural Resources Division of Research and Developrent 555 Cordova Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Al: I am in receipt of your letter of December 8,1981 soliciting (on behalf of the Susima Hydroelectric Project Steering Comnittee) additional inforI1'E.tion concerning the Mitigation Task Force.-I am happy to canply,in part because it affords me an opportunity to correct sorre- apparent misconceptions. Second,you misjudge slightly our tliretable on mitigation planning. We are just nON in the midst of ide.ntification of inpacts.Physical constraints have led to this tiJretable:Field studies had to be carpleted and surrrrarized,hydrolC9Y'data formulated so that pcwer generation simulation (which leads to water release/stage inforI1'E.tion) could be done,etc.We have by no rreans fully scq::ed ilnpact yet,but we are rapidly advancmg. Which leads me to the key point;when will an assessrrent be possible?'The ITOst canprehensive will appear in the draft feasibility report,to be published March IS,1982.A less canprehensive,but First,while I have no objection to Steering Corrmittee participation on our mitigation planning,I am sorrewhat surprised.As ,vas made clear early on,mitigation planning (and specifically the Mitigation Task Force Review Group activities)is being done within the formal coordination and consultation frarrev.urk of the Fish 2nd Wildlife Coordination Act and F.E.R.C.Regulations.By contrast,the Steering Carrnittee has worked vigorously to rerrain informal comrentators to the Sustina Hydroelectric Project proposal.If the Steering Ccmni ttee elects to join us in mitigation plarming,it should ~understccd.that we will txeat their participation as "formal".That in turn leads to other minor procedural concerns,such as what to do about dua.l .~~a::~\l--1"it'11 representation,etc. ALASKA-POWER AUTHORITY-!SUSITNA FILE P5700 ./1 fEQUENCE NO. P ~I L./ IIlIII\ I nonetheless fairly rigorous,assessrrent will be provided to the Revie.,r Group when they convene January 20,1982.I maN you are a rrember of that Review Group.You should be receiving your fo:crral invitation very socn,if not by nCJ.iJ.I suggest Steering COrrmittee involverrent,if any, be subsequent to that convening."""'! FOR THE EXECUI'IVE DlRECIOR DIl"1/blm cc:John Lawrence,Acres AIrerican (w/cy of Carson letter) Quentin Edson,F.E.R.c. : l.-.:j , ;1 .iii , ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY ,..., \ 334 WEST 5th AVENUE·ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 Mr.A1 Carson State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources 323 E.5th Avenue Anchorage.Al~ska 99501 Dear Al: December 17.1981 Phone:(907)277·7641 (907)276·0001 Just a quick note to advise you we will be meeting with the Cook Inlet Acquaculture Association on January 21.1982.5:30 p.m.in the Kenai 80rough 8uilding.This meeting will also be open to other special interest groups and the public,who will be notified via direct mailing and newspaper notices.We will be discussing the probable impact of the Susitna Hydroelectric Project to the anadromaus populations. You might want to pass thi~information to your colleagues on the Steering Committee.Your,as well as their,attendance would be welcome. 1""'1' I I"""!' 1 \ n l n FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DOW :ml j cc:R.Mohn,APA N.Blunck,APA J.Lawrence,Acres~ 7}:JJ ,! Jr(.Vid rV wo;n~JrJ'4tJ Project Manag~ Sincerely, Al Carson,Chairman Susitna Hydro Steering Committee cc:Steering Committee Members Reed Stoops 2 January 14,1982 -. -, -i 11ri~ - -e:,m!!!l!;:iI!ll=I;<;--iiiMl!lI!lI!~!!!l!I!!I!lI!iI!i!!'!.·1!!IiIIILII!!lU .:-.-....;..~.... I""'" I •I . !I"""1 ! li,1 r L i APPENDIX B-4 MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE ~...~~ :::-;X:..... :~-. FILE~ z ::;E'ai -J 0 ~,0:~;:::a:I-!::l..\;,;enuZC z« : 31 RECEI VE0-o CT UNIT~D STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE iNTERiOR F;SH AND WILDLIFE SERViCE iO"!l (:H,it>Mt i1(). ANCHORAQl:,ALASr.A !)S5C3 teo;l 276 33i:>O ~.r.tric P.~ould E~~cutiv8 Director Ala~ka P~r AuthQrity 333 West 4th hv~nuc~Suite ;...nd~oraS1le..aiask~99.5tll We ~~e int'ot'!ned h1 yon!"If,lttcl:'of A\lj!'\lt:lt.2a~1979,t'h~t th03.Alaek..~.J--1---i--:Po~~~kytnQrity {A?A)is preparing anapplic4tion for license tu tie Fi:dera1 E~ers:)'fu:gulat:ury CC'nl.1l2i~=ion (FE-it£:)for tht:propa:;;;cd Hydro t·"1....:.:ti:e1:ii~:2::: electric Power D~t:itJ?me!it 'W1tbL:i the Upper Su.'litna Ri.v~r ~iQ, li1aska.The purpc!Se uJ:thili letter b to pubt out federa.l fi:;h ~'l"!.,.,.oj--I-......,. vildlife ~~sp~n~tb11iti~and to iDsur~~ce.quat~consideration of fish a.'l-d "'l.idlife t't:l;OC~~~lOl:Z preventiOn,r.a:it.i.n~"tion,co-rnpcn:~H~ tioo$and enh.gDc~~ut throughout the pia:ilil.lng am1 d~cii;iun-~k.in~ p,;:"nceff~.:i~s;0i::i3tC!J wi.t"h th.,SUBtt·TL!l projB-ct. (1)Tl)~~'1!;h .:lut!4i1dl1f~C')OrtliJ:l8t1on Act.draft UC.1LOrt!l Proc~dur~g for Cv~~li~nr.~.nay 18,1979.8t~udardi~~B P1:QC e.o:lreri ,:jnd int~rag~nf~Y rt:1~L laU3-hip~Lt.).tuBu.::'e ~It that wildllf~~on8~rv~t1oo te f~jJ1 ~nn$i~~rp.d ~nd ~ieh~n eque.l1y w~th other p:cc:J-,=ct fe~'it!.1n~s in agi:'nc7 di'cisicn.- i!2ikin.g p.rOeE',BS~B by int e:g r.s t i r;f:~1.i~r:{!'Qns'ld~r~t ion!;j:n to Feder~SE~nci~~invol~ed in the analy~i~~~rlJor ~ppro~al of a .TlU~-teueri!'fl wa.t4i!r-k:'elated proj~ct have I::!&iiy ~~gpoll~ihl1:ttiea unrj~r various E~ecutivQ.Orders (EO)y 1~36~and ?oliciea to prevent ~nd rrltigat<?-imp~-ct$to ftBh ~Tld ¥'ilctlif~rr.l;:mJr~G9,~;.;...~11 m;'to c,lnn;;l{lCc t'hOJ;~rCi<r,I\Jr!;t;\:J~J'o jdimtiry ;j~imm:-e recDgnition of dir~ctl~~a of U~O$t ~p0rt~~e and rel~vance to the ~rotectioa of fish -sud ?i1dlif~r~a{itir<:es.t;""e liat the<fDllQ~""in~and includB ~ bri2t summary of mEasures require~: Th~pr~-applic.atiou plBnn.lr:{;yeriod aS8oelat~j \l1th the propolSe,<j SU:litn>!Hyd:'welet:tric Pmo'cr !li!.~~1cpj'Tlent il;~~ry c:r.it~r;:al .t;nn,:ddl!tTir,. the magnltud~of tbe proj~ctt limit~d ~~~ting data fur ii3h ~nrl .vildl,ife i:-e~,,"-·C~5i'J ~~d ~urtt-o£e£;ort.requ!!:'t:d for the filing ~f iJ .....rpn ....cl)nc.~iv ...applic-ation for licenae with FERC.Tn.·..edaiti"n, C!pr~hl!l1Si\TC 0.-.iy pl~nnin?iJ;r£.:ql.lisitn to th~,;n~i~rl1inn ,)f ~n ~n~iro~n~~11y ~ounrl proju~t ~nd oPtim~l n~c of the pl~nning pQr;o.~ th-€'.reby minil:Uzins th~pot€nti.al f(lr delsy in the pr(;~eBsinf~of p~C~;~D'~rrnit ~n~lic~ns~~~plic~ti9n~~nd cQ~plrir~~ith ~~r.i~~ envizo~~nta1 t=vi~y r~guir~~nt~. ....__~_.___.._----.~,----_..-_._.---._.._.,-,-. r tn., r r l hI J r :(r r 1 !1 ~ -------._._"~--""=---'.__"..._..__;__..-.__.,.4''''''~"•.." r-rojl:lct planninSJ,!'National EnnTotm.!'9ntal,Policy Act (NEPA) compli8nc~procerlur~8l financial and ~conom1canalvBeB, at1th{,1r.l~;:rtll)a doe.u~ut$,aud projee:t ~j:.,l~:cl;el1t:itio~." (1)Th~f..qvpe'i.l l)Jl EmTixl)~ntn1 Qt1~lit.y!:o (CEQ')Rt:8'ulation~ 16r b:iplemc\ltiog the Proce.dural i"rov"'1eions (;f the.Ha:tion~l Envi.rO~~n"t;i 1 ?Ql it;:)'"1uJ,-t (40 ern.,P.'3rt~1500-1 SOE,.July 30,1979j ~p'ecifie~pruviaic~requiring ~he lut~grat1D~ of the NEPA p.roG~~s into ~rly pl~~~iuB»the int~gr~tinn of NEPA requir~ment8 ~th other ~nviTo~ntal T~vi~~nd consultation Iti:qulr.;:ments,and tht:use of tbe l;~opiT'-? prQca$s. l::."'c ....j""n ~,{.-'>of'tr-..._'t:'"d·"...~·,;.'<',.,..i ,:;;fl€'.....J.~:s A.~t'ff7 J:;t.nt.S84,...,.:;.,.Jro,..~"-.'~....~-~_...............t .-....~..g .......-'f Q a;;~cnded~r~qulre~FERC to ask thB SBcr~t~ry of the 1.Ut~:rior.8c-tins;.'thTnl.'go t.h~ll..S.F.i~h >iDa ~ii1dlife S!?rnc~, ~hether ~y li~teu or propoe~d en~anfl~'~4 or ~hr~aten~d up~cieg ~y b~present in th?nr~~of the SU5it~a Hydro- electri~P~r Proicet.1£the fish and \.~ld1.ifc f:B.TVic.c ..Q....i~e~that iA:c:h species.Ulay bi:.1 'PTC~~TU:.in t.h-e 3re~of th~pruject,Fi::RC is r~qu1r13d by S~t::t:i.OTl 7 (c)t.o t:utu1u~t a ~101Qgi~~1 A86~<.~~nt ~o identliy 3DY liat~1 or r-ropo~~ enden~~r~o or thra~tcncd Hp~c1eB wnich aY~li~Bly t9 be affeci~~by tn~con8t~lctiQn prcj~ct.Th~a88e5~~nt i$ to hr.(:(""'ri!plc.1.eo <r::ithic laO usys,unli3ss a till'll:(~~teT.I.~~i£)11 its 4:'..1tually 8g.r~-E:d upon .. Se~llon 404 u£the Clean ~ter Act of 1977 and regulti~ final rul~s for !~?l~nta~inn of the ~~gul~~o~'permLt pt'ngr~of t;h~Co;:p~of Eng.iu~r~(33 eYE.",P8J::ta 320-329 ~ July 19.1911)reqti~re8 that a Department of th~Army perm:!t (8)be (lbtJJ.i,nad f<;l'F.~~1"ti'lin ;;tructurc:~or ...'\):d~in or aff~~tips ~~t~rs of the Unit~gStaLe~.~ue ~pplicat1u~(8) for such ~perpit(~)will be HUuJect to revi~w by ~ldlife :1genci=s~ !!:.."(eeut:1."e Orrl~I 11990 (Wetland;:)-"<1:;:t;;:~\}cd rlin Grder t.o .av{'d.d tf.!the:C7.i;fmt po;;;;ible th~16nS-i.€:=m and 8h~)rt...terl:li aeve~~~~pact~aB~uclate&with th8 destruction or E~dt fic~tiou u£wetiaode a~d to ~'Qid direct Qr tn~iTc~t aopport of n~~on~truction in veLldncl~~h~rever thar~is .,;1'T.:1::zt.i:::'."Jblc dt..;:rt:~t.1ve,n /led E~eetl.tiv€!Ordsr 11985 (FloOufJliil;:;'.:s)wilS iasue.d #tQ aVQid 'tn t.ha ext.ent.pQmdble the long-t€-Lm ~nd shnrt-term ad~er~~~p~ctg aS90ciated ~~tb the vccl~~n~y aud modification of floodpl~ins ~r.d to avoid dir~ct ~nd indir~ct ~uvport of fl~odpldiTh ctev~l~p 11:l~nt vhctevcr i:}:~te i~a practicable alto:<'Cn~ti...~.1I All ..:fe.4.t::r;!1 ageilciee .ere r.eBp~nBi"bl*t9 co~ly \itith the3;t:rot!; in the p laIJ.u.1ng so.d ,rl~deionvf!l.9.icj.nfi p't"n~aJ;l;- (4) (3) c r~...~ ! r rt Cntr l .I n, ! l ! Krie p.Yould No CQ~t~~ct for physical CQn~lru~tlon ~y b~€nter~d inlO and nn pny:iic,u eOlle:trtl~t'5t::>n may b~s.in uotl.l th:St'iliQln&ic.:11 AasessmBnt i.s;;ccml-plt:teu.In thQ (;-,,'H:n:i:.the couclu£!lons d~awn from th~Biological AaseBFrn~n~~re that list&J endan~eT.'~d or tht~atelled g:PGci~J;a~~llkely to ~~B.ff~ctc:d 'by th~ceuetruction Pi~jc:Ct.~FE.R(;is rft~tlired hy Sec:t.io~ 7{a)to init~~~~~he cuneultation prn~c~5. (6)W~te?Reeourcas f~~ncilt rrl~ciple3 ~nd gt~nd~rrl~fur r1~~n1ng Wat~rand Related Land K~~ource~(18 C~A.Part 704,A~ril l~1978)were ~etsblishcd fer pl~~the U~~ of the ~ater and rel~t~Q l~nd re~ources of tne Upi~ed S~~te=tu ach~eve ~bjac~ivc:~~dete~Ded coop~T~~ively, through th~cQordina~ed ~ctioua of thered~r~lT ~t~tet and local gov~rnrl!'Ont~t p:t'ivate t!jjt.er'PriJ;~~~d nrS~UUOilg. and indiviQua~~~!h~B~priocipJc~iDcl~e providing th~ basis for pl~nft'~of federal ~nd fed~r.:il,ly a~s1.at.ed-vati;Jr and laad r~i!Otrrc~~progro::m3 aud pr<t.)ec.ts an.:!f~dQ'i:"OIl lic~n3i~~~tiviti~as listed in the Star.riard~. It iB our uoderatandinH th~t your ageucy has c~~tl~ct~d with ~h%ee indep~fident con~Qlt~nt fi~fur ~ach to ~~~lop ~cc~reh~~ive plan of study (POS)to iuclud-e hiolo~ic.al :;'tlldieJ;aZiliQclated with th~Si)~ittia P%oj~ct and that frlM th~three lndependent posts and th~eXisting Corps of Bngin~~r~'Pleo of Study?~n uJti~ate campre- 1Hen~1.l,Ie?OS ...ill bs d~'i'i~d.The actions neC€iSssry t"cQmpl)<wit.h th~~l:x)\rcd li!&t~d lawa t p.)liciea.ann EDt Ji.dt::!lr.mst~ate theneJ::€ssity for clo~~con~ultation ~th f~~~T~1 .~d 3t~te w1i&11£e ag~nci~~ thr.rmghout proje.ct planning·and "bIpler--...t:nl;;it!.on. It:iJ;imt·er~t!ve that c(>or.jin>3t~d pbn''1ing h:::lilltlete-c:!TH.?.....-ittl ;;1 J sppruprlat~parties.~nd that s,u:h i'laUJ)i~f;;Incl\.ld~th(1 c O 'l1vnni:ng c,f licO?ing iW~ting~tn include:pa~tlc1pation by ~t;lt.~:md fccl~ri:ll wildlif~~~encie~.n)~purpose of th~~~npine ~~tlabs should indud~:·ot;:;~c:loping s ':::;:'-::lpr~h8r!.ai\1f.<POS ..hit.:-h b,;~res full wildlife ."1gency pa.l'ti.f:1patioTi thTOI,ighmlt ~acJi J=:h8ee of the.pl~nnina ;md t't:,dew processes;de.t~·ml,ning ~;jHii et:;1J~the.f~.::1~r~l <inn ~.;ti'tte \<i.1a1i£e Ag€!Oe1.eB or the .,ppl ieant 1 'All1 undert<'lke:~T!d n...Tt:r.~CL:..he require~st~di~~~r.rl iuyeat~sstiong:in~~!ing ~~quate ~nd timely tunoing of tho5~p~rfOl~n~th~$t~nic~;and ~~tab118hin~mvtually ~C~Qptable tsrget dB~es for t~c initistlo0 and co~~~plstt~n of ~tudi~~. 'the adhcrnnce to th",s~~u~~eati;)ni3 -:rl11 im~re that d:.!e·J.uate infor- ..~::t~i'c;i ·!:li;coll~~t€'.d to o:.i1~ble the clt:t~rtdnBti(\n of PT"oj~ct imp<icLll o!lud develop ~~l?-I.li"a~t.o pre,'~nt;~at.tigat".~;;;nc:l ,;=pcm;;::J t~fer ii-sil aud ~ildlifQ lo~~er.£ i· ;.$-;S ~~ .,~~: l§~ j~ 1~~~~ Ii l~ II ~f~J!";=--J.>~ AO&3~W~ irRR.C T 'J~;;hinp.toil RS.~~string't(3n OEC~Wai:lu..tng,ton C ~.H'llJol"(~.l ho·~~r.J:)___.,.lL....,..p:""'J!"au ,.,.~__ r~i.ESt BL.~..ADiia,.A:ochorase AIJEC.EPA,SCSi USGS.A.ncnQI'"i:lRt; C~: Hr.Eric P.Yould 1i~4onk.fqr~;:;re tc ;4>Q't"itinp.Cl0Sl?-ly ;;rf th your a~€'nc;r snd oth~r8 jnvol~p4 in this ~t~OYT ~nd truet th~t this l~tter will Bel~1e a~ ~ut.it;£:ul:the necesisity tor earl:;ill\lo1vtSt!!nt or ~nd con~v.1~;ttil)n with Wildlife ag~~ci~s. ( -;:r:TfF!H:·.{:i~~.;;.:~ -I t tPol.,,·,.-'1 I -•••t .1 J r c Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Bureau of Power Oivisionof Licensed Projects 825 North'Capitol Street~NE Washington,DC 20426 Attention:Mr.Ronald A.Corso Deputy Chief,Division of Licensed Projects Dear Ron~ / ......'/; October 16,1979 -P:5477.15 Susitna Hydroelectric Project 1"""', i, r ,....,. i - I appreciated your call October 10 regarding the September 24 letter from Gary Hickman~Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service~ to EricYould of Alaska Power Authority.Although the State will not make its decision on the Corps'or Acres until November,we have already had some useful Jlscoping"discussions with ADF&G,NMFS,FWS and ADNR. At Eric's request,I am forwarding herewith for your comnent,a draft of a proposed response.Please call if you have any suggested changes. Sincerely, /)(../117.... /t ..'(jV~ 50hn D.Lawrence· Project Manager JDL:pbf Enclosure ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED c ;;~..:!,.,J :;..,.-~'')'.-.'.'. ...:14'.",",_;" Mr.Gary Hickman Area Di rector United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 1011 E.Tudor Road Anchorage,AK 99503 Dear Mr.Hickman:Susttna Hydroelectric Project ( \.- Thank you for your letter dated September 24 concerning federal fish and wildlife responsibilities for FERC licensing of the Susitna Project.We wholeheartedly concur that all activiti es related to 1 icensing of the project require careful planning and coordination with all local,state and federal agencies involved.We also agree that the environmental base- line studi es,and the ensuing assessments and development of appropri ate investigation,compensation and enhancement measures are of particular concern.We fully intend to address these matters in as comprehensive and thorough a manner as possible either through the Corps of Engineers or our consultants,Acres American Inc.Selection of the Corps or Acres is anticipated in November. Some preliminary scoping meetings have already been initiated on our behalf by Acres American Inc and Terrestrial Environmental Specialists Inc with the Alaska Departments of Fish and Game and Natural Resources,the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service.We have also been in touch with Ron Corso of the FERC to solicit his views on the approach We should take in obtaining the necessary licenses for the project.It is our understanding that a key factor in the license application will be a valid demonstration to the FERC that all involved agencies have been consulted and that plans for compl iance with the appropriate regulations have been agreed.We have every intention of meeting this requirement to the complete satisfaction of FERC.Referring to the list of regulations in your letter we have been advised by Mr.Corso as follows: (1)Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act:FERC1s own regulations will govern for federal licensing of the Susitna Project. (2)CEQ Regulations:FERCls own regulations will govern for federal li cens i ng. (3)Section 404 of the Clean Water Act:compliance is necessary. (4)Executive Order 11990 (Wetlands),and Executive Order 11988 (Floodplains):FERC's own regulations are expected to govern in the case of Susitna. (5)Endangered Species Act:compliance is necessary. ,J ~, I r " - 2 (Q)Water Resources Council,Principles and Standards:these only apply for federal projects,and would not apply if the state selects a private consultant to undertake the Susitna Feasi bil ity Study. You should also be aware that we are planning to directly involve the ADF&G,ADNR,and possibly other state and federal agencies in appropriate areas of study.We will gladly keep you informed of progress in all aspects of the study which are subject to your jurisdiction and look for- ward to a close and mutually productive relationshi p. Sincerely yours, Eric P.Yould Executive Director "'"ea:H i, { I ~_,r_··"_ "',k ._' , ,'-,,,.,.,!l.., l~l, ~::-j ;'j /(7 f .i ,.j ~•i ~!I :!~\!_.; Ui\\;'-'\~l;",,,l""", .[ / REtEf\"EDF:~ .JAY S.HAMMOND.GOVERNOR ""'1 DIVISION OF PARKS !619 Warehouse Dr.,Suite 210 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 RfI:n JAN 3 1 1980 January 28,1980 Re:112;)-19 Jim Pedersen CEI!H&N 3201 C Street,Suite 201 Anchorage;Alaska 99503 i';,~ DR;st ·n.,i"·i.,:.:-t':or i,s co ',:..:,.;:'1n',;.\/;i,>.:it,,"a;:c'~ment reached between yourself and 'j'r,,:f::,,,,-;xd ::cr.:·:t~-:kt'_-::'<l ·.)F ,,'-base camp and airstrip near the 'l"".l :>,f,,''';'t;?on ....",:',...>'1 Fiv~r.The base camp location described cis in the '::'1 en:::i,~:n':~;,f ::;~NW!4 of Section 27,T32N,R5E~Seward meridian appeaTs LJ ;;e .:.t.:::<it"of any archaeolog:Lcal or histor:Lc sites,. We confirmed with Glenn Bacon,who is knowledgeable in the area~thai'~,).2~i.l~,i: the probability of encountering such sites is low.The proposed a~~r-1 strip is a dif ferent matter.It is further from the area Bacon :.:>t:.QUU·.CE'.~!,/,-/~i~examined and in a more likely terrain.For that reason we would ~/'1/' recommend an 'archacoloeicQl survey to ~nsure avoiding impacts on svch,.~)~f c.o sites.9:6;ii ':';:'''-I...._ -1-1 ~,-~I~i~!~i~\.,vr~~..,Q.' ;;~l__. r ..u-b /'/-c ~-:;-:-~70;~~r~----t/~_l:'c:.: ::) J 0 S;'' ~-'-C;?:;;?J;fEif..u.~,\;".Wl--i-IJPs~1 'i '~'-I~i J._J~I ~G..,::!-;~,rt '-I-!-"r~<:o"1"1t.:... ;-ti ;u;1-- '=!=C6 ,v L i ----.~---'-.--- -~--_.;! '."""l I r'" February 15,1980 P5700.~r il,,~,"; 5usitna Hydroelectric Project Study Very truly yours, !JJ}~ Philip t~.Hoover Staff Engineer ar Mr.Carrier: discussed in our meeting on February 11,1980,enclosed is a copy the Plan of Study for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project.It would appreciated if you could pass this copy along to Hr.Springer and •Corso for their infonnation.Any corrments you waul d have wi th gard to future 11censing considerations \'till be appreciated. ank you for taking time to meet with me.I lOOK forward to Qi-dinating development of the 1 icanse application with you as the udy progresses. Hils cl. cc:~awrencetil , I,' ni ! ed"EBEL c'2 \:HOBSON T.a I PHILCOX ~SHIPPEY r[,.,. 1 'TUCKERiMURRAY A SC)ECORA . .l!- i BAHADUR~_.-liJl.. r::o -I I -,t T ((\' ..:nr:t -{,r I -hI i "1 1 ;-.., I -I I -J•.,I ,'II Mr.Paul Carrier Division of Licensed Projects ......--="'=""-.l.\Qffi ce of £1 ectric Power.Regul ation :C;WARNOCK F~~eral,Energy Regulatory Commission 'D IUS 5 North Capi tal Street . shington.DC 20426 I""" , ! -i ! ----I I "~J-.~____,. ',:~~...",_;r!i-.1 March 11 ~1980 fnee.II.~'l Mr.Ron Corso Acting Director.Division of Licensed Projects Office of ElcctricPower Regulation .825 North capital Street Washington,D.C.20426 """I J ..dI Susitna Hydroelectric Projectarf·1r.Corso: e'purpose of this letter is to confirm the meeting scheduled for 9:00 m.Tuesday.April 8,1980 at the above FmC office address to discuss the tential 1 icr:nse apr:1 icatior.fer the Susitna Hydrocl ectric prcj€:ct~Thi s eting is arranged as a result of discussions between ~~.Paul Carrier of ur staff and M~.Philip Hoo¥er of i\cres. e Sus1tna project team will be represented at the meeting by the study onsor,the Al ask;!Pt:\vJPr Authority and by Acres American Incorporated,the ime contractor for the study.In addition to you and Mr.Carrier,it uld be appreciated if FERC representatives fran the environmental and gal specialities could attend,as well as any others who have c~ents on e sUbj ect Pl an of St udy. r pr-L~3rY topi c of l:lterest at the m~cti ng will l;u FERC s'~aff react i Or!to e Susit:l.1 FC5.Any con:;~;lt$resultin<J fran your revic\I,reldtive tv ;Jur epar'ation for d license ap;:11cat!on sutx:rittal,hi11 be appreciated.In dition,vre ~~uld also like to discuss the followinG topics: The p!.:ms to sub:~it a 1ict:!llsE!dPpl"ication prior to ~::;;nph::tioi1 of certain key monitorir.']st:Jdies; The extent of study participation by thcAlaska Departncnt of Fish and Came ~nd any implications on their potential (future)role uS In i ntervenot·. The i~:!pact on nUll-F ~Jer'a 1 Jevel ;)~;l~:lt of til~Corps of ::jllji tle~rs I Congrl.:ss;onal auUlOri zat ion for'Phas~I Study of ..lit:;Su:;i'~,)a pro.)~ct. -The ir;lpJ.cts of the p€l1dill';]ne~.,t'egulations tegar·~iIlY appiicatiulls fur maj 0'1'f)i'oj cct:.;. -The positiv2 Jnd nt:gat1v'~aspectoS of 1icensiny tilt:illtli'lhJudl ~i-Oject cOf.1poncnts separately or collectively (e.g.sequential license applica- tions for each of t\,/C dams vs.a single project application). WARNOCK DEBELIUS D( HOBSON PHILCOX T! SHIPPEY a TUCKER or MURRAY ml PECORA 'It BAHADUR I.....1t~./.;>, m,.... I tl .~ 'J 'In. "" - Ycur cooperation in providing assistar£c in this early stage of project dcvelo~r1lent is appreciated.¥Jc look for\'lard to meeting with you and your staff on April 2., .J Very truly yours. John D.Latlrence.P.E. Proj ect r'~anager cc:Paul Carri~r.FERC [ric Yould,APA Blind copies to:J.Hayden,P.Tucker,C.Debelius,E.L.Baum,Project Files ""'l March 31,1980 P5700.1l.71 ----~----------------IIIIESl±W_--;alI_=iIloohiiiicWl:liii-iWiliIiEh·...·...::---'------, ~'i 'L JJf'""'<, I I: I ( I I G~-~_-_~ Mr.Dale Arhart Division of Ecological Services Fi sh and Wi 1dl i fe Servi ce 18th andC Streets,NW Washington,D.C.20240 Dear Mr.Arhart:Susitna Hydroelectric Power Study Meeting with FERC r t i As discussed in our telephone conversation,the subject meeting with FERC will be held at their Washington office on April 8,Room 3401, 941 North Capi tal Street.Attached is a letter sent to Mr.Ron Corso of FERC confirming the meeting. Thank you for your interest.We hope to see you at the meeting. ~ I I ... PMH/ls Enclosure ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED C(n::;...;:_~g E:1~:ne(lrs S,.lle 323.Th~Clark Suilding C-:,l...:-,t<~,t·""!"·1ia~d 2jC~": / Sincerely,: 6(//'///~,/ .,V !//;:~_/'{-:j;~J."l-:",""""'---~---'.A/-"(,AWF:A ~"_ AWfORlTTPhiliPM.Hoover SUSllNA Ci vi 1 Engi neer flI~...5700_==-.j I ./--.:./:=::::::z:.;-I (NO. 1=3.2b --;--,z '.e.~I 0<...:J~'-....,..",.~w-:---·I--t,JG l~/i~-~--~-OC~~~-~.~-~-~-~~f~-;'C'CI'-_c~ •..--CAr)I I---I--l--:--!-- ...iDG I~/-.~+--~.,~t~)-:-~;I-I,....-..t p'~-\ I----t--li-p,..~!I '-"'~I (:··.;..r--A ,~. 'Ie.':i '-\,(\:(-j ; -.....__'J.-.-0--' "IBuj-#'-fILE -- March 11,1980 ( Mr.Ron Corso Acting Director,Division of Licensed Projects Office of Electric Power Regulation 825 North Capital Street Washington,D.C.20426 Dear Mr.Corso:Susitna Hydroel ectri c Project The purpose of this letter is to confirm the meeting scheduled for 9:00 a .m.Tuesday,Apr;1 8,1980 at the above FERC office address to di scuss the potential license application-for the Susitna Hydroelectric project.This meeting is arranged as a result of discussions betfJeen Hr.Paul Carrier of your staff and Mr.Philip Hoover of Acres. The Susitna project team will be represented at the meeti ng by the study sponsor,the Alaska Power Authority and by Acres American Incorporated.the prime contractor for the study.In addition to you and Mr.Carrier.it \'/ould be appreciated if FERC representatives frOO1 the environmental and 1 egal special ities could attend,as well as any others who have comments on the subject Plan of Study. Our primary topic of interest at the meeting will be FERC staff reaction to the Susitna POS.Any comments resulting from your review,relative to our preparation for a license application submittal,will be appreciated.In addition,we would also like to discuss the following topics: -The plans to submit a license application prior to completion of certain key monitoring studie~; -The extent of study participation by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and any impl ications on their potential (future)role as an intervenor,:: -The impact on non-Federal development of the Corps of Engineers· Congressional authorization for Phase I Study of the Susitna project. -The impacts of the pending new regulations regarding applications for maj or proj ects; -The positive and negative aspects of licensing the individual project components separately or collectively (e.g.sequential license applica- tions for each of two dams vs.a single project application). Your cooperation in providing assistance in this early stage of project development is appreciated.We look forward to meeting with you and your staff on April 8. Very truly yours. Pf1H/1 s CC:Paul Carrier,FERC Eric Youl d,APA ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED Consulting EngIneers S".le 329 Th~Clark Build.ng ColumbIa.r.~;lfyland 210:'; Telephone 201-992-5300 Wash.ngton lIne 301·596-5595 Olner O",!:es eu!I:lIO NY.Ptll~burgh.PA RaleIgh NC WashIngton.DC John D.Lawrence,P.E. Project Manager - ~. ,i _' ALPSI:A .roD.AUIHORITY , i g 1.980 ,...., ..I Septeuter 12.1980 Mr.Jim G1ll Acres Aneric.an.I:ac. 2207 SpeDard Road ADcborage,.Alaska 99503 Dear Jim: I an attaddtlg·a letter £rem AItiR.requesting they be kept·advised of B1JY data gad"""l"ed relad.ve to nav!gs.t:fJ:n use of the Susitna River aad its tributaries.Can you please alert your subc:mt:ract:cr to this request?\oIe wcW.d l1ke to 8CO *dUxJat.e it to the maxima·stent possi- ble. SitX61'1!1y. Robert A.1'iJhn. 1 Attachmect:Att1R Lett:er.August 29.1980 ce:~Lawrenee ;ji-:-_ !.L'i-,-, !Ii-,------ I I H :~'~ i-I-'---'~l~~!-&~4---- ;-®r::.i-c;,,_.,_ ;'-j--;--'-- !·-'1 ,--',i 'CM ce'l ,-'--I r :!I ,-Co;J l:'L ".I RECEIVED APR 1 It 1980 April 9,1980 Mr.Ronald Corso Director Division of Licensed Projects Office of Electric Power Regulation 825 North Capital Street Washington,D.C.20426 Dear Ron:Susitna Hydroelectric Power Study (Enclosed is an additional copy of the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Plan of Study as requested.Speaking for the study team,the cooperation of the FERC Staff in reviewing the pas and discussing pertinent pre-application issues in our meeting of April 8,1980,is greatly appreciated....., I Telephone 301·992·5300 \'IaSh,ngton LIne 301·595·5595 ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED ConsUl ling Engineers SUIte 329,The Clark BuildIng CoiumOJa.t.~aryland 210~': ~i yours, _I_!_[._:~:~;__I -i-:_;~_~_~L_j I ::~r,C , -I-~-'--, ~: -'-_.:---'..-! .j I :-'-·;O;l.:-_~~: -j-----_._-", [!' Very truly r4 ft.LA';'c,",PO'(;'i::!'I 1 [·~:T:'""JRITY t SUSiH-J,':"I FILE P5700 .L Hoover -~,1/.f11 Coordi natfbE(iUE~C~.I,~/o~i. .":"S i-:I-,,,!iz:-~I m r ...J •10 '.,2 '-J.:I;::1~'U;;: ~~~i 25 ~ Ph i1 ip M. Licensing E.L.Saumbec: PMH:kh Otner O!',ce·s Bu~!alo flY,P'l1s:Jurgn.P,A Raleigh NC \'IashlnQlon.DC MAY 3 U ISdn ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY ...lAY S.JiAMMDVD.c~i~akJA FILE P570.Q .)./I,~,;,- SEQUENCE NO. ~:23{) FG-80-II -12 Rf£'D MAY 30 moo ~1J&1r[@~~~~~~~/ DEP,\HTllIENTOF FIsn AND Gi\iUE / May 28 2 1980 --I I l ( -Mr.James H.Pedersen Project·Manager CIRI/H&N 3201 IIC"Street 2 Suite 201 Anchorage 2 Alaska 99503 \-.I RH~-~----+--j I \\ \\wee \\TES Dear Mr.Pedersen: R&M ADF&G ~ I I The Alaska Department of Fish and Game has reviewed the Governmental Permit/Plan Review Documentation for the Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibil~;~'~~)~'~~T--" Study Program to address activities of a general concern to this agency\_~~F~IL=E~Q:--~' and those which also require approval from this Department in accordance with Al aska Statute 16.05.870.Our comments on study acti viti es follow: GENERAL COMt~ENTS Hunting Activities r-t"I l,1 "...., I i i r""i', I ' I"I, ,! The Game Division in Region II has expressed a concern about the potential for impact on the wildlife assessment studies by hunting activities in the Watana camp area.The Game Division has stated 2 "It is evident that a large impact on game and furbearers may be expected in the Sus i tna drainage study ,area if persons involved in feasibility studies or in support of such studies are allowed to hunt and trap without restriction. Such recreation hunting in inself would not necessarily be harmful except insofar as it impacts the wildlife studies being conducted by the Department and the University.Hunting and trapping activities by the large number of people based at Watana camp will result in changes in animal distributions and abundance and would therefore severly bias the results of the wildlife assessment studies.In addition 2 it is likely that hunters and trappers would take some animals which have been marked or radio-collared at great expense,further impacting the coherence of the studies,especially in the vicinity of the camp:We suggest that-the APA lmpose a camp restn ctl on on huntl ng and trapPl ng by personnel using any of the feasibility study facilities within 15 miles on either 's i de of the Sus i tna from Gold Creek to the TyoneRi ver." 'K:2LH ;•r ~_. J~Pedersen -2-5/28/80 c Employees of Acres-American or their subcontractors should also be informed of the regulations contained in 5AAC 81.120 General Provisions. The following methods and means of taking game are prohibited:(3) by the use of helicopter or rotocraft in any manner including the transportation either to or from the field of any game or parts of arne,hunters,or hunti near,or an e ui ment used in the ursui t of game;...and also subsection 5 by use of an airplance, snownachine,motor-driven boat or other mothorized vehicles for the purpose of driving,herding,or molesting game;and that the definition of "taking"includes harrassment by aircraft. Aircraft Traffic APA/Acres should assure that aircraft engaged in point to point travel maintain a minimum elevation of 1,000 feet above ground level, weather conditions permitting.Ed Reed of TES has offered to have the TES employee stationed at Watana Camp complete a log of a11-helicopter activities at a lower elevations than this so that foci of disturbance can be related to animal activities.All contractors and subcontractors should be required to participate in maintaining this log.Beyond question,the level of helicopter activity which will occur in connection with the feasibility studies will imp?ct game populations,especially carnivores;the objective of these restrictions is to both minimize the impact and document it so that it can be evaluated. Solid Waste Management We suggest that all garbage generated by the field camps should be incinerated and buried within a strongly fenced enclosure to minimize tts attractiveness to Wildlife,especially bears. REVIEW OF STUDY ACTIVITIES Aeria 1 and Land Surveying pA-p.8 No comments,recommendations or AS 16.05.870 requirements. Hydrological Studies p.9-p.12 No comments,recommendations or Title 16 permit requirements. Environmental Studies p.13 No comments,recommendations,or Title 16 permit requirements. ..... ._---,,---_._-~.~_._-----------------------_...... ,.J.Pedersen -3-5/28/80 In accordance with AS 16.05.870,exploratory drilling and other activities related to this work are subject to the following requirements: 1.There shall be no fuel or petroleum products stored within 100 feet of the Susitna River and its tributaries. r ! "....., I I 2. 3. All mobile equipment shall be refueled at least 100 feet from the vegetated bank1ine of the Susitna River or its tributaries.Non- mobile equipment used in the course of drilling over river ice may be refueled on the river ice but extreme care should be taken to avoid spillage of petroleum products. Drill cuttings shall not be disposed in the Susitna River or its tributaries. 5. 4.Sedimentation from core drilling over ice of the Susitna River shall be minimized by casing each drill hole from the riverbed to the ice surface. Di scharge water from permeabil i ty tests shall not be introduced directly into flowing waters of the Susitna River or its tributaries. 6.Tracked or wheeled vehicles or equipment shall not be operated in the flowing waters of the Susitna River or its tributaries. 7.Each water intake equipment structure must be centered and enclosed in a screened box which must be constructed to prevent fish entrapment, entrainment or injury.Screen mesh may not exceed one-fourth inch. Pursuant to 6AAC 80.0l0(b),the conditions of this permit are consistent with the standards of the Alaska Coastal Management Program. This letter constitutes a permit issued under the referenced authority, must be retained onsite to be val id and expires December 31,1981. Please be advised that our approval does not relieve you of the responsibility to to secure other permits,State,Federal or local.You are encouraged to contact the Anchorage Permit Information and Referral Center,338 Denali Street,Room 1206,telephone 279-024,if you are in doubt about other required permits. Failure to "abide by permit stipulations and requirements ;s a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000 and/or six months in jail. Sincerely, "Ronald O.Skoog,Commissioner ~~<'"~~---.. BY:Thomas W.Trent Regional Supervisor Habitat Protection Section (907)344-0541 cc:John Rego -BLM Robert Boltlker -USFWS Kyle Cherry -ADEC La~ry Dutton -AONR RECEiVED J UN 1 G1980 333 WEST 4th AVENUE·SUITE 31 •ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 Phone:(907)277·7641 (907)276-2715 """'! June 13.1980 Mr.Ron Corso Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 400 1st Street,N.W. Washington,D.C.20427 Dear Mr.Corso: ( Pursuant to previous di scussi on with Mr.Qui ntan Edson,we request FERC presence in Anchorage to discuss various licensing aspects of the Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Thisvis1t could be in conjunction with your staff's .pl ans for vi s iti,ng the Tyee La ke site ..~',..":: r ',/,• ":.';' Sincerely, .t/;/','.:1./.)1.'.;1.(;{~;;;.-r-:'.?)(:r..k-... .....;,.../ Robert':A:Mohn . Directoi of Engineering.. ::' :.,.; ,::'. •ll,,," ,.' ',:', i· .i·'.' ..",., ,<The ne~dfor.,the meeti ngi s evidenced by the strong urging for such a .sess10nby the,state and federal agencies who have an interest in the project. ·':.·.,It.is·.the consensus of all..involved that a face-to-face meeting with FERC is IISKAPOWER ,neededat·th'fs early stage of·the study process to insure that proper work A-UnIORI1"f~ffortdsplanned especially in the environmental and fisheries programs. ;U SITN A"1\he meeting.wi 11.ccnst;tute the second convening of~he Susitna Interagency ILE .p5700:S,teer~ng Conun;.~t.ee:Acres.Amed can wi 11 be repre:ented.and prepared t~~i scuss :-,..:.I.L_-..:t)1e;f:sheriesan.cl,:..ln-str~a,?iflow study pr~gr~ms 1n detai.l.In our OplnlOn, 2UEl';CENO.the.tlmip9.:to\/;a'Z!,~.e7ting'~:'~~i}ourstaff 1S 1deal '".. :;:',,-:?-c:;,';r'We',::~dJrd;~N'k~'to pla:~'.;;'6'~'i;a;:twci-daysessioneither before or aft~r your i!'cO··,''sta ffl 5':vi 51 t,to\Ty'ee Lake~,'.,.We awai t your response and ':recommended meeti ng;l ~~d~tesWe::,wnladjust to.y()u~,·schedule...: g\',O ~,J·~';:':Tha;,~;::;;~m~'~J;"t~'ur~~!'ri~;'~j:~'~'~SSi5tance in guiding'us at this early but· ~C~..S~·._cii~1 ca,l 'Si?~g~;::.o,.;,;;!,e.,rOj ect.pl anning. ~"~gf J"'='F''/";!'i~:';Dk:·,,",, ~:_-,<·.·:·J ..-:--FOR THEiEXECUTIV[t.DIRECTOR::~~t~i_"1 '"">';'';0!~'':f,~K'. ,(:'1.1"I I'=l~~!=.·•.~~..;':'}Ohn La~re~c~ ,I D'N C!"~',;:.::(")./;,:. +-1 ·M.'R"iT(--.,..... -/-YRC'--' ...:...1----,--J!~I*~_i J<,,~"3:_ I-1"--:-- "l--.-l--;;-~~tl--· r h'!_t\'A..I:.ft,;..."I r,....,..c:7nn I I Q.Ai August 21,1980 P5100.11.88 •T.386 r Sus1tna ~droelectr1c Project Distribution of Environmental Procedures Manuals r Dean: addition,nine (9)sets of these procedures manuals have been sent theSusitna Steering Committee for review. r review and cOI1II1ents on these procedures manuals w6uld be appreciated. Sincerely, ~'~oung~o~ental Coordinator part of our 505itna Hydroelectric study program we have prepared cedures manuals for the major enviromental subtasks.Enclosed please d a complete set of ..nuals prepared to date.aAs modifications in our cedures occur,you will be supplied with revised editions. Dean ShulJIfay @ral Energy Regulatory Commission North Capital Street 4th Floor hintton,D.C.20426 I WILLETT -I WITTE "LAMB ...I /.., I BERFlY II Mr. I -../11;'0 ~"'".-,YI..;;z;825Ih:/JJ,,'A~-er f DLP Was#// r iC'G1 LL d/..,( LOWFlEY //Dea I'FRETZ ):r, r' HUSTEAD AsBevEprorfin pro CHASE In..... ['to I 1 Your· KRY/jrnh Attachment _______...._....._..---~----------...:a""--...""..,.,.-.....------...""".....""'-,."~ DIVISION OF RESEARCH &DEVELOPMENT August 29.1980 RECEIVED JAr s.HAItIMOIiD.'OYEINOI 323 E.4T1~A VENUE ANCHORAGE.ALASKA 99501 279-5577 Eric Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Authority 333 W.Fourth Avenue Suite 31 Anchorage,AK 99501 Dear Mr.Yould: At the Susitna Hydro Steering Committee meeting held on July 18,1980, the navigation user needs study as it relates to instream flow studies was discussed.At that time it came to our attention that personnel from the University of Alaska completed a propos~l to conduct this work,however,for budgetary and project scheduling purposes it hM been determined not to conducr-this study at this tim~.Staff of TES indicated to my st·aff that the possibility exists,pending further hydrologic studies and continuing development of instream flow studies, that data on navigation user needs for instream flow purposes may be gathered in.the future as the feasibility studies continue. I would like to request that your office and that of Acres,TES,and their subcontractors keep my department abreast of development of data gathered relating to navigation uses on the Susitna River and its tributaries.Additionally we would appreciate receiving a copy of the initial proposal written by the U.of A.staff to conduct such a data gathering effort.This will aid us in the review of any developments in this area of study,which this department believes should be conducted as part of the overall feasibility studies. Sincerely, '] .,~ Allan Carson Deputy Director cc:Mary Lu Harle ~1 ---------------------'-----,-. May 4,1981 P5700.1l.74 T.868 r t i ( /Mr •Robert Shaw State Historic Preservation Officer State of Alaska ,Department of Natural Resources Division of Parks 619 Warehouse Avenue Aftchorage.AK 99501 ~...-. Dear Mr.Shaw: / Susitna Hydroelectric Project Cultural Resources Investiqation ,, ..1 1"""i : I ~. 1"',,' i ; '.i In response to your request during our meeting of April 7.1981,I am forwarding a copy of the Susitna Procedures Manual for the Cultural Resources Investigations.In addition,I have enclosed a copy of the eu 1tura 1 Resources section from our Pl an of Study. I trust thi s will aid in your continued review of our program.Any specific questions on this component of our study should be referred to Mr.lew1s M.Cutler of Terrestrial Environmental Specialists,RD ,Box 388, Phoenix,NY 14135. Yours truly, Ke:Y1 n Young Environmental Coordinator KY:adh Enclosures I July 22,1981 P5700.1l.88 T.990 Kevin Young Environmental Coordinator Sincerely, P.Hoover (AAI)- D.\'Jozn1ak (APA). Y/ljr closure though we are not seeking a fannal review at this time,any cor:unents you va would be very much appreciated. at"j~ark:Sus1tna Hydroelectric Project Environmental 1980 Annual Reoorts discussed I am forwarding copies of our Susitna 1980 Annual Reports. e scope and objectives of the various subtasks under which these reports re prepared are outlined in our Plan of Study which you already have cppy of. •Mark Robinson deral Energy RegulatorY Commissiono1stStreet,N.W. shington,D.C.20427 WILLETT WITTE BERRY f1r 1-"(fix J;11 \,I: ·r])(.·/'J'J.l ..l..IJ· In..1 ~ L.AMB ,.- \ SINCLAIR l.~ VANOERBURGH ~.r !.:....-r~ 'hCARL.SON FRETZ ,.. JEX C LOWREY SINGH 1. ra HUSTEAD BOVE CHAse 'K La .L f ..~"'"'"- Pi r JA r s.HAMMONO.GOVERf.'OR September 10,1981 Jim GiL Acres American,In~. 2207 Spenard Road Anchorage,AK 99503 / / /333 RASPBERRY ROAD ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99502 344-0541 /1.7[ If/()'j :)-;;) Dear Jin:: Our Fairbanks office received a complaint from a moose hunter about disturbance of moose by helicopters north of the Watana Camp during the first week of September.Apparently,helicopters that appeared to be flying point to point ,vere seen to periodically drop down to lower altitudes as though they were looking at animals.He did not identify the helicopters,but there is a fair chance they were from the camp. The same hunter complained about a Cessna 180 which I have determined X to be one of our chartered aircraft that was radiotracking bears. The hunter felt that these activities were causing moose to move to lower elevations into more timbered areas.We have no evidence to support this impression,but it is certainly possible to disrupt animals enough to spoil an expensive hunt. Some conflict with hunters are unavoidable.but we should try to minimize them.We plan to try to avoid flights on popular hunting days such as opening days and major weekends.It would be useful if you would remind helicopter pilots of the problem and request that they maintain sufficient altitude to avoid disturbing animals except when their ,'<'ark or safety dictate otherwise.In particular,they should resist the natural tendency to go take a closer look at animals. Sincerely, -~../"7;~-/' Karl Schneider Game Biologist IV ';""".x- M;,.,ffzmcy B1 unck Put.)He Pe.rt.h:.i p~tion Off;eel"- Al~skD Puwer AuU:Drity 333 Uest 4-th Avenue~Suite 31 !'\:~ChtH~age..in i1ska ~95(n "-. l'\It.O~JU~U1TLR 10Tm:PllilLIC la LIlliS£.fum 'H)lit.1.HfH.RLSH.D AGEJiCIES AUD OR6A«IZATIOHS On Febrtfiu''Y'A.~9na1-1'.(.[l-it rQuld.EY.!acut:ive Directm'of thlJ Alaska i'o\\'Cr Autl~orH ...y.pJ"Cp'i)t~ii a 'fatWi\rdlng lett.c~int..l"Oaucing Un:~ Qcwi led Pla'n oi'StUi'.t~·.io·r the $u5itn~-Hydr-ete-l{'ctrlc Project.He n~~d at the ti~th~tthe.plan did noL purrrilmentl..}"fix'the m~rm~.n~in ~tch theiu'npDseo W1}ri!;.\\~)tddbe ttccoi<ipiisned ana.e>ipressed his desi ~f,.tIl?:.\- yoUi'aS$..ist.bnt~1\iitulcl contt~ibute 't.1its st.:ead.v ln~~rG\~i?i*=flt. .1hePt".Oject.l'eam has ut:.oen he'aviiy engaged -dur'i ng the pa~t.n1 nt". ~nt.br.i~\aecu~fijlH$·krmj ..Ul!=m~n..v ta5y.!O lInd !Htbtas~s \ilii.;h to!icthcr wi H u 1t-ifil,W1y 1 (;'~d t,Q't..>te .bas is UPiJil whi ch Un:.5 ~.tc Of Al D::;;kil C·i:lrt rr-~ke ~u info-nnNl d~cisi'On os'to -whether it.'Ce-n or simuld fn~c,el'd with the Susit.nu. r.yo1"oelectric ?f'Ojeetw.Con&t::uct.tOtl uf a camp was completed in j{fI'l'il 19!m' np.i):t..the Watana C~f:lf s:l W..FiC-td cre-«.s:have nf=P,!rateo since then 1rom:t.~ tt~t.al1a Call~tI.m'frt11ii a number of ot.her'l{;~~1'.fv!~$.ItN.ort~nt inf\.)m~t.itm has helm ami conii Al,Je..'i tn b~con ectco.w,~knoi1 fill:1.C.h rrt:):-e now about the geo lQgy ~hydrolQgy"t-ei sm;,lfl!.lYI'envi n:mmimt.~and eSpI'!ci 311y ;ihout the concerns and tfH.erusts of the public._ ..~.Ev~n whil e the l~{wk has progt"tl'S5.c-6~[f'1 c Ynul d'S J.>ro~Ct j t:d~i res ='.~l.:li.F'Q';:'::n na\:"e been l"ealize!:L Ii numher of infj)ortoot chtHltJ2!i hi1ve been madE!to the "i':-:'::~;TY plcfi.lhts v01unu!documents the ~~evisi{)nsa1)o brfcfty iJescr-ibcs thefr ~is;TT:tlgtncsis.Once ~~~tn.your cl:lrefu1 l'eview and CQlmmn1.$"~ttld ht'V~r:l -::::"7:(1 mr;cn appreciated.1 5ince~iy hope ;lCU w111 t"k~thetima-to iiddt"'ess ~.;'.'"'.~'f·~em·to;.-,---..1..f::."""i I .'-~~,-.jC~,;~:J.t .----, .~:) "0 ;§I / ..~z i '-...'~.~--,-,--1 On behiJ.l f of the enti ~"'e ftrnjec.t )'earn,.j Wnf:tt to ;"?;?1fw:i1&;;cur'i.lllpred,,- .".1.:i011 fat·t.he strrmg int.e~'est you have eXI}I"'Cs·~NJ to dute.WHh ~~Our ______J{-c:LasF1stal1ce~t.he 1~\'.1sed plan wOI c.ont1nuE to bg a·dynum'ic doclJ1iJ=nt. I Sincerely". \:~C/I2A, H -.\ .. a~hn n.l.a~ence Pr~j{"ct ~~ant1s~r- ..' I .',,-r i I :-:=1 ·4 .~. ;1 ] ..- ,I _L~_; I-~.-l _:_1 , I _.._-'--) -".<-; DATE:April 6,1981 NOTES OF MEETING PROJECT·NUMBER:AAI 218 LOCATION:DNR,Division of Minerals and Energy Management;703 W.Northern Li ghts 81 vd.,Anchorage ATTENDEES:Glenn Harrison,Director;Division of Minerals and Energy Management.J.D.Barnes,R.J.Krogseng,TES ~ I r- i i SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Mr.Barnes gave a short presentati on SUllJIJarl Zl ng the hi story of the Sus;tna Project and the role of Acres and TES in the present studies being conducted for the Alaska Power Authority.- ~c·Mr.Harrison responded that his divisions main interests involved coal,oil \,(.and gas and that he foresaw few problems that :the Susitna project would cause in his areas of interest. Mr.Harrison felt that the project "sounds good"and was well thought out. Mr.Harrison also commented that it would be good,as far as his division was concerned,to have some roads built into the Susitna area. Mr.Harrison stated that he appreci ated the meet;ng and that he would like to be.keptinformed on a periodic basis . .~~--:.::.-~~-.~.:.'.--._---...:~--~--. ,... i 1""""I {" Prepared bytf~~ :.;:Krogsen ;IrES DATE:April 6,1981 NOTES OF MEETING PROJECT NUMBER:AAI 218 .- LOCATION:Alaska Department of Transportation,Aviation Building,Anchorage ATIENDEES:Jay Bergstrand,DOT,Area Planner;J.D.Barnes and R.J.Krogseng, TES SUMrmRY OF DISCUSSION: Jeff Barnes outlined the history of the Susitna Project and Acres and TES's role in the present studies.Mr.Bergstrand was familar with the project and had been present at some of the Susitna project meetings. (,Mr.Bergstrand requested a copy of the Environmental Annual Reports,and he was referred to Nancy Blunck's office at APA. Mr.Bergstrand asked about transmission line high voltage effects 3 fish passage problems around the dams;what was planned for disposing of the timber in the impoundment areas,and was burning being considered as a mitigation measure for moose? Mr.Bergstrand was particularly interested in the planning process for Access Roads,Transmission Line routes and transportation corridors.He showed us proposed routes for new roads in the Lower Susitna Basin and we discussed where they would cross the proposed transmission lines. __....4 -----~-"_"_~•_.____ Mr.Bergstrand requested more infonmation regarding the impact and amount of flying activity during the study and construction periods the Susitna Project would have on the Talkeetna Airport.This information would be used to ascertain if the state would have to provide more services at the Talkeetna airport.(A letter:requesting this information was sent to Mr.Brownfield of Acres on April 16,1981). J };" Prepared --I "...,.. ( ---_._~----------.----------§ Page 2 ~. I I \ (- l . Mr.Baya inquired about the s~atus of legislatiy.e funding to cover the rest of Phase I studies and the tran~ition period. Mr.Baya wanted to know if any incremental instream flow work was being done on the Susitna River by the state. Mr.Baya feels that more attention needs to be paid to instream flow impacts, the effects can be far-reachi ng:He poi nted out that the move of the state capitol,urban growth of Anchorage and the Mat-Su,the proposed causeway to Point MacKenzie,all could cause serious impacts and need to be considered in a regional planning effort.He also pointed out the need to recognize the secondary impacts that a large supply of hydroelectric power would cause. Mr.Baya pointed out that the Fish and Wildl ife Service will be asked by the Secretary (of Interior)to respond with corrments during the FERC review process. The F&WS also has the requirement to coordinate fish and wildlife view points from the different agencies.Mr.Baya feels that the Susitna project has moved forward too far without funding for Fish and Wildlife Service participation. He would like to have a man assigned full time to the Susitna project to monitor the studies and keep him up to date because in the near future he will have to ask himself "ean I sign off on that?" Mr.Baya feels that the APA needs to find a way to get the F&WS actively involved. They need money to finance a staff position (approximately $50 -50,000 a man year).Normally when the Corps of Engineers have a project they would give the F&WS money every six months through an allocation transfer. Mr.Baya commented that recent cutbacks have caused problems and will probably result in a reduction in staff.In spite of these problems Mr.Baya said "we want to help plan a sound program ..•..we donlt want to be obstructionists." It •••but ~ithout funding for a full time position it will be virtually impossible to cornpletly review the study in a short period of time. Mr.Baya commented tQat in projects in the Lower 48 states they have found that often they had not looked far enough down the road to be aware of all of the impacts.For instance,along the Mississippi River the State of Mississippi is losing 16 miles of Delta every year,because river channelization is dumping sediments in deep water instead of spreading them over the delta areas. NOTES OF MEETING DATE:April 6,1981 PROJECT NUMBER:AAI 218 LOCATION:DNR Office,323 East 4th Ave.,Anchorage ATIENDEES:Mr.Ted Smith,Director,State Division of Forrest,Land &Water Management,ADNR.Mr.J.D.Barnes,Mr.R.J.Krogseng,TES SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Jeff Barnes outlined the history of the Susitna Project and TES's role in the studies. Mr.Smith had recently talked to Brent Petrie (now of APA)about the Susitna project and he appreciated the briefing and the concerns shown for his departments interests. Mr.Smith expects to get relief from the Legislative mandates which he feels are causing many of the problems in the state land disposal program. Mr.Smith feels that the access roads for the Susitna Project will help to open up and provide access for more state disposal lands. Mr.Smith strongly feels that the Alaska Power Authority should file applications for water rights as soon as possible to both reserve the water rights and to help DNR plan.(Alaska has recently adopted a water rights law similar to that of Montana and other Western states).He also would like to see applications from APA designating approximate routes for access roads and transmission lines so they can be included in DNR's planning at the earliest possible date. ,, -j -i J ~ I Ih • NOTES OF MEETING DATE:April 7,1981 PROJECT NUMBER:AAI 218 LOCATION:State Parks Headquarters,619 Warehouse Avenue,Anchorage ATIENDEES:"Jack Wiles,Robert Shaw,Doug Reger,Alaska State Parks;Kevin Young,Acres;Jeff Barnes,Lew Cutler,R.J.Krogseng,TES. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Mr.Barnes gave a short presentation covering the history of the Susitna Project and the role played by Acres,TES,and other subcontractors in the present study for the Alaska Power Authority. Mr.Shaw and Mr.Reger requested a copy of the Plan of Study and the Archaeology Procedures Manual.(Mr.Cutler will go over the Annual Report with Mr.Reger on the 8th of Apr;1). Mr.Wiles was concerned that if the State Parks Department would be the manager around the reservoir area,how big was the area going to be,or would it just be the 200 foot buffer strip. Mr.Reger wanted to know what was~the FERC application.He also wanted to know if the FERC people would consult with-his staff office.He also commented that they hadn't been involved up till now. Mr.Shaw wanted to know what the overall construction schedule would be. Mr.Wiles inquired about the status of the-access road and what the present .---. pl ans were. It was also established that artifacts that came from native owned ground are ~usually placed in the University of Alaska Museum to be held in trust for the natives. All attendees agreed that the Susitna Project "sounds good ll and they were satisfied with the planning that had gone into the-studies. -I {I NOTES OF MEETING DATE:April 7,1981 PROJECT NUMBER:AAI 218 LOCATION:USF&WS,Tudor Road,Anchorage AITENDEES:Keith Baya,Assistant Area Director F&WS;Kevin Young,Acres; J.D.Barnes and R.J.Krogseng,lESe Mr.Baya felt that the NEPA decision making process should be followed. Mr.Baya believes that the Sus'itna study is going to be one of the major studies for the next few years.He feels that the Fish and Wildlife Service needs to be involved in these studies and that his people have some expertise,but they need to be on the ground to be abl e to see -and -s-up-erv;se the studies~-'Ir:-~ they are not included Mr.Baya believes the rI----FERC coordination may take longer than felt politically wise or timely." Mr.Baya expressed an interest in what studies were planned for the coming year. If there is an early June tour for Starker Leopold,Mr.Keith Baya would_like to be included. Mr.Baya wanted to know if Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HE?)were being used in the studies.He felt that it may be necessary to do a HE?analysis 'later on • .Mr.Baya inquired about Dr.B.Kesselts Avian and Small Mammal Studies and what was scheduled for the summer field studies. i~: r l " Page 3 Mr.Baya also commented on the EIS that will be written on the Beluga Coal fields in the next few months,and how they plan to build a model to help figure out what (data)is driving the system.They also will be looking at the question of whether it would be better to build a port at Tyonek or ' haul the coal by railroad to Seward. Prepared·by ~ .J.K gsen TES ..-.. NOTES OF MEETING DATE:April 7,1981 LOCATION:Department of Community Building B,Anchorage PROJECT NUMBER:AAI 218 &Regional Affairs,225 Cordova, ATTENDEES:Ed Busch,Senior Planner;lamar Cotten,Associate Planner; Kevin Young,Acres;J.D.Barnes and R.J.Krogseng,TES. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Mr.Barnes gave an overview of the history of the Susitna project.Acres and TES's involvement in the present studies and our reason for talkingc/to people from their department. Mr.Busch was aware of the steering cormnittee through Al Carson.f~r.Busch's department provides planning-assistance to communities upon request.The Department also has a management program.One of their programs provides coastal zone management for the Matanuska-Susitna Borough.This could extend up the Susitna River. Mr.Busch's office has had sporadic involvement with the Susitna project.- He was on the review committee on contractor selection and also attended some of the workshops. Mr.Busch voiced some concerns that his office has about planning for the Susitna project.He feels there will be a number of impacts on local governments,and he wanted to know if their concerns had been considered? Mr.Busch believes that the-Matanuska-Susitna Borough will bear the brunt of the impacts (positive and negative)caused by the Susitna project.A major problem will be providing increased services. Mr.Busch wanted to know if the access roads would be kept open after the project was fini~hed and who will maintain them.He also wanted to know, if the railroad is built,has anyone considered the impact to Talkeetna caused by people driving to Talkeetna,parking and taking the train? Mr.Busch _recommended that TES do community profiles on the towns and villages that would receive most of the impact.As a minimum he suggested corr.munity profiles on Talkeetna,Cantwell,Paxson and Gold Creek ..A corrrnunity profile is a collection of information with photos and a map of the comnunity. (examples were prOVided).The profiles have been costing $10-11 ,000 to produce wi th the maj ori ty of the expenses go i n9 for per di em expenses and ca rtography. r-, '"""'..I I'~, -I \ \ PAGE 2 (Northwest Gas Pipeline Company produced some of the examples). Mr.Busch pointed out that if a village is incorporated into a second class city (such as Talkeetna)they are able to have more input in planning and governing themselves.For the smaller villages the State Legislature is the governing body,with the actual planning done by Mr.Busch's department. Wildlife planning is done by the ADF&G,and the Matanuska-Susitna Borough provides the schools.Mr.Busch does not speak for the Borough unless he has been requested to do so. Mr.Busch feels the number of construction workers has been under-estimated, as an exampl e,the Alyeska pi pel ine was under-estimated. Mr.Busch recommended that a permanent construction camp be built for the project.The temporary camps built for the pipeline are still being used and it would have been cheaper in the long run to build permanent camps. Mr.Busch commented that people from Frank Orth and Associates have talked to personnel in his office. Mr.Bus'ch also pointed out that the only way his office gets involved is when they have been asked to by the community. NOTES OF MEETING. DATE:April 8,1981 PROJECT NUMBER:AAI 218 LOCATION:Department of Public Safety,Division of Fish and Wildlife Protection~5700 E.Tudor Road,Anchorage . ATIENDEES:Colonel Robert J.Stickles,Director;Lt.Col.Tetzlaff,Capt.~ Wayne Fleek.,Lt.Rod Mills,Department of Public Safety;Kevin J Young,Acres;J.O.Barnes and R.J.Krogseng~TES. SU~1ARY OF DISCUSSION: Mr.Barnes presented an overview of the history of the Susitna project and the part played by Acres and TES in the present studies being conducted for the Alaska Power Authority. ('Co1.Stickles-requested that his department receive copies of the annual reports for Fish,Big Game and Access Roads. Col.Stickles asked what effect the dams would have on the flow of the Susitna River below Talkeetna.'He also wanted to know what water temperature changes may occur.He was very interested in the possible effects the project would have on moose and caribou.Col.Stickles also wanted to know how many miles of access roads were planned. Co1.Stickles wanted to know what ice effects were expected in the impound- ment area and also the effects expected in the downstream reaches of the river.. He also wanted to know what the construction time table was and when it would start.He needed this infonnation to help plan for the placement of officers. He will probably assign an officer to Chulitna when construction starts. Capt.Fleek asked about the amount of helicopter useage during the studies. He also wanted to know where the transmission line routes would be and if there would be access roads along them. Capt.Fl eek wanted to know how many peopl e waul dbe 1ivi n9 near the dams for· maintenance and operation of them. Capt.FleeR wanted to know if the impoundment areas were going to be logged. He also was concerned that i~e shelVing might cause caribou crossing problems. Capt.Fleek commented on t~e large number of bear in ~he area and wanted to know if we had had any bear problems·.He also requested that Fish and Wildlife Protection Division be sent the results of the Mitigation Gommitteec Their division would like to be in on mitigation planningc J .r ~.. I""" i PAGE 2 All agreed that Protection Divisionis greatest concern would be the access provided'to the area.They wanted to know if a landing strip was going to be built.They would also be interested in getting.permission to store extra gas for their heli copter at Camp Watana 1ater on. Lt.Mills said that they could tell us the number of guides using the area, and he agreed to send Krogseng a list of the guides and their best guess on the number of hunters using the area . ~~.._. ,...., i J -~. Reported by DATE:April 8,1981 NOTES OF MEETING PROJECT NUMBER:AAI 218 ~I c .( LOCATION:Department of Energy,Federa 1 Bui 1di ng,Anchorage ATTENDEES:Fred Chiei,Deputy Regional Representative;Kevin Young,Acres;.~ J~O.Barnes and R.J.Krogseng,TES. SUMHARY OF DISCUSSION:~, Mr.Barnes made his presentation covering the history of the Susitna project and the role of Acres and TES in the present studies being conducted for the Alaska Power Authority. Mr.Chiei appreciated being kept informed on the status of the project. Mr.Chiei commented'that his office is an off-shoot of the Secretary's office and that he deals primarily with energylpolicy'. Mr.Chiei noted that the FERC people operate out of his office when they are in town,.while the FERC engineers operate out of San Francisco.He also commented on the need for energy planning. Mr.Chiei said that his office tries to stay out of the states territory in energy matters,although a lot of things have not surfaced yet.He prefers it to be more of a state project and is happy to see state funding for it. Mr.Chiei commented that hydroelectric_projects_ltke th~Susitna p.r~J~c~. release energy like coal,oil _and gas t~at can be shipped elsewhere in the U.S.which hel ps to distribute the country's energy more evenly. Mr.Chiei said that he doesn't see any problems at this point and periodic reports (like this meeting)would be sufficient.He would also be interested in seeing the development scenario when it is developed. Mr.Chiei would like to receive information from Acres on the Tidal Power Study. Reported by 6-f:.~ ..J.ogsen rES -) NOTES OF MEETING-- DATE:April 8~1981 PROJECT NUMBER:AAI 218 t-,LOCATION:Nat;ona 1 Park Servi ce ~540 West 5th Avenue,Anchorage \; i ATTENDEES:Howard R.Wagner,Associate Director~Carl Stoddard~Terry _("'"Carlstrom,Ross Cavenaugh~National Park Service;Kevin Young, Acres;J.O.Barnes ~R.J.Krogseng,TES. ~SU~~RY OF DISCUSSION: I Mr.Barnes outlined the history of the Susitna project and the role Acres and TES have in the present studies being conducted for the Alaska Power Authority. Mr.Cavenaugh asked how the Fish and Wildlife studies fit into the overall planning process.He also asked what was being done about cultural resources. Mr.Cavenaugh also wanted to know what effect the project would have on the proposed Denali Scenic highway. Mr.Wagner said that he would be very interested in the transmission line route,especially where it is near the park (Denali).If the route passes through park bounda ri es,the ri ght-of-way approval may need congress i ona 1 1eve 1 approval.They want to keep the transmission line out of the park. - -. .. Mr.Carlstrom wanted to know what range of considerations or options were available.He comnented that access could be a direct-problem.The Denali--..-. National Park is only on the west side of the Parks hi ghway,but the trans- mission line would have a direct impact on the land across the road.He also wanted to be sure that someone was looking at indirect impacts caused by the project. Mr.Wagner also commented that USGS would soon have 1:250,000 scale maps with the-new park boundri es marked on them. Reported by:~tt r - -R:Krog#'fig,TES . -.e,- I NOTES OF MEETING DATE:April as 1981 PROJECT NUMBER:AAI 218 c} LOCATION:u.s.Anny ~orps of Engi neers s Elmendorf AFB,Anchorage ATTENDEES:Lt.Col.Perkins,Deputy District Engineer;Kevin Young,Acres; J.D.Barnes and R.J.Krogseng,TES. SU~~RY OF OISCUSSION: Mr.Barnes briefly covered the role of Acres and TES in the present studies of the Susitna project being performed for the Alaska Power Authority. Lt.Col.Perkins stated that the Corps has no funding for any work on the Sus i tna proj ect.- Lt.Col.Perkins strongly feels that the state should be asking the Corps; What permits will -be required?The state should also inquire about getting one blanket permit for the project. Lt.Col.Perkins wanted to know if we knew what permits would be needed,in particular any section 404 classification of wetlands would be filled in.~ He recorrmended that the head of his environmental group be contacted. Lt.Col.Perkins also noted that the access roads will require pennits to cross wetlands;also any dredging or filling that is required.Permits will also be required for constructing the transmission lines,especially if access roads are buil t. Lt.Col.Perkins pointed out that it takes a minimum of 200-220 days to process a permit.and if there are any objections they may have to be resolved in Washington,which will require even more time.., Reported by ~;~r.TES ~) NOTES OF MEETING DATE:Apr;1 9,1981 PROJECT NUMBER:AAI 218 ->-'--. foo, i I -t LOCATION:NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service,Federal Building, Anchorage AJTENDEES:Ronald Morris,Supervisor,Anchorage Field Office,Brad Smith, NOAA Fisheries Biologist;J.D.Barnes and R.J.Krogseng,TES. SU~~RY OF DISCUSSION: Mr.Barnes gave a presentation covering the history of'the Susitna project and the role of Acres and TES in the present studies being conducted for the Alaska Power Authority. Mr.Morris and Mr.Smith are both members of the Susitna Hydro Steering Committee and they will coordinate their work with the state fisheries people. Mr.Smith will be in contact wi th Dr.Dana Schmi dt of TES concerni ng the fisheries studies. Mr~Morris asked about dam design features and said that he will be in contact with NOAA engineers in the Oregon office. Mr.Morris said that they appreciated the contact. Reported bY'_l.L.~~:::e::.:::::::::;.~0:::::!~(~:Z:::::;~.",,<_·_- R.J.~rOgSen~ES c .. NOTES OF MEETING DATE:April 9,1981 PROJECT NUMBER:AAI 218 LOCATION:Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation,437 E.Street, ~Anchorage ATTENDEES:Bob Martin,Regional Environmental Supervisor,Steve Zrake.DEC; Kevin Young,Acres;J.D.Barnes and R.J.Krogseng,TES SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION Mr.Barnes outl i ned the hi s tory of the Sus i tna·Proj ect a nd the ro 1e of Acres and TES in the present studi es bei ng conducted for the Alaska Power Authori ty. Mr.Martin asked what impacts or changes were expected on water quality or air quality.He also wanted to know if the studies were long enough to establish a proper baseline ~eriod. Under socioeconomic,Mr.Martin wantedfto know if we had studied power genera- tion needs.He was referred to the ISER study. Mr.Martin wanted to'know if the studies would continue after the FERC applica-~1 tion has been made.Mr.Martin also wanted to know ttwhy the FERC application date was set so soon u •As an example,Mr.Martin wanted to know why the decision on the access road had to be made so soon;he wasn1t even "com for- table ll with how the three routes had been selected.He stated that his department would like to keep access down because it would be easier to manage. The Department of Environmental Conservation's interests in the Susitna area are administered out of Mr.Martins Anchorage offi~e.His major point of contact is the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Steering Committee. DEC's direct regulatory responsibility ;s waste water,drinking water,and solid waste disposal.DEC also has an interest in instream activities. Mr.Martin recoffi'TIended applying for a variance to build the construction camps to provide for drinking water and waste water and solid waste disposal. Mr.Martin feels that the major impacts of construction activities are going to be the access roads and the locations of construction camps .. Mr.Martin said that it may be easier to have just one transportation corridor. As an example,in transportation and handling of fuel~accidents are bound to happen,1 ike a truck may roll off the road.He feels that it is important to avoid as many critical habitat areas as possible. r ···wr Mr.Martin was also interested in the water quality studies.He feels it is very important to get a complete water quality series before road construc- tion starts.He wants to be able to measure construction effects,such as the run off into streams.from road building. Mr.Martin is also impacted by roads. sufficient. interested in the ,smaller feeder streams that would be He feels that 2-3 years ,of data from studies would be J~ Mr.Martin expressed a concern about cOT1Jl1unities along the river disposing of wastes in the Susitna River. Mr.Martin was especially concerned about the fuel transportation and storage system and the amount of fuel that would be used in a large project like Susitna.He feels it is necessary to plan to avoid or ininimize accidents or spills. -Mr.Martin cOrmlented on the need to maintain ecological integrity through land use and public use planning,and to have a voice in other areas that he can't regulate.He wants to see rational land use development,something that doesn't interfere with'habitat. Mr.Martin also wants to see more attention paid to using energy alternatives such as Retherford's recorrmenda t i on to us eel ectri ci ty to run pi pe 1i ne pumps instead of using oil or gas. Mr.Martin strongly recommended building a centralized constructi'on camp. He also recorrmended building where the permanent facilities will be located. Mr.Zrake wanted to know if under soci~cultural impacts we were looking at individual desires too?He also wanted to know if this would cover the trans- mission line too. Mr.Martin stated that DEC does not have any studies ,in progress that affect Susitna.They are working on a wetlands study with specific Alaska guidelines. Prepa red by---,A-;::-t::~-_""7:iij.-'f'~~_"""7?<---'-_",--- R.J.ijogsenli (, NOTES OF MEETING DATE:April 9,1981 PROJECT NUMBER:AAI-218 LOCATION:U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,Tudor Road,Anchorage,Alaska ATTENDEES:Mel Munson,Chief Ecologi~al Services;Gary Stackhouse,F&WS; Kevin Young,ACRES;J.Q.Barnes and R.J.Krogseng,TES. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Mr.Barnes outlined the history of the Susitna Project and the role of Acres and TES in the present studies being conducted for the Alaska Power Authority. Mr.Munson asked what ADF&G's role was in the studies.Hea1so wanted to know'what the time frame was for a11 of the studies ~nd when the EIS came into the picture.Mr.Barnes.outlined the FERC process and where the dif- ferent parts fit in. Mr.Munson wanted to know if we had a preliminary permit for the project.He felt that it was important that the state file soon. In 1952 Mr.Munson looked at 20 different proposed dams for River,Basin Studies. Devil Canyon and Watana Dams were part of that study.At that time he did not find any salmon in -the upper Susitna River. Mr.Munson wanted to know if ADF&G was looking at winter moose range in the study area.From personal experience in the area,he felt that the south facing slopes on the north side of the canyon from half way between Devil Can- yon to Watana were important to the moose population during the winter. Mr.Munson has watched caribou swim the river in many different places in the Watana area,they appear to get out any place they can get up the canyon wall. Mr.Munson commented that during peak numbers of carioou he has seen 6-8000 caribou on Mt.Watana alone.Also during peak numbers be has watched them crossing the Susitna River where many trying to swim the river would be carried down-stream and drown..He has seen hundred$of dead caribou washed up on shore. Mr.Munson wanted to know what was planned to mitigate for losses of moose habi- tat.He also commented that he opposed the Denali Dam because it would flood a highly productivity area. "'*'.I ._------------------------------ Mr.Munson also wanted to know if we were looking at the area above the Tyone Ri ver. Mr.Young outlined the various dam schemes that had .the Devil Canyon -Watana scheme had been sel ected. that it was a good choice. been considered and why Mr.Munson commented I~ I -( I r Mr.Munson said that one of the things he was interested in was what we were going to do to mitigate for lost moose habitat.He felt that there was a need for habitat development on upper Watana Creek.Mr.Munson also suggested burning,cutting or even sprigging willows as things to consider on Tsusena Creek. Mr.Munson was interested in the mitigation task force and its review group, although he commented that there is not much you can do for caribou. Mr.Stackhouse asked'what the status of the mitigation policy was.He hoped the group would be able to produce a policy for APA.Mr.Stackhouse also wanted to know what the basis for mitigation would be,was it going to be based on an a cre,for an acre or an animal for an animal?' Mr Stackhouse also asked about the vegetation analysis that was being per- formed;he was concerned that the studies be of a high enough quality to be able to use HEP (Habitat Evaluation Procedures)on the vegetation studies at a later date. Mr.Stackhouse wanted to know if any hydraulic changes were expected in the river or if any icing problems were anticipated.He was also concerned about the possibility of any vegetation changes. Mr.Stackhouse felt there was a possibility of some problems 'below Devil Can- yon and he wanted to know'if a re-reg dam was going to be put in.Mr.Stackhouse wanted to know what the planned construction periods for the dams were going to be,and if the Devil Canyon Coffer Dam would be bi9 enough to serve as a daily re-reg dam... .Mr.Munson asked about the expected water quality for the Susitna River between Devil Canyon and Talkeetna.He corrmented that it probably woul d have simil ar conditions to that found in Tazlina lake.Mr.Munson wated to know if any (; enhancement of the fisheries was expected»like in Kenai or Skilak Lake. Mr.Munson would like to receive a copy of R&M's Hydrology Report.He was interested in their prediction of·winter ice conditions. Mr.Stackhouse commented that he felt that one of the biggest-problems in the study was the fact that ADF&G hadn1t published a procedures manual for the fi sheri es study yet.He was also concerned that one person from ADF&G wore two hats;he worked on the Susitna project and was also involved in the state permitting process. Mr.Stackhouse was very concerned that APA had not filed a preliminary permit yet..He commented that withput the permit the F&WS has no official position to initi ate a formal seopi ng process under thei r nonna 1 NEAPA-FERC procedures. Mr.Munson commented that under standard conditions the state and federal F&WS work together on Exhibit s. Mr.Stackhouse pointed out that they need to tie in with the work being done ~ ." on transmission corridors and they also need to work with the Steering Committee. Mr.Stackhouse feels that time is the over-riding factor in the studies.For instance~if a railroad is constructed for the access method~it would cost ~ \an extra year. ~: Mr.j"unson summed up his corrments on a recreational standpoint by pOinting out that the reservoirs were not going to be good for fishing;that the Devil Canyon reservoir would provide some recreational boating~but that-the main uses for the reservoirs would be to provide access for hunting. I Mr.Stackhouse cornmented that he would like to see a copy of the instream flow studies. Prepa red by__..L-:,........,,.;;.....,fC.Jr::~~+-__-:~._ ~ 'I ) ,- "\L. NOTES OF MEETING DATE:April 9,1981 PROJECT NUMBER:AAI 218 LOCATION:Bureau of Land Management,District Office,Anchorage AITENDEES:Art Hosterman,Lou Carufel,Gary Seitz,Bob War~,".John Rego, BLM;Kevin Young,Acres;J.D.Barnes and R.J.Krogseng,TES SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION Mr.Barnes made a presentation covering the history of the Susitna Project and· the role of Acres and TES in the present studies being conducted for the Alaska Power Authority.He also covered the studies and reports that are being prepared as part of the .study. Mr.Seitz wanted to know if.FERC was responsible for the EIS.He also wanted to know if FERC would be asking BLM for permits or when BlM would get a chance to outline their re~uitements. Mr.Rego wanted to know if FERC would be the lead agency.The present permit is good for three P)years of studies ..After that construction permits would probably be necessary. Mr~Rego stated that he would like to see all three access routes studied; the Denali route north,the south route to Devil Canyon and the north service road between both dams.He commented that their Mr.Beckl ey has buil tal ot of roads and that he ought to take a look at the different routes. Mr~Hostennan wanted to know "what are the biggest problems?11 Also,what is the role of the State Fish and Game Department in the studies.He also wanted to know about Cultural Resources and how they were being"taken care of.Mr. Hosterman also asked about Human Resources and the Natives and their interests. Mr.Hosterman wanted to know if induced seismicity caused by.the weight of the dam and reservoir was being considered.Also asked the question of ". how much permafrost was in the area and whether or not it was being studied. The group also felt that public participation in study changes was a good idea. It was also felt that "ifyou are going to do one right this is the one."--- Prepared bY_~~_---:;:......,.e;=-=-_=;;;;;_·-:::-7''''~----~~ I \ NOTES OF MEETING DATE:April 9,1981 PROJECT NUMBER:AAI 218 LOCATION:Alaska Department of Fish &Game,333 Raspberry Road,Anchorage ATTENDEES:Carl Yanagawa,Regional Supervisor,Habitat Protection;Kevin Young,Acres;J.D.Barnes and Robert J.Krogse~g?!ES SU~~RY OF DISCUSSION: Mr.Barnes gave a short presentation outlining the history of the Susitna project and the role of Acres and TES in the present studies being conducted, for the Alaska Power Authority. Mr.Yanagawa outlined the state pennit system in whfch Mr.Trent is still the State Coordinator for the Department of Fish and Game for permits,although Mr.Yanagawa issues the permits.Mr.Trent gathers the data and other informa- tion that Mr.Yanagawa uses to issue the permits.The nonnal procedure is for Mr.Yanagawa to get a consensus from the different departments to help make the final decision. Mr.Yanagawa commented that he is presently short-handed in his department.He has a position number but no funding for it. Mr.Yanagawa had some questi ons about the access roads.He especi ally wanted to know when the road was going to be used.He said the Department .of Fish and Game would be prepared to make recorrnnendations and trade off in regards to the access roads,but they did not have any real hang-ups about them. As a result of a decision made in Juneau in March,Mr.Yanagawa will not be a member of the Steering Committee.The policy of the department is that Mr. Trent is the coordinator for ADF&G.The coordinator helps make the departments decisions.Mr.Trent is the only one who can raise official questions on the Susitna project. Draw-jng from his pipeline experience,Mr.Yanagawa commented that tt)is was the wrong job for a total preservationist,because sometimes you just have to get in and do your best to find the best route or method available and go with that, that not everything will be perfect.He recorrmended getting in and looking at routes early.Sometimes a problem can be solved by just moving the road 20 feet 1eft or ri ght. --, .."""l, Mr.Yanagawa also feels that you need to keep asking yourself "if you spend another million dollars~how much more infonnation are you going to get"? He also feels that it is important to make everyone aware of the assumptions that you are making up front. Mr.Yanagawa also feels that you need to pick astarti'ng place~because you cannot wait for all the answers to come in before you start. Also,drawing on his experience in building the pipeline,Mr.Yanagawa reconmended forgetting about bui 1di n9 a constrcuti on camp for temporary use and go ahead and design for pennanent use,because you will save money in the longrun. Prepa red by_.L:?:--:----,.,...,.~;.......:.,,---,:-J''---_--R.J~Y09Sf/ -----_..---------------..".,,-..------------------".. NOTES OF MEETING DATE:April 10,1981 PROJECT NUMBER:AAI-218 LOCATION:Uni vers ity of Alaska,Arctic Enviromental Infonnati on and Data Center,707 A Street,Anchorage,Alaska 99501 (907)279 -4523 ATIENDEES:William J.Wilson,Fisheries Biologist AEIDC;Kevin Young,Acres; J.O.Barnes and R.J.Krogseng,TESe SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Mr.Barnes gave a short presentation covering the history of the Susitna Project and the role Acres and TES have in the present study being con- ducted for the Alaska Power Authori ty . Mra Wilson was the project Leader for the Terror Lake project on Kodiak Is- land,and he discussed his experience in filing the FERC license application. Mr.Wilson wa~concerned about the slow start by ADF&G on the fisheries studya He felt that FERCls immediate reaction will probably be to reject_the application and.ask for more information.He also felt that organizations like lISusitna Now"should be aware of this and be expecting the request for more information. Mr.Wilson feels that some of the fishery'study tasks will requjre a10t of work,because some drainages in the Susitna bas';n do not have very much that is known about them. Mr.Wilson also commented that the instream flow studies may be a problem, because there is not much expertise available capable of doing the studies. On the Terror Lake Project Mra Wilson said that they used joint participation where USGS,F&WS and AEIDC crew members walked the streams together to pick out the study sites,because you can't pick them off from a map.Mre Wilson feels that you have to know what the project is going to do to the stream flows and that incremental instream flow studies will give you that flexi- bility. Mr.Wilson commented that FERC would 11ke to see an agreement between State and FeDeral agenci es over pol i des and requi rements. r- I 1f 1-'" -------------------------------------------- As a member of the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Steering Committee,Mr. Wilson is concerned about the lack of infonmation on what is going on. He felt that it took too long to hear back on the Steering Committeels comments on the procedure manuals,and that Acres should have responded sooner.Mr.Wilson also felt that the Steering Comnittee -should have seen the access road report earlier.He feels that preliminary information should be made available to the Steering Committee ijS soon as possible. Mr.Wilson feels that Acres should publish more data in a "this is what we found"fonmatand not just "this is what we conclude". Mr.Wilson feels that the S~eering Committee should be a competent and helpf~l sounding board for the project.He feels that the Steering Committee can help save steps by pointing out pitfalls and other regulation mandates that need to be complied with as part of their advisory capacity.The Steering Committee cannot playa part in policy decisions,but they can give feedback on what was discussed to both sides. As part of a University of Alaska policy,Mr.Wilson would like to see more knowledge made available to the public.He would also like to see a centra- lized depository or library of information on the project that would make available the procedures manuals,maps,.photos,charts,diagrams,and reports from the project. Mr.Wilson is also interested in seeing an informal Steering Committee meeting at Acres to provide an opportunity to open a dialogue with the Acres engineers. Prepared bY---:.)_0_-......,.----...1~e::.....fI::=-..:....-;~---RoJ0OKrO& NOTES OF MEETING DATE:AprillD,1981 PROJECT NUMBER:AAI 218 LOCATION:Alaska Division of Natural Resources,323 East 4th Avenue,Anchorage ATTENDEES:Al Carson,Deputy Director,Division of Research and Development, DNR;Kevin Young,Acres;J.D.Barnes and R.J.Kregseng,TES SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Mr.Barnes Summarized the ideas and concerns that had been expressed during the series of meetings with the various agencies. The primary request from those who were also me.mbers o"f the Steering COrImittee was the request to get information to the Steering Committee in time for them to review it before the meeting. Also high on the list was the desire for a central depository at the library where all of the information would be available to more people. Not everyone was knowledgeable about access roads;more information has to be distributed to get people up to speed.It should also be understood that some areas are incremental,that some mi nor impacts may work together to cause a major impact.It is also felt that it is important to send out the criteria on objectives that are to be used in making decisions to the Steering Corrmittee members and ask for their corrments on the fitness of the criteria. It is also important to get the in order to avoid tunnel vision a question. ground rul es set up before a dispute has started .~. /or having people argue about different parts of " There is still some confusion on how the FERC process works.It also appears necessary to get docketed or to put in a preliminary license application which will also authorize the Fish and Wildlife service to become involved in the study. Mr.farson said he would be willing to help reinforce any concerns such as engineering disputes that may arise. r Mr.Carson commented that he liked his meeting with APA~Acres and TES.He felt that it was open and not defensive.He also said that he is willing to start having Steering Committee meetings for discussion of problems~instead of fighting over problems. - Mr.Carson would like to see a copy of the Acres and TES monthly progress I""'"reports sent to the Steeri ng COl1J1li ttee because it provi des an overvi ew of what is happening. j r- i -ni Mr.Carson said the Steering Committee would like to know the decision making time lines.They also would like to know when studies and reports come in. Mr.Carson said that a criti.cal need which he-feels needs attention is the need for an understanding of technical,engineering,and socia-economic in- fonnati on,fed together ina hans ti c -approach to the whole problem.He said that we need to inter-mesh ideas before people such as engineers have a vested interest in their design. Mr.Young explained how he works closely with the design engineers to bring e.nvironmental and social concerns into the design at an early stage to try to avoid future problems. Mr.Carson corrmented on the need to get input from the Steering Committee members before certa in des i gn mil es tones a re rea ched. Mr.Carson said he would like to see £IS scoping procedures and activities used in solving some of the problems. Another suggestion Mr.Carson made was for Acres andTES to touch base with the Steering·Committee with a conceptual type outline.To ask the Steering Committee members "do you think this wil)do it?"Uwill it achieve our purpose?"He feels it is important to make sure you are using the right process before you go out and do all the work. Mr.Carson also corrmented that enl ightened engineers are better to work with than biologists. Prepared by:~ .J.K seng 44 .¥ .-• , j April 9,1981 P5700.1l.BB T.813 Sus1tna Hydroelectric Project FERC License Application ar Mr.Corso: •Ronald Corso,Director vision of Hydroelectric Project Licensing deralEnergy Regulatory Commission 5 North Capitol St.,Mail Stop 208 RB shington,DC 20426 . e purpose of this letter is to confirm the arrangements and agenda for e Susitna project meeting set for 9:00 a.m.,Tuesday,April 21,1981, the FERC office.This date and time were established by Mr.Carrier your staff and Mr.Hoover of Acres,in coordination with other Susitna udy team members and the Alaska Power Authority.The purpose of this eting is to bring the FERC staff up to date on study progress suring e year since our last meeting,discuss project development selection, d address several issues of licensing concern • r proposed format for the meeting is to provide initially about a e-hourpresentation for FERC staff's benefit.This presentation will robably consist of a 30 minute slide display to update FERC staff with the Plan of study progress to date.followed by a 30 minute review of highlights of activities in 1980 in regard to Susitna Basin development selection,environmental studies and other relevant issues.We hope to provide appropriate hand-outs prior to the latter revie\'l.Following this presentation \1e can answer any staff questions or elaborate on any specific topics.Finally,we would like to discuss several areas of specific concern including: -The polit1ve and negative aspects of licensing each Sus1tna project component separately versus a single application -The expected form and timing of the new requlations for major unconstructed projects and impacts on the Susitna application -The extent of inclus10n of transmission lines in the project application WILLETT 'I.\I1TTE LAMB /-- 'r1BERRY'i ?C tM'J "-e ~2 (tJ+-.-./--1a,/ '111".g GILL lAi LOWRS"{-r.E TZ -;~tr-l+--rrh hHUSTEAO BOVE Clt ~I nf v.t CHASE me, -"'"" i foh "';;.N~:;,jlfL I ....n I nu I •~ v ~n fJ , Mr.Ronald Corso Bederal Energy RSgulatory Commission April 9 s 1981 Page 2 !"'" f -Specific data requirements for support of license aPPlication (e.g.access roads,camp facit it1es,topographic maps,et:c.).. ..The sufficiency of the prelicensfng study coordination to date. We expect to have representation of three to four members of the Acres study team and one or two representatives of the Authority.It would be appreciated if you could arrange for appropriate members of the FERC staff to attend.We understand that the meetingw111 be in the Hydro- power Licensing Division Offices at 400 First Street. Should you have any comments or questions regarding the meeting or agenda, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerelys ..6'..?;;///~~John D.Lawrence Project Manager pr·1H/1 s/lj r cc:-1>1r-.Paul Carriers FERC ,. J above address)\ \Ie I v11r.Eric P.Yould.APA ,e.t \U~'\ I . -I Aprl1 15,1981 P5700.11.B8 T.830 - Sincerely, ~Latlrence Project r~anager have pleasure in fon1arding herewith 3 copies of an information ckage for perusal by your staff for our meeting April 21. lOOK fo~~ard to an interesting and productive meeting • 1('1 I •Ronald Corso,Director daral Energy Regulatory Commissiono1stStreet,N.H. shfngton,D.C.20427 ar Mr.Corso:Susitna Hydroelectric Project Information Package WI Ll.ETT WITTE IL.AMB i r ·t HAynFNf .Ji-~ 8ERRY '-I ;(,.T -tJ <''1/.::;'./1.;- ~.I rl ,I I='.....('~1,!/'"'1t:/y!", I y..:GILL.¥/;2t'I..i1l'la L.OWREY -r 9ETZ -.....""F' ~ HUSTEAD . SOVE .. n CHASE .L ."V \U JDL/jmh Attachment -! -. t ==:-:r r;sF -3iiP'f-: -! r ( DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES D/ViS/ON OF FOREST,LAND AND WATER·MANAGEMENT September 24,1981 John D.Lawrence Project ~1anager Susitna Hydroelectric Project Acres American Incorporated 900 tiberty Bank Bldg. Main &Court Streets Buffalo,New York 14202 Dear Mr.Lawrence: CEJVEO SEP 2 8 '981 JAY .s:HAMMOND,GOVERNOR 323 E.4TH A VENUE ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 PHONE:(9071 279-5577 In response to your request for Water Rights Research for Susitna River Basin,my staff has completed an extensive search of our computer files of water rights filed in that area.Attached is a township list of the areas searched.A complete listing as of September 21,1981 is also attached.Computer files are updated monthly,and this search used a fi 1e whi ch was 1ast updated on September 10,1981.More camp 1ete information on any of these files is available at our Southcentral District Office located at 323 East Fourth Avenue,Anchorage,Alaska, phone (907)279-5577.We are glad to be of asssitance in this matter. Sincerely, THEODORE G.SMITH,Director /Jl.L~~);(;$4~~_.- DEAN N.BROWN,Chief Water Management Section Wo .~I WATER RIGHTS RESEARCH FOR SUSITNA RIVER BASIN TOWNSHIP LIST I'II!l. For each river named,numbers in first column indicate township north, and numbers in the second column indicate range west,of the Seward -meri di an,unless otherwise noted. Susitna Fish Creek Montana Kroto-Trapper 14 7,8 17 5 24 4 20 6 11I'III\ 15 7,8 18 5 25 2,3,4 21 6 16 6,7 17 6,7 Alexander Skwentna Yentna 18 6 17 8 17 18 18 7 19 5,6 18 8 18 18 20 8 20 5 19 8,9 19 19,20 21 8-10 21 4,5 20 19 22 12 22 4,5 Willow 21 11-15,19 23 11,12 23 4,5 20 2,3 22 10,11,14-24 12,13 24 5 19 1,2,4 18 25 13,14 ~ f 25 5 26 14l265KashwitnaHappy2714,15 27 5 22 1,2,3,lE 23 18,19 28 14 -28 4,5 24 19,20 29 4,5 Sheep Ta"1 keetna 30 3,4 23 3 Little Willow 26 1,2,3,4 31 2,3 24 2,3 20 4 27 1,2,3,lE .-: 21 3 Kahiltna Chulitna Tokositna Chulina 22 8 30 5,6 '29 6 27 4 23 8,9 31 4,5 28 6,7 24 9 32 3,4 25 9,10 33 2,3 -, 26 10 22S llW F 27 10 21S 10,11W F 28 10 205 lOW F -