HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUS100LIST OF SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AHD
CLARIFICATION NEEDS
Draft Susftna Application
Exhibit E
December 21, 1982
.
I.
' . .
i ._
RECEIVED
DEC 2 r/1982
LGL ALASKA
UST OF SUPPLSDTAL IIFO-TIOII MD
CLARIFICATION NEEDS
Draft Susftna Applfcatfon
Exhfbft E
Prepared by
Argonne National Laboratory
9700 S. Cass Ave.
Argonne, I L 60439
and
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
P.O. Box X
Oak Ridge, TN 37830
for
Division of Envfron.ental Analysts
Federal Energy Re9Ulatory C..fssfon
V.shtngton, DC 20426
o.c.-.r 21, 1982
I : :.; l. ; 'I ": l~
F EDf nAt_ ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Hr . Eric Youtd
Executive Director
Alaska Power Authority
334 West 5th Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Dear Mr. Yould:
WI\SHINGTON l0426
December 22, 1982 OEPR-DEA
Susitna -
Alaska
The Division of Environmental Analysis (DEA) has completed
its prelioinary revi~w of the Draft Exhibit E for the Susitna
Hydroelectric Project. The results of this review are
attached and include a Harked-up Copy of the Exhibit E, a
List of Deficiences, and a List of Supplemental Information
Needs anrl Clarificatior.s.
This information is being made available in this draft form
to allow APA the greatest opportunity to prepare an environ-
mental report of scope and content adequate to support the
proposed application. Final comrnent on the entire Draft
Application, to include the Exhibit E, is scheduled for
January 14, 1S82.
Any questions concerning the DEA review should be directed to
Mr. J. Mark Robinson at 202/376-9060.
Sincerely, c);~.~ ~iA<{_C ( ( G-t ·l£Qf-.~-·--
Attachments: Harked-up Copy
Lawrence R. Anderson
Director, Office of Electric
Power Regulation
List of Deficiencies
List of Supplemental Information t~eeds and
Clarifications
I
'AlASKA POWER AUTHORITY
334 West 5th Avent.e.
2nd Floor
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
(907)~1
(907t 277-7141
lL~utrtroo cww troo£~~~01T'IT£O..
~~La ~.4_ I o
OA f (
""2-l .P~_._ ~ 2. j'o• "o~ Sv<., --..:::...
... ,,,,."''~
c;v~ \R_r~NT .,
F"E: ~~ R.~-nR~ ttl &.v.H
\A<.. e.·.\.;.+-E \) v TO s "--I~ ') J.,'-" p v " t'-t
22-07 sf=&v'oJ\~ J?Ll~D
GENTLEMEN:
WE ARE SENDING YOU~ Attached 0 Under separate cover v•a
COP'IU
I
I
0 Shop drawines
0 Copy of letter
OAT[ NO.
21 1l-c..c_ g-z..
_.}/ £l-c..-.<_ zz
________ the followin1 items:
0 Prints 0 Plans 0 Samples 0 Specifications
0 Chanee order
o ___________________ _
O[SCIIIPTION
Z>t iT1 ~'~~-'V't" ~
() v
~ rl 5 ~ (.)~ ~ t,_j/ bi~,.,._.,_dl~
~J< v ( 1-. , .. c.: ~....Po-\ ~ t-J~s
I
RECEIVED
n tnO,
L'L '-... c. v ~.,..,~
of Fisn a \.:I C:'~"·'"'
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
~lea Dept.
Sport RshJSUSitna Hydro
0 For approval 0 Approved • submitted 0 Resubmit copies for approve~
~ For your use 0 Approved • noted 0 Submit copies for cfiltfl)ution
0 As requested 0 Returned for c:omiCtions 0 Retum corrected prints
0 For review and comment 0
0 FOR BIDS DU ...._ _____ 19 ___ 0 PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US
REMARKS __ ~-----------------------------------
coPY ro.___________________ ~ J /} A' I/
SIGNED: :?bfvvv-{/ J V~
]j
1
J
CONTENTS
1 . General Description of the Locale
2 . Water Use and Quality ....
3.
4.
5.
6 .
7.
e.
9 .
Fish , Wildlife, and Botanical Resource s .
Aquatic Resources ..
Terrestr ial Botani c al Resources ..
Terrestrial Wi ldlife .....
Historic and Archaeological Resources
Socioeconomics
Geological and Soil Resources
Recreational Resources
Aesthe t ic Re sour ces
Land Use Pa t terns .
10. Alte rnative Locat i on s , De s igns, and Energy Sources
11. List of Literature
Page
1
3
9
9
19
25
33
37
45
49
53
55
57
59
]
]
J
]
-J
J
J
J
l
-
·-
·-
·-
·-
.. -
1 . p . E-1 -2, ' 4
1
1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE LOCALE
Provide i nformat i on on ambient a i r quality a nd on
air q~al ity requlati on s pertinent to the project
region and locale . In add i tion, provide data on
wind speed, wind d i rection , and inversion depth
and duration in the project area.
]II
II
~I
_I
]
']
·-1 .. -·-,
r -
•] ,.
1. p. E-2-5, t 3 to
p. E-2-10, 1J 2
2. p. E-2-15, 11 3
3. p. E-2-15, 1J 5;
p. E-2-42, t 3-5;
p. E-2-55, t 7 to
p. E-2-56, t 4;
p. E-2-91, t !:1
4. p. E-2-16, t 1-5
5. p. E-2-17, 1J 4
p. E-2-24, t 1-2
6. p. E-2-39, 1J 1
7. p. E-2-33, t 1;
p . E-2-86, t 1
8. p. E-2-3, t 1-2
9 . p. E-2-3, t 3
10. p. E-2-4, t 1
3
2. WATER USE AND QUALITY
Provide river morphology data including: channel
cross-sections, slope as a function of reach, and
photographs, including an estimate of the changes
from 1950 to 1980, concentrating on River Miles 149
to 184. Provide slough cross-sections , dep .. h
profiles and water surface profiles .
Identify sloughs and side channels that do not
form winter ice cover.
Provide an2lysis supporting conclusions regarding
impacts on river morphology.
Provide mainstem bedload data.
Provide data s uppo rti ng the effect of groundwater
on s 1 oughs. Provide data to support cone 1 us ions
regarding hydraulic connections between mainstem
and sloughs.
Provide data supporting estimate of flow required
to maintain minimum 2 ft . river stage.
Quantify projected increase in the ice-free extent
of the river.
Include in Table E. 2.1 all the gaging stations
identified in Figure E.2.1. Make data given in
Table E.2.1, Table E.2.2, and Figure E.2 .1 con-
sistent.
Include baseline ~onthly flows at each location
(as shown in the heading of Table E. 2. 2) from
32-year simulated streamflows .
Discuss skewness of logarithmic flow data. Di scuss
why log-normal distribution rather than Log
Pearson III distribution was used for fitting
data . Discuss basis for selecting flood peaks
presented. Include daily flood hydrographs for
low, average, and high flow years. Provide frequency
and duration of flows over 20,000 cfs.
11 . p . E-2-4, t 2
12. p. E-2-4, ' 4
13. p . E-2-4, ' 5 to
p . E-2-5, t 2
14 . p . E-2-23, t 4
15. p. E-2-24, t 4
16 . p. E-2-25, t 2
17 . p . E-2-25 , 1 3
18. p . E-2-31
19 . p . E-2-35, 1 1
p . E-2-70, t S;
p. E-2-76, 1 2;
p. E-2-85, t 3
20. p. E-2-35, 1 3
4
Expl ain the methodology used to obtain the flood
frequency curves for Watana and Devi 1 Canyon .
Indicate ho·w the estimated 10,000-yr floods for
these two locations were determined .
Include a reference and the ~ethodology used to
estimate PMF . Include the water surface profile
of the Susitna River associated with PMF.
Include flow duration curves for the Chulitna
River. Include comparable data (Figures E. 2.18-
E.2.25) for November through Apr il. Include dai ly
hydrographs for high and low flow years of record .
Include potentiometric maps for the major confined
and unconfined a quifers i n the Susitna River
Basin, and a description of groundwater occurrence
and movement in the basin. Provide a cross-section
profile shoowing ma jor aquifers with associated
hydraulic conductivities (particularly in the area
of the relict channel about 2600 ft upstream of
the Watana Dam).
Provide more data on the 63-acre 1 ake, e . g . ,
volume, ma ximum depth, mean depth, s horeline
length, and area-capacity curve .
Include the USGS map with the stream names pres~nted
in Tables E.2 .10 and E.2 .11 identified.
Identify all sloughs that wi ll be inundated.
Include the thalweg profile between Watana to
Talkeetna . Pro vide water surface profi les between
Watana and Talkeetna for Sus itna River releases of
1,000, 6,000, 12,000 , 14,000, 18,000, 20,000
and 32,000 cfs . Provide water surface elevation
of the Susitna River , during the discharge events
specified above, at stream flow control points
between Watana and Talkeetna . Further , provide
water surface profiles of representative sloughs
and side channels during 1,000 cfs mainstem releases,
assum ing Septelllber low flow slough conditions.
Prov ide suffi cient supporting data to predict
impacts to major confi ned and unconf i ned aquifers
in the Sus itna River Basin . Include changes in
groundwater flow and water tables.
Describe an,ticipated impacts for flows greater
than the 50-yr event .
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
]II
II
•
l i
,
. -
·-. -
u·,
'-
"
,I r -. .,
_,
21 . p. E-2-39, t 5 to
p. E-2-40, t 5
22. p. E-2-41, t 3
23. p . E-2-51, t 4
24 . p . E-2-52, t 1
25 . p . E-2-52, ' 3
26 . p . E-2-52, t 5
27 . p . E-2-55, t 5-6
28. p . E-2 -78, t3
29. p . E-2-81, t1
30. p . E-2-82, t 2
5
Explain how flow data for 1991-1993 were obtained
and developed . Include details of reservoir
filling simulation and rationale for flow data
selected for this study. Describe testing and
commissionin~ ~riteria.
Provi1e Figure E.2.77.
Incl ude the month l y operating rule curve for the
reservoir and monthly minimum energy demands with
associated average discharges through the powerhouse
for reservoir modeling study . Explain why only
32-year simulated flow data were used for monthly
energy simulation. why the extreme drought of the
period of record was modified to reflect a drought
with recurrence interval of one in 32 years , and
how this alteration of the data set affects projected
flows .
Include the constraints considered in the optimi-
zation study . Is this study for the Watana develop-
ment only?
Explain the relationship between the constant
daily flows and variable downstream monthly flow
requirements at Go 1 d Creek during May through
September . Provide estimates and supporting data
on projected changes in daily average flows .
Indicate initial reservoir conditions for the
post-project reservoir simulation.
Indicate the order of priority for these three
criteria if they cannot be satisfied simultaneously .
Discuss the basis used to select these three
criteria. Include legible copies of Figures E.2.85
through E.2 .88. Provide comparable analyses based
on da i 1 y f 1 ows .
Explain the relationship between daily operation
levels and monthly reservoir oper,ating rule curves .
Provide estimates and supporting data on projected
changes in daily average flows.
Indicate how 11any out 1 ets there are for each
reservoir . Is the outlet capacity equal to 11.600
cfs (31 ,000 minus 19,400)? Provide the capacity
of the powerhouse and outlet facilties for Watana
and Devil Canyon reservoirs.
Provide comparable analyses based on daily flows
and include flow duration curves for pre-project
and project conditions . Provide legible copies of
Figures E.2 .97 through E.2.100 .
31. p. E-2-92, t 2
32.
33.
34. p . E-2-13, t 1
35. p . E-2-25, t 6 , to
p . E-2-26, t 2;
p . E-2-28, , 2-5
36 . p . E-Z-26, 1 4 , to
p . E-2-27, 1 6;
p . E-2-66 , t 5 to
p . E-2-67, t 3
37. p . E-2-28, t 6 , to
p . E-2-29, t 2;
p . E-2-67, t 4
38 . p . E-2-29, t 4-5;
p . E-29 , ' 6 to
p . E-30, t 6
39 . p . E-2-32, t 5, to
E-2-34 , t 5;
p . E-2-37 , t 3-7;
p. E-2-38, t 1;
p . E-2-69, t 2, to
E-2-70, t 3;
p . E-2-71, t 4, to
E-2-72, t 1;
p . E-2-72, t 2;
p . E-2-75, t a , to
E-2-76, t 1;
p . E-2-85, t 2
6
Provide support for the conclusion that ice jams
will be reduced under base 1 oadi ng conditions.
Describe proj~=t-related activities, i ncluding
construction activities, for the relict channe l in
sufficient detail to assess potential groundwater
problems, including seepage .
Describe the Phase I Re creation Plan , including
the trail , in sufficient detail to assess potential
impacts to water t·!sources (water quantity).
Provide addit ional seasonal (monthly) ar.d d i urnal
s 1 ough water temperature ( i ntergrave 1 and water
column) data of representative sloughs .
Prov i de additional water use data (surface water
and groundwater). Ide ntify, characteri ze, and
quantify current discharges to t he Susitna Ri ver
Basin (project area). Discuss the water rights
policies in the State of Alaska and the state's
res pons i bi 1 ity to apportion rights to use water
among competing users. Discuss the Alaska Depart-
ment of Natural Resource s water rights app ropri -
ation doctrine .
Quant i fy •a ter use (navigation and transporta tion).
Supply background salinity data on a monthly
basis for the center of Cook Inlet and mouth of
the Susitna River. Include uncertainties i n these
estimates . Provi de program manual and user's
manu~l for the RMA salinity modeling .
Pr·;•vide water resources data (summary which
includes id,ent ification and c haracterization of
existing water bodies) for access routes and
transmission corridors (including Knik Arm of Co ~k
Inlet).
Character i ze and quantify project-related discharges
(e .g ., suspended solids, metal s , petroleum produc t s,
concrete contaminat ion and nutrients ) for all pha s es
of activity (construct ion-operation). Include
uncertai nties in these estimates . Discuss d i s -
charge treatment/control ~asures. Specify require ~
discharge permits .
[
(
[
[
(
(
[
(
[
[
[
c:
I c: _I
--I
~ -
r-..,_
.. _
,.--
40.
41.
42.
43 .
p. E-2-42, t 6, to
E-2-47, t 2;
p. E-2-56, t 5, to
E-2-65, t 2;
p . E-2-73, , 6, to
E-2-76, , 1;
p. E-2-82, 1
E-2-85, t 1
3, to
p. E-2-49, t 3,
E-2-50, 1 1;
to
p. E-2-66, t 5, to
E-2-67, 1 3;
p . E-2-76, t 5
p . E-2-50, 1 4-6;
p. E-2-67, t 4;
p. E-2-86, 1 2
p . E-2-87, 1 2-6;
p. E-2-88, 1 1-7
7
Include additional quantification of changes in
water quality parameters (e.g., temperature,
suspended solids, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, and
nutrients) for the project area (reservoirs and
downstream, including sloughs and Upper Cook
Inlet)
on a daily and monthly basis. Uncertainties in
these estimates should be indicated. Specifically:
Provide additional informat i on on the behavior
of suspended solids and on vertical illumination
in the reservoirs in sufficient detai J to
determine distribution pr ofiles in the reservoirs
and downstream loading of suspended solids .
Provide quantification of valley wall slumping
and resulting increases in suspended solids
within the reservoir and downstream.
Provide additional information on reservoir
operation!' {intake levels versus thermal profile!.)
to a~hieve desired downstream temperatures on
11onthly basis.
Provide downstream temperature and suspended
solids changes {main channel and slough, includi •1g
intergravel and water column) on a daily and
monthly basis at st.~amflow control points and
representative sloughs .
Provide similar information on impacts to water
quality (te~perature and suspended solids)
during drought and flood years of 50-year
recurrence interval .
Provide information on modeling efforts (program
and users maauals) for tec hnical evaluation
(e. g., DYRESM and suspended solid/turbidity
relationship).
Provide navigation and transportation changes due
to altered flows and a ltered open-water or winter-
ice conditions.
Provide additional quantification of salinity
changes for the center of Cook Inlet and mouth of
the Susitna River on a monthly basis. Include
uncertainties in these estimates.
Quantify water quantity and quality changes asso-
ciated with all access routes and transmhsion
corridors, i ncluding the submarine cable. Include
44 . p . E-2-90, , 1 , to
E-2 -93, 11 2
45.
4 6 .
8
deta il s of cons truction/operation that will be
used to Minimize i mpact s .
Include eleMents of the Aquatic Studies Program
relevant to water use and quality . Provide the
refined conc eptual mitigation plan based on the
Aquatic Studies Program and consultation with
appropri ate agencies.
Descr ibe pro ject-related activities including
construction activi ties , for the relict channel in
sufficient detail to assess potential impacts to
wate r use and quality .
Describe the Phase I Recreation Plan including the
trail , in suffic ient deta il to assess potential
impacts to wate r use and quali t y.
i[
I[
j[
If
1r
II
I[
I[
I[
I[
I
I
I
I .
I '
('
['
['
1:
~-
1
~-. -
·-1
I
·-r
...I
=I
-..
-
-
-
9
3. FISH, WILDLIFE, AND BOTANICAL RESOURCES
AQUATIC RESOURCES
1. p. E-3-9 to
p. E-3-ll
2. p. E-3 -11 to
p . E-3-12
3 . p. E-3-12
4. p . E-3-12 to
p . E-3-34
5. p . E-3-15, ' 1
6. p. E-3-17, '3
7. p . E-3-18, ' 3
8 . p . E-3-20, ' 2
9 . p . E-3 -29, ' 4
10. E-3-29, ' 4
Provide, on a monthly basis, the historical com-
~erc i al catch of the five sa lmon specie s in the
Upper and Lower Cook Inlet and other subregions as
available. The data should include, by species,
catch, effort, age, and sex.
Provide, on a monthly basis, the historical sport
catch of the five sa lmon species in the Upper Cook
Inlet and in the Susitna River . The data should
include, by species, catch, effort, age, and sex.
Pro vi de similar data for Arctic grayling and
rainbow trout in the Susitna River and in the
project area. Describe how fisheries impacts will
be incorporated in the app 1 i cant' s p 1 ans for
eitigation, aquatic studies, and •onitoring studi es .
Provide data on the ge ographic d istri buHon for
the sport fishing harvests listed at the top of
p . E-3-12.
Provide the 1980-19B2 AD F & G investigations of
the Susitna for salmon, Bering cisco , and eulachon ,
and rainbow trout and Arctic grayling .
Provide the percentage of rearing habi tats from
Dev i1 Canyon to T a 1 keetna represented by tributary
mouths an d clearwater sloughs .
Provide data to support the statements concerning
age compos ition of sockeye .
Comme nt on the extent to which Morrow's (1980)
results can be extrapolated to the Susitna.
Indicate to wha t extent this description is appl i-
cab l e to s al~on in the Susitna River .
Assuming the spawning hab i tat is not a limiting
factor for grayling, indicate what factor (or
factors) does control grayling populations .
Ind icate whether gillnets were used i n DeadMan Lake
as they were in Sally Lake .
11 . E-3-34
section title
12 . p. E-3-35 to
p . E-3-36
13 . p . E-3-35 , t 3
14. p. E-3-37, '3
15 . p. E-3-38, ' 2
16 . p . E-3-39, ' 2
17 . p . E-3-39, ' 2,
1st item
18 . p. E-3-40, , 3
19 . p . E-3-42, t 5
20 . p . E-3-45, ' 3
21. p. E-3-46, ' 1
22 . p. E-3-46, ' 2
10
Provide a breakdown by percentage of the habitat
types and the effects of flow changes on each type
from Devi l Canyon to Talkeetna .
Indicate whether 1982a, 1982b , or 1982c is appro-
priate for each Trihey citation. Also, provide
information on habitat areas (e.g., number and
surface area of sloughs), uniqueness of habitat
types, and changes experienced under various flow
regimes .
Provide the data to support the statement that
tributary and groundwater inflows are not necessary
for side-channel habitats to exist.
Provide data on how many chinook salmon reach the
impoundment area, the flow cond itions under which
they reach this area, and the estimated importance
of this area to chinook salmon populations in Cook
Inlet.
Provide a breakdown by percentage of the year-round
habitats of rainbow trout.
Discuss the e xistence and significance of nitrogen
supersaturat i on as a natural condition in t he
Dev il Canyon to Talkeetna Reach as indicated in
Chapter 2 (p . E-2-20).
Provide information on the occurrence and extent
of oxygen supersaturation in this and other reaches
of the Susitna River .
Provide data to show that 1981 data for pink
salmon, which is a 2-year species, are applicable
i n terms of determining whether or not this species
utilizes the mainstem Susitna for spawning.
Provide the preliminary observations of the source
of the upwelling waters .
Des c ribe and quantify, where possible, the use of
sloughs in the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon Reach by
resident fish .
Identi fy the tributaries capable of moving delta
materials under regulated flow conditions and
provide the velociti es ma intained i n these tribu-
taries under regu l ated flows .
Provide the data on spawning counts for individual
tributari es .
IJ[
I[
If
If
If
I[
I[
(
(
[
I
[
('
I
I
I
I
(
I
]
..,
-
,_ -
r-
._
....--
IP
'-
23 . p. E-3-46, t 3
24. p. E-3 -47, t 5
25. p. E-3-48, t 3-4
26 . p. E-3-49, ' 6
27 . p. E-3-50, t 6
28. p. E-3-51 , t 5;
p. E-3-53, t 6
29. p. E-3-54, section
heading
30. p. E-3-54, t 6
31. p. E-3 -55, section
heading
32 . p. E-3-56, ' 3
33 . p. E-3-58, t 3
34 . p. E-3-58, ' 4 ,
1 ine 5
35 . p. E-3-59, t 2
36 . p. E-3-59, t 3
11
Provide the data on species occurrence and relative
abundance of juvenile salmon in tributaries or at
tributary mouths by season and by species .
Provide a copy of the study, including a map
locating the study sites .
Provide details on the effects of flow changes on
channel width and physical habitat in the main
channel and side channels.
Provide data showing the relationship between
salmon movement during migration periods and river
discharge.
Provide the basis for the statement that sloughs
below Talkeetna appear to be less dependent on the
mainstem Sus itna River than the sloughs located in
the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon Reach .
Describe the use of sloughs and tributaries in
the Cook Inlet to Talkeetna Reach for spawning
habitat by eulachon and Bering cisco (utilize maps
where appropriate).
Provide additional detail on stream crossings in
road corridors and on the habitats and fish species
likely to be affected by these crossings .
Reference the appropriate figure in discussing
sloughs 19 and 20; these sites should be located
on a map . Reference to appropriate tab 1 es and
figures would greatly facilitate use and evaluation .
Provide locations of stream crossings in trans-
mission 1 i ne corridors and the effect of these
crossings on habitats and fish species likely to
be affected by these crossings.
Provide a work plan of the data collecting and
analysis programs currently planned or in progress.
Quantify the area to be dewatered by installation
of the two cofferdams.
Clarify use of the word 11 may .11
Include Taff et al. (1975) in the reference list .
Explain why few fish are expected to occupy the
area in front of the diversion tunne 1 s in the
summer. Quantify what is meant by 11 few fish .11
37 . p. E-3 -60, t 2
38 . p . E-3-62, t 1
39 . p . E-3-62 , t 3
40 . p. E-3-64 , 1 3
41 . p. E-3-65 , 1 4
42. p. E-3-67, ' 1
43. p. E-3-67, 1 3
44 . p. E-3-68, , 2,
1 ine 4
45 . p. E-3-68, 1 3,
lines 9-12
46 . p. E-3-68, 1 3,
l i nes 16-19
47 . p. E-3-69, 1 2
48 . p. E-3-69, 1 3
49 . p . E-3-70, 1 3
50 . p . E-3-7 0 , 1 7
51 . p. E-3-71, 1 2
12
Describe the holding ponds in terms of location,
size , and flow.
Clarify the statement that f i sh mot ili t y and
ability to clean up spills is increased in winte r .
Provide the gui delines set forth in Joyce, Ru ndquis t
and Moulton (1980).
Qu a nti fy the exc avated areas that wi ll be pern1anentl y
lost as f ish hab i tat and the areas that will be
temporarily altered.
Provide data on the physical, chemical, and bio-
logical characteristics of the lake the village is
to be built around .
Ref e rence the detailed de s cription of the diversion
tunnels and their operation.
Provide data on the resident fish populations
inhabiting t he impoundment area.
Cl arify the use of the word "probably."
Support the claim that 11 turbidi t y levels of the
i!Rpoundment are expected to be sui table for
... Su$itna River ."
Clarify this sentence .
Provide results from the "aquatic stud i e s in
progress" as soon as they are available .
Characterize and qu antify the po ssib le l oss of
spawn i ng areas in tributary hab1tats as the reservoir
fills .
Specify (a) how turbidity levels in lakes are
correlated with the absence of grayl ing or (b) the
carrying capacity of tributaries for grayli ng and
how thi ~ capacity varies with size of the grayling .
Provide a map i dentifying all lakes to be inundated
by Watana Reservoir and the results of any popu l a-
t i on studies conducted on eac h lake .
Reference other parts of Exhibi t E, espec i a lly
Chapter 2 ; this is a generic prob 1 em with Sec-
t i on 3.2.
I
I
I
I
(
[
I
(
('
I
('
(
(
(
I
[_
c:
~ I [:
[-
1
E:
r:
c
E
c
c
L
c
c
r.:
52. p . E-3-71, t 3
53. p. E-3-71, t 4 ,
54. p. E-3-72, 1 1
55. p. E-3-72, ' 2
56. p. E-3-72, 1 3
57 . p. E-3-73, t 2
58. p. E-3-73, t 3
59. p . E-3-74, ~ 1
60. p. E-3-74, ~ 2
61. p. E-3-74 to
p. E-3-76,
Side-Channel
Habitats
62. p . E-3-76, Slough
Habitats
63 . p . E-3 -76 , ' 5
64. p. E-3-77, t 3
65. p. E-3-78, t 1
66. p . E-3-79, t 1
13
Clarify the apparent conflict between the statement
that "anadromous f ish are prevented from using
habitats upstream of the canyon" and the statement
on p. E-3-37, t 3, that "adult chinook salmon were
documented to RM 158 .2."
Clarify the intent of the word "likely."
Reference the appropriate subsection in Chapter 2.
Describe the water surface profile model. Include
data showing channel cross sections and water
surface elevations.
Provide a quantitative analysis of the availability
of these holding areas as a function of flow.
Provide a quantitative analysis of the availab i lity
of these spawning areas as a function of flow.
Correct the Figure E.2.19 reference. Quantify the
effect of rapidly decreasing fall flows during the
filling schedule on various habitat characteristics.
Provide the supporting data and analysis for the
statement that releases from the reservoir will be
near 10 C during Jul y , August, and early September
during the third year of filling.
Provide the unpublished and cited reports investigat-
ing the effects of temperature on salmon behavior,
spawning, and development.
Provide a quantitative analysis of how the physical
characteristics and suitability of these side-
channel habitats change as a function of flow .
Provide a quantitative analysis of how the physical
characteristics and suitability of the sloughs
change as a function of flow .
Correct the reference to [Section 2 .2(b)(iii)].
Provide the supporting data and analysis on the
m1n1mum flows required to ensure easy passage of
salmon adults into slough habitats.
Quantify the additional rearing habitat that may
become available in mainstem and side-channel
habitats.
Provide a breakdown by percentage of the habitats
receiving salmon escapement.
67 . p . E-3-79, , 3
68. p. E-3-79, , 4
69 . p . E-3-79, , 4 ,
lines 9-13
70 . p. E-3-79, , 4,
lines 15-22
71. p. E-3-80,
72 .
73 .
74 .
75 .
76 .
77 .
Cook Inlet to
Talkeetna Reach
p. E-3-81 , ' 4-5
p. E-3-82 , , 2
p. E-3-82, , 4 ,
lines 5-6
p. E-3-82, , 4,
lines 9-11
p. E-3-83 , , 3
p. E-3-84, t 5
78 . p . E-3-87,
Talkeetna to
Watana Dam
79 . p . E-3-87,, 4
80 . p. E-3-88 , , 4
14
Clarify the connents concerning how the rearing
areas assoc i ated with tributary habitats will be
affected by lower mainstem flows .
Include additional data and analyses to support
the statement on down cutti ng of tributaries.
Clarify this sentence.
Provide the report of the study of possible
perched tributaries.
Provide a quant itative analysis of how the physical
characteristics and suitability of mainstem
habitats (p . E-3-80 to E-3-83), side-channel
habitats (p. E-3-83 to E-3-84), slough habitats
(p. E-3-84). and tributary habitats (p. E-3-85)
will change with changes in flow .
Provide stage-discharge relationshi ps or repre-
sentative cross sections for these mainstem habitats .
Correct the reference to Table E.e .18.
Provide support for the statt=me nt that 11 the most
critical time for fish occurs when flows are
lowe~t .11
Reference the appropriate subsection in Chapter 2.
Prov ide detai l on the limited rearing of juvenile
salmon in side-channel habitats.
Provide a quantitative analysis of how the slough
habitats in the Cook Inlet to Talkeetna Reach may
be affected by changes in flow .
Provide a quantitative analysis of how the physical
characteristics and suitability of the four hab itat
types (mainstem, side-channel , slough, and tributary)
may change as a function of changes in flow .
Indicate that the ab ility of chinook salmon to
pa ss through Devil Canyon and utilize spawning
habitat available in tributaries upstream from
Devil Canyon and below Watana Ou is only temporary .
Clarify whether sediments less than or greater
than 5 111icrons in size would be trapped by the
reservoir .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
[
I
(
I '
I
I '
('
['
['
l .
j
j
j
-
-
-
-----
-
-
81 . p . E-3-89, t 2
82 . p. E-3-90, t 2
83 . p . E-3-90, t 3,
line 5
84 . p. E-3-91, t 1,
line 3
85 . p . E-3-91, t 3
86 . p . E-3-93, t 5
87. p . E-3-94, t 4
88 . p. E-3-96, t 3
89 . p . E-3-96, t 5
90. p. E-3-101,
Inundation of
Upstream Habitats
91 . p. E-3-102, t 4
92 . p. E-3-106, t 2
93 . p . E-3-107 , t 1,
1 ine 6
94. p. E-3-107, t 3
95 . p. E-3-107, t 4
96. p . E-3-108, t 3
97. p . E-3-110, t 1,
1 ine 8
15
Include additional data and analyses t o support
the statements on rearing habitat in the mainstem.
Support the statement that particles greater than
5 microns would remain in suspension in the reservoir.
Cl arify the reference to RM 14 .
Clarify the use of the word uif ."
Include additional detail on this U~FWS study .
Include additional data and analyses t o s upport
the state.ents concerni ng the benefits of increased
flows for overwintering habitats in side channels .
Quantify the effec ts of ice on the slough habitats
as early nursery areas for emerging fry .
Quantify the increase in depth and wetted perimeter
under post-project flows for •ainstem hab i tats .
Qua nt i f y the increase in wetted perimeter resulting
from greater winter di scharge for s i de-channe 1
habitats .
Es timate the loss of habitat for chinook salmon
above Devil Canyon Dam and below Watana Dam that
would temporaril y be aade more ava i lable during
the fi ll ing of Watana Reservoir.
Quantify the loss of tributary habitats .
Define "sheet flow" and clarify the sentence
describing what happens when a road bisects a
wetland .
Clarify the use of the word "can.''
Describe the species of fish known to be in Tsusena
Creek and Devil Creek .
Provide detail on the manner of construction of
the road between Watana and Devil Canyon .
Indicate whether the option of building on trestles
rather than fill is preferrable or how the decision
concerning t his option wil l be aade .
Clarify the use of the word uproductivity ."
98 . p. E-3-113, t 3
99 . p. E-3-114 , t 4
100 . p . E-3-116 ;
p . E-3-117
101. p . E. 3-117
102 . p. E-3-121, t 2
103 . p . E-3 -124, t 5
104 . p. E-3-126 , t 6
105 . p. E-3 -127, t 1
106 . p. E-3-127 , t 2
107. p . E-3-129, ' 5
108. p. E-3-130 , t 1
109 . p. E-3-130, t 3
110 . p . E-3-130, t 3
lll. p. E-31-131, t 1
16
Provide additional information on the anadromous
species utilizing Knik Arm as a migration route.
Describe how "the vegetation is usually li~ited to
grasses and shrubs ."
Provide the work plan for the Aquatic Studies
Program during the preconstruction phase , the
constructi on phase, and the filling and operation
phases.
Provide the monitoring plan proposed during con-
struction and operation .
Provide information on locations of stream crossings
and important fish habitats likely to be impacted
by these crossings .
Provide information on rehabil i tation methods and
on the effectiveness of these propo sed methods in
preventing impacts i n aquatic systems with respect
to grading, contouring, shaping, and revegetation
of disturbed strean1 banks, abandoned settling
ponds, and borrow sites .
Provide details on bl asti ng guidel ines that are to
be fo i lowed to protect fish .
Prov i de documentation to support the statement
that "relatively few fish are pres ent in the
tunnel entrance vicinity.11
Provide the reason why fish lost in the diversion
tunnel would have been lost duri ng reservoir
filling .
Quantify the effect of flow reductions on access
of salmon to spawning sloughs.
Include data and analyses to support the statement
on flows at Gold Creek needed to avoid impacts on
adult salmon .
Clarify the ap parent conflict between the statement
11 winter flow regimes will be reduced during f ill ing
flow reg i mes .. wi th i nfonnation in Table f .3.17.
Clarify the last sentence of the first paragraph
under "Winter Flow Regime . 11
Provide details of ongoing studies of potenti al
impacts to slough habitats .
r .
[ .
I
r .
I
I
I
(
[
[
[
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
j
j
J
J
....
.,
j
_I
-
---
---
-
-
-
112. p . E-3-131, , 5
113. p. E-3-132, ' 4
114. p. E-3-133, t 2
115. p. E-3-133, ' 3
116 . p . E-3-134, ' 1
117 . p. E-3-135, t 4
118. p. E-3-137, '4
119. p. E-3-138, , 1
120 . p. E-3-138, ' 3
121 . p. E-3-138, ' 4
122. p. E-3-139, t 1
123. p. E-3-139, ' 3
17
Provide details of planned or ongoing studies to
evaluate the effects of spring breakup on fry
migration.
Provide data and analyses to support the statement
on proposed operational flows from July 25 to
September.
Provide the 1 eve 1 and duration of flows to be
provided to minimize impacts, and the study identi-
fying how these flows were derived .
Provide results of previous efforts designed to
modify sloughs .
Provide details of baseline (i.e., pre-project)
studies on outmigration of fry in the Susitna
River or in adjacent unregulated streams.
Provide detai'ls of candidate sites in which sub-
states would be added, cleaned, or otherwise
modified in order to improve spawning habitat for
salmon . Provide documentation of the effectivene~s
of such mitigation techniques .
Clarify the phrase "preventing temperature regula-
tion ."
The sentence implies that there is doubt as to
whether a layer of 8 to 12 C water will exist in
the top 100 feet of the reservoir . Explain the
uncertainty.
Provide information on alternate food sources that
would be available to salmon fry in late winter/early
spring in the Susitna River and Cook Inlet .
Expand on the topic of food resources by reference
to the published literature on feeding by juvenile
salmon.
Provide a breakdown by percentage of the spawning
and rearing habitats in the. project area that will
be inundated by the reservoir . Provide an estimate
of the potential additional alternative habitat
made available when the re s ervoir is filled .
Provide a breakdown by percentage of the grayling
spawning habitat in the project area that will be
inundated by the raservoirs .
Under measures to minim i ze impacts, one mitigation
procedure (lowering the su.·tace elevation dur i ng
the incubation period of grayling) is mentioned .
The paragraph concludes that "neither measure
124 . p. E-3-141, t 3
125. p. E-3-142, t 1
126. p. E-3-143, t 1
127. p. E-3-144, t 5
128. Table E.3.6
129 . Table E.3.13
130 . Table E.3.14
131. Table E.3.16
132 . Table E.3.16a
133. Table E.3.20
134. Tables E.3.27,
28, & 29
135. Chapter 7
18
would be feasible ." Explain what the other mitiga-
tion approach would be.
Provide a discussion on the effects of access
restriction and harvest regulations on harvestable
fish populations in Alaskan streams, such as those
in the Susi t na drainage.
Provide e descri ption of the type of grayling
compensation program planned, the location of the
anticipat ed releases , and the proposed schedule of
prograM ieplementation and op e ration .
Quantify the effect of cone valves on dissolved
oxygen levels downstream.
Provide a map locating the sloughs to be modified.
Provide reports of the studies identifying applicab le
slough modificati on techniques, and provide the
proposed schedule of program implementation and
operation . Provide results of previous experience
with similar artificial spawning channels .
Determ i ne the accuracy of helicopter s urveys for
estimat i ng the relative abundance of escaping
chinook salmon, as opposed to other salmon species .
Pro vi de e s t i mates of density in terms of number
per unit area of stream and t he total area of each
stream occup i ed by grayling .
Prov i de detai ls on cleaning and what the mechanism
of potential effects on f i sh wi ll be.
Clarify the column heading for this table .
Explain why increased wi nter water tempe r a t ure s
and increased summer water temperatures are listed
as major impact issues in this table and not in
Table E.3.21 .
The values o f river miles to be inundated do not
agree with values in Table E.3 .16 . Include informa-
tion for Deadman Creek in this table.
Provide pre-project streamflows for compar i so n.
Provide the percentage change from pre-proj ec t
flows resulti ng from operation of the Watana /Devil
Canyon dams for each •onth.
Provide an analysis of the impact of the Phase 1
Recreation plan on the fisheries resources of the
project area .
I
r
I
I
I
I
I
[
(
[
(
[
[
l
I
[
[
[
l
~
J
l r
J
~
,_,
~
-
..,
'
..,
19
TERRESTRIAL BOTANICAL RESO URCES
1. p. E-3-146 , 1 6
2. p. E-3-148, 1 4, to
p. E-3 -149, 1 5
3. p. E-3-148, 1 4
4 ~-E-3-150, 1 2
5. p. E-3-151, 1 4
6. p. E-3-151, t 5, to
p. E-3-165, 1 3
7 . p. E-3-151, 1 5
8 . p . E-3-152, 1 4
9. p. E-3-153, 1 4
Provide a complete floristic survey for the Willow
to Cook !nlet and Healy to Fairbanks transmission
corridors.
Describe the methodology used to select sites
surveyed for endangered or threatened species.
Provide justification as to why Borrow Site A was
the only borrow site searched for endangered and
threatened species, given that other borrow sites
{e.g., 0 , H, F, and C) will also not be inundated .
Provide results of surveys for the presence of
proposed endangered and threatened plant species
along the transmission corridors from Healy to
Fairbanks and Willow to Coo k Inlet.
Provide a quantitative est im ate of the likelihood
that forests within several kilo11eters of the
Sus i tna River may be harvested for merchantable
timber.
Resolve conflicts in the definition and designation
of vegetation types between the map {Figure E.3.Wl),
the tables (Tables E.3 .W4, E.3 .WZO, and E.3 .W24 -E.3 .\126)
and the text; for example, communit i es listed i n
the tab 1 es are not a 11 1 ocated on the map and
cor:munit i es discussed in the text are not a ll
listed in the tables .
Provide additional vegetation maps that use a
smaller scale {on the order of 1:24,000 for the
impoundment area and 1:63,400 for other project
areas) for areas affected by project facilities
and other operation. The reproduction of Figure E.3.wl
and other maps to be provided should be of better
quality than used for the draft Exhibit E. Locate
landmarks (e.g., damsites, impoundment outlines)
on the maps as appropriate to the scale.
Clearly indicate the location of wet l ands and
herbaceous community types in Fi gure E.3 .Wl .
Check Table E. 3. W6 to ensure that the average
cover percentages 1 is ted for the overs tory are
correct; the table now iMplies (1) that there is a
great deal of overlap between the black and white
spruce canopies in the overstory layer, and {2) that
total black spruce cover (2~) and white spruce
cover {17%) are relatively equal rather than black
spruce truly dominating .
10 . p. E-3-153 , , 6
11 . p . E-3-154, , 1
12. p. E-3-154, ' 3, to
p . E-3-155, 11 2
13 . p . E-3-156, , 4
and , 5
14 . p . E-3-157, , 4, to
p. E-3-158 , , 2
15. p. E-3-158, ' 3
and 1 5, to
p. E-3-159, 1 6
16 . p . E-3-158, 1 3
17 . p . E-3-159, '6
18 . p. E-3-160, , 1
20
Resolve the conflict between this paragraph and
Table: E.3.W7; prickly rose is identified in the
text as one of the two most important ground layer
sp~c i ~s but it is shown in the table to have only
S% cover in the ground layer.
Resolve t he conflict betwee n this paragraph and
Table E.3.W7; crowberry, northern Labrador tea,
bog b l ueberry, and mountain cranberry are identi-
fied as accounting for much of the woody ground
layer in both black and wh ite spruce forests but
none of these species is listed in Table E.3 .W7.
Resolve the conflict between community type designa-
tions in this section and those in Table E.3.W4
and Figure E.3 .W1; the text desc ribes three types
of deciduous forest communities (balsam poplar,
birch, and aspen) whereas the table and map identify
only one type (b i rch).
Identify the major species characteristic of herba-
ceous a lpine tundra (including a table for the
herb-sedge type that is similar to Tables E.3.W14
through E.3 .W16).
Resolve the nu~rous conflicts betwee n the text of
this section and Tables E.3.Wl8 and E.3 .Wl9, if
these tab 1 es are meant to represent will ow dnd
birch stands , respectively.
Clearly identify in Tab l e E.3 .W4 and Figur~ E.3 .Wl
herbaceous and w~tland vegetat i on types that are
discussed in the text.
Provi de the names of major species that comprise
herbaceous pioneer communities on gravel and sand
bars .
Describe the studies that are being conducted to
classify and map wetlands . Provide the classifi-
cation sys t~m being used and results of the studies
currently being conducted .
Reso 1 ve conflicts between this paragraph and
Table E.3 .W20: (1) according to the text , balsam
poplar stands cover 18% of tne Dev i l Canyon area,
notably on the floodplain, yet the se stands are
not i de ntified in the table; and (2) the table
ind icates that no deciduous or birch stands occur
in the Devil Canyon area, but the text states that
deciduous (~stly birch) stands do occur on the
slopes.
t[
I[
I[
l[
1r
I[
I(
[
(
(
[
(
(
I
('
('
('
['
l 1
19 . p . E-3-162, 1 2
20. p . E-3-164, 1 7, to
p. E-3-165, 1 2
21 . p . E-3 -165,
1 ast 1 i ne
22 . p . E-3-166 , 1 1
23 . p . E-3-166, 1 3 ;
p . E-3-177, 1 Z
24. p . E-3-166, 1 4
25 . p . E-3-166, , 4
26 . p . E-3 -166 , 1 5
27. p . E-3-167, 'Z
28 . p . E-3-168, ' 6, to
p. E-3-169, t 2
29 . p. E-3-170, 1 2-4
30 . p . E-3-171, 1 4
21
Resolve the conflict between this paragraph and
Table E.3.WZ3; thP text indicates that white
spruce cover is 421, whereas the table shows wh i te
spruce cover as 121 and birch cover as 42%.
Include a table similar to Tables E.3 .W24 through
E.3.W26 for the Willow to Healy corridor.
Provide the missing information.
Correct the typographi ca 1 error omitting the
proportion of open birch stands .
Provide an estimate of the number of hectares of
each vegetation type vulnerable t o vegetation loss
through eros i on of canyon s 1 opes for both the
Watana and Devil Canyon sites .
Provide the depth to permafrost or bedrock as well
as representative rooti ng depths for major species
found to occur near the proposed Watana impoundment .
Since the spillway is to be located on the north
(not the south) side of the damsite (see Exhibit F,
Plate F4), correct 1 4 to reflect this and provide
any changes this may ha ve on the area of greatest
blowdown potential .
Esti mate the amount of fug i tive dust generated due
to the construc"..i on . What are the anticipated air
quality and terrestrial i mpacts as a result of t he
fugitive dust and emissions from construction
equipment, camps , and the permanent vi 11 age ?
Correct the typographical error omitting a word or
words from the first line of the paragraph.
Provide information {for forests and shrublands)
as to the nature of natural revegetation and how
much longer it May take when soils are removed
either on purpose or due to erosion .
Provi de the following informati on : (1) the numbe r
of hectares affected by drawdown , (2) the effects
of ice shelving on vegetation, and (3) the likeli-
hood of revegetation taking place in areas affected
by drawdown .
Include, in the evaluation of vegetation encroach-
ment speed for the Watana to Devil Canyon reach, a
cons ide ration of reduced sediment 1 oads be 1 ow
Watana dam as explained in 1 1 of p. E-3-171, in
addition to the a 1 ready mentioned factors of
reduced summer peak flows and ice scour eliMination .
31. p. E-3-174, ~ 3
and , 4
32. p . E-3-178, , 3
33. p. E-3-179, , 3
34 . p. E-3-179 , 1 4, to
' 6
35. p . E-3-180 , 1 3
36 . p. E-3-186, 1 3, to
p. E-3-194, 1 2
37. p . E-3-186 , ' 3, to
p . E-3-194 , , 2
38 . p . E-3-186, , 3, to
p . E-3-194, ~ 2
39. p . E-3-186, t 3
22
In the evaluation of spring and fall temperature
mode rat ion near the Watana itnpoundment and its
effect on plant co.nmunities, include whether or
not this loca l climatic change will (1) affect the
length of the growing season, and/or (2) shift the
period of optimum temperatures, causing temperatures
to be out of phase with the period of optimum
1 i ght and thereby potentially affecting p 1 ant
production.
Correct the typographical error in the fourth line
of this pa r agraph ; in this case a word or words
are either missing or incorrect.
Modify the information in this paragraph and ' 3
on p . E-3-172 to clarify whether or not Oevi 1
Canyon is included in the post-project flows and
water surface a reas presented on p . E-3-172 . If
Devil Canyon is not inc 1 uded in the data on
p . E-3-172, then include water flows and surface
areas with Devil Canyon in operation on p . E-3-179,
or clearly state that they wi l l not change as a
result of Devil Canyon.
Esti mate the number of hectares of each vege-
tation type that wi 11 be c 1 eared due to access
road construction .
Provide Table E.3 .W29 as called out in this para-
gr ap h; currently Table E.3.W29 contains wildlife
data .
Provide a more detailed description of planned miti-
gation measures for we tl and s and floodlands. For
example, construction methods used specifically
for wetland areas should be described .
Provide map s showing the location and extent of
areas expected to requ ire revegetation as a result
of the proposed project construction or operation .
Also, identify the existing vegeta tive communities
surrounding areas to be revegetated.
Provide detailed information, such as a description
and map of soil types, data on soil physical and
chem ical characteristics, and maps showing the
location of permafros t outside the impoundment
areas . In addition , prov ide a general characteri-
zation of subsoils, especially for areas where
topsoil removal or erosion is likely.
Provide specific information on the methodology
that will be used to deter off-road vehicle use
(e.g., notice signs or fences).
I[
I[
I[
If
I(
(
I
(
(
[
(
I
I
(
I
['
['
l ,
40. p. E-3-187, '1
-c 41. p. E-3-187, '2
p . E-3-191, ' 4
1: 42 . p. E-3-188, ' 2
E
43. p . E-3-189, ' 3-6
44. p . E-3-190, ' 1
23
Provide information to support thP desirability of
placing fill for the construction ca mp, etc.
directly over vegetative ground cover and organic
soils . The following questions should be answered :
(1) What are the chances tha t the organic material
will decompose, causing subsidence? (2) Will
permafrost be affected? (3) After being covered
by gravel fill for a period of years, will the
soil that remains when the grave 1 is removed
really offer any advantage over soil replacement
using stockpiled soils?
Provide infonnation on the effect of long-term
soil storage under the conditions of the Susitna
Basin.
Provide specific information to describe how the
pit excavation in Borrow Site E will be rehabilita-
ted .
Provide specific information about the planned revege-
tation methodology along with documentation to
indicate the feasibility and potential success of
the plan . For example, the following types of
questions should be addr ssed : (1) Will soil that
has been stockpiled contain enough viable propagules
to establish adequate vegetation without seeding?
(2) How quickly will unsee ded areas develop a
sufficient plant covPr to prevent e r osion? (3) Is
there a feasible source for native spec i es seed of
the proper ecotypes? (4) Does the time of seeding
(fall or spring) ma ~~ a difference? (5) What is
the rational e to support the p l anned fertilizer
app 1 i cations (i .e . , are they based on actual
fertilizer trials for revegetation conditions in
Alaska)? (6) Wi 11 any other soil amendments
(e.g ., lime, organic materials) be incorporated
into t he soil ? In a ddition, descri e the planned
revegetati on strategy for each area identified i n
the maps requested by Comment 35 (e .g ., return to
community that existed prior to disturbance ,
replacement with introduced grasses).
Provide detailed information to permit evaluation
of the plan to ma i ntain early successional stages
i n the active floodplain. For examp l e, informa-
tion is needed on the genera l location of vegetation
areas to be monitored, how they will be monitored ,
the criteria that will be used to determine the
necessity of controlled flooding, and the cost,
amount, and potential effects to electrical genera-
tion capacity as a result of controlled flooding .
45. p . E-3-190, t 3
46. p. E-3-191, ~ 4
47. p. E-3-191, t 5, to
p. E-3-192, t 1
48 . p . E-3-192, t 3
49. p . E-3-192, 1 4
50 . p. E-3-192, t 5
51 . p . E-3-194 , t 1
52.
53 .
24
Describe in detail the planned methods for rehabili-
tation of the areas and structures discussed in
this paragraph.
See Co11111ent 42.
Correct the typographi ca 1 error that e 1 i mi nated
the line or lines at the end of p. E-3-191 and
beginning of p. E-3-192 .
Provide information describing how erosion will be
mitigated where a ccess cuts leave unvegetated
slopes .
Provide 3 plan describi ng proposed rehabil i tati on
measures that would be implemented in the e vent
that management provisions fail and off-road
vehicles are driven onto tundra from the access
route .
Describe implementation of possible management
options for limiting off-road vehicle use (e.g .,
signs, gates, fence s, security patrols).
Describe the methods that wi 11 be emp 1 oyed, if
any, to d i scourage off-road vehicle access to
transmission co rridors where access roads already
ex i st. In addition, provide informat i on as to
what rehab il itation measure s , if any , wi 11 be
imp l emented should the transmission c orridor be
subjected to repeated use via e x isting access
roads .
Describe pro ject-related activities, including
construct ion a c-l-~vit ies, for the relict channel in
sufficient detail 1.0 assess potential impacts to
botan ical resources.
Describe details of development of the Phase I
Recreation Plan, including the trail , '" ·•fficie n t
detail to assess potential impacts to bota .... ,
resources.
[
I[
r
If
f
(
(
[
[
[
[
(
(
[
I
[
[
[
l
J
J
J
J -
J
-
·-
-
-
-------
25
TERRESTRIAL WILDLIFE RESOURCES
1. p . E-3-195, t 2
2. p . E-3-195 to
p . E-3-381
3 . p . E-3-195, 1 3
4 . p . E-3-197 to
p. E-3-278
5. p . E-3-198, t 4
6 . p . E-2-200, t 1 ;
p. E-3-201, 11 3 ;
p. E-3-204, 1 3;
p. E-3-205, 4ft 3;
p. E-3-207, t 5
7 . p. E-3-200, ' 2;
p. E-3-201, 11 3
8 . p. E-3-204, t 3
9 . p. E-3-204, t 4;
p. E-3-205, 1 4
10 . p. E-3-205, , 2;
p. E-3-205, 1 4;
p. E-3-205, t 5;
p. E-3-207, t 2;
p . E-3-207, t 5
11 . p. E-3-206, t 6
Explain the discrepancy between Appendix EG and
the text regarding the number of bird species
occurring along the Susitna River floodplain below
Devi 1 Canyon .
Clearly identify on 111aps geographical features
and wildlife considerations being discussed (e .g.,
population concentrations, migration routes) in
relation to project features .
Indicate the presence i n the study region of any
wildlife on a state list of "protected" (Le .,
endangered, threatened, rare) or controlled species.
If no such species occur in the Susitna region,
this fact should be noted.
Provide quantification, where possible, of propor-
tions, numerical estimates, or data (in tables or
in the narrative text) to document or substantiate
qualitative statements . Ba seline narrative descrip-
tions frequently lack data support for qua litative
statements such as "more," "most," "few," and
"many ."
Show, on a ~ap, major seasonal movement patterns
of moose, clearly relating moose movements to
areas proposed for proj ect us e .
Provide the number of radio-collared moose and the
average number uf relocat i ons per animal for each
study year.
Show important breeding and calving areas on one or
more maps, directly relating these areas to areas
proposed for project use .
Quantify black spruce size and density classes .
Quantify moose use of habitat by cover type (or
riparian/non-riparian commun i ty) on a monthly
basis.
Quantify such phrases as "most commonly", "most
often", "frequently", "greatest", "a number of11
,
and 11 less frequently", and to more completely
describe the habitat (e . g ., "sparse-to-medium-
density, medium-height spruce").
Pro vide the analysis of browse data documenting
moose food habits in this area .
12. p . E-3-209 , t 4
13. p. E-3-210
14. p . E-3-211, t 3
15 . p. E-3-211, t 4
16 . p . E-3-213, t 2
17. p. E-3-215, t 6;
p. E-3-216, t 3;
p. E-3-216, t 4-5
18 . p . E-3-222, , 4;
p . E-3-222, ' 5
19 . p. E-3-228
20 . p . E-3-229 , 1 7
21 . p . E-3-233, t 7
22. p . E-3-235 , ' 7
23. p. E-3-235 , t 2
24. p . E-3-240, , 4
25 . p. E-3-241, , 6
26. p. E-3-253, , 7
26
Clarify the relationship between moos e density
(moose/km2 ) in the narrative text and the data in
Table W30 (referenced as Table W31).
Provide the bas i s for the 11 rough estimate11 of
moose numbers (t 2), and the ba sis for the assump-
tions that •oose stratum densities in CA7 and CA14
are equivalent (' 3).
Statements in the narrative text are inconsistent
with data in the tables cited.
Estimate the magnitude (or range) of the discrep-
ancy and the probable consequences of an inaccurate
estimate .
Provide a basis for the assumption that snow depth
is an adequate index of winter s everity .
Quantify phrases such as the following: "main
portion of the herd" , "many anima 1 s", "number of
Nelchina bulls", 11 high country" (elevations).
Spedfy what other "studies were conducted .. on Dall
sheep, besides distribution, and their rel e va nce
to an assessment of po t entia 1 project imp acts .
Pro vide a map to locate sightings or areas of
apparent Dall sheep concentrations.
Substantiate in Table W41 the state111ent "bears
tended to move to shrublands at higher elevation
later in the sunvner".
Provide the basis for the information presented on
brown bear diets.
Include information provi ded by the "studies now
underway 11
•
Specify the number of di fferent bears represented
by the 908 observations .
Quantify habitat use and include a brief statement
of the analytical methodology (e.g., "A chi-square
analysis of habitat use by black bears shows ... ").
For what years are data for the April to November
period that were used as a basis for estimating
wolf habitat use?
Clarify the term "short and long yearling moo se".
Specify the type of data collected from the aerial
marten transect flights (e . g . , animals sighted,
track counts).
(_
[
r
[
[
[
[
[
('
('
~ 27. p. E-3-256, ' 5
28. p. E-3-257, '3
29. p. E-3-258 to
E-3-366
l
Cl 30. p. E-3-258; ~ p . E-3-259
c
c
r:
c
c
c
c
r:
r:
r:
c
~
27
Specify the average number of animals considered
to comprise a fox 11 family 11
•
Provide the basis for the estimates of lynx popula-
tion levels.
Several tables in these sections and elsewhere in
the text were incorrec~ly referenced (e.g., Table W61
should have been Table W59). Also, some tables
and figures were provided that were never referenced
in the text. Correct these errors. Cross-referenr;i ng
within Exhibit E and to other Exhibits of the
application, where appropriate should be included.
Provide information on the bird surveys as follows:
Habitat maps delineating areas surveyed by
air.
Habitat maps delineating areas surveyed on
the ground.
Maps showing all cliffs and tree habitats in
the vicinity of the project suitable for
raptor nesting.
Maps showing all known raptor rests in the
vicinity of the project.
(Above maps should be of sufficient scale and
detail so that survey areas can be transcribed
easily to a map of areas to be affected by
the proposed project including borrow areas,
access roads, transmission lines, etc.)
Description of census methods for all ground
andd aerial surveys.
Altitude of the aerial surveys.
Effective area of ground/water surveyed by
air (i.e., size of plot).
Number of times each ground and aerial study
plot was surveyed.
Dates of each survey .
In addition, resolve discrepancy regarding the
time that raptor surveys were conducted, i.e. ,
p. E-3-259, '3, calls out a survey in fall 198 2 ,
not mentioned on the previous page.
31 . p . E-3-260 , ' 1
32 . p . E-3-260, ' 4
33 . p. E-3-262, ' 3
34 . p . E-3-262, ' 4
35. p . E-3-262
36. p. E-3-263, t 1
37 . p . E-3-264, ' 1
38 . p . E-3-264 , ' 3
39 . p . E-3-268, ' 4
40. p . E-3-280, ' 2
41. p . E-3-281, ' 3
42 . p . E-3-281, 1 3
43 . p . E-3 -281, ' 3
44 . p . E-3-282, ' 3
28
Describe the 11 prey base" for raptors in the upper
Susitna basin and lower Susitna floodpla i n.
Document the statement that the "density of ba 1 d
eag l es nesting in the lower Susitna River flood-
plain is slightly higher than that calculated for
the Tanana River ...
Describe the use of the lower Suitna floodplain by
spring and fall migratory waterfowl. Special
emphasis should be gi ven to that section of the
floodplain between De vi l Canyon dam and the con-
fluence of the Susitna and Chu litna Rivers .
Provi de bird survey data relative to secti ons of
the Susitna River from Co ok Inlet to the proposed
Devil Canyon dam .
Estimate the i mportance of the islands in the
lower Susitna Rive r to nesting waterfowl .
Provide data to support the statement that "the
main reasons for the low [waterfowl] use of the
lower river appear to be its rapid flow Jnd heavy
silt load ...
Prov i de 1981 watet•fowl data (average dens ities of
adults and broods } for the Tanana River val l ey .
Provi de the method of calculating the Importance
Values of water bod i e s a nd give the resu lts .
Correct the discrepancy between the text and
Table W66 regarding the number of bird territori es
identified on the mat-cushion tundra .
Include results of "current studies .. of moose .
Describe the technique of measuring moo s e habitat
quality .
Justify the use of "fore st cover units to determine
the. . . effects of hab i tat loss on 11oose11 if
"forest cover types are poor measures of moose
habitat quality".
Provide results of the p lanned studi es on fo r age
quality , critical winter range, and calving habitat.
Clarify the statement 11
••• browse resources in
bottomland areas may presently be at , or near,
their carrying capacity". Does this refer to
moose density in relation to available browse, or
the density of browse plants in relation to the
amount of browse that could be supported?
r
[.
r
r
(
[
[
[
[
[
['
[ .
[.
1 I ~
I I
I I
[ ]
[ ]
I J
1
c
c
r:
c
r:
c
c
c
c
45 . p . E-3-285, t 2
46. p. E-3-291, t 3
47. p. E-3-292, t 2
48. p. E-3-292, t 3
49. p . E-3-292, t 4
50 . p. E-3-292
51. p. E-3-295, ' 2
52 . p. E-3-295, to
p. E-3-299
53. p. E-3-299 to
p. E-3-317
54 . p. E-3-318 to
p. E-3 -356
55 . p. E-3-323, t 1
29
Explain how hunting and harassaent of Moose can be
prohibited effectively and document the efficacy
of the procedure.
Include a consideration of human disturbances that
moose would encounter at the mineral lick mentioned
on p. E-3-224, t 6.
Provide evidence for the statement that the number
of accidental •oose deaths during f illing or
operation of the Watana impoundment would be sMall
and the effect on population Minimal .
Quantify moose-carrying capacity and provide a
description of the bioenergetics model.
Justify the statements, (1) "Forage quality can be
assured by measuring available nitrogen and energy",
and (2) "Other nutritional entities ... are seldom
the limiting factor".
On p. E-3-292, t 2, highway and railroad kills of
moose are considered to be potentially "substantial 11
,
but are not mentioned in the summary of impacts .
Provide evidence to support the assertion that
11 hunting mortality can be easily regulated".
Provide some quantification as to the extent of
potential impacts on caribou, including additional
information on the frequency with wh ich caribou
cross the Susitna Ri ver during migration.
Quantification should be provided, as possible, to
aid in e valuating the extent of potential impacts
on Oall sheep (pp . E-3-299 to E-3-303), brown bear
(pp . E-3-303 to E-3-308), black bear (pp. E-3-308
to E-3-311), wolf (pp. E-3-311 to E-3-312), wolverine
(pp. E-3-312 to E-3-314), and beaver (pp. E-3-314
to E-3-317).
Provide some quantification, particularly of habitat
losses, as an aid to eva luating the extent of
potential impacts on mink , otter, red fox, marten,
moose , brown bear, beaver, and caribou .
Pro vi de the data and assumptions to support the
statement that "the upper Susitna River bas i n
population of golden eagles will be reduced by 3-5
pairs as a result of the construction and filling
of the Watana Reservoir."
56 . p . E-3-330, t 2
and 3
57 . p. E-3-331, t 4
and E-3-349, t 4
sa . p . E-3-332, t 3
59. p. E-3-334, t 1
60. p . E-3-349, t 5
61 . p . E-3-3 50, t 1
62 . p . E-3-363 , t 1
63 . p . E-3-363 , t 3
a nd 5
64 . p . E-3-368, t 6
65. p . E-3-373 t o
p . E-3-375
66 . p. E-3-375 , t 2
67 . p . E-3-380, t 3,
4 , and 5
68 . p . E-3-~81 , t 2
69 . p. E-3-381, t 2
30
Descr i be the specific safeguar ds to protect the
eaqle nests in sufficient detail to demonstrate
the effectivene ss of the plan .
Prov i de a n estimate of the number of nest sites
for cavity-nesting waterbirds that wil l be affected
by the proposed project?
Describe the effect that year-round ope n water
below the dam will have on spring and fall migratory
waterfowl . Describe how the open water affect the
abundance and distribution of bald eagles .
Provide a summary of roadside bird count data
(i.e., average of pre-1981 data vs . 1981) relative
to habitat of transects .
Resolve the discrepancy between the data in sentence
four of thi s paragraph and those in Table W79a.
Provide informa t ion to support the stateme nt that
no feeding habitat for shorebirds will be cre ated .
Provide a n explanation of how the ap plica nt pl a ns
to re-route the ac cess road to a void destruction
of bald eagle nest number BE-6 .
Provi de an explanation of how the Applicant plans
t o a void construction in the vicinity of nests
GE-18, R-21, and BE -8 during the ne sting period .
Pro vide r esults o f any stud i e s or si ngle-inc ide nt
repo rts of bird colli sions with transmission line s
in the vicinity of the proposed project.
Quantify, as pos sible, the eff i cacy of mitigat ion
proposed f or moose , caribou, Dall's sheep, brown
and black bears , and beaver a nd marten .
Expand the discussion of regulating hunt i ng pressure
to provide s uffic i ent information for e valuat i on
of the efficacy of such measures .
Pro vide justificati ons for (1) sensitive t ime
periods (text doe sn't a l ways agree wi th data in
Tab l e W6 0), and (2) minim um distances to avoid
disturbances to raptor nesting activity.
Def i ne l imiting ground and a ir a ctivities" a nd
"near those wa t e r bod i es ."
Prov i de the number of nest bo xes that wil l be s et
up, for what species, and in what general areas of
the project.
[
[
r
r
[ ,
[
[
[
[ 1
[ J
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
l J
70. Table W27
71 . Table W30
72 . Table W31
73 . Table W41
74 . Table W55,
Table WS6
75 . Table W72
---------------------------------------------
31
Explain the 2501 figure in the last column .
Indicate the source or basis for the "11oose density
per stratum" values and the ntethod for detennini ng
the "population estimatt! per stratum" entries .
Clarify the us e of moose per km of river as an
index of re 1 at i ve abundance rather than as a
population density.
Clarify the tems ~~~of months 11 and ~~~ of habitats ".
Provide Figure S, cited in footnotes to both tables .
Clarify whether mu s krat "pushups " refers to the
tota 1 numbers for 1 akes with pushu ps observed
within the borrow areas and imp oun dm~nt or to the
average number of pushups per lake wi thin the
borrow areas and impoundment.
Clarify the reference to "Table Bird Impacts 2"
since no such table exists in Exhibit E.
Provide an example of how the percent los s of
breeding pairs was calculated. Provide all acreages
and populat i on densities required to calculate the
percent loss for each species .
Provide rationale for the mini mum distance of
1/2 mile between any facility and a bald or golden
eagle nest.
Provide all mi ssing information in the Tables for
the following : Brant, Har l equin duck, Surf scot~r.
Black scoter, Pine grosbeak , Eastern ki ngb ird, and
Violet-green swallow .
Provide data by which relative abundance wa s
detenn i ned.
Define all codes used .
Describe project-related acti vi t ies , including
construction activities, for the relict channel in
suffic i ent detail to assess potential impacts to
wildlife .
Assess impacts to wi ldl ife attributable to develop-
ment of the Phase I Recreation Plan use of the
propo se d hiking trail .
[
[
33
4 . HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RE SOURC ES
The following archaeological field work must be ··n dertaken during the
1983 field season. The order of the list indi cates the priorities that should
be placed on the completion of each task.
1 . Completion of the reconnaissance survey of the proposed access roads,
railroad, Watana and Devils Canyon dam sites, construction camp areas,
associated impact areas , and reservoirs, including the resurvey of defined
locales that have potential for containing sites.
2 . Completion of aerial reconnaissance survey and on-ground reconnaissance
survey as necessary to complete sensitivity ~aps of all proposed trans-
mission corridors and recreation facility sites as may have been defined
indi cating the potential of these areas for containing archaeological and
historical sites .
3 . Comple t ion of reconnaissance survey of any additiona l direct-impact areas
that ~ay be defined prior to the 1983 field season.
4 . Completion of systematic testing of archaeological and historical sites
in the d irect-impact areas of the acce ss roads and railroad, and the
vicinity of the construction camp areas and the proposed sites of the
Watana and Devils Canyon dams and associated facil ities .
The following field work should be undertake n in the 1984 field season
~ and according to the following priorities . -
-
--
-
1 . Completion of systematic testing of sites in the reservoirs .
2 . Completion of reconnaissance survey along the proposed trans mission
corridors, recreation facility sites, and indirect and potential impact
a reds .
3. Completion of systematic testing of sites in these areas as ~ay be
nece s sary .
A preliminary report on the results of the 1983 field season should be
filed at the conclus ion of field work no later than September 1, 1983 . A
draft final report on the 1983 field s.eason must be prov i ded by December 1,
1983, followed by the final report by January 1 , 1984 . The final report on
the 1984 season should be filed after completion of all field work, no later
than January 1, 1985 . The 1984 report shou l d contain a site-specific cultural
resources management plan prepared in consultation with the Alaska State
Historic Preservation Officer , the Nat ional Park Service, and appropriate
federal land-managing agenc ies.
34
SUPPLEMENTAL IN FORMATION AND CLARIFICATION NEEDS
1 . p . E-4-1, ' 3
2 . p. E-4-4, , 1
3 . p . E-4-4, ' 4
4 . p. E-4-4, ~ 5
5. p . E-4-5 , ' 1
6 . p . E-4-5, ' 4
7. p. E-4-6 , , 1
8 . p . E-4-7, , 5
9 . p . E-4-9, 1 4
10 . p . E-4-10, ' 3
Provide a general percentage estimate of the
number of sites that have been inventoried within
project impact areas (percentage of the total
numbe r of sites that likely ex i st within the
project impact areas).
Fo 11 ow this paragraph by a paragraph providing
quantitative data concerning the percentages of
(a) sites, (b) direct impact areas, and (c) indirect
potential impact areas that have likely been
inventoried. Provide the percent coverage of
impact areas at the reconnaissa nce level and other
levels of survey .
1nclude FERC in this statement with the reference
to the State Hi storic Pr eservati on Officer (SHPO).
Replace the reference to the Advisory Council with
the "appropriate land-managing agencies".
Include the SHPO in the reference with the land-
Jnanaging agency.
Provide the approximate percentages of the direct
impact areas and indirect-potential impact areas
which have been surveyed at the reconnaissance
level, and a percentage estimate of the number of
sites inventoried within project impact areas.
Indicate the number of known sites that require
testing, and the probable number of sites that
would be located in unsurveyed portions of the
proje ct and require testing .
Correct the references to 1982 as necessary {the
first reference to this date appears to be incorrect).
Include a statement that (1) the FERC, the SHPO,
and the appropriate land-managing agencies would
be no tified and consulted about the definition of
new project impact areas, and the modifications of
the location of existing areas, and consulted
about appropriatE: cultural res ources inventory
measu r es , and that (2) appropriate inventory
measures would be implemented, and cultural resources
management plan developed, in consultation with
these agencies as soon as possible after the
identification of these areas.
Give the percentage estimates of the impact areas
and the number of sites inventoried.
[
[
[
[
r
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
(
I
[
[
[
I
]
J
J
J ..
J
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
11. p. E-4-15, t 2
12 . p . E-4-18, , 1
13 . p . E-4-18, ' 2
14. p . E-4-30, ' 2
15 . p . E-4-30, 1 3
16 . p . E-4-1 08, t 2
17 . p . E-4-108, ' 3
18 . p. E-4-110, t 2
19. p . E-4-113, t 3, to
p . E-4 -114, t 3
20 . p . E-4-114, t 3
21. p . E-4-116, t 4
35
Indicate the pert"'itting agencies, the kinds of
archaeological activitie s authorized by the permits,
the expiration dates of each permit, and the
survey and testing undertaken with each permit.
Provide evidence of the success of this strategy.
The percentage estimates of impact areas and sites
inventoried of the total likely existing in the
project should be repeated .
Discuss the potential of this strategy for inven-
torying a high percentage of sites in direct
impact areas in a timely and cost-effective manner.
Provide a statement indicating whether additional
reconnaissance testing is necessary at locales
where sites have not been inventoried (i.e.,
whether the inventory can be considered as completed
at these locations).
Mark the location of defined survey locales (surveyed
and unsurveyed), other survey locations, and areas
proposed for survey on Exhibit G maps. Five
copies of these maps should be filed with the
archaeological reports separately from the applica-
tion . Indicate that such maps will be provided in
a separate filing with the application, and that
periodic updates would be filed as surveys and
tes ting are completed .
The number 231 appears to be incorrect . Correct
or clari fy as necessary .
Revise this s tatement to include the FERC in
addition to the SHPO .
This discussion contradicts the earlier statement
on p. E-4-4, t 1, that 17 sites wnuld be directly
impacted . Corrections should be made as necessary .
Include a statement indicating that a detailed
site-specific management plan would be prepared at
the complet i on of the cultural resources inventory
in con s ultati on with the FERC, the SHPO, and the
appropriate land-managing agencies, and filed with
these agenc i es .
The number 53 may be incorrect . Seventeen additional
sites are noted as being directly impacted on
p . E-4-4 , t 1.
The number 53 appears i ncorrect. It should be
corrected it-necessary.
22. p. E-4-117, '1
23. p . E-4 -117, '1
24 . p . E-4-117, '1
25. p. E-4-114 , 1 1
26 . p . f-4 -118, 1 3
36
The mean ing of 38 sites i n thi s statement is
un cl ear . The reference appears to refe r to the
number of known sites requ i ring systemati c tes t i ng .
The statement shoul d be clarified as necessa ry.
The num ber 20 may be incorrect . It contradicts a
numbe r o f 1s-given on p . E-4 -114, 1 3 . Cor rect ions
shoul d be made a s neces s ary .
The num ber 26 co ntradicts the numbe r 25 given on
pp . E-4-115:-' 2 , and E-4-116, 1 4. Corrections
in the se number s sho ul d be made as ne cess ary.
Provi de the ge neral cost breakdown for the eight
million doll a r figure.
At tach copies of the s t ipul ations in the antiquities
permits t o this report.
[
[
[
[
[
l
(
[
[
[
1
c
c
c
c
c
c
1. p . E-5-4
through
p . E-5-18
2 . p . E-5-4, 1 4,
througn
p . E-5-5, 1 5
3. p. E-5-6 , 1 2
4. p . E-5-7, , 2
5 . p. E-5-7,, 4
6 . p . E-5-8, 1 7
7 . p. E-5-11, 1 3
8. p . E-5-12, 1 4
9 . p. E-5-15, 1 4
10. p . E-5-16 , 1 2
11 . p. E-5-17 , 1 3 , 4
12 . p . E-5-19, 1 1,
through
p . E-5-36, 1 4
37
5. SOCIOECONOMICS
Provide a discussion of the cultural setting (in-
c luding the Native American Alaskans and other long-
term res i dents), political organization, commercial
facilities, cost of li ving, and sources of power
for the existing en vironment .
Provide populati on data that show d istri butions of
age, sex, and ethnicity, as a baseline for comparison
with imm i grating populati ons .
Provide data on the distribution of temporary and
rental hous i ng or lodg i ng units .
Provide information on sources and capacity of
power suppliers.
Provide a brief di s cussion of the problem of
ins uffic ient water in Talkeetna dur i ng dry spells
(as noted on p. E-5-27).
Provide da t a on traffic c ounts and vehicle mix on
highways and roads in the project a r ea.
Provide i nformation on the standard of beds -per-
capi ta used .
Provide di scuss ion of other recreational fac i lities
and oppo rtunities (~.g ., theaters , commun i ty
organizations).
Provide information on : the uses allowed for
funding to Ahtna, Inc .; the relationship of Ahtna.
Inc., to Community of Cantwell, Inc .; the region
controlled by Ahtna, Inc .; and how Ah tna, Inc.'s ,
region i s related to the large Cook Inlet Nat ive
Corporat i on or Assoc i ati on .
Provide recent unemployment r ates in th i s section .
See Co~~ment 3 .
Provide a discussion of impacts related to develop-
ment of the proposed project on Native Alaskans .
13 . p. E-5-20 , 1 2
14 . p . E-5-20, 1 3
15. p. E-5-22, t 2
16. p. E-5-24, t 3-6
17 . p. E-5-24 , ~ 6
18 . p . E-S-25, t 2-4
19. p . E-5-26, 1 6, 7
20 . p . E-5-27, 1 4
21. p . E-5-27, 1 6, 7
22 . p. E-5-28, ~ 4
23. p. E-5-28, 1 5
24 . p . E-5-29, 1 1, 2
25. p. E-5-29, 1 5
38
Provide a list of the assumptions underlying the
population projections and distributions, as well
a s the specific family and support-to-direct
multipliers used . Include annual population
projections .
Inc 1 ude ons i te construction workers in these
estimates.
Because the standard ratio of 1 :1000 is for rural
areas, provide an e xpl anation of the use of this
standard to rura 1 and Anchorage suburban areas.
Provide estimates of additional truck, equipment,
and personal and other vehicle traffic vrlume to
compare with baseline counts, and information on
the plowing and maintenance of Denali Highway .
In case the state does not assume responsibility
for the maintenance of the project access road,
provide a discussion of an alternative plan.
See Comment 17. Provide yearly projections to
identify periods of greatest growth .
Discuss the conditions under which "a strain on
this informal system" will be defined as occurring,
as well as a plan or alternatives for who will
provide these services.
See Convnent 13.
Provide a specific projection of who would prov ide
this supervision as well as a discussion of the
likelihood of and basis for installing central
water and sewage systems.
Provide a discussion of the likelihood of incorpora-
tion and the basis for such an occurrence to
permit development of a lternative fiscal impact
scenarios, estimates of the availability of quali-
fied workers, and mitigation plans .
Provide data on the adequacy of water supply for
projected growth and a prediction of the likelihood
of Talkeetna's installing a community wate r system
and a discussion of the basis for this acti on .
See Comment 19.
Provide a plan for resolving any potential conflict
that may arise with the Ahtna Corporation .lver
de velopme rt of this land for housing, as noted
here and on p . E-5-51, 1 2.
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
(
[
[
[
[
1
-
r:
26 . p . E-5-29, , 6,
through
p. E-5 -30, , 1
27 . p . E-5-32, , 2
28 . p. E-5-32, , 3, 4
29 . p . E-5-33, , 3, 4
30 . p. E-5-35, , 1
31. p . E-5-35, , 5
32. p. E-5-37,, 5
33 . p. E-5-38, , 6
34 . p. E-5-39, , 3
35 . p . E-5-40, , 5 ,
through
p. E-5-42, , 1
36. p . E-5 -42, , 3 , 5
37 . p . E-5-43, , 2
38. p . E-5 -43 , , 4
39 . p . E-5-44 , , 2
40 . p. E-5-44, , 5
41 . p. E-5-45, 1 2
See Comment 13. Additionally, include information
on the populati on to be housed in a construction
camp at Cantwel l (p. E-5-47 ) and where thi s popu l a-
tion is incl uded in the scenari os .
See Cem ent 23 .
See C0111111ent 19 .
See Comment 13.
See Coment 13 .
For Cantwell in particular , provide a discussion
of changes in the Native popu 1 at ion to permit
characterization of impacts .
Provide a discussi on of where wo rkers will be and
whether they wil l be paid during the off-season
months .
Prov i de i nformation on whether the payrol l figures
include payme nts for worker hou sing .
Discuss the basis fo r the assum pti on s underlying
the di stribution of the wor k force to ho using
onsite and offsite and to local commun i ties .
Se e Comment 34. To a s sess long-term growth and
impacts on t he region's communities, provi de
justification for the assumptions made about the
permanent relocation to the region of a portion of
the workf orce and the temp orary relocation of
another porti on .
Provide the actual l ocation-specific multipliers
used and a justification fo r them .
Provide projections of how workers will be employed
and whether they will rema in in the area between
1990 and 1999 . See Commen t 32 .
See Comments 13 and 35 .
Prov i de a d iscu ssi on of whether the Alaska state
average houst:hold si ze is d ifferent f r om the
average construction wor ker hous eho l d size .
See Comments 13 and 34 .
Provide a d iscussi on of whe r e the other wor kers
(inc l uded in the high ca s e scenario but not the
moderate case for Cantwell ) wi ll be distributed
and an exp l anati on of which scenari os include the
42 . p. E-5-45, 1 6
43 . p. E-5-47, 1 1, 1 2
44 . p . E-5·49, 1 3
45 . p. E-5-50, 1 1
46 . p . E-5-50, 1 3
47. p. E-5-51, ~ 2
48. p. E-5-52, 1 4
49 . p. E-5-54, ' 2
50 . p. E-5-54, 1 3
51. p. E-5-54 , 1 5,
through
p. E-5-57, t 2
52. p. E-5-55, ' 4
53. p. E-5-55, 1 4
54. p. E-5-56 , 1 4
55 . p. E-5-57 ,, 2
56. p. E-5-58, 1 1
and 1 4
40
proposed railhead construction camp (p . E-5-47 ).
See Co1111ent 26.
See Comments 32, 34, 35, and 37 .
Provide information on how many and what kind of
units will be provided . See Comment 26. Also
provide justification of reducing the population-
per-household measure over time.
Include the capacity of lodges , other temporary
lodging units, and trai ler parks should be included
in the Ex i sting Env i ronment section. See Comment 3.
See Comment 44 .
Discuss the role of Ahtna, Inc . in the enterpre-
n ~ur i al h ~using activi ty, gi~en the statement on
p. E-5-7 , 1 1, that th is Corporation ow ns most of
the land around Cantwell .
See Comment 25 .
See Comment 46 .
Provide information on the location and numbers of
these i sol ated residences .
Provide information on housing and bus iness impacts
along the propo sed rail line and on the ongoing
study of land improvements .
Provide data on the avail ability of a l ternative
a r eas for the ten-year construction period and
possible conflicts with other guides and subsistence
residents in the alternative areas .
Provide estimates of project-related subcontracting
expenditures and spending patterns of construction
workers.
Discuss the assumptions used in est ima t ing the
number of secondary jobs . See Comments 13 and 36 .
Discuss whe ther secondary jobs wi ll be created in
Cantwe 11 , and whether they wi 11 be seasona l.
Discuss impacts and project i ons of inflation and
shortage of inventories as well as difficulties of
bu s inessPs in getting financing to begin or expand .
Provide justification for assumptions on which
revenue and expenditure projections in this section
are based . See Comment 13 .
[
[
[
[
[
[
(
[
[
[
[
1
J
:J
J
J
. J
,:J
~]
~
....
-
57 . p. E-5-61, '4
58. p. E-5-68, t 1,
through
p. E-5-86, t 4
59 . p. E-5-71, t 4
60 . p . E-5 -71, t 5,
through
p . E-5-72, 11 2
61 . p . E-5-74, 1 2
62 . p. E-5-75, 1 2
63. p. E-5-79, t 3
64 . p . E-5-81, t 1
and t 4
65. p. E-5-81, 11 2
and 'I 3
66 . p. E-5-81, 1 5,
through
p. E-5-86, t 4
67 . p . E-5 -83, 1 2
68. p . E-5-86, t 3
69 . p . E-5-86, t 4
70 . p . E-5-87, t 1,
through
p. E-5-96, t 4
41
Discuss the ro 1 e of Ahtna, Inc . , in Cantwe 11 and
the share of state revenue (if any) it currently
receives and could e xp ect to receive in the future .
Discuss potential impacts on Nat i ve use a nd on
Nati ve corporations and associations be cause
of the
particular reliance of these groups on fish and
wildlife for s ub sistenc e a nd employment (e .g.,
guide s ervi ces , lodg ing fac i lities) .
Provide information on whether local guide businesses,
Nat ive and other, rely on fish resources in the
proj ect area .
Provide a di scussion of whether subsistence
catch for Nati ve s d iffers from that for non-Nati ves,
whether Natives require permits, and the value of
the catch to Native s relative to non -N atives .
Provi de a description of the analysis be ing done
t o permit evaluation of its ade quacy for impact
identification.
See Comment 61 .
Provide projections of baseline a nd proj~ct impacts
on moose hunting , as well a s informati on on perm i ts
required or other regulations on moose hunting.
See Comment 61.
See Comment 60 .
See Comment 58 .
Becau se it is stated that inaccessibility to the
area has kept the number of trappers low, discuss
probable impacts to trapping activity because of
increa s e d a ccess i bility provided by project roads
and structures .
See Comment 58.
Include projections on project impacts to recrea-
tiona l trappers.
Ind i cate specific app licant-proposed monitoring
and mitigation pl ans to perm it precise evaluation
of the reduction in impacts intended by the applicant.
71. p . E-5-89, ~ 3,
through
p . E-5-95, t 2
72. p. E-5-90, t 2
73. p . E-5-90, ~ 5
74. p . E-5-91, t 1-4
75 . p . E-5-92 , t 4
76. p . E-5-93 , t 3
77. p. E-5-93, ~ 4
78 . p . E-5-93 , t 5 ;
p. E-5-94, t 1-4
79 . p . E-5-94 , t 2
80 . p . E-S-96, 11 1
81. p. E-S-96, t 3-5
82. pp. E-5-102
through E-5-144,
tables
83. p . E-5-103
84 . p . E-5-109
42
Specify the role of local community and regiona l
officials .
Provide specific plans for adjusting project
schedules with reference to other projects and to
r e duce i111pacts.
Provide a discussion of any d i s a dvant11ges of
co nstruction camps that have be e n identified in
similar large-scale project situations .
Indicate speci fie applicant-proposed mitigation
plans on transportation.
See Coment 61.
Prov i de plans for the railhead construction camp
in Cantwell, the role of Ahtna, Inc ., and specifics
on financial aid for relocating workers and for
shortfalls in comm unity finances.
Projections in Tables E-5-36 through E-5-37 indicate
that shortages will occur. Include specific plans
for stuaying and mitigating these problems . See
Comment 71.
See Comment 70 .
Provide deta ils on methods being used in ongoing
mon i tor ing and other studies of impacts . See
Federal Register , Vol . 46, No . 219, Friday,
November 13, 1981, p . 55929 on FERC response to
comments on 18 CFR 4 .41(f)(2)(v).
See Co mment 61.
Provide more specific i nformation on the monitoring
plan. See Comments 61 and 80 .
Describe assumpti on : used in making projections
and all sources of projections and data. See
Comment 13 . Specific exampl es follow .
Provide age . sex , a nd ethnic distributions in
these commun i ties to perntit identification of
potential conflicts with the immigrating population.
Provide unemployment statistics t o comple t e the
desc r iption of t he e mploy111ent s e tting an d to
provide data on t he a va i l able l ocal labor pool .
(
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
(
[
[
[
[
(
)
']
I""'
J
J
k]
,.
:J
J
J
~] ,
~]
•
~]
,.
J
r]
J
~
J
J
l
85.
86 .
87 .
88.
89 .
90.
pp . E-5-113
through E.5.118;
p. E-5-120;
p. E-5-125
p. E-5-122 ;
pp. E-5124
through
E-5-136
pp . E-5-125,
E-5-126, and
E-5-128 through
E-5-131
pp . E-5-135
and E-5-136
pp . E-5-138
Append ix E.5A,
Section (c) (iii)
43
Provide assumptions, calculations, and multipliers
used in 111ak i ng these projections in the tab 1 es
and /or in the text . See Comments 13, 34, 36, 37
and 39.
Identify sources for these tables.
Provide the ba s es for distributions to the cvmmuni-
ties in the Borough and the region .
Identify the multipliers used to generate the proje•:-
tions of secondary jobs and indicate whether the
multipliers were applied to the entire project
work force or only to those not expected to live
in the onsite facilities.
Identify the per-capita multiplier used in making
these revenue forecasts as well as the basis for
its use .
See Comments 13 and 88.
J
J __,
.J --.... _...
1. p . E-6-2, ' 1
2. p . E-6-4 , ' 5
3. p . E-6-4,
general comment
4 . p . E-6-5, ' 3
5. p . E-6-6, ' 7
6 . p . ~-6-7, , 3
7. p . E-6-9, '4
8 . p . E-6-10, ' 6
9. p . E-6-11, ' 7
10 . p. E-6-12, ' 1
11. p. E-6-13 , ' 3
12. p . E-6-14, ' 3
45
6. GEOLOGICAL AND SOIL RESOURCES
Pro vi de the names and a generic discussion of the
stratigraphic units in the area.
Provide supporting data on the configuration of the
Quaternary surface.
Provide a tabulat ion of significant seismic e vents
and their intensity at the site. Also provide a plot
showing cumulative magnitude-recurrence frequency for
each seismic source area identified in the study.
Discuss the effects of seismically induced seiches
and predicted water level fluctuations due to seiches .
last sentence in the section is misworded .
Describe the "length-distance criteria" methodology
used to select the significant faults . Discuss any
assumptions used in the methodology.
Provide a map showing locations of sign ificant features,
a nd a written description of the features .
Identify the "13 features" and discuss thi!ir or1g1n
and any effect they may have on the project (i .e.,
higher-than-anticipated permeability in shear zones,
etc .).
Correct the mean peak acceleration of 8 .35 gat the
Watana site.
Provide the attitude of the contact between the
diorite and andesite in the discussion.
Prcvide rose diagrams or stereonet plots showing
orientations of joints , fracture zones, and shears.
Discuss the coincidence of "the Fins" feature with
the western portion of the relict channel.
Discuss the origin of "the Fins" feature. This feature
was app a ·ently important i n erosion at the west end
of the r 'i ct channel zone -are there other unident i -
fied she ~ zones beneath the other inci sed portions
of the relict channel ?
13 . p. E-6-15, t 1
14 . p . E-6-16, ' 3
15 . p . E-6-16, 11 5
16 . p . E-6 -18 , 'I 4
17 . p. E-6-18 , 'II 5
18 . p . E-6-20, 'I 7
19. p . E-6-21, ' 1
20 . p. E-6-24 ,
general comment
21 . p . E-6-25, 'I 5
22 . p . E-6-27 , 'II 3
2 ~. p . E-6-27, 'I 2
24 . p . E-6-27 , t 5
215 . p . E-6-27,
general comment
26 . p. E-6-28 , t 6
27 . p . E-6-33, t 6
28 . p . E-6-35. t 3
46
Provide e vidence of identification of sufficient
quantities of each type of soil required .
Provide rose diagrams or stereonet plots show i ng
orientations of joints, fracture zones. and shears.
Clarify "spacing and tightness of the joints i ncreas e
with depth ."
Discuss the area of potential permafrost in the south
abutment of the Devils Canyon site shown in Fi gure E.6 .25 .
Table E6 .28 is called out but was not provided in the
review copy .
Discuss the potential impacts of the several she ars
and fractures which may intersect the tailrace tunnel
shown in Figure E.6.19 .
Provide a figtJ r e showing surficial geology including
glacial deposits in the reservoir area.
Discuss the impacts of tectonic se i smicity on the
dam . Discuss the potential impacts of dam failure.
Discuss how the previous substant i al glac i al loading
of the region may affect the probability and magn i tude
of anticipated RIS .
Provide an estimate of the geographic area RlS likely
to be felt . Estimate how many people RIS would
affect.
Identify the plan for additional study of the Fog
Lakes relict channel .
Provide additional data on the soil and bedrock.
conditions i n the Watana reli c t channel.
Provide estimates of acreages e xpected to be
affected by each type of slope failure for each
reservoir .
Document the statement that liquefaction susceptible
soil s a r e not extensive in the reservoir areas .
Discuss the impact of seismically induced failure of
the Watana relict channel under full pool conditions ?
Add bedrock testing in Watana relict channel and add
study of seepage to the Fog lakes area . Discuss
further study of the shear under the saddle dam a t
the Devils Canyon site.
If
j[
r
f
r
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
29 . p . E-6-35 . t 5
30. p . E-6-35 , 1 6
31 . General comment
47
Discuss the impacts of reservoir slope failures on
the land and biota .
Provide an ana lysis of the effects of seism ically
induced seiches .
Provide the criteria whereby the mitigation mca ~c rPs
to reduce the leakage through the relict channel will
be chosen. Prov i de an anaysis of the i mpacts of each
of the a l ter ~ative measures .
1. p . E-7-4, , 3;
p. E-7-5, , 1
2. p. E-7-8, 1 3
3. p . E-7-10, t 4
4. p . E-7-11 , , 2
5 . p. E-7 -12, , 2
6 . p . E-7-14, , 5,
, 6; p. E-8-15,
, 1-4
49
7. RECREATION RESOURCES
Verify the dimensions of the proposed Watana impound-
ment; e.g., a 54-mile-long reservoir as opposed to
approximately 48 miles reported in Exhibit A
(p. 1-1) of the application . Also verify the
dimensions of the proposed Devil Canyon impoundment ;
e .g ., a 32-mile-long reservoir as opposed to the
approxi mately 26 miles reported in Exhibit A
(p. 7-1) of the application.
Characteri ze visitor interpretation and related
facilities at dam and powerhouse sites in detail
compatible with levels of development implied on
pages E-7-93 and E-7-94, and Table 7.20.
Provide Figure E.7.4 showing "E xisting and Proposed
Regional Recreation Areas" (cf "list of Figures,
Figure 7-4 -later"). The figure should include
sufficient place names and identified landmarks to
facilitate overall orientation and provide for
points of reference.
In view of the greater size and popularity of
Dena 1 i National Park and Preserve, c 1 ari fy the
greater 198! attendence or visitations at Denal i
State park.
Clarify the following : The Kenai Peninsula Parks
(page E-7-11, , ~) do not appear to be listed in
Appendix E.7.A . Is the "region" referred to here
(p. E-7-12, , 2) the same region depicted in
Figure 7.4 (to be provided "later" as indicated in
Chapter 7 "list of Figures)? If not, the region
identified on this page (E-7-12) should be depicted
by mapping or should be otherwise described .
Clarify the discussion presented in relation to the
following :
Figure E. 7.4 is not available; thus, the
locations of several future regional facilities
listed in Table E.7.7 are not identifiable.
High-priority develop11ent sites e;tablished
by the State Parks Division are not "listed"
in Figure E.7.6. Further, Figure E.7.6
7. p . E-7-15, 1 6
8. p . E-7-17, 1 2
9. p . E-7-17, t 6
10 . p . E-7-18, t 2
50
dep i cts "e xis t i ng recreat i on " as opposed to
"Future Fa cili ties", the t i t l e of t h1 s
subsec tion .
The co l on following paragraph 2 o f Subsec -
ti o n 2.1 (f) i mpl i e s t hat a ll subseque nt named
areas a re apparent in Fi gure E. 7. 6. If
Denali State Par k is s how n in the f i gure, i t
is not identified, nor i s the Tokos i t n.;
Resort s ite a s we ll a s o ther proposed de ve l op-
ment sites with i n t he State Park , as i denti f i ed
on p . E-7-15 .
The lake Louise Re c reati on Area i s we ll
removed from the area shown i n Fi gure £.7.6 .
It is not cl ear how e xpansi on of th i s hea vily
used recreation area would s ignificant ly
infl uence recreation development in the
pro ject area . Furth ~r. Lake louis e is acce s s-
ible from the Glenn Highway .
The s i gnifi cance of boating at, and the
locat i on of, Tangle and Kepler lakes i s no t
apparent i n Fi gure £.7 .6 .
Document studies and /or informat i on sources i nd i -
cating the Upper Susitna River are not su i table
for es tab 1 i shment of dedicated areas such a s
National Parks (Pr~serves), Wi ld and Scenic Ri vers
(including recreation) and State Parks . Discuss
Alaska DNR's designat i on of areas listed in
Appendix E7B as 11 Future Reg i onal Recreational
Opportunities 11 (p. E-7-15, t 5).
Verify that Table £.7 .6 is a complete listing of
the existing pub 1 i c and commercia 1 deve 1 opments
within and adjacent to the study area; e .g.,
Denali State Park is not listed .
Verify that there are 11 existing structures at
the High lake lodge . Figure E. 7. 7 indicates the
presence of three structures at High Lake, whereas
only two structures are indicated in Figure E.9.6.
Also indicate whether the Lodge at High Lake and
the structures along Portage Creek are operated as
a unit or complex .
Clarify that Table £.7 .8 and Figures E.7.5, £.7.6,
and £.7.7 include a complete listing of trail
locations, condition, and use . Also, the trails
listed in Table E.7 .8 (and other important tra i ls)
must be keyed to and identified (by name or number)
in figure s such as E. 7.6, E.7 .7, and E.7 .8.
r 1
r I
r I
r I
r I
( I
r I
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
l I
l I
l I
[ 1
[ 1
[
]
J
11 . p. E-7-18, 1 3
12. p . E-7-20, 1 2
13. p . E-7-22, 1 1
14 . p . E-7-22, 1 2
15 . p . E-7-22, 1 6
16 . ~· E-7-32, 1 2
17 . p. E-7-33, 1 2
18 . p . E-7-45, 1 1
(Item 2)
19 . p . E-7-66(A);
p . E-7-68(H)
20. pp . E-7-84, 1 4, to
E-7-89, 1 2
51
Provide copies of any regulations developed by BLM
for management of public trails located on local
1 and s se 1 ected by Native corporations. A 1 so
identify trail ea s ements obta i ned by BLM in
Fi gures E.7 .6, E.7 .7, and E.7 .8 as proposed for
e xisting trails .
Pro vi de a base map dep i cting boundaries of the
recreation study area, i ncluding identified place
names a nd landmarks.
Ident i fy the 11 several majo r projects within the
region,. that could significantl y affect future
recreati on .
Identify t he unnamed " ... river and along Portage
Creek ar•d Talkeetna Ri ver . ..--
Identify the "Denali Planning Block 11 by reference
or description.
Provide an explanation of the basis for anticipating
that all game hunting by project personnel would
be prohibited, and provide a rationale as to how
such a prohibition would be justified and enforced .
Specify ob j ect ives , methodology , and timing of
future studies planned by APA to develop a recrea-
t i on plan for mitigating recreati on impacts related
to transmission line corridors .
Pro vi de detai ls as to how the calculated recreation
demand ((Sec . 3.5(c)] was factored into the develop-
ment of the Recreati on Plan , as presented in
Section 5 .
Provide information, as i ndicated, relative to
Phase 1 development of the trailhead facility at
Summit, the 25-mile trail along the Middle Fork of
the Chulitna Ri ver , and the 20-m i le e xtension into
the Tsussna Creek watershed . Ind icate all pertine nt
design specifications, anticipated level of use ,
and the trail rating for hikers . Also indicate
the potenti al for ORV use ; whether the trail would
be patrolled ; and managing age ncy(ies) involved .
Delete discuss i on presented in Section 5.5 , anci
Tables E.7.17 and E.7 .18 from Volume 4 , Chapter 7
(Recreation Re sources) and incorporate this infor-
tnation into Vo lume 3, Chapter 5 (Socioeconomic
Impacts). See also: Items C and U, p. E-7-62;
Item C, p . E-7-69; Item U, p. E-7 -70; and Phase 1 ,
Item C, p . E-7-93 .
21 . p . E-7-91, t 1
(Item 2)
22 . p . E-7 -92, t 5
23 . p . E-7-93
(Phase 2, Ite111 0 };
p. E-7-94
(Phase 4, Item S)
24. p. E-7-95, t 3
52
Identify the "var i ous parties" that will participate
wi th APA in scheduling recreation developments .
Also , provide details concerning procedures whereby
all affected parties may contribute to decisions
relative to scheduling development .
Clar i fy the discrepanc i es in the number and kinds
of recreation f a cilities to be provided at the
various development sites; e .g ., compare facility
inventories on this and following pages E-7-93
and E-7-94 with those listed on pages E-7-62 to
E-7-84, those shown in Figures 7.12, 7 .13 and 7 .14,
and those shown in Table 7.20.
Characterize the Watana and Devil Canyon Dam Site
visitors centers in terms of phys i cal compos i t ion ,
dimensions, and general conf i guration, and indicate
whether the visitor center facilities are subject
to scheduling decisions a s are other phased develop-
ments that are dependent on peri odic review of
perceived recreation needs .
Verify whether the State Division of Parks and APA
wi 11 have tota 1 authority for contro 11 i ng the
level of recreation development in the project
area, and whether this situation contradicts
arrangeme~ts discussed in Comment 19.
1
L 1
r I
r I
[ I
r I
[ 1
[ 1
[ I
[ 1
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
l I
[ ]
[ I
[ ]
[]
( II
1 . p . E-8-8, f 5
2. p . E-8-15,
Plate 8 .6
3. p. E-8-16 to
p . E-8-33
4 . p . E-8-34
5 . p . E-8-37
6 . p . E-8-39 to
p. E-8-42
7. p. E-8-43 to
p. E-8-44
8 . p. E-8-45, f 3
9. p. E-8-46, f 4
p. E-8-50, t 6
10 . p. E-8-97 to
p. E·8-106
to
53
8. AES THETIC RESOURCES
Describe in detail Step 1 of the ~thodology to
produce the report on Aesthetic Resources .
Describe the designated "Talkeetna Lowlands" and
"Talkeetna River" landscape character types in the
text, and include photographs. Clarify the areas
designated ~'Chal i tna Moist Tundra Uplands" and the
"Tundra Uplands" and describe in detai 1 the 14
"Except i ona 1 Natura 1 Features" 1 i sted on Plate
8 .6 .
Define the slope terminology (steep, moderately
steep, gentle , flat, etc.) according to a degree
of slope (e.g., gentle slope = 10° to 20°).
Append a detailed discussion of the 11ethods,
assumptions~ and analysis used in developing the
viewer sensitivity categories and viewer types .
Append a detailed discussion of the methods,
assumptions, and analysis used in developing the
aesthetic value and absorption capability rating
system .
The "aesthetic value" and "absorpt i on capability''
rating co 1 umns do not appear to agree with the
11 c0111111ents 11 co 1 umn for the "Landscape Character
Types" of Wet Upland Tundra, Talkeetna Uplands,
Susitna Upland Terrace, and Tanana Ridge . Clarify
these discrepancies.
Append a detailed discussion of the ~nethods ,
assumptions. and analysis used i n developing the
co~osite rati ng system.
Append further definition of co.patibl e and incom-
patible aesthetic impact ratings.
Discuss significant viewpoints and viewshed areas
of the proposed dam and reservoir and the transmis-
sion line corridor .
Append detailed discussi on of the four aesthetic
mitigation categories. Types of studies, develop-
~~~ent practices , engineering and architectural
designs, landscaping, etc .• should be described.
11.
12.
54
Describe project-related activities, including
construction activities, for the relict channel in
sufficient detail to assess potential i~acts to
aesthetics.
De scribe details of development of the Phase I
Recreation Plan, incl ~~ing the trail, in sufficient
detail to assess potential impacts to aesthetics .
'r
li
I
If I
1r
1 if
I[ I
I[ I
[ I
I I
I[ I
I[
( I
( I
l I
l I
[ l
l ,I
1. p . E-9-8 to
p. E-9-22
2. p . E-9-8 to
p. E-9-22
3. p. E-9-23 to
p . E-9-35
4 . p. E-9-23 to
p . E-9-35
5 . p . E-9-23 to
p. E-9-35
6. p. E-9-29, t 6
7. p . E-9-30, t 4, to
p . E-9-31, t 4
8. p. E-9-34, 1 5
9. p . E-9-35. 1 6
10. p . E-9-37, t 3
11 . p . E-9-37, t 8
________________________________________________________ ...... 55
9. LAND USE PATTERNS
Discuss existing land values in the p•·oposed
project study area and along the entire transmission
1 i ne corridor.
Discuss future land status, future land use, and
future land •anagement of the lands without the
project within the project study area and the
entire transmission line corridor .
Discus s potential change in land values resulting
fro~ the construction and o~e r ation of the dam and
reserv~ir , access roads, and trans•ission lines .
Specifically address the effects of projected
land uses in wetlands and floodlands that would be
impacted by the development and operation of the
project.
Discuss the potential for induced land use changes
(development and activity) resulting fr011 the
deve 1 opment of a penaanent town site near the
Watana dam .
Clarify the term 11 profound alterations11 and discuss
such impacts in detail .
Quanti fy to the the extent and type of 1 and use
change and land value change to lands within the
project area and surrounding population centers.
Quantify the amount of acreage of agricultural
land affected.
Discuss transmission line •iti gation 11easures
further to include the types of .easures that will
be e~~~ployed, including specific U.S. Fish and
Wildlife right-of-way management plan techniques
that will be used.
Locate proposed agricultural land sales within the
project area, including trans•ission line corridors.
Discuss, in detail, the types of land use
controls applicable to the project lands and sur-
rounding study area.
12 .
13.
56
Describe project-related activities, including
construction activities, for the relict channel in
sufficient detail to assess potential impacts to
land use .
Describe detai 1 s of development of the Phase I
Recreation Plan , includi ng the trail, in sufficient
detail to assess potenti al impacts to land use .
[
1.
2.
3 .
4.
5.
6.
7.
8 .
9.
10 .
11 .
12.
57
10 . ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS, DESIGNS, AND ENERGY SOURCES
p. E-10-5, ' 3
p . E-10-8 , ' 1, to
p. E-10-12, ' 5
p. E-10-11, ' 1
p. E-10-12, 1 6, to
p . E-10-13, ' 4
p. E-10-13, ' 2-3
p. E-10-30, ' 3
p. E-10 -31, ' 6
p . E-10-31, § (c)
p. E-10-31 , ' 8
p . E-10-32 , ' 3, to
p . E-10-36, ' 7
p. E-10-34, ' 3
p. E-10-42, ' 2
Explain the technique used to adjust the criteria
weights.
Provide a brief description of land use and aesthetic
resources for the Chakachamna , Snow, and Keetna
sites.
Provide an estimate of the importance of the
Chakachatna River salmon spawning areas to the
commercial fisheries of Cook Inlet.
Provide a brief discussion of land use imp acts for
the Chakachamna, Snow, and Keetna sites and aesthetic
impacts for the Chakachamna and Snow sites.
Estimate the magnitude of the impacts of development
of the Chakachatna site, at the level of developm en t
likely to occur.
Provide the data and analysis us ed to determine
the minimum flows that will mitigate salmon spawning
impacts.
Provide the data and analysis that support the
requirement of no significant da i ly variations in
flow .
Provide a recommended action. The section should
also serve as a guide as to how the proposed
action was determined. A 1 tern at i ves shou 1 d be
presented in a comparable format, with the important
issues clearly defined.
Discuss the techniques used to give prime consider-
ation to cost and schedule control .
Provide a brief discussion of land use and aesthet i c
impacts for proper assessMent of the significance
of the impacts .
Provide an objective rating sche~e and sufficient
data to determine the importance of the fisheries
resource in each alternative route .
Describe the analysis scheme used to rate the
fisheries, streams, and stream vicinities for each
alternative .
13 . p. E-10-43, ' 1
14 . p. E-10-62, § (e)
15 . p . E-10-81, , 3, to
p. E-10-138 , t 2
16 . p. E-10-83, ' 1, to
' 5
17 . p. E-10-86 , ' 2
18 . p. E-10-87, '4
19 . pp . E-1 0-106
and E-10-116
58
Descr i be the surveys conducted along each alter-
native t r ansmission corridor.
Present the environmental data and rating scheme
for each of the alternatives.
Provide a brief discussion of land use and aesthetic
resource issues for each alternative electrical
energy source for adequate evaluation of the
alternatives .
Because the four major vegetation conrnunities
described in the text only cover 65% of the region
according to the text, clarify the text to account
for the vegetation types occurring on the rest of
area (percentages should be given). Specifically,
the vegetation types occurring over 35% of the
region are not identified, yet two of the four
major types together account for only 10% of the
region (i .e ., wet tundra occupies 7% and alpine
tund ra occupies 3%).
Clarify the discrepancy between the 700-HW facility
stated here and the assumpt ion of a 400-MW facility
earlier in the section .
Provide an estimate of the number of hectares that
would be removed annually as a result of mining
along with an estimate of time required for reclama-
tion .
Provide information on the socioeconomic environme nt
(e . g ., emp loyment, economics , population, land
values, accident preparedness of local services).
r
r
r
r
r
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
['
[
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
)
)
]
1
J
]
1
1
1
59
11 . LIST OF LITERATURE
Include adequate reference information for the following:
1. p. E-2-25, t 4
2. p. E-2-25, t 6
3. p. E-3-23, t 5
4 . p. E-3-60, 1 5
5. p. E-3-74, t 2
6 . p. E-3-176, t 2;
p. E-3-180 , 1 5;
p. E·3·188, t 2;
p. E-3-192, t 2
7. p. E-3-255, t 7
8 . p . E-3-292, t 4;
p . E-3-293, t 1;
p. E-3-293, 1 2
9. p. E-5-97
10 . p . E-7-36 , t 7
11. p. E-7-38, t 1
12. p. E-7-40, t 5
13 . p . E-7-42, t 2
14. p . E-7-43 , t 1
15 . p. E-7-52, t 4
16 . p . E-7-54, t 5
17. p. E-7-56, t 1
18. p. E-7-87, t 1
R&M (1902).
Dwight (1981).
Freethey and Scully (198C).
Wandard Stanford (1979).
Reingold (1968).
References omitted fr~ the list of literature,
as specifically indicated in the •ark-up copy of
ExhiMt E.
Miller and McAllister (1982).
The seven citations in these paragraphs.
Stephen R. Brauad & Associates (1982), cited on
p. E-5-89 .
The study attributed to John 0' Nei 11 (1978).
The River Basin Cooperative Study .
The BLM Denali Block Management Plan.
The Alaska Public Survey (1982).
"A 1975 University of Alaska outdoor recreation
study" and "1975 Outdoor Retreat ion Survey ,
L. Johnson, 1976 ."
The Matanuska-Susitna Borough Coastal Manageeent
Plan, Draft , 1982.
The University of Alaska Concept Plan Survey .
Division of Parks Priority Trails standard .
National Recreation & Park , Open Space Standards .
19 . Table E. 7.1
20. Table E.7 .8
21. Table E. 7. 9
22. Table E.7.10
23. Table E. 7.11
24. p . E-8-7, t 5
25 . p . E-8-116;
p . E-8-117
26. p. E-9-39 to
p. E-9-40
27 . Table 10 .6
60
Acres American, Inc., Oct., 1982 .
Sus itn;J Hydroe 1 ectri c Project, Land Use Report.
Frank Orth & Assoc. , 4/82.
Borough Planning Department, 10/21/82.
1970 Alaska Outdoor Recreation Plan.
Susitna River Basin Study, J . McNei 11, 11/78.
The cited study, Wahrhaftig (1965), should be
referenced in the Aesthetic References Se c tion of
the application.
All references )isted in the Aesthetic Resource s
References Section should be appropriately cited
within the written text of the application.
All referenc es listed in the Land Use References
Section should be appropriately cited within the
written text of the application.
Cite r eferences for information in this table .
[ .• [ll
[:.
[ll
(
[
[
[
[
[
[
[.
[
['.
1[:•
1£.
I[ •
1['.
[~