Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Before the FERC Application for License Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project 1997
..J HAlO november nineteen-hundred ninety-seven, BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR LICENSE FOR MAJOR WATER POWER PROJECT, 5 MEGAWATTS OR LESS REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC PROJECT NO. 11480 HAIDA CORPORAnON HYDABURG,ALASKA Prepared by HDR Engineering, Inc. 500 -108th Ave. NE, Suite 1200 Bellevue, W A 98004-5538 Copyright ® Haida Corporation, 1997. All rights reserved. This document, or parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form, for any purpose, without the prior written consent of the Haida Corporation. f\RL~S Alaska 1<",,',.;, .'~ L:I'I'lifl' & lnrUr1:lal:OD Scnioos :,i'>i":J .1')Ii.;illg, Suite 1)] : !: ii" llvitJencc Drive .\1' "'h!i'!, AK 99508-4614 Application for License Table ofContents REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC PROJECT NO. 11480 APPLICATION FOR LICENSE FOR MAJOR WATER POWER PROJECT, 5l\1EGAWATTS OR LESS TABLE OF CONTENTS Section INITIAL STATEMENT 1-1 EXHIBIT A -PROJECT DESCRIPTION A-I EXHmIT F -GENERAL DESIGN DRAWINGS F-l EXHIBIT G -PROJECT BOUNDARY MAPS G-l APPENDICES A B C D E F G Hydrology Data Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Fisheries and Aquatic Studies in the Reynolds Creek Drainage Additional Species of Interest in the Reynolds Creek Drainage Cultural Resources Report PennitlCertificationApplications Agency Consultation Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 FERC Project No. 11480 Application/or License Initial Statement INITIAL STATEMENT BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR LICENSE FOR A MAJOR WATER POWER PROJECT, 5 MEGAWATTS OR LESS 1. Haida Corporation applies to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for a license for the Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project (FERC Project No. 11480) as described hereinafter. 2. The location of the project is: State: Alaska County (Borough): Not in an organized county or borough Township or nearby town: Hydaburg (Prince of Wales Island) Stream or other body of water: Reynolds Creek 3. The exact name, address, and telephone number of the Applicant are: Haida Corporation P.O. Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 907/285-3721 4. The exact name, address and telephone number of each person authorized to act as agent for the Applicant in this application are: Mr. Charles Skultka, Sr. Mr. John E. Bnms Chairman, Board of Directors Resource Manager Haida Corporation Haida Corporation P.O. Box 89 P.O. Box 89 Hydaburg, AK 99222 Hydaburg, AK 99222 907/966-2574 907/285-3721 9071747-7619 (FAX) 907/285-3722 (FAX) Ms. Cynthia Pickering Mr. Duane Hippe Christianson Vice President 911 West 8th Ave., Suite 302 HDR Alaska Anchorage,AK 99501 2525 "C" Street. Suite 305 907/276-7735 Anchorage, AK 99503 907/253-2026 (FAX) 907/274-2000 907/274-2022 (FAX) Reynold~ Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 I-I FERC Project No, 11480 Applicationfor License Initial Statemellt Mr. Paul A. Berkshire Mr. Michael V. Stimac, Manager Project Manager Licensing & Environmental Services HD R Engineering, Inc. HDR Engineering, Inc. 500-108th Ave. NE, 500 -108th Ave. NE, Suite 1200 Suite 1200 Bellev1;le, WA 98004-5538 Bellevue, WA 98004-5538 425/453-1523 425/453-1523 425/453-71 07 (FAX 425/453-7107 (FAX) 5. The Applicant, Haida Corporation. was fonned under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act and is not claiming preference under section 7(a) of the Federal Power Act. 6.(i) The statutory or regulatory requirements of the State of Alaska that atIect the project as proposed with respect to bed and banks and the appropriation, diversion, and use of water for power purposes, and with respect to the right to engage in the business of developing, transmitting, and distributing power and in any other business necessary to accomplish the purposes of the license under the Federal Power Act. are presented in Table I-I. Table I-I also lists approvals not required under the Federal Power Act, but which the Applicant will seek if such actions are helpful for efficient and timely project development. It is intent of the Applicant to continue to consult with pennitting agencies and comply fully with applicable statutory and regulatory requirements. 6.(ii) The steps which the Applicant has taken or plans to take to comply with each of the laws cited in Table I-I are: • A Water Rights pennit application (LAS #19845) was submitted to the Alaska Department of Natillal Resources in July] 995. An amendment to the application was submitted in November 1997 (see Appendix F). • In accordance with Section 40 1 of the Clean Water Act, application must be made for certification from the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation that the project will comply with the Clean Water Act, the Alaska Water Quality Standards, and other applicable state laws. By agreement between the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Department of Environmental Conservation, application for a Department of Anny Pennit to discharge dredged or fill material into navigable waters under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act may also serve as application for State Water Quality Certification. An application for a Section 404 penni! was submitted to the COE in November 1997, which triggers the application for Water Quality Certification (see Appendix F). • A Section 404 Pennit is required from the COE per the Federal Clean Water Act if activities include discharge of dredge or fill materials into waters of the U.S and wetlands. The application was filed in November 1997 (see Appendix F). &-'}'nolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11-180 I-2 November 1997 Application for License Initial Statement • A Section 10 pennit is required from the COE per the Rivers and Harbors Act if the proposed project affects navigable waters. The application was filed in November 1997 (see Appendix F). • Consistency with the Alaska Coastal Management Program is required and the necessary review is conducted by the ADGc. An Alaska Coastal Project Questionnaire and Certification Statement was submitted to ADGC in November 1997 (see Appendix F). • A Fish Habitat Permit will be obtained from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game for instream work. The application was submitted in November 1997 (see Appendix F). • A utility easement is required from the Alaska Department of Natural Resources for the aerial crossing of Hetta Inlet by the transmission line. The Application for Right-of Way or Easement was submitted in November 1997 (see Appendix F). • An evaluation of potential project effects on historical, archeological, and cultural resources has been prepared. This evaluation has been submitted to the State Historic Preservation Office, the Commission, and other appropriate parties. TABLE 1-1 APPLICABLE PERMITS AND APPROVALS REQUIRED BY THE STATE OF ALASKA AND FEDERAL AGENCIES Permit or Approval Agency Statute or Regulation Status Pennitto appropriate public waters Alaska Dept. of Natural Resources 111 AAC 93.040 and III AAC 93.050 Application (LAS # 19845) submitted in July 1995. An amendment was submitted in November 1997. 40 I Water Quality Certification Alaska Dept. of Environmental Conservation Federal Clean Water Act Application was made as part of Section 404 Permit Application. Section 404 Pennit Section 10 Pennit U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers (COE) Federal Clean Water Act; Rivers and Harbors Act Application was submitted in November 1997. CZMA Consistency Detennination Alaska Dept. of Governmental Coordination (ADGC) Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) Coastal Project Question naire and Certification Statement submitted in November 1997. Fish Habitat Penn it Alaska Dept. of Fish & Game AS 16.05.840 Fishway Act; AS 16.05.870 AnadromousFish Act Application submitted in November 1997. Utility Easement Alaska Dept. of Natural Resources AS 38.05.850 Application submitted in November 1997. Cultural Preservation Approval State Historic Preservation Office AS 41.35 Alaska Historic Preservation Act; AS 41.35.090 Notice Required of Private Persons To be sought. Reynolds Creek H.vdroeleCfric Project November 1997 1-3 FERC Project No. 11480 Application for License Initial Statement 7.(i) Proposed installed generating capacity: Phase 1 -1.5 MW and Phase 2 -3.5 MW for a total of 5 MW. 7.(ii) 0 existing dan1 [gJ unconstructed dam 0 existing dam, major modified project 8. No lands of the United States will be affected by the proposed project. 9. Construction of the project is planned to start within 24 months, and is planned to be completed 'Within 48 months, from the date of issuance of the license. 10. The Applicant is seeking benefits under Section 210 of Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURP A). This intent was stated in the cover letter dated January 26, 1995, transmitting the First-Stage Consultation Package and Study Plans. The Applicant's position was also presented in Scoping Document 2 (SD2) (issued in July 1997) on page 1 and also on page C-11 of SD2 in response to a comment letter, and appeared on page 1-4 of the Draft Application for License and pages 4 and 19 of the draft Prelimiminary Draft Environmental Assessment promulgated via a letter dated August 20, 1997. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11-180 1-4 November 1997 Application/or License Initial Statement STATEMENT OF APPLICANT IDENTITY AND POLITICAL SUBDIVISION INVOLVEMENT (§4.32(a» (1) The sole Applicant for this project is: Haida Corporation P.O. Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 (2)(i) The entire project is located on the Prince of Wales Island, Alaska. There are no federal facilities that 'Will be used by the project. (2)(ii)(A) The Project is not located in any city, town, or similar political subdivision. (2)(ii)(B) There is no city, town, or similar local subdivision of 5,000 people located within 15 miles of the Project diversion. (2)(iii) No irrigation district, drainage district, or similar special purpose subdivision owns, operates, maintains, or uses any project facilities or any federal facilities that will be used by the project. (2)(iv) The City of Hydaburg. Alaska, may be interested in. or affected by the application. (3)(v) Indian tribes that may be affected by the project include Haida Corporation and Sealaska Corporation. This application is executed in the State of Alaska by: Haida Corporation P.O. Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 The following exhibits are filed herewith under the FERC Regulations pursuant to 18 CFR. Subpart G, Paragraph 4.61, and are hereby made a part ofthis application: Exhibit A -Project Description Exhibit F -General Design Drawings Exhibit G -Project BOlmdary Maps Appendices Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment, in lieu of the Exhibit E. Environmental Report Reynolds Creek If.vdroelectric PfYHect November 1997 1-5 FERC Project No. 11480 Applicationfor License initial Statement VERIFICATION WIJ5HINV1f/N ) ST ATE OF Jtt:A:~I<:A: ) ss. ) <2.h Y?-R.I es S k, ..... I+1fJ? ~""M~being duly sworn, depose and say that the contents of this application are true to the best of his knowledge and belief. The tmdersigned Applicant has signed the application this (772:.. day of tv' ~ ,1997. Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public in and for the State of Alaska this 17fl1. day of !1/&v'5N'l f3£l?-: , 1997. /ilL /M Notary Public, residing at h: ihyd\reynolds\licenselinitia/.doc Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 1-6 FERC Project No. /1480 Exhibit A -Project Description EXHIBIT A PROJECT DESCRIPTION TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1.0 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................A-l 1.1 General Project Setting and Location ...........................................................A-l 1.2 Drainage Area .......................................................................................A-l 2.0 PROJECT FEATURES ...............................................................................A-4 2.1 Diversionllntake ....................................................................................A-4 2.2 Penstock ..............................................................................................A-4 2.3 Powerhouse ..........................................................................................A-5 2.4 Tailrace ...............................................................................................A-5 2.5 Access Roads ........................................................................................A-5 2.6 Transmission Line/Switchyard ...................................................................A-6 3.0 MODE OF OPERATION ............................................................................A-8 4.0 ESTIMATED PROJECT COST ....................................................................A-9 5.0 PURPOSE OF PROJECT ...........,................................................................A-9 LIST OF TABLES Table Page A-I Summary of Project Features .......................................................................................... A-7 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page A-I Average Monthly Flows ................................................................................................. A-2 A-2 Annual Flow Duration Curve .......................................................................................... A-3 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 A-i FERC Project No. 11480 Exhibit A -Project Description EXHIBIT A -PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 General Project Setting and Location The proposed Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project site is located on the southwest side of Prince of Wales Island in southeast Alaska approximately 10 air miles east of Hydaburg (Exhibit F, Figure F-l). Specifically, the Project is located in T77S, R85E, in Sections 3 and 4 (Exhibit F, Figure F-2). Reynolds Creek is a high-gradient stream that originates in the mountains to the north and east of Copper Harbor and flows to the sea at Copper Harbor through a steep narrow canyon that widens with decreasing gradient from about the 100 foot elevation. The project would consist of a small diversion dam and intake at the outlet of Rich's Pond (Lake Mellen), a bypass pipe, a steel penstock, a powerhouse, access roads, and an overhead 34.5 kV transmission line. The project would be constructed in two phases. In the first phase, the diversion/intake, penstock, access roads, transmission line and a 1.5 MW powerhouse will be constructed. In the second phase, the powerhouse will be expanded and an additional 3.5 MW unit will be installed, increasing the project capacity to 5 MW. General drawings of project features are presented in Exhibit F. With the exception of the area of Hetta Inlet affected by the aerial crossing of the transmission line, all project lands are privately held by the Sealaska and Haida Corporation. Haida Corporation intends to obtain a real property interest for all project lands through a negotiated settlement with the Sealaska Corporation. An Application (see Appendix F) for Right-of-Way or Easement has been submitted to the Alaska Department of Natural Resources for the aerial transmission line crossing of Hetta Inlet. 1.2 Drainage Area The Reynolds Creek drainage area, consisting of 5.2 square miles, is primarily located in T76S, R84E, Section 36; T76S, R85E, Sections 31, 32, 33; T77S, R85E, Sections 1,2,3,4, 10, 11, 12; and T77S, R86E, Sections 6, 7 on Prince of Wales Island, Alaska. The elevation in the basin varies from the natural Lake Mellen elevation of 876 feet mean sea level (fmsl) to a high of approximately 2,800 feet and is generally oriented in a southwesterly direction. The basin includes three lakes: Lake Marge (1,750 finsl approx.); Summit Lake (1,318 finsl); and Lake Mellen (876 finsl). The mean basin elevation is approximately 1,600 feet. The drainage basin surrounding Lake Mellen is primarily steep with slopes averaging about 50%. The basin is generally forested with areas of muskeg near the lakes and tributary streams and exposed bedrock outcroppings in the higher elevations. The estimated average annual flow of Reynolds Creek at the point of diversion is 57 cfs. The average monthly flows and annual flow duration curve are shown in Figures A-I and A-2. A derivation of the long-term hydrology and annual and monthly flow duration curves are presented in Appendix A. Reynolds Creek HydroelectriC Project November 1997 A-I FERC Project No. 11480 FIGURE A-1 Reynolds Creek Average Monthly Flows 100,------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------, 90 f 80 70 60 i ~ 50 ~ 40 20 10 o Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep --------------- --------- --------------------------- ---------------------- ---------------- ---------------------------- ----- FIGURE A-2 Reynolds Creek Annual Flow Duration Curve 350 ------------------------f---.--._....-----300 _.250 _.-200 l \~ ~ II. . . ....... . ..150 ......100 ~ " I'---- 50 .............. o o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Exceedance (%) Exhibit A -Project Description 2.0 PROJECT FEATURES Project features are summarized in Table A-I and described below. 2.1 DiversionlIntake A diversion will be constructed near the outlet of Rich's Pond, a small sub-basin at the outlet of Lake Mellen. The crest of the dam will be at elevation 876 finsl. The diversion structure will be grouted riprap with a concrete core cutoff wall. The crest length of the structure will be approximately 20 feet and the section will act as a weir with uncontrolled overflow when the lake is above elevation 876 fmsl (Exhibit F, Figure F-3). The backwater from the dam will inundate Rich's Pond and interconnect to the existing surface elevation of Lake Mellen. Access to the diversion will be provided primarily by a soon to be constructed logging road with a very short stretch of new road (approximately 100 feet). The intake structure will consist of a small concrete box-type of structure located on the left side of the diversion. The front of the intake will be protected by a trash rack. Stoplog slots will be located downstream of the trashrack to provide a means to dewater the intake during periods of maintenance. A steel transition piece will connect the intake to the penstock. A small valve house will be located immediately downstream of the intake. The valve house will house the penstock shutoff valve and operator as well as an uninterruptiblepower supply to ensure fail-safe operation of level control elements and flow sensors. A bypass pipe will pass directly through the center of the diversion structure. This bypass pipe will provide uninterrupted flow to the bypass reach downstream of the diversion. The bypass pipe will be oversized for the required flows and is currently estimated to be 12 inches in diameter. The inlet of the bypass pipe will be protected by a bar structure to prevent debris from entering. The outlet of the bypass pipe will be equipped with either an orifice plate or valve which will be used to regulate discharge flows. 2.2 Penstock An approximate 3,200-foot-Iong welded steel penstock will convey water from the intake to the powerhouse (Exhibit F, Figure F-4). The penstock will have a diameter of 42 inches corresponding to a maximum flow rate of 90 cfs. The penstock will be of above-ground construction on simple saddle supports approximately 40 feet on-center. The penstock will have an epoxy lining and coating to provide corrosion protection. Thrust blocks will be provided at changes in alignment and grade as well as at the powerhouse. The penstock will have a leak detection system installed which will automatically close the intake pipeline shutoff valve in the event that a leak occurs. The penstock will cross from the left to the right side of Reynolds Creek approximately 500 feet upstream ofthe powerhouse. At this location, the pipe will have a clear span of about 40-50 feet. A concrete footing/thrust block will be poured on each side with a formed cradle to accept the pipe. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 A-4 November 1997 Exhibit A -Project Description A bifurcation will be installed on the penstock directly above the powerhouse to accommodate the addition of a second turbine and generator unit. 2.3 Powerhouse The powerhouse will be located in plan at the approximate location of the anadromous barrier of Reynolds Creek. The powerhouse will sit on an excavated bench at or about elevation 110 finsl, which is approximately 20 feet above the ordinary high water mark of Reynolds Creek. The actual design elevation will be determined once geotechnical investigations are completed in conjunction with final design. The site will be excavated in anticipation of Phase 2 construction space requirements. The powerhouse will be an insulated, pre-engineered metal building on a concrete slab foundation. The powerhouse will initially contain one 1,500 kW horizontal impulse turbine/generator set, flywheel, inlet piping, guard valve, switchgear, and controls. Centerline of the turbine will be at approximately elevation 115.0 finsl. A second 3,500 kW turbine and generator unit will be added in Phase 2. Initial (Phase 1) space requirements are approximately 40 feet by 40 feet. Final (Phase 2) space requirements are approximately 40 feet by 100 feet (Exhibit F, Figure F-5). 2.4 Tailrace A tailrace channel will return project flows back to Reynolds Creek as near as possible to the anadromous barrier. A rip-rapped lined tailrace channel will extend about 80 feet from the powerhouse back to Reynolds Creek. The high gradient and lack of pools in the tailrace channel will act as a barrier to upstream fish migration. It is proposed to have the tailrace return to Reynolds Creek at the base of the falls where the creek daylights from the canyon at the approximate location of the base of the existing log jam at about elevation 90 finsl. This location is approximately 50 feet downstream of the location of the anadromous barrier identified by the agencies. This location was selected because it would return the water to the creek with the least amount of construction-related impacts to the stream. 2.5 Access Roads A limited amount of new access road will be needed to construct the project. The major landowner, Sealaska Corporation, has announced intentions to log in the drainage basin below Lake Mellen in 1997 and has already begun to construct a road system to access the area. By the time the Reynolds Creek project begins construction, the logging road system will be complete. It is estimated that less than 500 feet of new road will be required to access both the powerhouse site and the diversion site. Access roads constructed in conjunction with the project will be of the same design as the primary logging roads. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 A-5 FERC Project No. 11480 ExhibitA -Project Description 2.6 Transmission Line/Switchyard The switchyard at the powerhouse will consist of a pad-mounted disconnect switch and a pad mounted step-up transformer. An overhead 34.5 kV transmission line would follow the access road from the powerhouse and existing logging roads along the edge of Copper Harbor north along Hetta Inlet. Approximately 3.3 miles from the powerhouse, the transmission line would make an aerial crossing of Hetta Inlet via Jumbo Island. In conjunction with final design, a submarine cable crossing of Hetta Inlet will be evaluated as an alternative to the proposed overhead route. The line would then follow the existing road to a point approximately 1.4 miles northeast of the town of Hydaburg where it will connect with an existing powerline. Total length of the transmission line will be approximately 10.9 miles. Except for the aerial crossing of Hetta Inlet, the poles would be designed as tangent line structures on about 300 foot centers. Design of the line will also incorporate the latest raptor protection guidelines. Collision avoidance devices will be installed on the line at appropriate locations to protect migratory birds. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 A-6 November 1997 Exhibit A -Project Description TABLE A-I SUMMARY OF PROJECT FEATURES Location T77S, R85E, in Sections 3 and 4, Prince of Wales Island, Alaska, near Copper Harbor, 10 miles east of the community of Hydaburg. Approximate latitude 55 0 14' and longitude 132°36'. Intake Concrete box type located on left side of diversion with trashrack. Diversion 20-ft.long, concrete weir, crest elevation =0 876 fins!. Reservoir Name: Lake Mellen Surface Area: 150 acres Control Elevation: 876.0 Min. Elevation: 872.0 Usable Storage: 600 acre-feet between elevation 876.0 and 872.0 Penstock Total Length: 3,200 ft. Diameter: 42 inches Material: Steel Components: Epoxy exterior coating, epoxy interior coating ow Continuation Continuous bypass constructed through diversion structure. Powerhouse Phase 1 Phase 2 Total Size: 40 ft. by 40 ft. 40 ft. by 60 ft. 40 ft by 100 ft. Number of Units: One One Two Type ofTurbines: Impulse Impulse - Turbine Flow: 30 cfs 60 cfs 90 cfs Gross Head: 760 ft. 760 ft. - Net Head: 758 ft. 753 ft. - Power: 2000HP 4700HP 6700HP Generator: 1,500kW 3,500kW 5,000kW Auxiliary Unit 1-50 kW Diesel Generator Transmission Line Voltage: 34.5 kV (design) Length: 10.9 miles Type: Overhead on timber poles, tangent line construction Access Roads Length: 500 ft. total Average Annual Energy Initial Load: 1,600 MWh (Hydaburg only) Phase I: 11,500 MWh (energy production at capacity) Phase 2: 23,500 MWh (energy production at capacity) i Estimated Project Cost $7,400,000 (1997 dollars, Phase 1 construction only) $2,500,000 (1997 do liars, Phase 2 construction only) Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 A-7 FERC Project No. 11480 ExhibitA -Project Description 3.0 MODE OF OPERATION The Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project will operate almost entirely in a run-of-the-river mode, generating electrical energy based on system load and available streamflow. During normal operation, water will be continuously released into the bypass reach through the low level outlet of the diversion. Any additional water up to the desired turbine flow will be diverted through the powerhouse and returned to Reynolds Creek near the anadromous fish barrier. Turbine flow will range from a minimum of about 5 cfs to a maximum of 90 cfs depending on the electrical load of the system and the installed capacity. Lake Mellen will be used to synchronize the daily variations in electrical load with the daily variations in inflow. In all but extremely dry hydrologic periods, the water balance of upper and lower Reynolds Creek will be the same on a weekly, if not daily, time frame. A typical mode of operation for an impulse-style turbine is to set up the turbine such that when generation is interrupted for any reason, the deflectors are automatically swung into position to divert flow away from the rotating water wheeL This is a standard method used to maintain flow through an impulse turbine until a plant operator can assess the reason for the plant shutdown. Flows through the turbine would be reduced to a minimum level (5 cfs) when the deflectors are in place. If, as is often the case, the unit could be restarted within a short amount of time, the deflectors would be left in place until the unit is restarted. If, however, it is clear that the turbine will be out of service for an extended period, flow through the jets would be slowly shut-off. Three likely control modes are probable for the project. In the first control mode, the project would be responsible for governing system frequency. As such, the project would be required to react to load swings ("load following") by increasing or decreasing output from the project. This would be the control mode in the early years when the project is used to meet the needs of Hydaburg exclusively. Once the project becomes an integrated resource in the larger Prince of Wales Island electrical system, it is probable that the project would see an additional two modes of operation, "block" loading and "level control". When block loaded, the project would operate at a desired output level and, therefore, relatively constant flow leveL When under level control, the project would be operated to maximize the generation from the available water while maintaining a constant pool elevation in Lake Mellen. In this case, inflow into Lake Mellen will be equal to outflow. In these latter two modes, governing, or control, of the system frequency would be performed by one of the other generating resources in the interconnected system. When the project is operating in either a load following or block loaded mode, storage will be used when the turbine flow required to meet the load is in excess of inflow. When the turbine flow required to meet the load is less than the lake inflow, storage will be increased or, if the lake elevation is at the spillway crest, the excess water will be spilled. Due to the limited storage available in Lake Mellen, the length of time and the frequency of which the project could operate in these modes is a function of the amount of inflow to Lake Mellen and the magnitude of the load to be met. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 A-8 November 1997 Exhibit A -Project Description 4.0 ESTIMATED PROJECT COST The estimated cost of the project for Phase 1 is $7,400,000. This cost includes construction, permits, engineering, administration, and contingencies. The estimated cost of expanding the powerhouse and adding an additional unit is $2,500,000. 5.0 PURPOSE OF PROJECT The purpose of the Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project is to generate renewable power and energy to serve the community of Hydaburg, Alaska. The project will ultimately provide power and energy to the remainder of Prince of Wales Island. The development of this renewable energy project will replace existing diesel powered generation facilities on the island. The replacement of these facilities will initially reduce diesel consumption by 115,000 gallons per year. When the project is fully utilized it will reduce diesel consumption by approximately 1.6 million gallons per year. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 A-9 FERC Project No. 11480 Drawing F-l F-2 F-3 F-4 F-5 Exhibit F -General Design Drawings EXHIBIT F GENERAL DESIGN DRAWINGS TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT LOCATION AND VICINITY MAP PROJECT SITE PLAN INTAKE SITE PLAN AND SECTIONS PENSTOCK PROFILE AND SUPPORT DETAILS POWERHOUSE SITE PLAK AND SECTIONS Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Prr4ect November /997 F-i FERC Project No. J1480 ARCTIC OCEAN 'I' 4 " ALASKA \ Q~&7 %~~~,"a,(, «-" ~ ~/ ~O' (1:)'" is o~ ~\ ,.,-:;:::::. 0-.£:;,AA~RA<;Ec;::::l d:!// HOllis! 1Ir/ A ~ . "" f'\ sl '\ "'\\. Crolg "-II 1(" \\ ;,~ PACIFIC r ~ ..ry -< ".., 'h~I' ':tl Ill-,,""'\... I _ VI "v- LOCATION MAP THIS DRAWING IS A PART OF THE APPLICATION FOR UCENSE MADE BY THE UNDERSIGNED THIS 24-'TH DAY OF NO'IIEMBER. 1997'~1!~ oF" _ v A ~'l/:)." '\ /'\. i..c:ICAnON ) OCEAN \t., ~ VICINITY MAP HAIDA CORPORATlON APPLICATlON fOR LICENSE REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC PROJECT NO. 11480 PROJECT LOCA TlON AND VICINITY MAP EXHIBIT F-l -'no. Inc.HDR EnQin",v•• FERC DWG. NO. L..J en 00 n:: Lake Mellen COPPER HARBOR T 76 S T 77 S NOTES: 1. CONTOURS INCLUDING HORIZONTAL AND VERl1CAL INFORMA110N WERE OBTAINED USING BLACK AND WHITE DIAPOSI1lVES FLOWN IN 1991 AT AN APPROXIMATE SCALE OF 1:72,000 OR 1" = 6,000' AT DAM AND POWERHOUSE SITES CONVENTIONAL SURVEY METHODS WERE USED TO OBTAIN 2' CONTOUR INTERVALS. 2. CONTOUR INTERVALS LOCATED EVERY 15 FT. 1 _ 500" THIS DRAWING IS A PART OF THE APPLICA 1iON FOR LICENSE: MADE BY THE UNDERSICNED THIS 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER. 1997m.J!~ HAIDA CORPORA nON APPLICA nON FOR LICENSE REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC PROJECT NO. 11480 PROJECT SITE PLAN EXHIBIT F-2 HDR En Inc. FERC DWG. NO. ----- ------ TRASHRACK INTAKE STRUCTURE -- ~ -"-- ~ ----. ------------\. ---_.- _.------_ ---- BUTTERFLY /. VALVE GROUTED RIPRAP 12". MIN. FLOW PIPE OR1F1CE aeo 880 / EL. 877.0 "/ ~y /// / "'l / ) / / / // / / / / / / / / / / / / --0>>. ./ / 0_ PENSTOCK GROOT HOLE---L (TW) -. INTAKE DOWNSTREAM ELEVA TlON \1\1".1'-0" STEEL PENSTOCK AIR VENT IN STREAM 1NI'Il-l PLATE "J BUTTERFLY VALVE !,iIN. POet. 874.5 (APR.-MAy)-.i MIN. POet. 872.0 (JUN.-MAR.) TRASHRACK 860 PENSTOCK ~~~,~o9N CD INTAKE SITE PLAN \14"=1'-0" 'Il-lIS DRAINING IS A PART OF 'Il-lE APPLICAnON FOR UCENSE MADE BY 'Il-lE UNDERSIGNED 'Il-lIS 24'1l-l DAY OF NO\IEIIIBER. 1997. m/~ GROUTED RIPRAP HAIDA CORPORA11 ON APPLICA110N FOR LICENSE12". MINIMUM INSTREAM FLOW PIPE 1NI'Il-l S"O ORIFICE PLATE REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC PRO.£CT NO, 11480 INTAKE SITE PLAN AND SECTIONS EXHIBIT F-3 , Inc. FERC DWG. NO. ~H' ! IfFa:T GROUT HOLE k.-uJ rFa:T1 Yi,-.. 1"-0'"~~~·~o9N· ED --- -------- ---- ~-~ ~-1000 , --. r CREST I I EL 676.0 900 I DAM INTAlE I I ----1-.....itrr ! I [ i---r-----I ! -~~~---800 --- ' ~" 700 I ! , I[ ; !I --------~ ~ 600 ..J ~~~ --.--------~- VI ~ ~ ~ ~---~~-~~t::l 500 -:----i----~~ c-- u.. ~ ,~E~'i ~)~ "" ~! '[ Iz I / ~ I~ 400 <{ I I EK/1 iREI :tN?LDS C1> i I AN D DRAIN V LVEli.J II I I..J li.J I-1 -~ L._-r300 . --I-~I jI ! I I ~ I "'I~~-.. ----~-200 I I I I ~--100 ---i 0 I :----I . I-- ~~-- I I l I POWERHQ SE \ II - I ~Io; 1 ~~~ 0 0 ... <> 0 0 ...- 0 '" ... .... 0 0 ...,., <>0 ...... <>0 ... of) 0 <>... '" 0 0 ... .... <> ""... <Xl 8 ....,. 0 0 ... 0- 0 0 ... = 0 0 ... N- <> 0 ...,.,- 0 <> ......- 0 0 ... '"- "" 0 ... '"- 0 0 ... ....- <><>... '"- 0 0 + '"- 0 0 ... 0.,. 0 "" ....,. 0 0 + .... .... <><>...,.,... 0 "" ... ... N <><>......, .... "" ""... '"... 0 <> <I.... '" <>0 ... "' " 0 0 ... '"... <>"" ... <>., 0 0 + r; PENSTOCK PROFILE (IN FEET) 1"=100' 42"~ PENSTOCK 4:n. PENSTOCK THIS DRAWING IS A PART OF' THE APPLICATION F'OR UC1::NSE MADE BY THE UNDERSIGNED THIS 24TH DAY OF' NOVEMBER. 1997, CONCRETE PENSTOCK SUPPORT ~/~ HAIDA CORPORATION APPLICATION FOR LICENSE REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC PRO.£CT NO. 11480 ROCK BOLT T(TYI') !'EET PENSTOCK PROFILE AND SUPPORT DETAILS ~ 8 I EXHIBIT F-4\II" -1'-0' Inc. FERC DWG. NO. <4-0 j FEET TYPICAL PENSTOCK SUPPORTS ~ v." • to-O·y."=,'-o· '~ 100 I 210 !'EET ," = 100' ~6'0 ~ % ~ % ~ ~'" \ILfL ~ 30 --- TAILRACE APPROX. EL 100,0 APPROX, REYNOlDS CREEK El, 90,0 SECTION THROUGH POWERHOUSE SECTION THROUGH W=I'-O· Y."=1'-0· I I / // /1"IIrTRIBUTARY /0;:7 ' ______ ACCESS ROAD o '" POWERHOUSE SITE PLAN '"=40' ~ ~ '' POWERHOUSE 90"± -" ... 'b ~ ....'" ..... 210 160 APPROX, EL 110,0 ORIGINAL CROUND LINE \ /-----,---_/ ~Ili\'Silll!\Sl' ;~S~o9N ED ~ I 'iFtET MI." *" 1'-0·' 40 80 FEETkt;Iwd ! I I" = 40' THIS DRAWING IS A PART OF THE APPLICATION FOR LICENSE MADE BY THE UNDERSIGNED THIS 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1997, // L..L-. ~I'-~ HAIDA CORPORA nON APPLICA nON FOR LICENSE REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC PROJECT NO. 11480 POWERHOUSE SITE PLAN AND SECTIONS EXHIBIT F-5 HDR FERC OWG. NO. Exhibit G -Project Boundary EXHIBITG PROJECT BOUNDARY MAPS TABLE OF CONTENTS Drawing G-l G-2 PROJECT BOUNDARY, SHEET 1 OF 2 PROJECT BOUNDARY, SHEET 2 OF 2 Reynold\' Creek Hydroelectric Pr~iecl November 1997 G-i FERC Project No. 11480 F,ivt1"" POINT A. 11 E IN PO!N T AT EXlS11NG PO\\ER UNE POWER PLANT .-I ,0;0 BEGINNING AT POINT A N. 1,238,643.86 E. 2,865.954.01 AN AREA aOUNOED BY LINES 50' TO THE LEFT AND '''~/~~ ,00 LEXISTING ACCESS ROAD 31132 T 76-5 ~ 77 S ~l! ~ co co 0:: 0:: THIS DRAWING IS A PART OF THE APPLICATION FOR 1 76 5 33 1 77 S City of Hydaburg 7 18 RIGHT OF 11-iE FOLLOIllNG DESCRIBED CENTERLINE; N.12'7'20"W. 270' N.e'·57'OO"E. 1200' N.37'J,'1S'£. 650' N.62'41'09"E. 600' N,67"'9'09·E. 2300' N.84'9'2'·E. 900' N.87'41'31"E. sao' N.43"22'26"£, 400' N,70'5S'04"E, 1600' N.8YOZ·18"[, 150' N.63"9'SO'£, SSO' 5.51"30'06"[ 6SO' N,68"24'52"E. 1600' 5.81"47'36"E 360' N.83"31'ZI"E. 6SO' 5.61'03'3S"E. 1400' N.51'08'10'"!:. 15SO' N.73'S'I'"E. 6100' N.S5"29'02"E. 3SO' 5.83'7"5"E. 1100' N,4715'oo"E, 300' 5.56'45'59'[. 600" N.72"54'22'"!:. 700' S,05'O::rzS"E. 4SO' N.67"3S'OI"E, 1500' S.,S'S1'SO"W. 1800' N.64"SS'06"£' 700' 5,01 "OS'04"£ 13SO" 5.14"39'13"E. ISO' 5,21 "OS'49"E. 1900' 5,64'46'II"E, 7SO' 5.03'07'27"£. 10SO' S.49'07'36"£' 350' 5.54"2S'06"E. 550' 5.71"42'26'£. 750' 5,43'32'09"E. 7SO" N.6S"39'29'E. 950' 5.22'54'20"E. 14SO' 5,82'36'04"r. 450' 5.12"35'08"E. 1750' N,67"04'11'"!:, 350' 5,34'5'25"E, 1050' N.45"46'18'E. SOO' 5.79'48'30"(. I1SO' N.15"27'31'"!:. 1200' N.64"08'52'E. 1000' N.17'OI'32'W. 400' N.84"07'34"E, 1550' N.30'43'J7"(. 550' 5.71 "08'32"E. 200' N,54'SS'47"E, 1100' N.78'38' 4g'E. 700' N,7I'35'3",£. 1650' N.59'04'39"E, 750' 1<I,56'3"09'"!:, 500' S,71 '40'39"E, 1350' N.71 '5S'36"E. 750' 1'1,37"01 'o1'w, 416,44.'i8 N.69'S3'01"E. 600' 1" TO POINT B AT THE POWERHOUSE SITE N. 1,237,348.S4 E, Z,90e, 729.18 TH£N S,43'S1·31"W. 50' 5.46"23'59"£. 260' N,43'51'31"£, 175' N.46"23'59"W. 260' S.43'SI'31"W, 125' TO POINT 8, THEN FROW POINT C AT THE POWERHOUSE SITE 1'1, E. AN RIGHT N.43'36'01"E, 290,36' 5.64'50'56"E, 408.71' N.70"03'31'"!:. 331.00' N.43'9'«.8"E. S08,S7' N.78"31'47'"!:. 942.00' N,89'9'OI"W. 377,16' TO P~NT 0 AT THE INTAK£ SITE 1'1, 1,238,032.64 E, 2,911,460.10 11-iEN S.OO'41·00"W 50' 5,89' 9'Ol "W, 34.66' N,S2"26'52"E. 44.aa' DUE EAST 28J'± TO CONTOUR 885 TliEN FOLLOW CONTOUR AROUND RICH'S POND AND LAKE t.iEl.LEN TO POINT E N. 1,238,209.59 £. 2,911,815.61 TliEN OU£ WEST 190' lHEN S,52"26'52"W. 208.28' S.00"41'OO·W, SO' ra POINT 0 , ~ 1000' MADE BY THE UNDERSlGNED THIS 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1997. ?;n/~ HAIDA CORPORA nON APPUCA nON FOR LICENSE REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC PROJECT NO. 11480 PROJECT BOUNDARY, SHEET 1 OF 2 EXHIBIT G-1 Inc. FERC DWG, NO. , .... ,,, '1 6 15 I 16 PROPOSED 34.5 ~v7 N~t I ! (> 61 J /(J))J{(I('l'RANSr.IISS10N LINe: . ,,_:' (~I~~~~~~-~(((;))) 31132 Hetia Inlet "'" ~ T 76 S ----~~--------~~~--------------~+-------~~~~--~----~--~~ T 77 S WI W '<T i,{") DO co o::lO:: 6l ~ T 76 $ 150~ ~)(' I ~,~" ~la~0 THE F'ORIA APPLICATION UCENSE :2.0~-~ ~~"'/, .~ ~DE~SIGNED THIS 24TH DAY OF' NOVEMBER. 'SO~:::---~,-=" / )'/:;:::::-//' ~ 9 / ..r?~ 1/ L L •600~ .... , <:fJ / // ~ Y'/J.~~ ....., '-................ _-' ,'V ..,"-P d> & '.... I ..... ,\ ' ,':l ,'b .... '1 \.-LOGGING HAlDA CORPORATION ROAD (TYF) APPLICATION FOR LICENSEI REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT . FERC PROJECT NO. 11480 PROJECT BOUNDARY, SHEET 2 OF 2 EXHIBIT G-2 FERC DWG. NO. 9 7 18 16 18117 1000 t 000 2000 FEETU ~ ; ! ,~ • 1000' Application for License APPENDIX A HYDROLOGY DATA November 1997 Re;vnolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Prq;ect No. J /480 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 Hydrology Data November 1997 Hydrology Data TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION LIST OF FIGURES Reynolds Creek Hourly Inflow -September 1 -December 10, 1995 Reynolds Creek Hourly Inflow -March 30 -August 31, 1995 Reynolds Creek Water Year 1952 -.Daily and Average Monthly Flows Reynolds Creek Water Year 1953 -Daily and Average Monthly Flows Reynolds Creek Water Year 1954 -Daily and Average Monthly Flows Reynolds Creek Water Year 1955 -Daily and Average Monthly Flows Reynolds Creek Water Year 1956 -Daily and Average Monthly Flows Reynolds Creek Water Year 1983 -Daily and Average Monthly Flows Reynolds Creek Water Year 1984 -Daily and Average Monthly Flows Reynolds Creek Water Year 1985 -Daily and Average Monthly Flows Reynolds Creek Annual Flow Duration Curve Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -October Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -November Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -December Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -January Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -February Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -March Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -April Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -May Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -June Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -July Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -August Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -September November 1997 -1-Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 Hydrology Data INTRODUCTION Streamflow data has been recorded by the USGS at two locations on Reynolds Creek. USGS gage no.15081995, which was located near the outlet of Lake Mellen and had a drainage area of 5.2 square miles, operated from July 1982 through September 1985. USGS gage no. 15082000, which was located just downstream of the proposed powerhouse location and had a drainage area of 5.7 square miles, operated from June 1951 through September 1956. An eight year period for the project was obtained combining the flow records of these two gages. A drainage area correction was applied to the data from gage 15082000. This data is presented graphically in the figures of this Appendix. Approximately 9 months of hourly flow data was recorded at the diversion site in 1995. This data is also included in this Appendix. Since this data was for an incomplete water year, it was not included in the simulated long-term record. In 1997, the Applicant and the USGS entered into a cooperative agreement to re-establish gage no. 15081995 at the outlet to Lake Mellen for water year 1998 which began October 1, 1997. November 1997 -1-Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 Reynolds Creek Hourly Inflow Sept 1~Dec 10, 1995 200 ~-r----r---. ~-~~.-...--I---I, l---l---J--I ~--+·-l-+-1__1 __ --j.--+-+H-+---l----l180 +- _..+--+ .-·l-.-\-~._\.--.j_.-.\--.-...\---J-----..III U------J..-I.-Y 1'L -+-1-\ -+--+-~+----H----.J 140 ._-_... -_.. 160 +-~~.- +---l-----lJf-llII'--I-+- fOO j-I-I H\-t +-~++f-. . ..-I 80"-1 I I .l-I---+---+---~Ji----+--+~-~~\ 60 +-+---1-1-1---.~ _.. -----~-----~ -1--+----+ 40 +--I I f-+------~ - -.-..--- 20.~' , -..-..---1-----1---+ ~ l---l--~.-~-~+~ 1+- -t.l---t ~~-+-----~-.---\---1----1 -1-----1-··1-.-+--.+---+-----+---- 0~1~L-~-L--~-L~--~~~--~-L--~~_4--L-~~--+_~--~~_4--~_r~~~~--r_~ (") r- ID ~ ~ Hours HDR Engineering, Inc 11/13/97 200 180 160 140 120 ti ~ 100 i:L 80 60 40 20 o Reynolds Creek Hourly Inflow Mar 30 -Aug 31, 1995 ,~---~ .~. ~~~. ---- f-~ ---~-- '-~'--~-'--.L.~ 1---~ ~ ~ ~-, ~~~ ~-r-~-~ ~--- \\ J~"-n, I)wI. .,rN !--~ ~-'--r~ -----r-- f- f--- ~ -~ 'In, '-~-+ ~-~I----~-'--L-.~ -'- f~-~-f----,~~ ~-- ~--1-~-~-+ -~ '----~ ---I 1I.. !~- 1{-, . "' \,. ~ \ ---I~ -\ '-~ '" "" ~ Hours ----... ~~ --'-~~.. ---f---r ~ !--~ I~----~ '--~-f--- L.~. ~-~ '---f-I-~--~ -~---~ ~ -~ r---~ ~-~ •. __.. ~-~ -,-~!-- --- \-\ '-r-~~ I \ ~ --I--1-~-~ \ .~ ---,.. rJ "L./ir ""\.., ~-...h. ~ Il'-<.....-'--~,---... .... ~ ~ ~ M ~ HDR Engineering, Inc 11/13/97 250 200 150 -:! Co)- 3:: 0 u:: 100 Reynolds Creek -Water Year 1952 Daily and Average Monthly Flows .-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~ - 50 .}-, \ I \ I \ AI OLI------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~ Time Reynolds Creek -Water Year 1953 Daily and Average Monthly Flows 220 200 180 160 -i:i-120 ~ .2 100 IL ~ 60 + 40+ "I 0 140 I II ~111/1/52 ~t 1011152 L~ J \ ~v:'''~1 ~ ~I 1/1/53 ~ '"'13 VM 8/1/53 UA.--, IVI V\ -\-----tr-J 2/1/53"J \.J 3/1/53 Time 7/1/53 L1l.1.-+---"r 1 --iI:-y- 8/1/53 ~ 360 340 320 300 280 260 240 220 -200J!! u-3: 180 0 u:: 160 140 120 100 eo ~~111~3 60 40 20 0 Reynolds Creek -Water Year 1954 Daily and Average Monthly Flows 2/1154 1011153 ..----+-·.1/1154 Time 220 200 180 160 140 -.t! 120 u-~ 0u::: 100 80 I II I~ 60 + V'2/'15' ljI) 111115440 101116420 111155 31'15' 511156 0 Time Reynolds Creek -Water Year 1955 Daily and Average Monthly Flows \~ 11I2/,,,.I~ --=---hrT\l \J \r 611155 R lh ~ Iv ~. 711155 i~ ~ 1'1/55 wvu~~ 811166 Reynolds Creek -Water Year 1956 Daily and Average Monthly Flows 320 300 280 260 240 220 200 _ 180 of!! u - 160 ~ u:: 140 120 9/1/56I I I. /Ill II I I 100 80 60 .., f10/1'" 20 ... '"'--9-4/1/56 8/1/56~ 2/1/56 3/1/56 Time 0 Reynolds Creek -Water Year 1983 Daily and Average Monthly Flows 260 240 220 200 180 160 -'5 140 -~ .!:! 120 LL 100 80 60 40 f10/1/82 20 0 ~ 12/1/82 211/83 Time 200 180 160 140 120 i ui 100 o u::: 80 60 40 20 o Reynolds Creek -Water Year 1984 Daily and Average Monthly Flows ,\, _ .... 11/84 ~ 1111/83 ~ 1/1/84 ~ , \\ \ 1211183 t\A. ~ 411/84 3/1/84 '"' )~ \ ~ \ ~1/84 \"",\ Time I ~ 711184 811!A \ V VI! ~ ~'~ '~4 8/1/84 , Reynolds Creek -Water Year 1985 Daily and Average Monthly Flows 280 260 240 220 200 180 _ 160 J!! u'i 140 .. 0 u: 120 3/1185 100 80 60 2/1/85 40 I 1/1/85 11/1/84 2J 8/1/85 9/1/85 0 Time Reynolds Creek Annual Flow Duration Curve :i .!:!.. ~ LL. o 10 20 30 40 50 Exceedance (%) 350~--------r---------~------~---------'---------'---------'---------'---------'--------, 300 250 -11---... f 200 ...1 ... , ---~ 150 100 r-..... ~I-I 0~1------~------~------~------~------~------~------~------~-------+------~ 60 70 80 90 100 Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -October 200r-!~,------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------, 160 140 120 :! u-100 ~ it 80 60 40 20 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Exceedance(%) Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -November 200~i'~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~ 180 160 ~ ~ 100 0u:: 80 60 40 20 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Exceedance (%) Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -December 200 180 160 140 120 ;[ u -100 ~. ii: 80 60 40 20 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Exceedance(%) Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Durati<?n Curve -January 200 180·' 160 140 120 ~ ui 100 0u: 80 60 40 20 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Exceedance (%) 0 Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -February 200 180 160 140 120 ~ u -100 ~ ii: 80 60 40 20 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Exceedance(%) Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -March 200r"----------------------------------------------~ 180·· 160 140 120 i3: 100 o u: 80 60 40 20 O+,---------r---------r--------~--------~--------~--------;_--------~--------+_--------+_------~ 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Exceedance(%) Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -April 200n,'---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------. 180 160 140 120 :§" .!:!. ~ 100 o ii: 80 40 20 O~I--------~--------~--------~--------~--------+_--------+_--------+_--------r_--------~------~ 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Exceedance (%) Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -May 200 ~~----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 180 160· 140 120 .l!! ~ ;: 100 .S! u.. 80 60 40 20 O+,---------r--------~--------~--------~--------~--------+_--------+_--------r_--------~------~ o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Exceedance (%) Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -June 200 180 160 140 120 ~ u -100 ~ u:: 80 60 40 20 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Exceedance (%) Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -July 200 180 160 140 :i ui 0u: 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 Exceedance(%) 60 70 80 90 100 Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -August 120 ~ u -100 ~ it 80 60 40 200 180 160 140 20 o· 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Exceedance Reynolds Creek Monthly Flow Duration Curve -September 200 180 160 140 120 i' ,£. ~ 100 Li: 80 60 40 20 0~'--------~-------+--------~-------4--------~--------~-------+--------~-------;--------~ o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Exceedance (%) Application for Licellse APPENDIXB PRELIMINARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN November 1997 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC PROJECT NO. 11480 PRELIMINARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN November 1997 Preliminary Erosion & Sediment Control Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. ; .................. 1-1 1.1 Project Description/Location .................................................................................... 1-1 2.0 PROPOSED PROJECT DEVELOPMENT ......................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Diversion / Intake ..................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Penstock .................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.3 Powerhouse ............................................................................................................... 2-3 2.4 Tailrace...................................................................................................................... 2-3 2.5 Switchyardand TransmissionLine .......................................................................... 2-3 2.6 Access Road .............................................................................................................. 2-4 2.7 Other Mechanical, Electrical, and Transmission Equipment .................................. 2-4 3.0 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS ......................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Climate ...................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Topography ............................................................................................................... 3-1 3.3 Geology ..................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.3.1 General Geology .......................................................................................... 3-1 3.3.2 Economic Mineral Deposits ......................................................................... 3-2 3.3.3 Erosion and Mass Movement ...................................................................... 3-2 3.3.4 Faults, Shear Zones and Joints ..................................................................... 3-3 3.3.5 Seismicity ..................................................................................................... 3-3 3.3.6 Volcanic and Geothermal Activity .............................................................. 3-3 3.4 Soils ........................................................................................................................... 3-3 3.5 Vegetation ................................................................................................................. 3-4 3.6 Surface Water Drainage ............................................................................................ 3-4 4.0 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION ............................................................................................. 4-1 4.1 Construction Scheduling .......................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Area ofDisturbance .................................................................................................. 4-1 4.3 Risk Assessment ....................................................................................................... 4-1 4.3.1 Impacts During Construction ....................................................................... 4-2 4.3.2 Mitigation ofImpacts During Construction ................................................ 4-2 5.0 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES ................................................... 5-1 5.1 General Guidelines ................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Erosion and Sediment Control BMPS ..................................................................... 5-1 5.2.1 Stabilization Practices .................................................................................. 5-1 5.2.2 Structural and Stormwater Management Practices ..................................... 5-3 5.2.3 Other Controls .............................................................................................. 5-3 Reynolds Creek HydroelectricProjecQ November 1997 FERC No. 11480 Preliminary Erosion & Sediment Control Plan Chapter 5.3 Site Specific Provisions ............................................................................................ 5-4 5.3.1 Diversion ..................................................................................................... 5-5 5.3.2 Penstock, Powerhouse, and Tailrace ........................................................... 5-5 5.3.3 Access Road and TransmissionLine ........................................................... 5-5 5.4 Revegetation ............................................................................................................. 5-5 5.5 Preservation, Restoration and Cleanup .................................................................... 5-6 5.6 Maintenance, Monitoring and Plan Modifications .................................................. 5-6 ApendixA -Examples of Erosion and Sediment Control Measures LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 Project Location and Vicinity Map ....................................................................................... 1-2 2 Site Plan ................................................................................................................................ 2-2 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Projecf3 November 1997 ii FERC No. 11480 Preliminary Erosion & Sediment Control Plan 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL REQUIREMENTS The Haida Corporation is applying for a license from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for the development of a 5 megawatt (MW) hydroelectric power project located on Reynolds Creek, 10 miles east of Hydaburg on Prince of Wales Island (Figure 1), in southeast Alaska. This Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) has been prepared as part of the Application for License. It is a conceptual plan which describes stabilization and structural practices currently envisioned to be implemented to minimize erosion and the transport of sediments. The stabilization and structural best management practices (BMPs) are also described. A Final ESCP will be prepared during final design of the project. The Final ESCP will supplement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for Construction Activities (SWPPP), and be developed in accordance with federal guidelines for the State of Alaska. These guidelines are set forth in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System and the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) General Permit for the Authorization to Discharge Under NPDES for Storm Water Discharges from Construction Activities that are Classified as Associated with Industrial Activity (General Permit). A record of dates when major grading activities occur, when construction activities temporarily or permanently cease on a portion of the site, and when stabilization measures are initiated will be included in the Final ESCP. A copy of the Final ESCP, the notice of intent, any inspection reports and all other reports required by the permit will be retained by management for three years after the date of final stabilization of the construction site. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 1-1 FERC No. 11480 II I ~,... ".. j. ! ProfJo.~etf \ .~ 1 Transmission I ~Une ~-T--"--'r' .l.._ 7.l+-.., i I ARC rtc OC(AN ~ ~( •... " ~ \~ ~ ALASKA \ I 1 :j: . :..~. \ -"'. -~ ~"ollse'?'/ .. " / :c-~..:.. ~ / \ \" ',' \.. "'.,..".", (, ,+ ~ t;h <;:::) ... P,. C I r, C oceAN LOCATION MAP '~l VICINITY MAP Figure I Reynolds Creek Location M ap Preliminary Erosion & Sediment Control Plan 2.0 PROPOSED PROJECT DEVELOPMENT! SITE DESCRIPTION Prince of Wales Island is located at the south end of the Alexander Archipelago, a belt of mountainous islands off the Alaskan coastal mainland. Reynolds Creek is a high gradient stream that originates in the mountains and flows through several lakes and then through a steep narrow canyon before discharging into Copper Harbor and Herta Inlet. The proposed project will be located on land currently owned by the Haida Corporation or on land that will be acquired through lease or purchase from Sealaska Corporation or the State ofAlaska. (Figure 1). The proposed Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project will consist of the following features (Figure 2): (1) a small diversion dam and intake at the outlet of Rich's Pond (Lake Mellen), (2) a steel penstock, (3) a powerhouse, (4) a tailrace to return water to Lower Reynolds Creek, (S) a switchyard, (6) up to SOO feet of new access roads, and (7) approximately 10.9 miles of 34.S kV overhead transmission line. 2.1 DIVERSIONIINTAKE Lake Mellen (El. 876 finsl) would serve as the primary reservoir for the project. A diversion would be constructed near the outlet of Rich's Pond, a small sub-basin at the outlet of Lake Mellen. The proposed project would construct a concrete dam in Rich's Pond at elevation 876 finsl. The diversion structure would be grouted riprap with a concrete core cutoff wall. The crest length of the structure would be approximately 20 feet and the section would act as a weir with uncontrolled overflow when the lake level topped 876 fins!' Backwater from the diversion would inundate Rich's Pond, raising the water level to that of Lake Mellen and creating one continuous waterbody. The intake structure would consist of a small concrete box structure located on the left side of the diversion. The intake would be protected by a trashrack. Stoplog slots would be located downstream of the intake for dewatering during maintenance and a valve house would also be located immediately downstream of the intake. The intake would be connected to the penstock with a steel transition piece. A 12 inch diameter bypass pipe passing directly through the center of the diversion structure would provide uninterrupted flow to the bypass reach downstream of the diversion. The bypass inlet would be protected by a bar structure and the outlet equipped with a plate or valve to calibrate discharge flows. 2.2 PENSTOCK A proposed 3,200 foot long, 42 inch diameter, welded steel penstock would convey water from the intake to the powerhouse. The penstock would be above-ground construction, supported by saddle supports approximately 40 feet on-center. Thrust blocks would be provided at changes in alignment and grade and at the powerhouse. The penstock would cross from the south to the north side of Reynolds Creek, approximately SOO feet upstream of the powerhouse. Where it crosses the Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 2-1 FERCNo.11480 ___'l,\J~~ ., I T ns·~~ ---~6 --~, -I. '~~ WI'".. '" <0 '" " " ____ ~------'''=,:---------';1;- :;I,~ I~ -cpo 'rITf1 I" • 1000 Figure 2 Reynolds Creel{ Site Plan Preliminary Erosion & Sediment Control Plan creek, the pipe would have a clear span of 40-50 feet and would be supported at either end by a poured concrete footing/thrust block. Placement of the pipe section over the creek would be with a crane from the bank. A leak detection system would be installed in the penstock to activate an intake shutoff valve in the unlikely event that a leak occurs. Timber along the penstock route would be cleared and removed using a highline. A highline is also proposed for installation of the penstock and the in-place pouring ofthe cradle supports. 2.3 POWERHOUSE The powerhouse would be located on an excavated bench above the ordinary high water mark of Reynolds Creek, at the upper limit of the anadromous fish habitat. Blasting would be required to create the bench. The powerhouse would be an insulated, pre-engineered metal building on a concrete slab foundation. It would initially contain one 1,500 kilowatt (kW) horizontal impulse turbine/generator and associated equipment, but would be sized to accommodate a second 3,500 kW unit proposed for the future. The rated net head for the turbines would be 740 feet and rated flow 30 cubic feet per second and 60 cubic feet per second respectively for each unit. The centerline of the turbines would be approximately El. 115 fmsl. Initial space requirements are 40 feet x 40 feet., however ultimate space requirements would be 40 feet by 100 feet, thus the pad will be sized to accommodate the greater space requirements. 2.4 TAILRACE The discharge from the powerhouse would be returned to Reynolds Creek via a rip-rap lined tailrace channel approximately 80 feet in length. The discharge point would be at the base of the falls where the creek exits the canyon and would be as close as possible to the upper limit of the anadromous fish use of the area. This location was selected because it would minimize construction related impacts to the stream. 2.5 SWITCHY ARD AND TRANSMISSION LINE The switchyard at the powerhouse would consist of a pad-mounted disconnect switch and a pad mounted step-up transformer. The power would be relayed to Hydaburg via a 34.5 kilovolt overhead transmission line. The line would follow existing road rights-of-way from the powerhouse approximately 3.3 miles north along Copper Harbor and Hetta Inlet. At this point an overhead crossing from the east side of Hetta Inlet via Jumbo Island to the west side of the inlet is proposed. From Hetta Inlet, the transmission line would continue over land along existing road rights-of-way to Hydaburg where it would enter a small substation. The overall length of the line is estimated to be 10.9 miles. Except for the aerial crossing ofHetta Inlet, the poles would be designed as tangent line structures on about 300 foot centers. A communications line will run along the penstock to the diversion/intake. Reynolds Creek HydroelectricProject November 1997 2-3 FERC No. 11480 Preliminary Erosion & Sediment Control Plan 2.6 ACCESS ROAD Much of the roadway needed to access the project exists or will exist prior to the start of the hydroelectric project construction. The road system developed by the land owner, Sealaska Corporation, services on-going and planned logging operations. An estimated 500 feet of additional road will be required to extend the existing system to the powerhouse and the diversion site. The new roads will be constructed to the same design standards as the mainline logging roads. 2.7 OTHER,MECHANICAL,ELECTRICAL,AND TRANSMISSION EQUIPMENT Electrical accessory equipment would include medium voltage switchgear, station service equipment, direct current (DC) power supply, ventilation equipment, and lighting. Instrumentation would include continuous readout of lake elevation, valve status indicators, drain sump level controls, and ventilation controls. A battery back-up system with an on-line charger would be provided to supply control power sufficient to shutdown the plant in the event of a power outage. Battery backups would be at both the powerhouse and the valve house. Communications cables for instrument signals would be run in conduit from the powerhouse to the valve house along the penstock. Level signals from Rich's Pond, and signals to open and close the pipeline shutoff valves would be sent over the communication cable. The power line would provide power to operate the instruments, valve motor operators, and small space heaters in the valve house. A computer-based plant control panel located in the powerhouse would monitor all plant functions and would shutdown the turbine if any problems arise. A telephone autodialer would then callout to the plant operator to report the problem. The fail-safe operation mode would be to shut down the project in the event of an emergency_ Remote monitoring of all plant functions and equipment condition would be performed via a SCADA system over telephone lines. Reynolds Creek HydroelectricProject November 1997 2-4 FERC No. 11480 Preliminary Erosion & Sediment Control Plan 3.0 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS 3.1 CLIMATE The project area experiences a cool, moist, maritime climate and cloudy weather is common. Two pressure systems influence seasonal weather patterns. From September through Maya low pressure system dominates, bringing storm tracks through on a regular basis. During the summer months, the northward-moving Pacific high pressure brings, drier, calmer weather. Average annual precipitation for the region ranges from 80 to 160 inches, and snowfall ranges from 20 to 200 inches. Hydaburg receives approximately 116 inches of precipitation, including 55 inches of snow. October and November are the wettest months and June and July the driest. Average summer temperatures range from 46°F to 70°F and winter temperatures average between 32°F and 42°F. Wind varies on a seasonal basis although storm force winds are not unusual in the project area. During winter, winds from the southeast predominate and during summer, winds typically blow from the northeast or southeast, with direction and speed being strongly influenced by local topography. 3.2 TOPOGRAPHY Reynolds Creek and Hydaburg are located on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska. Hydaburg is approximately is approximately 46 miles west of Ketchikan and 210 miles southeast of Juneau. Topography is a combination of steep mountains and glacial valleys. In the vicinity of Reynolds Creek on the east side of Hetta Inlet, the mountains rise steeply from the water's edge to elevations of 3,500 feet. On the west side of Hetta Inlet, lowlands extend from the inlet to Hydaburg and elevations generally do not exceed 300 feet. Surrounding mountains rise to over 2,000 feet. Numerous lakes dot the area. The proposed project would utilize runoff from a 5.2 sq. mi. drainage area. Elevations in the drainage basin range from about 2,900 feet (Green Monster Mountain) to sea level at Copper Harbor. 3.3 GEOLOGY 3.3.1 General Geology Southeastern Alaska has been tectonically active since the early Paleozoic Era and has a complex geologic and structural history. It is divided into several geologic terranes, each of which has a unique geologic history. The terranes are bounded by faults which are generally major lineaments that follow the valleys, coastlines, and inlets of southeastern Alaska. Southeast Alaska was glaciated during the most recent ice age, which ended about 10,000 years ago. At that time, continental ice thickness were in the range of 3,000 ft. The ice depressed the land and smoothed the topography The land then rebounded, elevating some marine deposits several Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 3-1 FERC No. 11480 Preliminary Erosion & Sediment Control Plan hundred feet above sea level. Alpine glaciation also affected the higher mountains of the region, carving U-shaped valleys, cirques, aretes and hanging valleys. In the proximity ofPrince of Wales Island, the geology is dominated by the Alexanderterrane. The Alexander terrane is comprised of stratified, metamorphic, and plutonic rocks that range in age from Precambrian to Cambrian through Middle Jurassic. The proposed project is located in the Craig subterrane, one of several sub-units located within the larger Alexander terrane geologic unit. The oldest rock types in the Craig subterrane are the arc-type metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks of the Wales group that were metamorphosed and deformed during the Middle Cambrian to Early Ordovocian Wales orogeny. These rocks formed the depositional and intrusive basement for the arc-type volcanic-plutonic-sedimentarycomplex of the Early Ordovician to Early Silurian age. From the Middle Silurian to earliest Devonian, the southern portion of the Alexander terrane (including the Craig terrane) experienced the Klakas orogeny, characterized by southwest vergent thrusting, regional metamorphism and deformation, uplift and erosion, and generation of plutonic bodies. The upper Paleozoic strata consists of shallow marine carbonate rocks, clastic rocks, and volcanic rocks which have subsequently undergone extensive erosion. The Upper Triassic strata consist of a basal conglomerate and sedimentary breccia followed by rhyolite and rhyolitic tuff, massive limestone, calcerous argillite, and basaltic-andesiticpillow flows of breccia. Project area geology is dominated by three geologic units. The lower reach of Reynolds Creek and the shoreline of Copper Harbor consist of Late Precambrian carbonate rocks, marble of the Wales Group and Cretaceous thermally metamorphosed hornfelsic rocks rich in albite-epidote and gamet. The upper reach of Reynolds Creek, Lake Mellen, and Summit Lake are mapped as Cretaceous Granodiorite. 3.3.2 Economic Mineral Deposits Mining occurred in the project area in the early 1900's. The Copper Mountain Mine was located on the south side of Copper Mountain and was operated by the Alaska Copper Company. The deposit was discovered in 1897. At the height of its operation, the mine consisted of more than 3,600 feet of tunnels, 435 feet of shafts and raises, numerous pits, an aerial tram, and an Allis Chalmers smelter capable of processing 250 tons of ore per day. Production was halted in 1907 and resumed again in 1914, but reportedly failed to produce additional ore. In addition to copper, the mine produced silver and gold. Remnants ofthe mine (Coppermount) are still visible. 3.3.3 Erosion and Mass Movement Existing slopes in the project area appear to be relatively stable. Minor surficial soil creep occurs but is confmed to the top 1-2 feet of loose clayey, silty, sandy top soil and organic cover that on or near steep slopes. This type of movement is common on saturated, steep slopes underlain by rock. Mass wasting (large block failure) occurs along the vertical cliffs of Reynolds Creek canyon and along steep slopes. In addition, areas on the north side of Copper Harbor may exhibit evidence of mass movement. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 3-2 FERC No. 11480 Preliminary Erosion & Sediment Control Plan 3.3.4 Faults. Shear Zones and Joints Faults have been mapped near Summit Lake and off the lower reach of Reynolds Creek. They appear to have a northwest or northeast trend. 3.3.5 Seismicity Southeast Alaska lies in an active seismic zone. Regional seismicity appears to be primarily controlled by north-south strike-slip motion between the North American and Pacific Plates of the west coast of the Alexander Archipelago. A listing of historic earthquakes was obtained from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Geophysical Data Center Catalog. While the historic record is very short (the earliest earthquake listed was in 1949), it does show that most of the seismicity in the region is along the west edge of the Alexander Archipelago. The nearest historic earthquake to the site was a magnitude 5.0 event located within 10 mi. of the project area. The largest event in the listing is a magnitude 6.4 event located approximately 60 mi. southwest ofthe site. Large earthquakes in the region include the August 21, 1949 Queen Charlotte Islands and July 30, 1972 Sitka events. The 1949 magnitude 8.1 (Rogers, 1983) earthquake was located approximately 120 mi. southwest of the site. The 1972, magnitude 7.6 event was located about 140 mi. northwest ofthe site (Coffman and von Hake 1974). 3.3.6 Volcanic and Geothermal Activity No volcanic or geothermal activity has been identified in the vicinity of the proposed project. 3.4 SOILS This information is based on observations made by Harzaduringa limited field reconnaissance trip to the project area on May 6 and 7, 1996. Soils in the upper part of the drainage have developed from a variety of organic and inorganic sources. Inorganic soils have developed from glacial deposits, uplifted marine sediments, and metamorphic and igneous rocks. The organic soils have developed from deposits of decomposed plant material that is found in poorly drained areas associated with low relief. Soil deposits in the vicinity of Copper Harbor and the mouth of Reynolds Creek appear to be a combination of glacially derived soil and floodplain deposits with an estimated thickness of up to 10 feet. Soils along the lower reach of Reynolds Creek are comprised of alluvium up to 10 or more feet thick. This soil is less cohesive and is susceptible to erosion by surface water. Soils in the upper reach of Reynolds Creek are generally stable, due in large part to the vegetation cover. Their stability may be affected by the proposed logging, which will remove the protective vegetative cover and disturb the root system. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 3-3 FERCNo.11480 Preliminary Erosion & Sediment Control Plan 3.5 VEGETATION The proposed project site is on lands owned by Sealaska Corporation. The area was heavily forested, primarily with Sitka spruce and western hemlock, but Sealaska plans call for intensive logging and this has already begun. Other tree species that occur in lesser percentages include mountain hemlock, Western red cedar, Alaska cedar, alder, cottonwood, alpine fir, Pacific fir, and lodgepole pine. Forests have very dense canopy and understory layers blocking out most direct sunlight. Small bush saplings of shade-resistant hemlock and cedar, with blueberry, devils club, and other shrubs form a dense understory. Huckleberry, copper bush, Sitka alder, juniper, skunk cabbage, ferns, mosses, and grasses also contribute to this understory. Intermediate plant communities that combine elements of forest and bog grow near the forest edge. Characteristic plants of this vegetative type are shore pine, rusty menziesia, sedges, mosses, and rooted aquatics. Alpine tundra occurs in open terrain above the treeline where barren rocks and rubble are interspersed with low plants including cassiopes, mountain-heath, dwarf blueberry, dwarf willow, avens, alpine azalea, lichens, and mosses. Muskegs are interspersed with forest stands on poorly drained soils and are composed mainly of sphagnum mosses and sedges, with rushes, crowberry, and stunted conifers. Plants commonly found along the shoreline and tidal marshes include beach rye grass, beach pea, beach lovage, hemlock parsley, oysterleak, seaside plantain, pickleweed, Lyngbye sedge, and arrowgrass. Most of the project area is steep and well drained, however, the area surrounding Rich's Pond is muskeg bog and some saturated forest occurs along Reynolds Creek. The US Fish and Wildlife Service's National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) mapping for the area indicates the muskeg wetland type adjacent to Rich's Pond is designated permanently flooded palustrine with an unconsolidated bottom (PUBH). The saturated forest wetland type downstream along Reynolds Creek and on Jumbo Island is designated as PF04B. 3.6 SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE The proposed project would utilize runoff from a 5.2 sq. mi. drainage area supplying Lake Marge (El. 1,750 finsl), Summit Lake (El. 1,318 finsl), Lake Mellen (El. 876 fins I), and Rich's Pond (EL 870 finsl). Water flows from Lake Mellen into Rich's Pond and down through a steep narrow canyon that broadens with decreasing gradient at about EL 100 fins!' From this point, Reynolds Creek drains to Copper Harbor which opens to Hetta Inlet. Most of the precipitation that falls drains as runoff to streams and surface waterbodies because of the area's steep topography, shallow soil conditions, near-surface underlying bedrock, and thick organic ground. Suspended sediment concentrations are generally low, with most sedimentation occurring as a result ofstreambed scour and erosion or mass wasting. Groundwater storage quickly becomes saturated, particularly during periods of heavy precipitation, causing stream discharges to swell and fluctuate. Reynolds Creek HydroelectricProject November 1997 3-4 FERC No. 11480 Preliminary Erosion & Sediment Control Plan 4.0 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION 4.1 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULING The proposed construction schedule is based on FERC issuing the license by February 1999. Milestones preceding facility startup are: • Submit FERC License Application November 1997 • Receive FERC License February 1999 • Begin Construction April 1999 • Award Turbine/GeneratorContract April 1999 • Begin Commercial Operation June 2000 Prior to initiating construction, this Preliminary ESCP will be finalized, detailing a construction sequence and estimated completion date. All construction will be perfonned during construction windows as set forth by the regulatory agencies. It is anticipated that the construction will take approximately seven months, to be perfonned between April and November, 1999. 4.2 AREA OF DISTURBANCE An area of approximately 7 acres would be disturbed by the project elements. Soil mobilization and transport would be reduced by limiting clearing and construction activities to the minimwn necessary for construction. The transmission line route will follow existing cleared rights-of-way, limiting the amount of clearing and reducing the potential for project-related erosion, sedimentation,and slope instability. Most of the project vicinity will have been disturbed by prior logging operations. 4.3 RISK ASSESSMENT Activities associated with the construction of the Reynolds Creek hydroelectric project have the potential to cause erosion and sediment problems. These can be managed and controlled through the implementation of appropriate controls and Best Management Practices (BMP' s). The following is a summary of potential problems and areas of concern that may arise from the activities identified. Measures that address these concerns are described in Appendix A, Examples of Erosion and Sediment Control Measures. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 4-1 FERC No. 11480 Preliminary Erosion & Sediment Control Plan 4.3.1 Impacts During Construction Temporary increases in turbidity in Rich's Pond may occur during construction of the diversion and intake. A temporary cofferdam and bypass culvert would be used to prevent water from entering the diversion construction area. There is also a potential to increase erosion and sediment production during excavation for the powerhouse, staging area, penstock supports, tailrace, and access road. In addition, blasting would occur at the powerhouse site to create the building pad. The blasting would generate spoils and may effect wildlife in the vicinity of the powerhouse area. Vegetation removal would be necessary at staging and stockpile areas and there would be a risk of erosion and sedimentation from stockpiles or cleared ground. 4.3.2 Mitigation of Impacts During Construction Temporary erosion and potential sediment production created by disturbance of overburden soil at the diversion, along the penstock route, powerhouse, staging area, tailrace and access roads would be mitigated by use of Best Management Practices (BMP's) to control runoff and prevent erosion and delivery of construction sediment to streams. Water seeping into the diversion construction area would be discharged into the adjacent forest through a perforated pipe. Any sediments would be ftltered by the organic mat. Where blasting is perfonned for the powerhouse in close proximity to Reynolds Creek, controlled blasting techniques would be used to prevent flyrock from reaching the creek. Construction spoils would be placed in areas away from running water and the potential for erosion and the generation of sediment would be minimized by employing appropriate BMP's. Reynolds Creek HydroelectricProject Nooember 1997 4-2 FERCNo.11480 Preliminary Erosion & Sediment Control Plan 5.0 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES 5.1 GENERAL GUIDELINES The goal of this ESCP is to minimize project related erosion and to capture any project-generated sediment. This Preliminary ESCP presents types of BMPs which will be utilized in the various project areas. The Final ESCP would indicate locations of BMPs, timing of construction, sensitive areas, and detailed design of the BMPs. A geotechnical engineer would assess all problem areas during final design. The Contractor would follow the guidelines outlined in this ESCP while constructing all erosion and sediment control (ESC) measures. These measures would be part of the construction contracts. Continuous on-site monitoring would ensure the following BMPs are implemented at appropriate locations prior to and during construction activities. Following construction completion and site stabilization, the BMPs would be removed as per regulations. 5.2 EROSION AND SEDIl\1ENT CONTROL BMPS 5.2.1 Stabilization Practices Stabilization BMPS are use to ensure existing vegetation is preserved and disturbed areas are stabilized quickly. StabilizationBMPs to be implemented by the contractor may include: • Implementation of ESC measures prior to clearing or grading, throughout and after construction. All exposed and unworked soils shall be stabilized by suitable application of BMPs. Sediment ponds and traps, perimeter dikes, sediment barriers, and other BMPs intended to trap sediment on-site shall be constructed as a first step in grading. These BMPs shall be functional before land disturbing activities take place. • Minimization of the construction disturbance area through the use of clearing limits. In the field, marking clearing limits and/or any easements, setbacks, sensitive/critical areas and their buffers, trees and drainage courses. These limits, including staging area, would be defined using perimeter fencing. In addition, perimeter fencing will be used to isolate any buffer zones for sensitive areas. Properties adjacent to the project site shall be protected from sediment deposition • Limiting clearing to only those areas which would be graded and stabilized in the current season. Schedule major land disturbing activities during the dry season, or as requested by regulatory agency personnel. Protect bare soil from rainfall and overland flow and revegetate as soon after final grading as permitted by seasonal conditions. Reynolds Creek HydroelectricProject November 1997 5-1 FERCNo.11480 Preliminary Erosion & Sediment Control Plan • Constructing with equipment appropriately sized for the job. The proper selection of equipment can help reduce erosion and sedimentation potentiaL Equipment would be proportionally sized for the job. Use of smooth tracks on equipment when possible will reduce soil disturbance. Wide track or low ground pressure equipment (in areas which do not need compaction) would avoid over-compacting soil to be revegetated. • Exercising care to preserve the natural landscape; conducting all operations to prevent any unnecessary destruction, scarring, or defacing of the natural surroundings throughout the project area. Conducting all operations in a manner causing the least disturbance to the topsoil outside of the construction area. Indiscriminate bulldozing, scraping, movement of equipment, and other operations which would result in unwarranted erosion and damage to the natural vegetation would not be permitted. Material from construction work would be deposited where it would be protected from erosion or transport into surface waters by surface run offor high stream flows. • Preventing mass movement of soils by removing topsoils under all major construction features and by laying back permanent cuts and other excavations to stable slopes. • Maintaining all temporary erosionlsedimentcontrols in a satisfactory condition until such time that clearing and/or construction is completed, permanent drainage facilities are operational, and there is no longer the potential for construction induced erosion. • Replacing topsoil and mulching. Stockpile topsoil for use during revegetation of the construction area. The contractor may allow for natural reseeding by neighboring species, or ifapplicable, reseeding with an appropriate seed mix may be performed. • Covering and/or stabilize stockplies with barriers or cover measures, such as clear plastic covering. Locating stockpiles so that natural drainages and swales are not blocked and diverting overland flow to bypass stockpile areas. Filter fabric fencing may be used to intercept any runoff leaving the stockpile area • Protecting erodible materials from wind and rain by seeding and mulching, or by covering with matting, plastic sheeting, etc., until site restoration activities are complete. • All temporary erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be removed within 30 days after final site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary BMPs are no longer needed. Trapped sediment shall be removed or stabilized on site. Disturbed soil areas resulting from removal shall be permanently stabilized Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 5-2 FERC No. 114BO Preliminary Erosion & Sediment Control Plnn • Light seeding of appropriate areas to provide inunediate protection from erosive rainfall, especially areas left to over winter without a final grade. Seed species timing and fertilization to be coordinated with agencies. A mixture of Norcoast bering hairgrass, Arctered red fescue, annual rye and Calamagrostis canadensis may be used as a default. 5.2.2 Structural and Stormwater Management Practices These practices are used to divert flows from exposed soils, store flows or limit runoff and discharge of pollutants. Stormwater management practices are used to control pollutants after stabilization has occurred. BMPs which may be employed at the site include: • The use of filter fabric (silt) fencing and/or brush barriers to reduce the velocity of run-off from construction areas and minimize the volwne of construction runoff flowing across bare soil areas . • Intercepting storm water drainages and diverting overland flow away from the construction areas. BMPs addressing these situations may include interceptor dikes and swales, pipe slope drains, ditches and outlet protection. • Providing temporary drainage facilities to control runoff released from the construction area. Trap or filter out sediment before it leaves the construction area through use of properly sized sediment traps and/or sediment ponds. Grade areas to drain to sedimentation ponds equipped with oil/water separators. Size sedimentation ponds to provide storage requirements as outlined in Section 6.A .. • Dewatering devices shall discharge into a sediment trap or sediment pond. Sediment pond discharges will be to established drainage courses that previously received the run-off (maintain existing flow patterns). • Placing check dams along all ditches before and after the sediment ponds. • Placing crushed rock construction entrances and/or surfacing on actively traveled areas. 5.2.3 Other Controls Non-erosion control BMPs which may be required during the construction phase of the project will address the use and handling of chemical supplies during construction. Depending upon contractor arrangements these supplies mayor may not be present at the site. If chemical supplies are used and handled on site, appropriate material handling and disposal BMPs will be initiated for the products. The BMPs which may be applicable include: Reynolds Creek HydroelectricProject Navember1997 5-3 FERC No. 114S0 Preliminary Erosion & Sediment Control Plan • Perfonning all work by methods which prevent entrance or accidental spillage of solid matter, contaminants, debris, and other objectionable pollutants and wastes into any streams or watercourses, such as sediment ponds, sediment traps, oil/water separators, collection sumps, etc. • Storing oils, fuels, concrete curing compounds and other toxic materials in a bermed area with an impervious liner. Equipment would be fueled in an area specified to catch spilled materials. • Chemicals and petroleum products would be isolated in one or two laydown areas selected by the contractor to best suit his construction needs. These areas would be designed to meet state standards for hazardous materials storage and properly controlled. Containment areas would be constructed using berms and impermeable (PVC) membranes. A more detailed explanation of the methods used to implement these control measures and functional design diagrams can be found in Section 6.0-Erosion and Sediment Control Measures Narratives. Where applicable, any additional agency requirements for ESC measures would be incorporated into this plan by reference. The Final ESCP would be made available to the agencies for review and comment. 5.3 SITE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS The following sections describe major construction activities and ESC measures for the areas affected by the project. It is anticipated that major construction activities would proceed along the following described sequence of events. However, alternate methods may be employed if appropriate. The proposed project facilities and proposed locations for the referenced ESC measures will be located in the final ESCP. It is anticipated that contractors would use the ESC measures and locations as shown on the plan drawings. However, the locations, sizes and types of measures shown are advisory. Alternatives may be used so long as the intent of this plan is met. The contractor would be required to take additional measures, as directed, to meet the objectives of the ESCP. The contractor would be responsible for replacing or repairing erosion control structures which are damaged or non functional, and for stabilizing all construction sites to reflect pre-construction conditions. The contractor would also be required to stockpile additional materials such as silt fencing, sand bags, and sorbent pads near the construction site in order to immediately deal with unanticipated erosion or spill problems. Following construction, inspection would be made ofthe new project facilities to determine remedial or maintenance needs. In addition to ESC measures, the clearing limits will be shown on drawings. The clearing limits are the outer boundaries to which vegetation removal or disturbance would be required for construction related activities. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Navember1997 5-4 FERC No. 11480 Preliminary Erosion & Sediment Control Plan Temporary staging areas will also be called out on the final ESCP drawings. The staging areas would be delineated with perimeter fencing and/or filter fabric (silt) fence. Impermeable liners would be installed where fuel and other toxic or hazardous materials are stored. 5.3.1 Diversion There would be a staging and spoils area near Rich's Pond to support construction of the diversion. BMP's proposed include installation of a filter fabric fence around the area. Vegetation cleared to develop the staging area would stockpiled for reapplication and site restoration after construction has been completed, ifof appropriate species and quality. Otherwise, the vegetation may be used as a brush barrier or spoiled in a designated area. Stormwater would discharge across native vegetation, seeping back into the ground. 5.3.2 Penstock. Powerhouse, and Tailrace The powerhouse would be constructed on a pad above ordinary high water. All penstock, powerhouse, and tailrace construction activities would be staged from the here and the area would be surrounded with silt fence to intercept any sediment before it reaches Reynolds Creek. The staging area would include a bermed and lined fuel storage area and a separate concrete truck washout area which would be bermed to prevent escape of contaminated water. The staging area would be graded to maintain positive drainage. Runoff would spread out through natural vegetation. A separate spoils area would be located adjacent to the staging area. Riparian areas would be protected during construction and would be restored following construction. Only a small area of riparian habitat should be impacted near the tailrace channel. No portion ofthe penstock or its supports would be in the creek channel. 5.3.3 Access Road and Transmission Line With the exception of the aerial crossing of Hetta Inlet, the transmission line route would follow existing roads. Pole-mounted transmission lines would be designed to minimize the risk of raptor collisions or electrocutions. Additional measures would be taken ifthe poles come within 100 feet of a drainage course. These measures would be determined during final design and location of the transmission line. 5.4 REVEGETATION Only the areas necessary for construction activities and project facilities would be disturbed during project construction. Existing vegetation would be maintained wherever possible to minimize the area of exposed soil and soil movement. Clearing activities would be limited to only those areas which could be graded and stabilized during that season. All disturbed areas would be stabilized using mulches or other techniques. If agency personnel determine reseeding with an appropriate Reynolds Creek HydroelecmcProject Ncwember1997 5-5 FERC No. 11480 Preliminary Erosion & Sediment Control Plan erosion control seed mix is applicable to the site, this process will be included in the revegetation plan. Otherwise the site will be left to revegetate naturally after construction is complete. Areas that were unvegetated prior to construction will not be revegetated. 5.5 PRESERVATION, RESTORATION, AND CLEANUP No trees would be removed except those required to be removed for construction. Trees, brush, and roots removed would be disposed of in a manner conforming to land owner requirements. If materials are burned, applicable permits must be obtained from the appropriate agency. It must also be documented that burning and disposal of ashes was accomplished in accordance with permit conditions. Vegetation not designated to be removed would be protected from damage during construction operations. Deleterious material such as dirt, silt, cement, or petroleum products would not be allowed to enter stream channels or intermittent drainages, nor would such contaminants be placed where they could later enter these areas. Rubbish and construction debris including cans, bottles, paper, stumps, and slash would not be deposited within 150 feet of the high water mark of any stream or other water body. All rubbish would ultimately be removed from the site. All disturbed areas would be properly cleared of temporary structures, rubbish, and waste materials upon completion ofthe project. Disturbed areas would be properly graded to drain and revegetate to blend with the surrounding terrain. Sediments trapped by control measures would be removed and distributed over the areas to be restored. When disturbed areas have been restored and revegetated, control measures would be removed and the areas they occupied rehabilitated and revegetated. Spoils areas would be graded to properly drain and available overburden would be placed over the spoils areas and left to revegetate naturally. 5.6 MAINTENANCE, MONITORING AND PLAN MODIFICATIONS The implementation of the measures described in the Preliminary and Final ESCPs, stipulated as part of project permit requirements, and described in the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan would be the responsibility of the project contractors. The requirements for erosion control would be written into the contracts, and would be enforced by the owner through the resident engineer. During construction, culverts, check dams, and other sediment control measures would be cleaned on an as-needed basis. Additional erosion and sediment control materials would be stored on-site and would be available if required. The contracts would contain provisions whereby, if the contractor fails to observe any of the requirements for erosion control so that environmental contamination occurs, the engineer would have the right to stop the work where it is contributing to the contamination. The contractor would then be required to take the necessary steps to stop the contamination before continuing with the work. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 5-6 FERC No. 11480 Preliminary Erosion & Sediment Control Plan Frequent inspections conducted throughout project construction would ensure maintenance and monitoring of the erosion control measures and installations. The construction site will be inspected by project managers during actual construction. It is their duty to ensure that construction contractors follow the plan requirements and that construction BMPs are followed and/or maintained per this plan. All BMPs shall be inspected, maintained and repaired as needed to assure continued performance of their intended function. All on-site erosion and sediment control measures shall be inspected at least once every seven days and within 24 hours after any storm event of greater than 0.5 inches of rain per 24 hour period. An inspection report file will be maintained by the facility management. All facilities will be designed to meet or exceed present storm water quality codes. Repairs and modifications would be made as required. Following construction, revegetated areas would be inspected by the owner once a year for two consecutive years to ensure that site restoration was successful. Where the re-establishment of plant growth appears to be sparse or unsuccessful, alternative planting and restoration techniques may be required. Annual inspections would continue for at least two years or until a permanent vegetative cover is established. ESC measures would be monitored by the engineer and hislher assistants, and would require ongoing effort as the project plans are finalized and modified for unanticipated field conditions. There may be situations where erosion control measures, thought to be necessary during planning, are either not needed, not working effectively, or need modifications due to unforeseen conditions. Project modifications during the fmal design stages and construction phases would require that modifications be made to the ESC measures. Improvements and changes to the ESCP would be implemented as needed to meet specific construction and weather conditions as they are encountered. These changes and additions to the ESCP would be noted in the construction log book. Field drawings and/or photographs with a discussion on the erosion control problem and the proposed solution would be included in regular reports. Reynolds Creek HydroelectricProject November 1997 5-7 FERC No. 11480 Appendix A -Examples of Erosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan APPENDIX A EXAMPLES OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES Cover Measures Clear Plastic Covering Soil Erosion Matting and Mulches Surface Water Control Interceptor Dike and Swale Pipe Slope Drains Sediment Retention Temporary Sediment Pond Sediment Trap Roadway Traffic Erosion Control Gravel Filter Berm Construction Road Stabilization Prevention of Erosion in Drainage Channels Check Dams Culvert Outfall Protection Perimeter Protection Buffer Zones Silt Fence Barrier Brush Barrier Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 FERC No. 11480 Appendix A -Examples of Erosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Pian EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURE Cover Measures TYPE: Clear Plastic Covering DEFINITION: The covering with clear plastic sheeting of bare areas which need immediate protection from erosion. PURPOSE: To provide immediate erosion protection to slopes and disturbed areas that cannot be covered by mulching, in particular during the specified seeding periods or as otherwise required by the local government. Clear plastic is also used to protect disturbed areas which must be covered during short periods of inactivity. Because of many disadvantages clear plastic covering is the last preferred covering BMP. LOCATION: • Disturbed areas which require immediate erosion protection. • Areas seeded during the time period from November 1 to March 1. (Note: Plantings at this time require clear plastic covering for germination and protection from heavy rains.) ADVANTAGES: • Clear plastic covering is a good method of protecting bare areas which need immediate cover and for winter plantings. • May be quickly and easily placed. DISADV ANTAGEDIPROBLEMS: • There can be problems with vandals and maintenance. • The sheeting will result in rapid, 100% runoff which may cause serious erosion problems and/or flooding at the base of slopes unless the runoff is properly intercepted and safely conveyed by a collecting drain. This is strictly a temporary measure, so permanent stabilization is still required. • It is relatively expensive. • The plastic may blow away if it is not adequately overlapped and anchored. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 FERCNo.11480 Appendix A -Examples ofErosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan • Ultraviolet and possibly visible light can cause some types of plastic to become brittle and easily tom. • Plastic must be disposed of at a landfill; it IS not easily degradable in the environment. • Ifplastic is left on too long during the spring it can severely bum any vegetation that has grown under it during cooler periods. DESIGN CRITERIA: • Clear plastic sheeting shall have a minimum thickness of 6 mil. • Covering shall be installed and maintained tightly in place by using sandbags or tires on ropes with a maximum 10 foot grid spacing in all directions. All seams shall be taped or weighted down full length and there shall be at least a 1 to 2 foot overlap ofall seams. Seams should then be rolled and staked or tied. • Covering shall be installed immediately on areas seeded between November 1 to March 1, and remain until vegetation is firmly established. • When the covering is used on unseeded slopes, it shall be left in place until the next seeding period. • Sheeting should be toed in at the top of the slope to prevent surface flow beneath the plastic. • Sheeting should be removed as soon as is possible once vegetation is well grown to prevent burning the vegetation through the plastic sheeting, which acts as a greenhouse. MAINTENANCE: • Check regularly for rips and places where the plastic may be dislodged. Contact between the plastic and the ground should always be maintained. Any air bubbles found should be removed immediately or the plastic may rip during the next windy period. Re-anchor or replace the plastic as necessary. All temporary erosion and sediment control measures shall be removed within 30 days after fmal site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary BMPs are no longer needed. Trapped sediment shall be removed or stabilized on site. Disturbed soil areas resulting from removal shall be permanently stabilized. Reynolds Creek HydroelectricProject November 1997 FERC No. 11480 Appendix A -Examples of Erosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURE Cover Measures TYPE: Soil Erosion Matting and Mulches DEFINITION: Application ofgeotextiles or plant residues to the soil surface. PURPOSE: To provide immediate protection to exposed soils during the period of short construction delays, or over winter months through the application of plant residues, or other suitable materials, to exposed soil areas. Mulches also enhance plant establishment by conserving moisture and moderating soil temperatures. Mulch helps hold fertilizer, seed, and topsoil in place in the presence of wind, rain, and runoff and maintains moisture near the soil surface. LOCATION: Mulching and matting can be used in areas which have been seeded either for temporary or permanent cover; mulching should immediately follow seeding. Mulching and matting can also be used in areas which cannot be seeded because of the season, or are otherwise unfavorable for plant growth. Matting is also effective as a temporary cover, either due to delays in construction or during periods, (such as winter) when no construction would be taking place. DESIGN CRITERIA: 1. The engineered fabric shall be placed on the uphill slope and across the top of placed riprap to help prevent migration of fine materials down through the riprap. The fabric shall be carefully placed making sure that a minimum overlap of24 in. be maintained at all seams. 2. The fabric shall be placed on riprap taking care to prevent tearing of the fabric. In the event that the fabric is tom, the fabric shall be replaced or additional fabric shall be placed to provide a minimum overlap of24 in. adjacent to the tear. 3. When placing backfill over the fabric care shall be taken to minimize dropping ofthe backfill material directly on the fabric. Careful observation shall be made to ensure that all damaged areas are identified and properly repaired as indicated above. 4. Soils under soil erosion fabrics shall be prepared by properly grading and preparing soils for seeding prior to placement of fabric. Preparation includes removal of all trash and large stones, and removal of footprints, tracks and ruts providing a smooth even surface. 5. Fabric shall then be rolled into place and stapled to secure it into position, as recommended by the manufacturer. Fabric joints shall overlap a minimum of 4 in. from side to side. When joining two rolls, the second roll shall overlap the first roll a minimum of 18 in. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 FERC No. 11480 AppendixA -Examples ofErosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan 6. Avoid stretching fabric as it is rolled and stapled into place. Fabric must be in complete contact with the ground to prevent water from flowing under fabric. 7. Mulch materials, matting materials, and application rates are to be defined in construction specifications. 8. Erosion blankets (nets and mats), may be used on level areas, on slopes up to 50%, and in waterways. Where soil is highly erodible, nets shall only be used in connection with an organic mulch such as straw and wood fiber. Jute mats shall be heavy, uniform cloth woven of single jute yarn, which if 36 to 48 in. wide shall weigh an average of 1.2 lbsllinear yard. It must be so applied that it is in complete contact with the soil. If it is not, erosion would occur beneath it. Netting shall be securely anchored to the soil with No. 11 gauge wire staples at least 6 in. long, with an overlap of 3 in. 9. Excelsior blankets are considered protective mulches and may be used alone on erodible soils and during all times of the year. MAINTENANCE: 1. Mulched areas should be checked periodically, especially following severe storms, when damaged areas of mulch or tie-down material should be repaired. 2. All temporary ESC measures shall be removed within 30 days after final site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary controls are no longer needed. Trapped sediment shall be removed or stabilized on site. Disturbed soil areas resulting from removal shall be permanently stabilized. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Nooember1997 FERCNo.11480 Appendix A -Examples of Erosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURE Surface Water Control TYPE: Interceptor Dike and Swale DEFINITION: A ridge of compacted soil or a swale with vegetative lining located at the top or base of a sloping disturbed area. PURPOSE: To intercept storm runoff from drainage areas above unprotected slopes and direct it to a stabilized outlet. LOCATION: Interceptor dikes and swales can be used where the volume and velocity of runoff from exposed or disturbed slopes must be reduced. When an interceptor dike or swale is placed above a disturbed slope, it reduces the volume of water reaching the disturbed area by intercepting runoff from above; they are also used in conjunction with pipe slope drains at the top of slopes. When dikes or swales are placed horizontally across a disturbed slope, they reduce the velocity of runoff flowing down the slope by reducing the distance that the runoff can flow directly downhill. DESIGN CRITERIA: 1. Interceptor Dikes: Construction traffic over temporary dikes shall be minimized. a. Top width shall be 2 ft. minimum. b. Height shall be 18 in. minimum, measured from upslope toe and at a compaction of 90% ASTM D698 standard proctor. c. Side slopes shall be 2: 1 or flatter. d. The grade shall be topographically dependent, except that the dike shall be limited to grades between 0.5% and 1 %. e. Stabilization of slopes less than 5% shall be achieved by seeding and mulching within five days of dike construction. Stabilization of slopes greater than 5% shall be dependent on runoff velocities and dike materials. Stabilization should be done immediately using either sod or riprap to avoid erosion. f. The upslope side ofthe dike shall provide positive drainage to the dike outlet. No erosion shall occur at the outlet. Provide energy dissipation measures as necessary. Sediment laden runoff must be released through a sediment trapping facility. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 FERC No. 11480 Appendix A -Examples ofErosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan 2. Interceptor Swales: a. The bottom width ofthe swale shall be 2 ft. minimum, and the bottom shall be level. b. The depth shall be 1 ft. minimum. c. Side slopes shall be 2: 1 or flatter. d. The grade shall be a maximum of 5%, with positive drainage to a suitable outlet. e. Stabilization shall be achieved by temporary seeding or by riprap 12 in. thick pressed into the bank and extending at least 8 in. vertically from the bottom. f. If the slope of the disturbed area is less than 5%, swales shall be spaced every 300 ft. If the slope of the disturbed area is between 5% and 10%, swales shall be spaced every 200 ft. Ifthe slope is greater than 10%, swales shall be placed every 100 ft. g. The outlet shall be a level spreader or riprapped leading to a stabilized outlet or sedimentation pond. MAINTENANCE: 1. The measure should be inspected after every major storm and repairs made as necessary. Damage caused by construction traffic or other activity must be repaired before the end of each working day. 2. All temporary ESC measures shall be removed within 30 days after final site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary controls are no longer needed. Trapped sediment shall be removed or stabilized on site. Disturbed soil areas resulting from removal shall be permanently stabilized. Reynolds Creek HydroelectricProject Ncraember 1997 FERCNo.11480 Dike Material compacted /_ z tnn_1 90% Standard Proctor . . ~!1 ' 2(7 I I" ---!___ I!rmin' .! 1__' ~-/l'f::;;..~.'-'.!'..:://.Ib:'lIJ.. ':''':1 ",'!>;'';<'lli'!::'i, -':Io(r -;,;;;/e;::;-..,.-;.....,71 {"•.•• S'mrn . .~ '. I__ ..I inlerceplor dike spacing .. 100', 20Ir Or 300' dcpcndsng on grade INlERCEPTOROIKE I~/ 1 l'lmin.. Spacing .. 100',200". or 300' depending on Slope • fNTERCEPTORSWALE Temporary Interceptor Dike/Swale Exhibit Appendix A -Examples ofErosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURE Surface Water Control TYPE: Pipe Slope Drains DEFINITION: A pipe extending from the top to the bottom of a cut or fill slope and discharging into a stabilized water course or a sediment trapping device or onto a stabilization area. PURPOSE: To carry concentrated runoff down steep slopes without causing gullies, channel erosion, or saturation of slide-prone soils. LOCATION: Pipe slope drains can be used on any steep slope where a temporary or permanent measure is needed for conveying runoff without causing erosion. DESIGN CRITERIA: 1. The capacity for temporary drains shall be sufficient to handle a lO-year, 24-hour peak flow. Permanent pipe slope drains shall be sized for the 25-year, 24-hour peak flow. 2. The maximum drainage area allowed per pipe is 10 acres. 3. The entrance shall consist of a standard flared end section for culverts 12 in. and larger with a minimum 6-in. metal toe plate to prevent runoff from undercutting the pipe inlet. the slope entrance shall be at least 3%. 4. The soil around and under the pipe and entrance section shall be thoroughly compacted to prevent undercutting. 5. The flared inlet section shall be securely connected to the slope drain and have watertight connecting bands. 6. Interceptor dikes shall be used to direct runoff into a slope drain. The height of the dike shall be at least 1 ft. higher at all points than the top ofthe inlet pipe. 7. The area below the outlet must be stabilized with a riprap apron. 8. If the pipe slope drain is conveying sediment-laden water, direct all flows into the sediment trapping facility. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 FERC No. 11480 Appendix A -Examples of Erosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan MAINTENANCE: I. Check inlet and outlet points regularly, especially after heavy stonns. The inlet should be free . ofundercutting, and no water should be going around the point of entry. If there are problems, the headwall should be reinforced with compacted earth or sand bags. The outlet point should be free of erosion and installed with appropriate outlet protection. 2. All temporary ESC measures shall be removed within 30 days after final site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary controls are no longer needed. Trapped sediment shall be removed or stabilized on site. Disturbed soil areas resulting from removal shall be permanently stabilized. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 FERC No. 11480 Discharge into a S1abaized watercourse or a sediment trapping device oromo a S1abilized area or CPEP pipe Slope c 2:1 HcO.1Z elbows tF\"'---'-----~~~p~Slope 30;. or ~steeper 6" min Corrugated metal Cutoff Wall \ or CPEP pi?e. \ entrance section ~ ,I I ~. '.. Diameter 0 (lor pipe ~ '2'1 4' min. at less than 1 % slope Rip rap sholl be in accordance with section 9-13. ~ of the WSOOT/APWA Standard Specifications. Rip ra;> to be reasonably well groded with rock gradation cs follows: Passing 8 inch sql.lore sieve l00~ Passing 6 inch sql.lore sieve 40-60~ Passing 2 inch sql.lore sieve 0-10~ Oepth of apron sholl be equol !o pipe diameter Corrugaxed metal Pipe Slope Drains Exhibit Appendix A -Examples of Erosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURE Sediment Retention TYPE: Temporary Sediment Pond DEFINITION: A temporary basin with a controlled water release structure formed by constructing an embankment of compacted soil or by excavation, or by constructing an above-ground basin with concrete ecology blocks. PURPOSE: To control and retain seepage and run-off pumped from construction areas such that sediment-laden waters do not enter existing surface waters. Sediment ponds are a temporary measure and are intended to be maintained until the site is permanently protected against erosion. LOCATION: Not determined. DESIGN CRITERIA: The sediment pond may be formed by partial excavation or by construction of a compacted embankment, or constructed of ecology blocks lined with an impermeable membrane. It may have one or more inflow points carrying polluted water. Baffles to spread the flow throughout the basin should be included. A securely anchored riser pipe is the principal discharge mechanism. The top of the riser pipe is left open to act as an emergency overflow. The riser pipe would be solid for its lower section, with two l inch diameter dewatering holes located at the top of the sediment storage volume on opposite sides of the riser pipe. The upper section would be perforated and wrapped with geotextile fabric. Outlet protection is provided to reduce erosion at the pipe outlet. Sediment ponds would be designed according to the following general specifications, the details of which are subj ect to change during fmal design: 1. The sediment pond would have a sediment storage volume of at least 18 in. in depth plus a settling volume of not less than 2 ft. in depth. 2. The basin length is defined as the average distance from the inlet to the outlet of the pond. Generally, the basin length to width ratio would be 4. 3. Interior sides of the earth embankment would be no steeper than 2 ft. horizontal to 1 ft. vertical. 4. An outfall consisting of a vertical pipe or box type perforated riser joined by a water tight connection to a pipe which extends through the barrier or dam forming the pond would be provided. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 FERC No. 11480 Appendix A -Examples ofErosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan a. The crest elevation of the riser would be a minimum of 6 in. below the lowest elevation ofthe barrier or dam forming the temporary pond providing a minimum 6 in. of free board. b. The bottom of the riser would be attached to a minimum 1 ft. high base of sufficient mass so as to prevent riser floatation. c. A gravel filter consisting of washed gravel or quarry rock would be placed around the perforated riser. d. Discharge from the sediment pond would be to a rock lined ditch to prevent scour at the pipe outlet and would pass through a filter fabric fence immediately prior to discharge from the site. MAINTENANCE: It is important to understand that sizing is perhaps less important for sediment ponds than is constant maintenance. Inspections must be made and sediment removed regularly for sediment ponds to function well. 1. Inspections should be made regularly, especially after large storm events. Sediment should be removed when it fills one halfof the pond's total sediment storage area. 2. All temporary and permanent ESC practices shall be maintained and repaired as needed to assure continued performance oftheir intended function. All maintenance and repair shall be conducted in accordance with an approved manual. 3. All temporary ESC measures shall be removed within 30 days after final site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary controls are no longer needed. Trapped sediment shall be removed or stabilized on site. Disturbed soil areas resulting from removal shall be permanently stabilized. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 FERC No. 11480 /.vrh' -~tbrbrs ~~f:lK Oi-nifafi'5 fla:;.fit:1Y1 : ~.. ...... m~w -~~~~~r---~-----1-------L______L-_ ·,.vo/e r:i!:r!:r/?,/l!dOr.,;h AjJ( ~ In g,"..,yel-filled' /;-e,n"A ~;"eJ1f pielt.Jl.1!er'~ hf"fj' J,.e 1l'~h;~/"5jtd AQrM. I ~:l""DnTl'i!:./ u:;..",,"i-t ?i"e '/} ~e.Ii ~f" s-Ao/-U...., .£c. J a-rr.(. a j?tr:fi,l'"?I:I'led rrfu-'p~e (;.Cre.r-e.:/ ,UJ"~ .,.c;//,n 1U.b'7G g,.,.c:/ .!!J'M"1""t!/ ~CDne 4. Sediment Pond Exhibit A. If riser is placed ~.. L;"=L; we-effectiwe wiCltl'l of bain A • surface area of basin wftI!n filled to crest L • 1h0l"'leS1 trawel distances around the baffle from inlet to Outlet Riser hen! is in very here no bailie poor Ioc:ation: baffle is reQuiredis I'9quired ~~~~~e=~~~=5~~a=~~ ------;:,------9---'-.- BAFFLE Normal Pool J: In II1is case it is Inllow A imponant to place i baffle so 1ha1 Ll ., L2 Elevalim of Sneeu of glvWOOd 411 ... 8 ft x l'i in riser c::rt:st e"tC!f"ior glvWOOd Ot eauiv. r Depth 01 water in basin when IuD 3' Max. I r. I I I I r I I I I I I I Elevation of J I ..1 Posts 4 in SQUlIIe or S in round ....n.mu..... set 111 leaSt 3 ft intO ~ound basin bottOm "'..------~ 8 It c:ent~s Sediment Pond Baffles Exhibit Appendix A -Examples ofErosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURE Sediment Retention TYPE: Sediment Trap DEFINITION: A small temporary ponding area, with a gravel outlet, formed by excavation and/or by constructing an earthen embankment. PURPOSE: To collect and store sediment from sites cleared and/or graded during construction. It is intended for use on relatively small building areas, with no unusual drainage features, and projected quick build-out time. It should help in reducing silt-laden habitat, particularly in streams. The trap is temporary measure (with a design life of approximately 6 months) and is to be maintained until the site area is permanently protected against erosion by vegetation and/or structures. LOCATION: Proposed building sites where the tributary drainage area is less than 3 acres. ADVANTAGES: 1. Downstream riparian properties will not be damaged by sediment deposits originating from that development. 2. Sediment deposits downstream will not reduce the capacity of the stream channel. 3. Sediment will not cause the clogging of downstream impoundments and other facilities. DISADV ANTAGESIPROBLEMS: 1. Serves only limited areas. 2. Sediment traps (and ponds) are only practically effective in removing sediment down to about the medium silt size fraction. Runoff with sediment of finer grades (fine silt and clay) will pass through untreated, emphasizing the need to control erosion to the maximum extent first. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: Sediment traps should be used only for small drainage areas. If the contributing drainage area is greater than 3 acres, refer to Sediment Ponds, or subdivide the catchment area. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 FERCNo.11480 Appendix A -Examples of Erosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Sediment must be periodically removed from the trap. Plans shall detail how this sediment is to be disposed of, such as by use in fill areas on-site, or removal to an approved off-site dump. Sediment traps, along with other perimeter controls, shall be installed before any land disturbance takes place in the drainage area. DESIGN CRITERIA: The sediment trap may be formed completely by excavation or by construction of a compacted embankment. It shall have a 1.5 foot deep sump for sediment storage. The outlet shall be a weir/spillway section, with the area below the weir acting as a filter for sediment and the upper areas as the overflow spillway depth. • The temporary sediment trap volume can be found by computing the detention volume required for the 2-year, 24-hour design storm. Side slopes should not exceed 3:1. After determining the necessary volume, size the trap by adding an additional 1-112 feet for sediment accumulation to the volume computed using the 2-year, 24-hour design storm. • To complete the design of the temporary sediment trap: a. A 3:1 aspect ratio between the trap length and width of the trap is desirable. Length is defined as the average distance from the inlet to the outlet of the trap. This ratio is included in the computations for the surface area at the interface between the settling zone and sediment storage volume. b. Determine the bottom and top surface area of the sediment storage volume to be provided using 1-1/2 feet in depth for sediment storage and 3:1 side slope from the bottom of the trap. Note the trap bottom should be level. c. Determine the total trap dimensions by adding the depth required for the 2-year, 24-hour design storm above the surface of the sediment storage volume, while not exceeding 3: 1 side slopes. MAINTENANCE: The key to having a functional sediment trap is continual monitoring and regular maintenance. The size of the trap is less important to its effectiveness than is regular sediment removal. Sediment should be removed from the trap when it reaches approximately one foot in depth (assuming a 1-112 sediment accumulation depth). Regular inspections should be done and additional inspections made after each large runoff-producing storm. All temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control practices shall be maintained and repaired as needed to ensure continued performance of their intended function. All maintenance and repair shall be conducted in accordance with an approved manual. Reynolds Creek HydroelectricProject November 1997 FERCNo.11480 Appendix A -Examples of Erosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan All temporary erosion and sediment control measures shall be removed within 30 days after final site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary BMPs are no longer needed. Trapped sediment shall be removed or stabilized on site. Disturbed soil areas resulting from removal shall be permanently stabilized. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Navember1997 FERCNo.11480 Sed 1."ment Trap Outflow C hannel is constructed by excavation l' depth of 2 2' settling depth d Oment storage105' se I " 4" rock- ~,=,~ " "fencingfilter:fabnc --CROSS SECTION NO SCALE e constructed bynote: may b b ilding a bermexcavation or by u rflow spillway ove width0 06' minimum rock I wash ed grave oSed1m ent Trap Exhibit Appendix A -Examples ofErosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURE Roadway Traffic Erosion Control TYPE: Gravel Filter Berm DEFINITION: A gravel berm construction on rights-of-way or traffic areas within a construction site. PURPOSE: To retain sediment from traffic areas by using a filter berm of gravel or crushed rock. LOCATION: Where a temporary measure is needed to retain sediment from rights-of-way or in traffic areas on construction sites. ADVANTAGES: • This is a very efficient method of sediment removal. DISADV ANTAGESIPROBLEMS: • This BMP is more expensive to install than are other BMPs which use materials found on-site. DESIGN CRITERIA: • Berm material shall be 1/4 to 3 inches in sizes, washed, well-graded gravel or crushed rock with less than 5 percent fines. • Spacing of berms: Every 300 feet on slopes less than 5 percent Every 200 feet on slopes between 5 and 10 percent Every 100 feet on slopes greater than 10 percent • Berm dimensions: 1 foot high with 3: 1 side slopes 8 linear feet per 1 cfs runoff based on the 1 O-year, 24-hour design storm Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 FERCNo.11480 Appendix A -Examples of Erosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan MAINTENANCE: Regular inspection is required; sediment shall be removed and filter material replaced as needed. All temporary and pennanent erosion and sediment control practices shall be maintained and repaired as needed to assure continued perfonnance of their intended function. All maintenance and repair shall be conducted in accordance with an approved manual. Reynolds Creek HydroeiectricProject November 1997 FERC No. 11480 Gravel Filter B erm Appendix A -Examples ofErosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURE Roadway Traffic Erosion Control TYPE: Construction Road Stabilization DEFINITION: The temporary stabilization with stone of access roads, parking areas, and other on-site vehicle transportation routs immediately after grading. PURPOSE: The purpose of construction road stabilization is to reduce erosion of temporary road beds by construction traffic during wet weather. This stabilization also reduces regrading of permanent road beds between the time of initial grading and fmal stabilization. LOCATION: Construction road stabilization applies wherever rock-base roads or parking areas are constructed, whether permanent or temporary, for use by construction traffic. Exceptions may be granted in areas with gravelly soils as approved by the local government. Efficiently constructed road stabilization not only reduces on-site erosion but can significantly speed on-site work, avoid instances of immobilized machinery and delivery vehicles, and generally improve site efficiency and working conditions during adverse weather. DESIGN CRITERIA: 1. A 6-in. course of 2 to 4-in. crushed rock, gravel base, or crushed surfacing base course shall be applied immediately after grading or the completion of utility installation within the right-of way. A 4-in. course of asphalt treated base (ATB) may be used in lieu of the crushed rock, or as advised by the local government. 2. Where feasible, alternative routes should be made for construction traffic; one for use in dry condition, the other for wet conditions which incorporate the measures listed below. 3. Temporary roads should follow the contour of the natural terrain to the maximum extent possible. Slope should not exceed 15%. Roadways should be carefully graded to drain transversely. Provide drainage swales on each side of the roadway in the case of a crowned section, or one side in the case of a super-elevated section. 4. Installed inlets shall be protected to prevent sediment-laden water entering the drain sewer system. 5. Simple gravel berms without a trench can be used for less traveled roads. 6. Undisturbed butter areas should be maintained at all stream crossings. 7. Areas adjacent to culvert crossings and steep slopes should be seeded and mulched andJor covered. Reynolds Creek HydroelecmcProject November 1997 FERCNo.11480 Appendix A -Examples of Erosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan 8. Dust control should be used when necessary. MAINTENANCE: 1. Inspect stabilized areas regularly, especially after large stonn events. Add crushed rock if necessary and restabilize any areas found to be eroding. 2. All temporary ESC measures shall be removed within 30 days after final site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary controls are no longer needed. Trapped sediment shall be removed or stabilized on site. Disturbed soil areas resulting from removal shall be pennanently stabilized. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 FERCNo.11480 4--S-Quarry Spalls Provide Full Width of Ingress/Egress Area Stabilized Construction Entrance Exhibit Appendix A -Examples of Erosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURE Prevention of Erosion in Drainage Channels TYPE: Check Dams DEFINITION: Small dams constructed across a swale or drainage ditch. PURPOSE: To reduce the velocity ofconcentrated flows, reducing erosion of the swale or ditch, and to allow water velocity to allow retention of sediments. LOCATION: • Where temporary channels or permanent channels are not yet vegetated, channel lining is infeasible and, therefore, velocity checks are required. • In small open channels which drain 10 acres or less. No check dams may be placed in streams (unless approved by the appropriate agencies). Other permits may also be necessary. • Check dams in association with sumps work more effectively at slowing flow and retaining sediment. ADVANTAGES: • Check dams not only prevent gully erosion from occurring before vegetation is established, but also cause a high proportion of the sediment load in runoff to settle out. • In some cases, if carefully located and designed, these check dams can remain as permanent installations with very minor regrading, etc. They may be left as either spillways, in which case accumulated sediment would be graded and seeded, or as check dams to precipitate further sediment coming off that site. DISADVANTAGESIPROBLEMS: • Because of their temporary nature, many of these measures are unsightly, and they should be removed or converted to permanent check dams as appropriate. • Removal may be a significant cost depending on the type of check dam installed. Reynolds Creek HydroeiectricProject Navember 1997 FERCNo.11480 AppendixA -Examples of Erosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan • Temporary check dams are only suitable for a limited drainage area. • Clogging by leaves in the fall may be a problem. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: Check dams can be constructed ofeither stone, logs, or pea gravel filled sandbags. Log check dams may be more economical from the standpoint of material costs, since logs can often be salvaged from clearing operations. However, log check dams require more time and hand labor to install. Stone for check dams, on the other hand, must generally be purchased. However, this cost is offset somewhat by the ease of installation. If stone check dams are used in grass-lined channels which will be mowed, care should be taken to remove all the stone from the channel when the dam is removed. This should include any stone which has washed downstream. Since log check dams are embedded in the soil, their removal will result in more disturbance of the soil than will removal of stone check dams. Consequently, extra care should be taken to stabilize the area when log dams are used in permanent ditches or swales: DESIGN CRITERIA: • Check dams can be constructed of either rock, pea-gravel filled bags or logs. Provide a deep sump immediately upstream. • The maximum spacing between the dams shall be such that the toe of the upstream dam is at the same elevation as the top ofthe downstream dam. • Rock check dams shall be constructed or appropriately sized rock. The rock must be placed by hand or mechanical placement (no dumping of rock to form dam) to achieve complete coverage of the ditch or swale and to ensure that the center of the dam is lower than the edges. The rock used must be large enough to stay in place given the expected design flow through the channel. • Log check dams shall be constructed or 4 to 6-inch diameter logs. The logs shall be embedded into the soil at least 18 inches. • In the case of grass-lined ditches and swales, check dams shall be removed when the grass has matured sufficiently to protect the ditch or swale unless the slope of the swale is greater than 4 percent. The area beneath the check dams shall be seeded and mulched immediately after dam removal. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 FERCNo.11480 Appendix A -Examples ofErosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan MAINTENANCE: • Check dams shall be monitored for performance and sediment accumulation during . and after each runoff producing rainfall. Sediment shall be removed when it reaches one halfthe sump depth. • All temporary erosion and sediment control measures shall be removed within 30 days after fmal site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary BMPs are no longer needed. Trapped sediment shall be removed or stabilized on site. Disturbed soil areas resulting from removal shall be permanently stabilized. Reynolds Creek HydroelectricProject November 1997 FERC No. 11480 " 't NO SCALE f 24M ---.....~! b. Rock Check Dam NO SCALE ;... " L • The drsl.Jl/"Qt WC1'I ..... , poonlS A , B -01 eQLIiIi 4IiINUan r'1 ·~.ir ~;II!~i .. ; ,.-}I' ..! -...... ~. ~ilt--.,. Check Dams .~,~ • ~/I I.:,"; :'.. ' . '.~Of , , l '.: t' I • . • I II ~ : ... ," ,I : ~ ••• ),.... ISM a. Log Check Dam . ':'. Ii! ;. l 1..../., I.=..:.--<:::=.::s....:::=='-=-=--.. ; ....,1' ",~. ..... ..' .., ~------------~ c. Spacing Between Check Dams Check Dams Exhibit Appendix A -Examples ofErosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURE Prevention of Erosion in Drainage Channels TYPE: Culvert Outfall Protection PURPOSE: The velocity of flow is nearly always speeded during passage through a culvert and always when passing down a chute. To prevent the fonnation of a scour hole or plunge pool, the end of the culvert or chute would be protected by the placement of a I-ft. thick blanket of quarry spalls tapering from a width of twice the culvert diameter at the outfall to four times the culvert diameter at a length of four culvert diameters. GENERAL: The velocity of water flowing through a culvert or down a chute would usually increase and, therefore, would tend to fonn a plunge pool where it flows into an unlined channel. To minimize this potential, the velocity of the water shall be dissipated with the use of riprap. The typical outfall shall include the following provisions. This type of detail is temporary or pennanent. 1. The riprap blanket shall be a minimum of 12-in. in thickness. Material may be dumped or hand placed. 2. The lateral extent of the rock shall be at least one-half culvert diameter on each side of the chute or pipe. 3. The length ofthe apron beyond the end of the chute or pipe shall be four diameters. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 FERC No. 114BO ROAD SURFACE 18" CIA. CULVERT (MIN. SIZE UNDER ROADS) c:i d~..... PLAN :5 ill 0.0. CULVERT 1'-0· tHICK LAYER OF RIPRAP 1'-0· TIiICl< LAYER OF RlPRAP EXTEND 2'-0" EAOi SIDE OF. CULVERT TYPICAL SECTION FOR CULVERTS BENEATH ROADS Culvert Outfall Protection Exhibit Appendix A -Examples of Erosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURE Perimeter Protection TYPE: Buffer Zones DEFINITION AND PURPOSE: An undisturbed area or strip of natural vegetation or an established suitable planting that will provide a living filter to reduce soil erosion and runoff velocities. LOCATION: Natural buffer zones are used along streams and other bodies of water that need protection from erosion and sedimentation. Vegetative buffer zones can be used to protect natural swales and incorporation into natural landscaping ofan area. ADVANTAGES: • Buffer zones provide critical habitat adjacent to streams and wetlands, as well as assist in controlling erosion, especially on unstable steep slopes. Buffers along streams and other water bodies also provide wildlife corridors, a protected area where wildlife can move from one place to another. • Act as a visibility and noise screen. DISADV ANT AGESIPROBLEMS: • Extensive buffers will increase development costs. DESIGN CRITERIA: • Preserving natural vegetation or plantings in clumps, blocks, or strips is generally the easiest and most successful method. • Leave all unstable steep slopes in natural vegetation. • Fence or flag clearing limits and keep all equipment and construction debris out of the natural areas. • Keep all excavations outside the dripline oftrees and shrubs. • Do not push debris or extra soil into the buffer zone area because it will cause damage from burying and smothering. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 FERC No. 11480 Appendix A -Examples ofErosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan • Vegetative buffer zones for streams, lakes or other waterways should be a minimum of 100 feet wide on each side with increases subject to other on-site sensitive conditions, existing vegetative conditions and erosion hazard potential. MAINTENANCE: Inspect the area frequently to make sure flagging remains in place and the area remains undisturbed. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Navember 1997 FERC No. 11480 Appendix A • Examples of Erosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURE Perimeter Protection TYPE: Silt Fence Barrier DEFINITION: A temporary sediment barrier consisting of a filter fabric stretched across and attached to supporting posts and entrenched. The filter fence is constructed of stakes and synthetic filter fabric with a rigid wire fence backing where necessary for support. PURPOSE: To intercept and detain small amounts of sediment under sheet flow conditions from disturbed areas during construction operations in order to prevent sediment from leaving the site, and to decrease the velocity of sheet flows. LOCATION: Filter fences must be provided immediately upstream of the point(s) of discharge of run-off from a site, before the flow becomes concentrated. They may also be required below disturbed areas where run-off may occur in the form of sheet and rill erosion or wherever runoff has the potential to impact downstream resources. Silt fences would be installed along drainageways downslope of disturbed areas prior to any upslope grading. Silt fences would be installed around spoils and stockpile areas, immediately following disposal ofexcavated material. DESIGN CRITERIA: A silt fence is a temporary barrier made of one of four types of water permeable filter fabric: 1) woven silt-film fabric; 2) woven monofilament fabrics; 3) woven composites; or 4) non-woven heat-treated or needle punched fabrics. Non-woven and regular strength slit film fabrics shall be supported with wire mesh. Filter fabric material shall contain ultraviolet ray inhibitors and stabilizers to provide a minimum of six months of expected usable construction life at a temperature range of 0° to 120°F. Selection of a filter fabric is based on soil conditions at the construction site (which affect the apparent opening size (AOS) fabric specification) and characteristics of the support fence (which affect the choice of tensile strength). The designer shall specify a filter fabric that retains the soil found on the construction site yet would have openings large enough to permit drainage and prevent clogging. The larger the AOS number, the smaller the AOS size of the opening in the fabric. The material used in a filter fabric fence must have sufficient strength to withstand various stress conditions and it also must have the ability to allow passage of water while retaining soil particles. The ability to pass flow through must be balanced with the material's ability to trap sediments. Silt fences shall meet the following criteria: 1. The filter fabric shall be purchased in a continuous roll cut to the length of the barrier to avoid use ofjoints. When joints are necessary, filter cloth shall be spliced together only at a support post, with a minimum 6-in. overlap, and both ends securely fastened to the post. Reynolds Creek HydroeiectricProject November 1997 FERC No. 11480 Appendix A -Examples ofErosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan 2. Posts shall be spaced a maximum of 6 ft. apart and driven securely into the ground a minimum of 30 in., (where physically possible). Where solid rock is encountered, steel posts would be used and would be securely grouted into the rock. Posts shall be installed on a slight angle toward the expected run-off source. 3. A trench shall be excavated approximately 8 in. wide and 12 in. deep along the line of posts and upslope from the barrier. The trench shall be constructed to follow the contour. 4. When slit film filter fabric is used, a wire mesh support fence shall be fastened securely to the upslope side of the posts using heavy-duty wire staples at least 1 in. long, tie wires or hog rings. The wire shall extend into the trench a minimum of 4 in. and shall not extend more than 36 in. above the original ground surface. 5. Slit film filter fabric shall be wired to the fence, and 20 in. of the fabric shall extend into the trench. The fabric shall not extend more than 36 in. above the original ground surface. Filter fabric shall not be stapled to existing trees. Other types of fabric may be stapled to the fence on the upstream side. 6. When extra-strength or monofilament fabric and closer post spacing are used, the wire mesh support fence may be eliminated. In such a case, the filter fabric is stapled or wired directly to the posts with all other provisions of number 5 above applying. Extra care should be used when joining or overlapping these stiffer fabrics. 7. The height of the silt fence shall be a minimum of 2 ft., measured from the existing or graded ground. 8. Maximum slope steepness perpendicular to the fence line shall be 1:1. 9. Maximum sheet or overland flow path length to the fence shall be 100 ft. 10. Filter fabric fences shall be removed when they have served their useful purpose, but not before the upslope area has been permanently stabilized. Retained sediment must be removed and properly disposed of, or mulched and seeded. MAINTENANCE: 1. Inspect immediately after each rainfall, and at least daily during prolonged rainfall. Repair as necessary. 2. Sediment must be removed when it reaches approximately one third the height of the fence, especially ifheavy rains are expected. 3. Any sediment deposits remaining in place after the filter fence is no longer required shall be dressed to conform with the existing grade, prepared and seeded. Reynolds Creek HydroelectricProject November 1997 FERCNo.11480 AppendixA -Examples of Erosion and Sediment Con trol Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan 4. All temporary ESC measures shall be removed within 30 days after final site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary measures are no longer needed. Trapped sediment shall be removed or stabilized on site. Disturbed soil areas resulting from removal shall be pennanently stabilized. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 FERCNo.11480 Filter Fabric MaI8rial 6t:f wide raIs. Use staples or wire rings 10 attaliCh fabric 10 wire 2" by 2" by 1. Ga. Wsre Fabric or equiv. ~ --.,.-,~~--,.-.,..,.-,.-,.---.--.--,--,-,...-~,.-~~,----. C\I 6' Max. Z" by 4" wood posts. standard or better or equal al1I!ma18: SIeeI fence poslS Pn:Mda 3/." • 1.S" washed gravel backlil in IntnC:tI .-.cr on both sides of fiIIar tance fabric on !he swtace b. in Filter Fabric Fence Detail Exhibit AppendixA -Examples of Erosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURE Perimeter Protection TYPE: Brush Barrier DEFINITION: A temporary sediment barrier constructed at the perimeter of a disturbed area from residue materials available from cleaning and grubbing on-site. PURPOSE: To intercept and retain sediment from limited disturbed areas. LOCATION: Below disturbed areas of less than one quarter acre that are subject to sheet and rill erosion, where enough residue material is available for construction of such a barrier. Note: This does not replace a sediment trap or pond. ADV ANT AGES: Brush barriers can often be constructed using materials found on-site. PROBLEMS: None. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: Organic litter and spoil material from site clearing operations is usually burned or hauled away to be dumped elsewhere. Much of this material can be used effectively on the construction site itself. During clearing and grubbing operations, equipment can push or dump the mixture of limbs, small vegetation, and root mat along with minor amounts of soil and rock into windrows along the toe of a slope where erosion and accelerated runoff are expected. Anchoring a filter fabric over the berm enhances the filtration ability of the barrier. Because brush barriers are fairly stable and composed of natural materials, maintenance requirements are small. Material containing large amounts of wood chips should not be used because of the potential for leaching from the chips. DESIGN CRITERIA: • Height 3 feet (minimum) to 5 feet (maximum). • Width 5 feet at base (minimum) to 15 feet (maximum). • Filter fence anchored over the berm will enhance its filtration capacity. MAINTENANCE: • Brush barriers generally require little maintenance, unless there are very heavy deposits of sediment. Occasionally, tearing of the fabric may occur. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 FERC No. 11480 Appendix A -Examples of Erosion and Sediment Control Measures Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan • When the barrier is no longer needed the fabric can be removed to allow natural established of vegetation within the barrier. Over time, the barrier will rot. All temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control practices shall be maintained and repaired as needed to ensure continued performance. All maintenance and repair shall be conducted in accordance with an approved manual. Reynolds Creek HydroelectricProject November 1997 FERCNo.11480 filter fabric draped over 6" x 6'" (min.) trench brush pile and secured in trench w/ compacted backfill ~ -'-- L?,=20~_-~-._------ vegetative debris/brush piledalong uphill edge of uniformly in row to form barrierbrush barrier Brush Barrier Exhibit Application for License APPENDIXC FISHERIES AND AQUATIC STUDIES IN THE REYNOLDS CREEK DRAINAGE November 1997 Re;vllolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 Fisheries and Aquatic Studies in the Reynolds Creek Drainage Revised Report Prepared by: Pentec Environmental, Inc. 120 Third Avenue South, Suite 110 Edmonds, Washington 98020 (425) 775-4682 November 14, 1997 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ".. """" .. """" .. """"""."."",,.,,,,.,,"",,.,,"""""""""" I 1" "" Background and Objectives ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Physical Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Anadromous Fish Resources ...................................... 4 Arctic Grayling Life History -Literature Synthesis ...................... 8 Grayling Spawning Migration and Timing ................................... 8 Egg and Juvenile Development ............................................ 9 Fall and Winter Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Reynolds Creek Field Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11 Materials and Methods ................................................. 11 Upper and Middle Reynolds Creek ..................................... 11 Lower Reynolds Creek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Results and Discussion ................................................. 12 Upper and Middle Reynolds Creek ..................................... 12 Lake Marge .................................................... 12 Summit Lake ................................................... 12 Jack's Pond ..................................................... 17 Interlaken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Lake Mellen .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Rich's Pond .................................................... 21 Lower Reynolds Creek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Summary ............................................................ 28 Upper and Middle Reynolds Creek ..................................... 28 Lower Reynolds Creek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 References """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" 31 November 14, 1997 Pentec 00214\OOS\APPENO\FISHAQU2.WPD:JPH page i FIGURES Figure 1 Locations of fish sampling effort by gear type (1995-97). Figure 2 Timing of fish history stages in Reynolds Creek system. Figure 3 Topography of Lake Mellen inlet of Interlaken Pond. Figure 4 Topography of Lake Mellen outlet to Rich's Pond. Figure 5 Lower Reynolds Creek stream profile. TABLES Table 1 Anadromous fish counts for Reynolds Creek (Copper Harbor) from ADF&G records (1963-1996). Table 2 Fish caught in Reynolds Creek drainage during 1996. Table 3 Approximate stream gradients for various reaches of Lower Reynolds Creek. November 14,1997 Pentec 00214\OOS\APPENO\FISHAQU2.WPO:JPH page ii FISHERIES AND AQUATIC STUDIES IN THE REYNOLDS CREEK DRAINAGE INTRODUCTION BACKGROLIND AND OBJECTIVES The Haida Corporation is planning a hydroelectric project in the Reynolds Creek system in Hetta Inlet. The project is intended to replace diesel as the source of electricity for Hydaburg and to supply energy for the western towns on Prince of Wales Island. Pentec Environmental, Inc. (Pentec), has been conducting aquatic studies in the Reynolds Creek drainage to determine the nature of use of the system by Arctic grayling, Pacific salmon, and trout. These studies included locating Arctic grayling spawning and rearing areas, locating trout and salmon rearing and spawning areas, and determining the upstream migration barrier to Pacific salmon. The purpose of these studies was to allow assessment of the impacts of the planned hydroelectric project on the fish and aquatic life in the drainage. The next three sections of this report provide the results of three elements of the work performed by Pentec: compilation of information on the existing anadromous fish resources of Lower Reynolds Creek, compilation of information from the literature on relevant aspects of the life history of arctic grayling, and the results of fieldwork conducted by Pentec over the last three years. PHYSICAL CONDITIONS Reynolds Creek is a high gradient stream that originates in mountains to the north and east of Copper Harbor on the southwest side of Prince of Wales Island, part of the Alexander Archipelago of southeast Alaska islands. The Reynolds Creek drainage (Figure 1), including all of the lands along the main channel downstream of Lake Marge, is a narrow glaCial valley. Valley walls are steep and wooded except where rock cliffs are too steep for vegetation or where avalanche paths limit vegetation to shrub. The valley was largely unlogged and had no roads until very recently. A portion of the drainage of a major tributary to Reynolds Creek (entering from the north about 400 it above tidewater) was dearcut in the early 1990s. Currently (1997), Sealaska Corporation is engaged in logging road construction and timber harvest in the lower Reynolds Creek drainage and around Lake Mellen. Additional areas in the drainage of this November 14. 1997 Pentec 00214\OO5\APPEND\FISHAQU2.WPD:JPH page 1 Copper Mountain ~~~ DMI"s': 1 .. \ I APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET ~/ Powerhouae ~ \_-BanIer ~-----0' 1250' 2500' 5000' MIddle ....A ReynoIdec_\ .lac1($ flO'.... ~--~ \...A . A.....e#'~~l \iI" 'b1~ ~e"" Legend: F Fyke Net (7/97) Angled (multiple)A Electrofishing (multiple) SummHLake AY~ c;r~- ""'" Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Figure 1 Pentec Environmental, Inc. Edmonds, WA 98020Pentec Locations of fish sampling E NV/FlONIIIINTAl (425) 775-4682 for HDR Engineering. Inc. effort by gear type (1995-97). 8/5/97 figl,dwg tributary were disturbed in the early part of the century by copper mining activity high on Copper Mountain, a peak 1 mile to the north of Lake Mellen. The Reynolds Creek system consists of upper, middle, and lower reaches. Upper Reynolds Creek begins above Lake Marge (elevation approximately 1,750 ft relative to mean sea level, frnsl) and flows from it over several waterfalls into Summit Lake (elevation approximately 1,319 frnsl). Middle Reynolds Creek flows from Summit Lake through Jack's Pond and Interlaken Pond into Lake Mellen (elevation approximately 876 frnsl). An additional short reach connects Lake Mellen to Rich's Pond. Lower Reynolds Creek begins in steep cascades below Rich's Pond and flows to the mouth of Reynolds Creek at Copper Harbor. The lower portion of Reynolds Cree~ is divided into two reaches. The first reach (the 'bypass reach") begins just below Rich's Pond and continues to the anadromous fish barrier at an elevation of approximately 95 to 100 frnsl, about 1,100 ft above the mouth of Reynolds Creek (Figure 1). The second reach (the "anadromous reach") is from the anadromous fish barrier to the mouth of the creek at Copper Harbor. The Alaska Department of Fish and Garne (ADF&G) Anadromous Stream Catalogue, Stream 10420 on Craig A-2 quadrangle (ADF&G 1992) shows use of Reynolds Creek by coho, churn, and pink salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch, O. keta. O. gorbuscha, respectively). Arctic grayling (Thymallus arcticus) were introduced to Summit Lake and Lake Marge in 1962 (ADF&G 1995, letter). Since that time, they have populated the Reynolds Creek system downstream to Rich's Pond, the outlet subbasin of Lake Mellen. Grayling reside in the lakes and ponds of the system throughout the year. They move into inlet tributary streams to spawn in the sprin~ and some reside in these streams through the summer. November 14. 1997 Pentec 00214\ooS\APPEND\FISHAQU2.WPD:JPH page 3 ANADROMOUS FISH RESOURCES ADF&G has records of aerial counts of salmon spawning escapement to streams in the Copper Harbor area since 1963 (Table 1); data provided by S. Walker, ADF&G Commercial Fish Division, Ketchikan). Because of the size of the streams and the dense tree canopy, the data are primarily from saltwater. Thus, the numbers may represent fish from several streams and probably underrepresent the true numbers of fish using streams in the area (since those already in the streams are not counted). These data show numbers of pink salmon in the harbor peaking from mid-August into early September and chum salmon present only after mid-September. Peak numbers of pink salmon in the harbor and lower streams have exceeded 100,000 twice in the last 10 years (ADF&G statistics). Chum salmon have been inconsistently reported because surveys are only infrequently conducted after the first week in September. The maximum reported number of chum salmon is just over 100 (1985). No other adult salmon were reported, but juvenile coho and cutthroat and (or) rainbow / steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus clarki, O. mykiss, respectively) fry have been reported by ADF&G observers. Pink salmon begin to move into Reynolds Creek in mid-to late August (Figure 2). Initial spawning probably occurs in lower stream reaches; access to areas farther upstream probably becomes easier as fall rains increase in September. Spawning probably peaks in late August or early September and extends through September. Fry leave the streambed gravels in early spring and move quickly to marine areas to rear. Chum salmon generally enter the system somewhat later in the fall than do pink salmon, but the presence of numerous active spawners and a few spent fish in early September suggests a considerable overlap with pink salmon activity. It is likely that chum salmon continue to spawn at least into mid-October or September. Like pink salmon, chum fry leave the system quickly upon emergence from gravel (Figure 2). November 14, 1997 Pentec 00214\OO5V\PPEND\FISHAQU2.WPD:JPH page 4 Table 1 Anadromous fish counts for Reynolds Creek (Copper Harbor) from ADF&G records (1963-1996). Date Surve~t~2e S2ecies Mouth Tidal Stream Total count 26-Aug-63 Air Pink 7,000 700 7,700 07-Sep-66 Field Pink 90 75 420 5S5 20-Sep-72 Field Pink 420 275 695 09-Aug-73 12-Aug-73 15-Aug-73 20-Aug-73 12-Sep-73 Air Air Air Air Boat Pink Pink Pink Pink Pink 2,500 2,500 10,000 13,000 9,000 500 400 2,500 2,500 10,500 13,000 9,400 23-Aug-74 27-Aug-74 Air Air Pink Pink 10,000 20,000 10,000 20,000 07-Aug-75 21-Aug-75 Air Air Pink Pink 15,000 9,000 9,000 15,000 13-Aug-76 15-Aug-76 16-Aug-76 20-Aug-76 Air Air Air Air Pink Pink Pink Pink 400 3,000 3,000 10 1,500 400 3,000 3,010 1,500 04-Aug-n OS-Aug-n 24-Aug-n 22-Sep-n 30-Sep-n Air Air Air Air Field Pink Pink Pink Pink Pink 4,000 16,000 3,000 500 16,000 6,300 4,000 16,000 16,000 3,000 6,SOO 20-Aug-7S 26-Aug-7S Air Air Pink Pink 3,000 100 10,000 3,100 10,000 12-Aug-79 20-Aug-79 Air Air Pink Pink 1,500 SOO S,OOO 2,300 S,OOO 05-Aug-SO 13-Aug-SO 1S-Aug-SO Air Air Air Pink Pink Pink Few small SChools 1,000 5,000 5,000 1,000 10,000 29-Jul·S1 06-Aug·S1 24-Aug-S1 Air Air Air Pink Pink Pink 100 4,000 4,000 11,000 100 S,Ooo 11,000 02-Sep-S2 OS-Sep-S2 17-Sep-S2 17-Sep-S2 Air Air Field Field Pink Pink Pink Chum 3,000 1,000 1,000 6,500 440 1,422 19 1,000 9.500 2,S62 19 OS-Aug-83 2S-Aug-S3 Air Field Pink Pink 1,500 20.000 1,500 20,000 21-Au 9-84 Air Pink 7.000 7,000 14,000 Pentec page 5 Table 1 (continued). Seecies Mouth Tidal Stream Total countDate Surve~tyee 19-Aug-85 Air Pink 18,000 16,000 34,000 26-Aug-85 Air Pink 4,000 35,000 39,000 08-Sep-85 Field Pink 1,635 1,635 08-Sep-85 Field Chum 5 5 28-Sep-85 Field Pink 4,000 3,000 7,000 28-Sep-85 Field Chum 112 112 05-Aug-86 Air Pink 10,000 25,000 35,000 05-Aug-86 Air Pink 500 500 12-Aug-86 Air Pink 1,000 2,000 3,000 19-Aug-86 Air Pink 5,000 12,000 17,000 06-Sep-86 Air Pink 110,000 110,000 01-Aug-87 Air Pink 50 50 13-Aug-87 Air Pink 15,000 15,000 19-Aug-87 Air Pink 15,000 33,000 48,000 27-Aug-87 Air Pink 25,000 25,000 11-Aug-88 Air Pink 4,000 4,000 15-Aug-88 Air Pink 2,000 2,000 24-Aug-88 Air Pink 8,000 8,000 04-Aug-89 Air Pink 10,000 10,000 17-Aug-89 Air Pink 2,000 6,000 8,000 16,000 1Q-Aug-90 Air Pink 300 700 1,000 23-Aug-90 Air Pink 800 800 04-Aug-91 Air Pink 500 500 13-Aug-91 Air Pink 14,000 14,000 12-Aug-92 Air Pink 6,000 6,000 25-Aug-92 Air Pink 2,000 2,000 10-Aug-93 Air Pink 25,000 25,000 29-Aug-93 Air Pink 500 65,000 65,500 05-Sep-93 Air Pink 130,000 130,000 15-Aug-94 Air Pink 2,000 2,000 27-Aug-94 Air Pink 1,500 7,800 9,300 22-Aug-95 Air Pink 1,000 1,000 26-Aug-95 Air Pink 4,000 7,500 2,000 13,500 02-Sep-95 Air Pink 20,000 20,000 14-Aug-96 Air Pink 10,000 27,000 37,000 29-AuS-96 Air Pink 25,000 25,000 002141005\appendlanadlsh.x1s Pentec page 6 Figure 2 Timing of fish life history stages in Reynolds Creek system. Jan. Feb. Mar. April May June July AUQ. SePt Oct. Nov. Dec. Pink Salmon Spawning I I I I Incubation I I Freshwater rearing C Marine rearing 15 To 18 Months Chum Salmon Spawning I 1 I Incubation I I Freshwater rearing C Marine rearing 2 to 3 years Coho Salmon Spawning 1 Incubation T I Freshwater rearing 1 to 2 years I I I I I I 1 Marine rearing 2 to 3 years Rainbow/Cutthroat Trout Spawning Incubation I I I I Freshwater rearing 1 to 2 years I I I I I I I I Marine rearing ?? 2 to 3 years before first spawning mi ration Arctic Grayling Spawning migrations (Some fish spend summer in stream) Incubation I I Instream rearing (YOY) I I I I I I Lake residency (jUY.) I I I I I Lake residency (adults) ARCTIC GRAYLING LIFE HISTORY .. LITERATURE SYNTHESIS GRAYLING SPAWNING MIGRATION AND TIMING Arctic grayling spawn in the early spring to mid-summer in interior Alaskan streams (Tack 1980). Immediately before or during ice breakup, when the water temperature is 0 °C to 4°C, grayling begin their migration from their winter habitats to their spawning areas in Alaska, Canada, Montana, Washington, and Wyoming (Brown 1938, Nelson 1954, Bishop 1971, Netsch 1975, Tack 1980, Krueger 1981, Beauchamp 1982). In an interior Alaskan stream, migration to the spawning stream was observed to peak during maximum discharge and increased turbidity from spring breakup (Tack 1980). Tack (1980) also observed the beginning of the spawning run to be triggered by the length of day and water temperatures approaching 1 0c. By contrast, migration has also been associated with decreasing discharge and turbidity in a small northern Alaskan stream and in a stream in southwestern Montana (Lund 1974, Craig and Poulin 1975). Kruse (1959) found maximum grayling runs to spawning areas near Grebe Lake, Wyoming, occurred when the average daily water temperatures ranged from 4.4 °C to 10 0c. During the entire spawning run, the average daily temperatures ranged between 4.4 °C and 14°C. Bishop (1971) associated the presence of grayling on the spawning grounds with water temperatures between 2°C and 10°C. In southwestern Montana, Lund (1974) observed spawning runs to be heaviest when stream temperatures were between 7 °C and 10°C. Peak 'spawning activity of grayling in Canada, Montana, and Wyoming generally corresponds with water temperature of 7 °C to 10°C (Tryon 1947, Kruse 1959, Bishop 1971, Lund 1974). Tack (1972) found that a water temperature of 4 °C triggered grayling spawning in interior streams of Alaska. In western Alaska, Alt (1976) also found that most grayling began spawning at 4 0c. Bishop (1971) observed that grayling spawned in Canada when water temperatures were between 2 °C and 10°C. In Wyoming, Kruse (1959) found spawning took place when the temperatures ranged from 4.4 °C to 10°C. Spawning runs normally last a little more than six weeks, although individual spawners remain on the spawning grounds a very short time (Kruse 1959). In Grebe Lake, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, and Providence Creek, Alberta, Canada, males would hold their territories for 4 to 7 days (Kruse 1959, Bishop 1971). Brown (1938) and Kruse (1959), while November 14, 1997 Pentec 00214\OO5\APPEND\FISHAQU2.WPD:JPH page S studying grayling near Yellowstone National Park, found that females would remain in the spawning areas for 10 hours to 4 days (Brown 1938, Kruse 1959). According to Brown (1938), Kruse (1959), and Bishop (1971), spawning occurred between 12:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. in streams near Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, and Alberta, Canada, respectively. Peak spawning occurred in mid-afternoon. Grayling did not spend the entire spawning period on the spawning grounds. In the early evening, grayling began moving back to nearby lakes or quiet pools. By midnight all grayling had moved off the spawning grounds. They remained in the lakes and pools until between 9:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. the next day when the males again assumed control of their territories (Brown 1938, Nelson 1954, Kruse 1959, Bishop 1971). Lund (1974) found that grayling in Limestone Creek, in southwestern Montana, exhibited daily movements into and out of spawning areas similar to those found by Bishop (1971) in Canada. Most fish entered the inlet stream in the afternoon when water temperatures were maximum and then attempted to leave again in the evening as water temperatures decreased. Van Wyhe (1962) found that most spawning in the Copper River and Prince William Sound drainages in Alaska took place between 8:00 p.m. and 2:00 a.m. when spawning areas were not exposed to sunlight. Tryon (1947) observed similar grayling movements during spawning in Montana. Grayling began migrating from Rogers Lake into the inlet stream to spawn between 5:00 and 6:00 p.m. They continued to migrate out of the lake until 11:00 p.m. By 6:00 a.m. the next day, most of the grayling had moved out of the streams back to the lake. Once spawning is completed, most male and female grayling leave the spawning grounds (Kruse 1959, Brown 1938). They move upstream or downstream or enter another stream to reach summer feeding areas (Tack 1980). Mature grayling may remain in larger spawning streams longer than in smaller streams (Reed 1964). EGG AND JUVENILE DEVELOPMENT In the Centennial Valley area of Montana, grayling eggs reached the eyed stage 10 days after fertilization and hatched between 14 and 19 days after fertilization, when the mean daily temperature was 3.8 °C (Bishop 1971, Nelson 1954). Kruse (1959) found that grayling eggs hatched between 16 and 21 days after fertilization, when the average daily temperature was 10°C, in Grebe Lake, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. Kratt and Smith (1977) observed hatched grayling in the substrate 31 and 32 days after spawning, when the mean daily November 14, 1997 Pentec 00214\ooS\APPEND\FISHAQU2. WPD:JPH page 9 temperature was 5.2 °C in Saskatchewan, Canada. After hatching, the fry spend an average of 3 to 10 days in the substrate before emerging (Nelson 1954, Kratt and Smith 1977). The first 2 weeks after emergence, grayling fry are relatively helpless in water currents. Therefore, they reside in backwaters and the protected areas along the streams (Nelson 1954, Bishop 1971). Kruse (1959), while studying grayling in Grebe Lake, Wyoming, found that fry drifted into the lake within a period of 10 days after hatching in nearby tributary streams. In both the interior and the arctic coastal plain streams of Alaska, the young-of-the-year (YOY) grayling spend their first summer feeding near their natal streams (Craig and Poulin 1975, Tack 1980). They congregate in schools and are found in quiet backwaters, protected areas along the streambanks, side channels, pools, and vegetated areas of adjacent sloughs (Nelson 1954, Tack 1971, Tack 1972, Alt 1976, Houghton 1983). Fry use interstitial spaces and shadows of boulders for cover (Krueger 1981). FALL AND WINTER BEHAVIOR Va scotto (1970), while studying grayling in MacManus Creek, Alaska, observed that fry move into deeper waters and become solitary and territorial in late summer. According to Tack (1980), in early fall grayling fry leave the headwater areas and smaller streams and enter larger rivers and lakes to overwinter. In the Yukon Territory, grayling fry associated with lakes that have inlet or outlet streams move into these lakes to overwinter after spending the summer in the streams (de Bruyn and McCart 1974). Migration to wintering areas in northeastern Alaska occurs when water temperatures approach 0 °C in late summer and early fall (Yoshihara 1972). In northeastern and interior Alaskan streams, grayling of all age classes generally move downstream to overwinter in large streams and rivers (Yoshihara 1972, Tack 1980). Occasionally there is upstream migration from an outlet stream into a lake or to spring areas for overwintering (Shallock 1966, Tack 1980). Grayling use pools of intermittent and flowing streams, spring-fed streams that do not freeze to the bottom during winter, beaver ponds, and large lakes for overwintering (Nelson 1954, Wojcik 1954, Craig and Poulin 1975, Tack 1980, Krueger 1981). According to Krueger (1981), pools in overwintering areas are greater than 1.4 m deep. Yoshihara (1972) predicted that pools in northeastern Alaska needed to be between 2 and 4 m deep in order to be suitable winter habitat for grayling. November 14, 1997 Pentec 00214\ooS\APPEND\FISHAQU2.WPD:JPH page 10 REYNOLDS CREEK FIELD STUDIES This section provides a description of fieldwork conducted by Pentec over the 1994 through 1997 period and a detailed narrative of results, broken down by geographic region of the watershed. MATERIALS AND METHODS Upper and Middle Reynolds Creek In the upper and middle reaches of Reynolds Creek electroshocking, angling (spinner and fly casting), and visual observations were used in July 1995 and 1996 to determine distribution of grayling of various life history stages. Because grayling spawn (Figure 1) in the spring following ice breakup, spawning surveys, consisting of visual inspections and electroshocking, were conducted in inlets to Summit Lake and Lake Mellen every 2 weeks between April 22 and June 7, 1996. In July 1997 floating fyke nets were fished in Lake Mellen. Two fyke nets were set near the outlet of Lake Mellen, and one was set off a point of land just southwest of the Reynolds Creek Inlet to Lake Mellen. Only three grayling were captured in 29 net-days of fishing. Lower Reynolds Creek To determine fish species composition and distribution, electroshocking, minnow trap sets, and visual observations were conducted in the anadromous reach in July 1995 and 1996 and in the bypass reach in July 1995. An additional visual survey was conducted on September 10, 1995, to assess the upper limit of salmon spawning migration. Gradients of various reaches of lower Reynolds Creek have been calculated from surveys conducted and digital maps prepared by the Haida Corporation (Sentec 1996). November 14, 1997 Pentec 00214\OOS\APPEND\FISHAQU2.WPD:JPH page 11 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Upper and Middle Reynolds Creek In 1995 and 1996 studies, grayling were found in the primary inlet stream and associated ponds of Lake Marge, in outlet ponds below Lake Marge, in Summit Lake, Jack's Pond, Interlaken, Lake Mellen and their tributaries, and above and in Rich's Pond. The sizes of the grayling captured at various locations in 1996 are shown in Table 2. Lake Marge In April 1996 a ripe male (280 mm) was captured along with a smaller (probable) female (185 mm) in the inlet to Lake Marge. Another pair of fish was seen at the outlet of an underground stream flowing from a small pond in the Lake Marge inlet stream system. These fish retreated into the underground portion of the stream and could not be captured. Angling in the lake failed to capture any fish. The Lake Marge outlet ponds and their inlet and outlet stream reaches (Figure 1) were surveyed on August 26, 1996. Two small grayling (110 to 130 mm) were shocked at the outlet of the upper pond but were not captured. Numerous small grayling were seen rising at the inlets to both ponds. Larger fish were also seen rising at the inlet to the upper pond, and a large school of larger grayling (e.g., > 200 mm; approximately 25 to 50 fish) was seen in the deeper . portion of the upper pond. A few small fish, in the 80 to 100 mm size range, were seen cruising the shoreline of the southernmost embayment of the upper pond. Fly fishing in areas of rising fish produced hits on nearly every cast, but because of the small size of the fish, only two were captured (112 and 118 mm). Electroshocking along the shorelines of the ponds and in the streams coming into and leaving the ponds failed to reveal any fish not otherwise visible. We concluded that Lake Marge and its associated ponds and streams support a healthy, self-sustaining population of grayling. Summit Lake No fish were seen or captured in the three inlet streams (one entering from the northeast shore and two entering from the northwest shore; Figure 1) to Summit Lake on April 22 and 23, May 7 and 21, and June 7, 1996, or in July 1995. Angling in the lake near the mouths of the three primary tributary systems and the outlet to Reynolds Creek failed to capture any fish, and no fish were observed feeding on the lake surface in 1995 or spring 1996 surveys. November 14, 1997 Pentec 00214\ooS\APPEND\FISHAQU2.WPD:JPH page 12 Table 2 Fish caught in the Reynolds Creek drainage during 1996. Disposition Length and breeding Fish # Species Sex (mm) Location Date condition 1 Grayling U 185 Lake Marge 4/23/96 Released not ripe 2 Grayling U 118 Lake Marge upper 8/26/96 Released pond inlet 3 Grayling U 112 Lake Marge lower 8/26196 Released outlet 4 Grayling M 280 Upper Reynolds Creek 4/23/96 Released ripe 5 Grayling F 265 Summit Lake, near 7/17/96 Collected east most inlet not ripe 6 Grayling M 340 Summit Lake inlet 7/17/96 Released 7 Grayling U 320 Summit Lake inlet 7/17/96 Released 8 Grayling F 275 Summit Lake at 7/17/96 Released margin of outlet/inlet 9 Grayling F 190 Summit Lake outlet 7/17/96 Released 10 Grayling F 175 Summit Lake log jam 7/17/96 Released above shore outlet 11 Grayling M 345 Upper Reynolds 4/23/96 Released Creek, inlet to Jack's ripe Pond 12 Grayling F 360 Jack's Pond 5/21/96 Released, not ripe 13 Grayling U 98 Jack's Pond inlet 8/26196 Released 14 Grayling U 102 Jack's Pond inlet 8/26/96 Released 15 Grayling U 92 Jack's Pond inlet 8/26196 Released spring stream 16 Grayling U 94 Jack's Pond inlet 8/26196 Released spring stream 17 Grayling U 260 Jack's Pond 8/26/96 Released 18 Grayling U 275 Jack's Pond 8/26/96 Released 19 Grayling U 280 Jack's Pond 8/26/96 Released Pentec 00214\OO5\APPENO\GREYREY3.WPD page 13 Table 2 (continued). DisposHion Length and breeding Fish # Species Sex (mm) Location Date condHlon 20 Grayling U 54 Interlaken Pond inlet 7/18/96 Released 21 Grayling U 54 Interlaken Pond inlet 7/18/96 Released 22 Grayling U 56 Interlaken Pond inlet 7/18/96 Released 23 Grayling M 215 Above Lake Mellen 517/96 Released ripe 24 Grayling M 250 Above Lake Mellen 517/96 Released ripe 25 Grayling M 355 Reynolds Creek at 4/23/96 Released Lake Mellen inlet 26 Grayling M 190 Reynolds Creek at 4/23/96 Released Lake Mellen inlet ripe 27 Grayling F 245 Lake Mellen near inlet 7/17/96 Released 28 Grayling F 290 Lake Mellen near inlet 7/17/96 Collected, not ripe 29 Grayling M 385 Lake Mellen 617196 Released not ripe 30 Grayling F 210 Above Rich's Pond 7/18/96 Released 31 Grayling F 215 Above Rich's Pond 7/18/96 Released 32 Grayling F 235 Rich's Pond inlet 517196 Released stream not ripe 33 Grayling M 300 Rich's Pond Inlet 517196 Released stream ripe 34 Grayling U 280 Rich's Pond 617196 Released not ripe 35 Grayling U 275 Rich's Pond 617/96 Released not ripe 36 Grayling F 280 Rich's Pond 5/21/96 Released, not ripe 37 Grayling F 197 Rich's Pond 7/18/96 Released Pentec 00214\ooS\APPEND\GREYREY3.WPD page 14 Table 2 (continued). Disposition Length and breeding Fish # Species Sex (mm) Location Date condition 1 Cutthroat U 110 Reynolds Creek lower reach 617196 Released 2 Cutthroat U 35 Reynolds Creek Mouth below the tributary 7/19/96 Collected 3 Cutthroat U 36 Reynolds Creek Mouth below the tributary 7/19/96 Collected 4 Cutthroat U 35 Reynolds Creek Mouth below the tributary 7/19/96 Released 5 Cutthroat U 36 Reynolds Creek Mouth below the tributary 7/19/96 Released 6 Cutthroat U 74 Reynolds Creek Mouth below the tributary 7/19/96 Released 7 Cutthroat U 38 Reynolds Creek at the Confluence 7/19/96 Released 8 Cutthroat U 41 Reynolds Creek at the Confluence 7/19/96 Released 9 Cutthroat U 41 Reynolds Creek at the Confluence 7/19/96 Released 10 Cutthroat U 111 Reynolds Creek above bridge 7/19/96 Released 11 Cutthroat U 115 Reynolds Creek above bridge 7/19/96 Released 12 Cutthroat U 140 Reynolds Creek above bridge 7/19/96 Released 13 Cutthroat U 145 Reynolds Creek above bridge 7/19/96 Released 14 Cutthroat U 210 Reynolds Creek above bridge 7/19/96 Released 15 Cutthroat U 190 Reynolds Creek below log jam in thalweg 7/19/96 Released 16 Cutthroat U 92 Reynolds Creek below log jam in pool 7/19/96 Released Pentec 00214\OO5\APPEND\GREYREY3.WPD page 15 Table 2 (continued). Fish # Species Sex Length (mm) Location Date Disposition and breeding condition 17 Cutthroat U 95 Reynolds Creek below log jam in pool 7/19/96 Released 18 Cutthroat U 115 Reynolds Creek below log jam in pool 7/19/96 Collected 19 Cutthroat U 118 Reynolds Creek below log jam in pool 7/19/96 Released 20 Cutthroat U 120 Reynolds Creek below log jam in pool 7/19/96 Collected 21 Cutthroat U 120 Reynolds Creek below log jam in pool 7/19/96 Released 22 Cutthroat U 133 Reynolds Creek below log jam in pool 7119196 Released 23 Cutthroat U 120 Reynolds Creek below log jam in pool 7119/96 Released 24 Cutthroat U 44 Reynolds Creek Mouth below the tributary 7/19/96 Collected 1 Steelhead U 62 Reynolds Creek at the Confluence 7/19/96 Collected 2 Steelhead U 132 Reynolds Creek at the Confluence 7/19/96 Released 3 Steel head U 138 Reynolds Creek at the Confluence 7/19/96 Released 4 Steelhead U 115 Reynolds Creek above bridge 7/19/96 Collected 5 Steel head U 120 Reynolds Creek below log jam in pool 7/19/96 Collected 1 Dolly Varden U 48 Reynolds Creek at the Confluence 7/19/96 Collected 1-7 Sculpin U Reynolds Creek lower reaches 617196 Released U =Undetected. Pentec 00214\OOS\APPEND\GREYREY3.WPD page 16 On July 17, 1996, two grayling were caught in the lake near the northwest tributaries, one male approximately 340 mm long and another (sex undetermined) about 320 mm long. Both were unintentionally released. After 45 minutes of angling, these were the only two fish caught. No fish were caught or seen by electroshocking either of the tributary streams or the alluvial fan in the lake margin. No fish were caught or seen in the eastern inlet stream (July 17, 1996). One female (265 mm) caught in the lake nearby was sacrificed and the stomach contents were examined. The stomach was full, mostly with insect larvae and unidentifiable organic material. The fish had very small (0.5 mm) orange eggs in skeins. Near the inlet to Summit Lake from Lake Marge, several fish were rising on July 17, 1996, and one female (275 nun) was caught by angling. Many fish (160 to 200 nun range) were seen at the outlet logjam on the same day. One female (175 nun) was caught by angling; one female (190 mm) was caught by electroshocking. The fish in the logjam were schooling; six to eight fish could be seen together at times. We estimated that there could be about ±50 fish among the logs. A single YOY grayling was captured in a hoop net by ADF&G biologists near the northwest inlet streams in July 1996 showing some in-lake rearing by fish in their first summer. Jack's Pond The reach of middle Reynolds Creek below Summit Lake generally has a moderate to high gradient but is punctuated with several areas of higher gradient, including waterfalls and cascades. A small subbasin is formed just downstream of the outlet of Summit Lake where the stream is blocked by a ledge to form a narrow rocky-bottomed basin (Jack's Pond; elevation about 1,250 fmsl; Figure 1). Areas of this reach in the viCinity of Jack's Pond, as well as the pond itself, support healthy and self-sustaining grayling populations. In July 1995 Jack's Pond and the reach just upstream had a large number of juvenile and adult fish (155 to 275 mm). The reach of Reynolds Creek just above Jack's Pond has several braided channels, including one that appeared to originate from springs adjacent to the main channel. This latter channel is an apparent spawning stream and contained numerous fry (62 to 72 nun; mean 67.9 nun; n =7) in July 1995. Jack's Pond provides the first refuge that could support fish migrating out of Summit Lake. It is probable that some fish from Summit Lake plantings migrated out of the lake and ended up finding good habitat in this area; these fish then began to gradually populate additional areas downstream. November 14. 1997 Pentec 00214\oo5\APPENO\FISHAQU2.WPD:JPH page 17 The several channels of stream above Jack's Pond were electro shocked again in 1996. In April one ripe male (345 mm) was captured in a large pool in the main channel. Grayling scales were observed on a mossy log across a small tributary to Reynolds Creek, indicating predation on fish moving into the stream from the pond. Location of the log (under overhanging brush) suggests that the predation was by a mammal (otter or mink). Angling in the pond failed to capture any fish. The stream reach between Summit Lake and Jack's Pond was electroshocked on May 21, 1996. A male approximately 200 to 250 mm was raised by electroshocking in a large off-channel pool, but it eluded capture. One large unripe female (360 rom) was caught in the pond on hook-and-line. The inlet to Jack's Pond and the small spring-fed tributaries of Jack's Pond were electroshocked on August 26, 1996, and two grayling (98 mm, 102 nun) were taken. Large numbers of small grayling were rising in the pond where the inlet stream current merged into the still waters of the pond. In the spring-fed tributaries where small grayling were captured in 1995, two more juveniles were captured (94 mm, 92 mm). Scale analysis indicated that these were YOY. Fly fishing captured a grayling (280 mm) in the pond itself, and spin fishing captured two fish (260 and 275 mm). Many others were seen rising, and two to three fish hit the spinner on each cast. Interlaken The lower portion of Reynolds Creek for a few lOs of meters above Interlaken (Figure 1) is accessible to grayling and appears to be an important reach for spawning and rearing. Numerous fry (52 to 61 mm; mean 55.2 mm; n = 13) were taken in the slower pool margins and in slow moving distributary channels just above the lake in July 1995. Juvenile grayling (148 to 165 nun) were abundant in this reach, indicating a prolonged residency or re-entry into the stream after overwintering in the pond itself. Grayling fry were also taken along the pond margin in the immediate vicinity of the mouth of Reynolds Creek and in the mouths of two small streams entering Interlaken from the bog area east of Reynolds Creek This strongly suggests that grayling also spawn in these smaller streams, which may be more accessible during high flows in the spring spawning period. November 14, 1997 Pentec 00214\OO5\APPEND\FISHAQU2.WPD:JPH page 18 Interlaken was visited again on May 7 and July 17, 1996. A single large grayling (> 350 mm) was hooked near the outlet (but not landed) on May 7. At the inlet, four fry were turned up by electroshocking on July 17, but only three of these were caught (54 mm, 54 mm, and 56 mm). Lake Mellen The reach of Reynolds Creek flowing into Lake Mellen from Interlaken flows over a bedrock cascade that may prevent upstream migration of grayling from Lake Mellen to Interlaken (Figure 3). Below this cascade, about 50 m of Reynolds Creek is accessible to grayling. Limited spawning and rearing in this reach is indicated by the collection in July 1995 (by electroshocking) of a single grayling fry (55 mm) in a small side channel and a juvenile 080 mm) in the pool below the cascade. This area was electroshocked again on April 22, 1996, upstream to a large pool at the bedrock cascade. Two ripe male grayling (355 and 190 mm) were captured in the uppermost pool. Scales and eggs were seen on a log along this reach of Reynolds Creek, again indicating mammalian predation of grayling in the stream. No other fish were seen in the stream, although several were seen feeding at the surface offshore in the main body of the lake. Angling in the lake failed to capture any fish. On May 7, 1996, this area was electro shocked again and two ripe male grayling (250 and 215 mm) were captured in the uppermost pool and about midway between this pool and the mouth of the stream, respectively. Three additional fish were seen moving rapidly downstream away from the electroshocking operation. No fish were seen feeding at the surface offshore in the main body of the lake. Angling in Lake Mellen near the inlet stream failed to capture any fish. On May 21, 1996, one fish 050 to 200 mm) was raised by the electro shocker in a pool but it eluded capture. No fish were seen feeding at the surface offshore in the main body of the lake. Angling in Lake Mellen near the inlet stream failed to capture any fish. On June 7 this reach of the stream was electroshocked but no fish were seen or captured. Several fish were seen feeding in the upper end of Lake Mellen. One large unripe male (385 mm) was captured on hook-and-line in Lake Mellen near the inlet. On July 17, 1996, no fish were caught or seen in electroshocking the inlet stream, but many were jumping in the lake. About 25 were caught by angling over approximately 80 minutes. Two were retained for measurement (245-mm female, 290-mm male) and scales. The male was sacrificed. It had very small testes and the stomach was full and contained several beetles as November 14. 1997 Pentec 00214\ooS\APPEND\FISHAQU2.WPD:JPH page 19 Lake = interlaken ELEV. = 889 Fmsl : ~- ... Survey monument "0" at elevation 880.3 Fmsl APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 0' SO' 100' 200' Pentec Ii I/VIROI/VEI/TAL Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project for H DR Engineering, Inc. Figure 3 Topography of Lake inlet of Interlaken Mellen Pond. 8/5/97 fig3-4.dwg well as other insect larvae. Like the female in Summit Lake, it had no recognizable amphipods in its stomach despite their abundance in woody debris along the lake shore. The outlet of Interlaken Pond was also surveyed and several fish in the 130 to 180 mm range were seen. Electroshocking on several occasions failed to capture any grayling along the shorelines of Lake Mellen near the inlet stream. In July 1997 fyke net and hoop net sampling was conducted to index grayling populations at three locations in Lake Mellen (Figure 1). The catch rates were very low at all stations and it was concluded that this technique would not provide an adequate index. Hook-and-line sampling was conducted for I-hour periods in the immediate vicinity of the fyke nets along the outlet logjam on July 17 and 24, 1997, and near the inlet on July 24. Hook-and-line sampling also was conducted at the Rich's Pond inlet for 30 minutes on July 17 and for 20 minutes on July 24. Angling success was high at all three sites. A total of 40 grayling were beached and numerous other strikes were felt, often two or more per cast. The relative catch rates at the three sites were 1.8, 1.6, and 2.9 fish per 10 minutes of effort at the inlet, outlet, and Rich's Pond respectively. This rate includes substantial time spent in anesthetizing, meaSuring, and tagging fish. Qualitative observations of numbers of rising grayling were made in the course of rowing from the inlet to the outlet sampling areas. Fish were constantly rising in the vicinity of the outlet logjam and throughout the cove in which Reynolds Creek enters the lake. No fish were seen along other shorelines viewed, primarily the area from just beyond the inlet fyke net and south along the shoreline to the rocky pOint that projects into the lake from the north shore. Two small grayling (51 and 54 mm) captured in a fyke net set near the Reynolds Creek inlet to Lake Mellen in July 1997 confirm that, as in Summit Lake, YOY grayling use shallow areas of the lake for rearing in their first summer. Rich's Pond Grayling were readily taken on spinning or fly gear in Rich's Pond and near the outlet of the main basin throughout the survey period. Juvenile fish (100 to 120 mm) were visible in the deep channel leading to the outlet of Rich's Pond and among the logs accumulated at the outlet of the main basin. Electroshocking failed to capture any grayling along the shorelines of Rich's Pond or in the stream connecting the main basin to Rich's Pond (Figure 4) in 1995. All of these areas had apparently good habitat and cover and abundant amphipods. November 14,1997 Pentec 00214\OO5\APPEND\FISHAQU2.WPD:JPH page 21 ! I < ::::0 '-J 0 :3 ~ :;:0 0 ;:s. (jJ \J 0 ::l Q. Log Jam With Vegetat;on Lake Mellen ELEV. = 876 Fmsl APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET """-__-2!S 0' 50' 100' 200' Figure 4Reynolds Creek Topography of Lake Mellen outletHydroelectric ProjectPentec E NV'lfO#llIlENTAL to Rich's Pond.for HDR Engineering, Inc. 8/5/97 fig3-4.dwg Rich's Pond and the stream section between Lake Mellen and Rich's Pond were sampled on April 22, 1996, using an electro shocker in the stream reach and angling in the pond. No fish were captured or seen. A single ripe grayling male (300 mm) was captured on May 7 by electro shocking in the stream reach between Rich's Pond and Lake Mellen. Angling in Rich's Pond captured an unripe female grayling 235 mm in length. This stream reach was electroshocked again on May 21, but no fish were captured or seen. Angling in Rich's Pond captured a female grayling 280 mm in length. On June 7 no fish were observed in the stream, but several fish were seen feeding in the pond. Three fish were captured by hook-and-line within 10 minutes. Two were measured (280 and 275 mm). Two fish (210 and 215 mm, female) were caught together by electroshocking in the stream between Rich's Pond and Lake Mellen in July 1996. No fry were seen. The stream substrate was covered with a heavy growth of filamentous algae as it had been all during the spring. Jeff Davis (ADF&G) agreed (based on the absence of fry and abundance of algae) that there is probably no spawning in this reach. It is likely that spawning occurs only in areas with clean grave1. Electrofishing this reach in July 1997 failed to capture any grayling, but two adults were spooked out of one of the larger pools where high flows reduced the effectiveness of the gear. Many fish were jumping at Rich's Pond on July 17, 1996. One fish (197 mm) was caught by angling. As noted above the catch rate by spin fishing at the inlet to Rich's Pond in July 1997 was the highest of any of the locations indexed. Lower Reynolds Creek Below the site of the proposed diversion structure at the outlet of Rich's Pond, Reynolds Creek drops over an impassable waterfall and into a very steep walled canyon. Stream gradients in various reaches (Table 3) have been calculated based on surveys conducted by Sentec, Inc. (1996) for the Haida Corporation. The stream falls steeply (average grade over 30 percent) for approximately the next 1,800 ft of the bypass reach (Figure 5). It is presumed that these conditions dictate that there is no fish habitat in this reach. Below elevation 300 ft, the gradient moderates to about 11.1 percent for the next 1,290 ft. Portions of this lower end of the bypass reach (e.g., just above the anadromous fish barrier) consist of a series of step pools interspersed with cascades and waterfalls. Banks remain steep, the streambed consists of bedrock and coarse boulders, and turbulence is high except during low flows when some qUieter pool margins are available. Minnow traps were set in this reach in November 14, 1997 Pentec 00214\OOS\APPENO\FISHAQU2.WPO:JPH page 23 1000 900 800 J jj) >/ .!!! «I Bypass 700 -I I cReach m600 -I E 0-500 -l ~I i !400 -l 5 c 300 -I 0 ;: North E Tributary 2001 iii I 100 -Anadromous fish barrier MHHW o 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 Distance (ft) from mean high higher water (MHHW) in Copper Harbor Figure 5 Lower Reynolds Creek stream profile. i~0:: (I)~ ~~ November 1994 and July 1995 but no fish were caught. One cutthroat (95 mm) was captured by electroshocking in July 1995 confirming the presence of a small, isolated population of this species. Lower Reynolds Creek below the anadromous barrier was surveyed and mapped in detail by ADF&G in August 1979 (ADF&G 1979) and has been qualitatively surveyed by Haida Corporation contractors on several occasions since late 1994. Data on fish captured in qualitative electro shocking in Lower Reynolds Creek are provided in Table 2. Table 3 Approximate stream gradients for various reaches of Lower Reynolds Creek. Reach boundary Available elevation Percent spawning area (ft Rei. to MSL) Upper feature Reach length (ft) grade (%)* Lower 15 North tributary 450 4.4 47Upper 35 Lower 35 USGS gage 468 8.2 14Upper 75 Lower 75 Tailrace 155 6.4 0Upper 90 Lower 90 Anadromous barrier 48 20.8 0Upper 100 Lower 100 Bypass reach 210 23.8Upper 150 Lower 150 Bypass reach 1290 11.6Upper 300 Lower 300 Bypass reach 405 37.0Upper 450 Lower 450 Bypass reach 405 37.0Upper 600 Lower 600 Bypass reach 534 28.1Upper 750 Lower 750 Diversion dam 456 32.9Upper 876 * Source ADF&G 1979. The lowest 450 it of Reynolds Creek is the lowest gradient portion of the stream (Table 3 and Figure 5), and ADF&G (1979) surveys indicated that this reach has approximately 47 percent available spawning area (ASA; stream length weighted average). This reflects the high proportion of smaller gravel materials in the streambed in this reach. The source of much of this material is a small tributary that enters Reynolds Creek from the north at the upper end of this reach (Figure 1). In this lower reach the slope is about 4.4 percent and currents are moderate November 14, 1997 Pentec 00214\ooS\APPEND\FISHAQU2.WPD:JPH page 25 to swift. No real pools were present during high flows (> 100 cfs) observed in November. At lower flows in July 1995 considerable areas of lower velodty pool and riffle habitat were present. Limited areas were seen in November 1994 that appeared to provide good salmon spawning habitat and these areas appeared to be fully utilized by pink and chum salmon during the September 10, 1995, survey. The lower portion of the North Tributary had good streambed gravels and supported the highest density of pink and chum salmon spawning observed in the September 1995 survey. ADF&G (1979) indicated that 70 percent of the area at the mouth of the lower tributary was considered to be available spawning habitat. A large proportion of the streamflow into this north tributary comes from a large spring of several cubic feet per second that enters the stream about 200 ft above its mouth. About 200 ft above this tributary, Lower Reynolds Creek recombines into a single channel after having been braided in three or four channels for about 300 ft downstream of the old US Geological Surveys (USGS) gaging station. Several large trees blown down into the creek have created falls of 2 to 3 ft in height across two of the three channels in the lower portion of the braided reach. The third channel passes under one of these logs, allowing fish passage upstream into the braids. Just below the USGS station location, this third braid (dry in July 1995) is also partially blocked by a 2-ft debris dam, but fish can pass this area in certain flows. Stream gradient remains moderate throughout this reach (average 8.2 percent; Table 3) except for some areas of lower gradient in portions of some of the braids. As in the lower reach, pools are few but bed materials are generally coarser here, reflecting the lack of gravel sources in the canyon upstream. ADF&G reported relatively low percentages of available spawning habitat in the subreaches above the tributary (mean about 14 percent, range 0 to 50 percent). Pink salmon were widely distributed throughout this reach in September 1995. One of the few discrete pools in the lower creek at higher flows is found at the old USGS gaging station, about 975 ft from the stream mouth and at elevation 75 fmsl. This pool, although it lacks well-defined hydraulic control, comprised the last likely spawning area for salmon in the stream under November flow conditions. ADF&G (1979), however, reported no available salmon spawning habitat above the USGS station although they observed some adult pink salmon in the reach. Just upstream of the USGS station, the gradient steepens to about 12 percent between 80 fmsl and 90 fmsL In November 1994 water cascaded in a near continuous, high velodty cataract in this reach with only limited areas of lower velOCity eddies behind boulders along the bank. November 14, 1997 Pentec 00214\ooS\APPENO\FISHAQU2.WPO:JPH page 26 Between 90 frosl and 100 fmsl the gradient increases to over 20 percent as the stream passes over about a 12-ft waterfall, turns sharply to the north, and enters a steep-walled, high-gradient canyon. This fall has been identified as a barrier to anadromous fish with no possible access or habitat for anadromous fish upstream. Under the lower flows seen in mid-summer, the reach immediately above the gage station is a series of pools and cascades with reasonably good fish habitat in the pool margins. Streambed materials are coarse, however, and the value of this habitat for spawning salmon is marginal as indicated by ADF&G (1979; see also Table 3). There were a large number of cutthroat trout of several year classes caught by electroshocking in the reach of Reynolds Creek above the confluence with the tributary in July 1995 and 1996. Sizes ranged from 32 to 125 mm. Electroshocking in the reach just above the USGS gage station in July 1995 captured several larger cutthroat (85 to 155 mm) but few YOY (average =35.3 mrn; n =3). Several of these fish may have been young rainbow or steelhead trout as indicated by their shorter upper maxillary. Numerous schools of pink and chum salmon were seen near the mouth of Reynolds Creek Pink salmon were more abundant than chums. A small school (approximately 50 fish) of pink salmon was seen in the vicinity of the mouth of two very small tributaries that enter the northeast corner of Copper Harbor near the old smelter site that are reported by ADF&G (1992) to support pink salmon. The reach from the mouth of Reynolds Creek to the old USGS gaging station contained a great many pink salmon and some chums moving upstream or actively spawning in every available lower velocity portion of the stream. Numerous pink salmon and a few chums were also moving upstream and spawning throughout the lower 100 ft of the major northern tributary. Above the USGS gaging station, where stream gradient increases, the numbers of fish dropped markedly in proportion to the diminished area of the stream with velodty and turbulence characteristics that would allow fish to rest or spawn. Despite this, pink salmon were visible in each stream margin area without turbulence for about 90 ft upstream of the gaging station. Fish were moving upstream by actively jumping cascades or by avoiding the thalweg and moving upstream along the stream margins. At about 90 ft above the gaging station (about 90 fms!), a cascade system of 4 to 6 ft in height is not a total block to salmon migration; several (4 or 5) pink salmon were found just upstream of the cascade in a relatively lower velocity November 14, 1997 Pentec 00214\o05\APPEND\FISHAQU2.WPD:JPH page 27 stream segment that is a pool under low flow conditions. These fish likely accessed this area via a lower velocity side channel that bypassed the main cascade at high flow. However, this segment is at the toe of another higher and steeper falls (toe elevation approximately 95 fInsI). No fish were seen in the limited area of nonturbulent water above this cascade, and there was no apparent way fish could bypass the cascade at these or any flows. Agency biolOgists who visited the site (July 1995 and April 1997) agreed that this cascade was very probably the ultimate migration barrier. Although a significant number of pink salmon spawners (100s) reached the area of Reynolds Creek above the USGS gaging station, it is probable that their spawning opportunities there are limited. As noted, ADF&G (1979) reported no available spawning habitat above the USGS gage. Surveys conducted in July 1995 and 19% assessed salmonid rearing habitat and potential sources of spawning gravels in this reach. The streambed upstream of the gaging station is boulders and coarse, angular rubble with very little gravel of a size in which fish could actually construct a redd. As a result, spawning probably consists of releasing eggs and sperm among the rubble. Only those eggs that lodge in cracks among the rubble would have a chance of surviving to the fry stage. This condition gets increasingly severe with distance upstream of the gaging station. The potential contribution to the system's production of fry from the reach below the barrier <beginning at about elevation 85 ft) is likely negligible. In contrast, Lower Reynolds Creek below the gaging station and its main north tributary have good spawning and rearing habitat in series of pools formed by low cascades, mostly over large organic debris. The pools typically had low velocity tailout glides among large cobbles. ADF&G personnel reported capturing coho fry in the tributary (ADF&G 1995). SUMMARY Upper and Middle Reynolds Creek Surveys in 1995 -1996 have done much to expand our understanding of the distribution and life history of arctic grayling in the Reynolds Creek system. In general, all indications are that there is a net movement of fish downstream toward Lake Mellen as significant upstream migrations are blocked by waterfalls and cascades. Spawning appears to occur only in selected locations in the inlets to lakes and ponds in the system. Surveys have indicated that the most probable spawning period is from mid-April through May in some years, although in 1997 heavy ice and snow cover on Summit Lake and Lake Marge may have delayed spawning into May. November 14, 1997 Pentec 00214\OOS\APPEND\FISHAQU2.WPD:JPH page 28 Electroshocking in the primary inlet stream to Lake Marge demonstrated the presence of a reproducing grayling population resulting from plantings in 1962. The ponds formed where Reynolds Creek crosses a flat bench also support an isolated but reproducing population that has been established by fish dropping out of falls at the outlet of Lake Marge. Excess production in this area may in turn provide recruitment to the abundant grayling population in Summit Lake, as repeated surveys failed to document spawning or fry in the inlet streams to this lake. Summit Lake has an good grayling population that could support a quality fly-in fishery in mid to late summer, especially near the inlets and outlet. ADF&G records do not indicate any planting of fish downstream of Summit Lake. Yet just below the lake and isolated from it by cascades, ripe adults in spring and presence of fry and juvenile grayling in the summer indicate a reproducing population in Jack's Pond and its inlet streams. Similar evidence of a reproducing population has been seen in Interlaken Pond and Lake Mellen. Electroshocking in 1995 and 1996 indicated that a greater number of fry are apparently produced in the inlets to Interlaken than in the inlet to Lake Mellen, suggesting that a portion of the very abundant grayling population in Lake Mellen may stem from downstream migration of fish produced in the Interlaken inlets. A bedrock cascade between Interlaken and Lake Mellen may prevent upstream spawning migrations from Lake Mellen, but the number of fish in Lake Mellen and the relative paucity of identified spawning in more accessible areas may mean that such upstream migrations are possible. Several ripe grayling were captured in the pool at the base of the cascade in spring 1996 surveys. Jack's Pond, Interlaken Pond, and Lake Mellen all have excellent grayling populations that could support recreational fisheries, although only Lake Mellen is readily accessible by float plane. The relative catch of YOY grayling between mid-summer 1995 and 1996 indicates a substantially greater recruitment in 1995 and a high degree of interannual variability. The stream reach between Lake Mellen and Rich's Pond would appear to offer excellent habitat for grayling rearing and, except for an apparently year-round cover of filamentous green algae, for grayling spawning. Although one ripening fish was captured in this reach in spring of 1996, the absence of fry in repeated electro shocking surveys (1995 -1997) strongly indicates that spawning does not occur here. Despite this, the concentration of adult grayling at the inlet of this stream to Rich's Pond is as large as any seen in the system. Lower Reynolds Creek Lower Reynolds Creek is a relatively high gradient stream flowing through old-growth forest, although logging that began in 1997 is altering this condition. About 1,120 ft of stream November 14. 1997 Pentec 00214\OOS\APPEND\FISHAQU2.WPD:JPH page 29 to an approximate elevation of 95 ft above mean sea level is accessible to anadromous fish, and use by pink and chum salmon is high. Use by coho salmon is moderate or variable, at least in comparison with the large runs of pink and chum. Cutthroat and rainbow trout populations may be a mix of resident and anadromous forms with anadromy more common in the lower reaches and residency more common in the upper reaches (from the USGS gage station upstream). We are confident in the identification of the anadromous fish barrier. Salmon were documented in September 1995 at the base of the cascade and falls that was identified in July 1995 as the most likely barrier. Salmon were not present above the barrier even though conditions at the time of the September survey were favorable for maximum upstream travel. Above the anadromous fish barrier (within the canyon leading up to Lake Mellen) a very few resident cutthroat are found. November 14, 1997 Pentec 00214\oo5\APPEND\FISHAQU2.WPD:JPH page 30 REFERENCES Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G). 1979. Survey field data sheet provided by ADF&G 1995. Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G). 1992. Anadromous stream catalog. Stream 10420 on USGS Craig A-2 quadrangle. ADF&G, Juneau. Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G). October 17, 1995. Letter from J. Durst, Klawock Habitat Manager, to J. Houghton, Pentec Environmental, Inc. Alt, K. A. 1976. Inventory and cataloging of north slope waters. Federal Aid in Fish Restoration, Annual Report of Progress 17(F-9-8), Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Anchorage. Beauchamp, D. A. 1982. The life history, spawning behavior, and interspecific interactions of the arctic grayling (Thymallus arcHeus) in upper Granite Lake. Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Washington, Seattle. Bishop, F. G. 1971. Observations on spawning habitats and fecundity of the arctic grayling. Progressive Fish Culturist 88(1):12-19. Brown, C. 1938. Observations on the life history and breeding habits of the Montana grayling. Copeia 3:132-136. Crai8t P. c., and V. A. Poulin. 1975. Movements and growth of arctic grayling (Thymallus ardicus) and juvenile arctic char (Salvelinus alpinus) in a small arctic stream, Alaska. Journal of Fisheries Research Board of Canada 32:689-697. de Bruyn, M" and P. McCart. 1974. Life history of the grayling (Thymallus arcticus) in Beaufort Sea drainages in the Yukon Territory. In P. J. McCart, editor. Fisheries research associated with proposed gas pipeline routes in Alaska, Yukon and Northwest Territory. Canada Arctic. Gas Study Ltd.!Alaskan Arctic. Gas Study Co. BioL Rep. Ser. 15(2):1-110. Houghton, J. P. 1983. Cominco Alaska, Inc., environmental baseline studies, Red Dog project. Report of Dames & Moore for Cominco Alaska, Inc., Kotzebue, Alaska. November 14. 1997 Pentec 00214\OO5\APPEND\FISHAQU2.WPD:JPH page 31 Kratt, L. F., and R. J. F. Smith. 1977. A post-hatching sub-gravel stage in the life history of the arctic grayling, Thymallus ardicus. Transactions of American Fisheries Society 106(3):241-243. Krueger, S. W. 1981. Freshwater habitat relationships: arctic grayling (Thymallus arcticus). Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Habitat Division, Anchorage. Kruse, T. E. 1959. Grayling of Grebe Lake, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. US Fish and Wildlife Service Fishery Bulletin 149(59):307-351. US Government Printing Office, Washington, OC. Lund, J. A 1974. Reproduction of salmonids in the inlets of Elk Lake, Montana. Unpublished Master's thesis, Montana State University, Bozeman. Nelson, P. H. 1954. Life history and management of the American grayling (Thymallus signifer tricolor) in Montana. Journal of Wildlife Management, 18(3):324-342. Netsch, N. F. 1975. Fishery resources of waters along the route of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline between Yukon River and Atigun Pass in north central Alaska. Research Publication 124. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska. Reed, R. J. 1964. Life history and migration patterns of arctic grayling, Thymallus arcticu5, (Pallas), in the Tanana River drainage of Alaska. Research Report No.2, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Juneau. Sentec, Inc. 1996. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project. Digital topographic survey maps. Anchorage, Alaska. Shallock, E. W. 1966. Sport fish investigations in Alaska. Investigations of the Tanana River and Tangle Lake fisheries, migratory and population study. Project F-005-R-07, Work Plan 16, Job B, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Anchorage. Tack, S. L. 1971. Distribution, abundance and natural history of the arctic grayling in the Tanana River drainage. Federal Aid in Fish Restoration, Annual Report of Progress, 1970-1971, Project F-9-3, 12(R-I), Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Anchorage. November 14, 1997 Pentec 00214\OO5\APPEND\FISHAQU2.WPD:J PH page 32 Tack, S. L. 1972. Distribution, abundance and natural history of the Arctic grayling in the Tanana River drainage. Federal Aid in Fish Restoration, Annual Report of Progress, .1971-1972, Project F-9-4, 13(R-I), Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Anchorage. Tack, S. L. 1980. Migrations and distribution of arctic grayling, Thymallus arctieus (Pallus), in interior and arctic Alaska. Federal Aid in Fish Restoration, Annual Performance Report, 1979-1980, 2HF-9-12), 2HR-I), Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Anchorage. Tryon, C. A. 1947. The Montana grayling. Progressive Fish-Culturist 9(3):136-142. Van Wyhe, G. 1962. Inventory and cataloging of sport fish and sport fish waters of the Copper River and Prince William Sound Drainages. Federal Aid in Fish Restoration, Annual Report of Progress, 1961-1962, Project F-5-R-3, (11-A):277-243, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Anchorage. Vascotto, G. L. 1970. Summer ecology and behavior of the grayling of MacManus Creek, Alaska. Master's thesis. University of Alaska, Fairbanks. Wojcik, F. 1954. Spawning habits of grayling in interior Alaska. Federal Aid in Fish Restoration, Quarterly Progress Report F-1-R-4, 4(1), US Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Game Commission. Yoshihara, H. T. 1972. MonitOring and evaluation of arctic waters with emphasis on the North Slope drainages. Federal Aid in Fish Restoration, Annual Report of Progress, 1971-1972, Project F-9-4, 13(G-III-A), Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Anchorage. November 14, 1997 Pentec 00214\oo5\APPEND\FISHAQU2.WPD:JPH page 33 Applicationfor License APPENDIXD ADDITIONAL SPECIES OF INTEREST IN THE REYNOLDS CREEK DRAINAGE November 1997 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 Additional Species of Interest in the Reynolds Creek Drainage Prepared by: Pentec Environmental, Inc. 120 Third Avenue South, Suite 110 Edmonds, Washington 98020 (425) 775-4682 July 29, 1997 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ................................................... 1 Species Evaluations ............................................. 1 Spotted Frog .......................................................... 1 Thurber's Reedgrass ..................................................... 3 Lenticular Sedge ....................................................... 3 References ................................".."................."..."....".".".. 4 ADDITIONAL SPECIES OF INTEREST IN THE REYNOLDS CREEK DRAINAGE INTRODUCTION This report provides information on several candidate species of concern that have been identified by various agency comments received in response to the First-Stage Request for Consultation (InterMountain Energy 1995) for the Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project. The species discussed in this report are not covered in the text of the Reynolds Creek Environmental Assessment because they are either no longer candidate species or their distribution does not appear to include the Reynolds Creek site. SPECIES EVALUATIONS SPOTTED FROG The spotted frog occurs in southeast Alaska at the northern limit of its range, where it occupies coastal forests on the mainland and a few islands in the Alexander Archipelago (Hodge 1978, Turner and Dumas 1972, Turner 1962, Stebbins 1985, Nussbaum et al. 1983). There are no records of its occurrence on Prince of Wales Island. In the Alexander Archipelago they are known from only from Mitkof Island and the smaller islands at the mouth of the Stikine River (Lindell 1995, pers. comm). This relatively widespread species is undergoing a taxonomic revision and will probably be split into two species (Green et al. 1995). The proposed change identifies two species: Rana pretiosa Species A, from southwestern Washington State and Oregon; and Rana pretiosa Species B, which includes all other populations. Species A is a Category 1 candidate species. It is only known from 7 or 8 locations within its former range. Species B is widely distributed and locally common. It is a Category 2 candidate species because of threats to isolated local populations in Utah and Arizona (McAllister 1995, pers. comm.). The genetic variability of Species B conforms to the pattern exhibited by populations that are shifting their range. In this case, the shift is from south to north in response to the recent (6,000 to 8,000 years before present) history of the Wisconsin glacial period. The expansion into British Pentec 00214\oo5\APPEND\TERREST.TES:JPH page 1 Columbia and Alaska has occurred quite recently, less than 6,000 years ago. It is thought (Lindell 1995, pers. comm.) that spotted frogs entered Southeast Alaska from British Columbia along the major transboundary rivers from Juneau to Ketchikan including the Taku, Stikine, Salmon, and Unuk Rivers. Because of the distance and isolation of Prince of Wales Island relative to these river systems, it would be highly unlikely to find spotted frogs on Prince of Wales Island (Lindell 1995, pers. comm.). No frogs, tadpoles, or froglets were found in any of the lakes, ponds, or potholes examined during field reconnaissance in July 1995 or in 1996 or 1997 surveys. The spotted frog breeds early in the season, around the end of February or beginning of Marchl. At higher elevations, it breeds somewhat later but while snow is still on the ground. The main temporal cue seems to be the first warm rains and high water of the season. The eggs hatch around the end of March or the first week of April. The tadpoles metamorphose into froglets toward the end of June or the first week of July. The froglets remain in the vicinity of the breeding ponds after metamorphosis. Where frogs have bred, one would almost certainly find froglets in pond margins throughout the month of July. In many locations, adults and subadults as well as froglets can be found in and around breeding ponds and associated streams throughout the summer. In other locations, however, the only sign of the frog's presence is the tadpole and newly transformed froglets. Much of the habitat in the study area is only marginally suitable for spotted frogs. The preferred spawning locations are in shallow grassy areas at the margins of ponds, marshes, and bogs, particularly where tadpoles can follow the retreating shoreline into deeper water as the season progresses. Spotted frogs occasionally use clear cold mountain streams or lakes with rocky bottoms, but a high density of frogs or tadpoles in this habitat is not to be expected. However, potholes in mountain bogs and marshes, such as those found in middle Reynolds Creek, are good spotted frog spawning habitat. If spotted frogs were to occur on the island at all, these potholes would constitute suitable habitat. Based on the known distribution of this species and the absence of froglets in potential spawning areas in mid-July of 1995 through 1997, we concluded that spotted frogs do not occur on the site. lThis discussion of spotted frog breeding phenology is based on a telephone conversation with K. McAllister, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. The earlier dates are for lower latitude or elevation; the later dates are for higher latitude or elevation. Pentec 00214\ooSIAPPEND\TERREST.TES:JPH page 2 THURBER'S REEDGRASS The taxonomy of this species has been changed from Calamagrostis crassiglumis to Calamagrostis stricta spp. inexpansa. This change was recognized in The Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of California (Hickman 1993). C. stricta inexpansa occurs on both sides of the Bering Sea. It is common in British Columbia east of the Coast/Cascade mountains but infrequent along the coast. It is not currently of conservation concern. It will shortly be reclassified from a Category 2 candidate (a species for which listing as threatened under the Endangered Species Act is possibly appropriate but conclusive infonnation is lacking) to a Category 3 candidate (a species that was once considered for listing under the Endangered Species Act which is no longer being considered). No plants resembling Calamagrostis were identified at the site. LENTICULAR SEDGE Carex lenticularis var. dolia is on the Rare and Endangered List for Alaska and was a Category 2 federal candidate. It has rarely been collected. It occurs in the Coast Mountains of Alaska and British Columbia and in the Rocky Mountains from Jasper, British Columbia, to Glacier National Park. It has also been collected from Queen Charlotte Island. It occurs at high elevations and latitudes, in wet meadows, and lake shores. This variety is distinguished from other varieties of C. lenticularis by the terminal flowering spike, which is primarily pistillate (female) in C. lenticularis dolia but staminate (male) in the other varieties. Mature achenes are present from late August through mid-September (Standley 1985). There were several species of Care:x noted on site, but only one resembled C. lenticularis. This plant was relatively abundant on the shores of Summit Lake and the Summit Lake outlet pond. However, all inflorescences had staminate terminal spikes. The plant was keyed to C. lenticularis limnophila on the basis of the color of pistillate scales and the shape and color of the perigynium (Standley 1985). C. lenticularis limnophila occurs from the Aleutian Islands to Humboldt County, California. It has been collected from Prince of Wales Island. However, this variety occupies wet meadows and lake shores near the coast, at or near sea leveL Since the plant was collected at l~OO-to 1~80-ft elevation, it is possible that this identification is incorrect. The samples have been preserved and are available for inspection. Standley (1985) notes that var. limnophila "may be confused with robust plants of var. lipocarpa [a widespread and abundant variety that was fonnerly known as Care:x kelloggii], but the differences in characters of the perigynia and spike width are usually reliable taxonomic features." Pentec 00214\ooS\APPEND\TERREST.TES:JPH page 3 REFERENCES Green, D. M., T. E. Sharble, J. Kearsley, and H. Kaiser. 1995. Postglacial evolution, genetic subdivision, and speciation in the western North American spotted frog complex, Rana pretiosa. Evolution. In press. J. C. Hickman. 1993. The Jepson manual: higher plants of California. University of California Press, Berkeley. Hodge, R. P. 1978. Amphibians and reptiles in Alaska, the Yukon, and Northwest Territories. Alaska Northwest Publishing, Anchorage. InterMountain Energy, Inc. 1995. First-stage consultant package and proposed study plan, Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric project, FERC No. P-11480-000. InterMountain Energy, Inc., Cave Junction, Oregon. Lindell, J. August 16, 1995. US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Personal communication. McAllister, K. 1995. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. Personal communication. Nussbaum, R. A., E. D. Brodie, Jr., and R M. Storm. 1983. Amphibians and reptiles of the Pacific Northwest. University of Idaho Press, Moscow. Standley, L. A. 1985. Systematics of the Acutae group of Carex (Cyperaceae) in the Pacific Northwest. Systematic Botany Monographs, The American Society of Plant Taxonomists 7:59-69. Stebbins, R. C. 1985. A field guide to western reptiles and amphibianS. Houghton-Miffin, Boston. Turner, F. B. 1962. An analysis of geographic variation and distribution of Rana pretiosa. American Philosophical Society Yearbook 1962:325-328. Pen tee 00214\OOS\APPENO\TERREST.TES:JPH page 4 Turner, F. B., and P. C. Dumas. 1972. Rana pretiosa. Catalogue of American Amphibians and Reptiles 119:1-4. Pentec 00214\oo5\APPEND\TERREST,TES:JPH page 5 Application for License APPENDIXE CULTURAL RESOURCES REPORT November J997 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Projecl No. J 1480 An Archeological Survey of the LaKe Mellon Hydroelectric PI9ject, South Prince of Wales Island, Alaska CHRS R. CAMPBELL, ARCHEOLOGIST C.R.C. CULTURAL RESOURCE CONSULTANT 601 MAIN STREET, KETCHIKAN. ALASKA 99901 Introduction Cultural resources management for any project located wholly or in part on federal lands, or funded and licensed wholly or in part by a federal agency is authorized by a number of laws, including but limited to the following: the Antiquities Act of 1906 (Public Law [PL] 59-209; the . Historic Sites Act of 1935 (PL 74-292); the Reservoir Salvage Act of 1960 (PL 86-523); the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (PL 89-665, as amended in 1976, 1980, and 1992); the National Environment Policy Act of 1974 (PL 93-291); the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (PL 96-95); and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (PL 101-601: 104 STA 3048). The regulations most relevant to field investigations are 36 Code of Federal Regulation (CPR) 60, which authorizes the National Register of Historic Places, and 36 CPR 800, which executes Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act through the definition of the review procedure for any cultural resource aff~ed by a project located wholly or in part on federal lands, funded wholly or in part With federal moneys, or licensed wholly or in part by a federal agency. Cultural or paleontological resources located wholly or in part on State of Alaska lands, including the intertidal zones of coastal waterways, are protected by the Alaska State Historic Preservation Act of 1971, Alaska Statute 41.35. Regional Setting Present Environment. Prince of Wales Island, the largest island in the Alexander Archipelago, is positioned near the southern end of the Alexander Archipelago. The Prince of Wales province is a subregion of the coastal trough province (Warhaftig 1965:42-43). It is typified by moderately rugged glaciated terrain dissected by steep walled U-shaped valleys. Several passes less than 500 feet in elevation cross the range of mountains that run like a spine down the center of the island. Many of the passes are in actuality drainages of major streams, such as the Thome River drainage which effectively transects the northeastern section of Prince ofWaIes Island. In keeping with the generally homogenous vegetative cover in this region, predominant flora consists of old growth Reynolds Crk Archeological Report 10/10196 page I spruce hemlock forest, with cedar stands being found on more level terrain where soils are less permeable, dotted with muskegs containing bull pine and shrubs. The climate of Prince of Wales Island is maritime, characterized by minor temperature fluctuations and high levels of precipitation that falls in the form of rain. Freezing weather is uncommon. Prevalent wind patterns are southeasterly, with gales generally occurring from October to December. Coastal spruce-hemlock forests begin directly above the high tide line and extend to the alpine, blanketing most of the island. Scrub forests consisting of cedar intermixed with hemlock and pine are blanketing most of the island. Scrub forests consisting of cedar intermixed with hemlock and pine are found in poorly drained contexts, such as the interfaces between muskegs and the more productive forest communities. Muskeg conditions occur in contexts of low or gently sloping . terrain (Heusser 1960). Faunal taxa are thoroughly described in the Forest Cultural Resources Overview (Arndt et. aL 1987b). Significant animal populations include waterfowl, seabirds, bald eagles, sport fish such as salmon and trout, and large game animals such as Sitka black tailed deer (Odocoi/eus hemiorms sitkensis) and black bear (Ursus americanus). To this may added that the productivity of littoral and marine biotic communities far exceeds that ofterrestrial species. Past Environments. This area achieved its distinctive characteristics since the advent of the Holocene c. 14,000 years ago. During the preceding period, the Late Wisconsin TlIDe of the Pleistocene (more commonly referred to as being the "ice-age"), vast glaciers blanketed a large portion of the earth's surface. Eastward, the mainland and Revillagigedo Island was engulfed by a massive ice sheet called the Cordillera. Whether this glacier also encompassed Prince of Wales Island is open to debate, although data suggests they were not: The nature of the present topography ofPrince ofWales suggests other local centers of glaciation. The well-developed mountain chains were at least the Reynolds Crk Archeological Report 10/10196 page 2 centers of valley glaciers ... Whether they coalesced and attained ice-sheet proportions is unknown ... (Heusser 1952:334). Heusser (ibid.) postulated that biotic communities or refugia flourished in unglaciated sections of Southeast Alaska throughout the Pleistocene. Biotic communities could have survived on nunataks (mountain peaks that jutted above the glaciers) and along the western coast of Prince of Wales Island. He pointed out that temperatures averaged only 10 degrees lower than those enjoyed at present (Heusser 1960). The presence of such a refugium would explain the rapid revegetation of deglaciated areas at sea level. This led Fladmark (1975) to compare Prince of Wales as having been like modern Greenland. There may have been an interior ice cap spilling out in a westerly direction toward the sea through major transverse valleys, but along the western shore, the ice did not achieve the magnitude to allow coalescence. Glacial retreat appears to have occurred sooner in the west where the ice was thinner than in the east, where lay the massive, thick Cordillera (Heusser 1952). Glacial retreat began approximately 14,000 years ago and was complete by 11,500 years ago (Mayewski, Denton, and Hughs 1981:134). Glacial retreat represents the advent of the Holocene. Hence, the majority of the Holocene represents a period of severe unrest as, through various mechanisms, stabilization was achieved. Perhaps the best example is that the earth's crust physically responded by uplifting to the lack of pressure from heavy glaciers depressing the surface. This is called isostatic rebound. Initially sea levels stood much higher than at present, as much as 500 feet higher in the vicinity of Juneau (Twenhofel 1952). Between 14,000 and 10,000 years ago, areas that presently lie between sea level to an as of yet undetermined elevation were submerged. As the land uplifted, the ocean levels seemed to drop until the shorelines reached their present configuration. Isostatic rebound resulted in erosion from the downcutting of streams and soils to reach their present equilibrium. Reynolds Crk Archeological Report 10/10196 page 3 Perhaps one of the greatest challenges facing archaeologists working in Southeast Alaska is the question of when land would have been available for human occupation following deglaciation. The location of elevated shore lines has relevance to archaeologists given the supposition that aboriginal populations likely have always established camps· and communities within the productive beach fringe instead of the interior of the islands that comprise the Alexander Archipelago. The location of past shore lines is inextricably tied to deglaciation and associated reforestation. Past sea level fluctuations are recorded in fossil marine shell deposits. Fossil marine shells look like modem ones; they are not fossilized impressions or extrusions in rock.. The difference is that they are not found in contexts reflective of their habitat. They are present either at an elevation higher than the modem beach or in dense strata below mean high tide. The shell deposits, often located on elevated marine terraces, are indicative of raised or lowered sea levels. The difficulty in locating them stems from their possible destruction, either by subsequent marine transgressions or by transformational processes such as slope wash, or tree throw. Because such beaches would now be elevated, they would be located in a mature forest or muskeg context. A beach protected at present is more likely to be backed by a remnant fossil marine shell bed than one that is exposed to violent wave action. Exposures of fossil marine shell are discovered in erosional features such as root wads. stream banks or beds, and road cuts. One has been identified through shovel probing a lake margin (Mobley 1984:43). Locating, analyzing, and dating fossil marine shells appears to hold promise for predicting the location of archaeological sites. To date, a concerted effort has been made to identify fossil marine shell deposits on Prince ofWales and associated islands, although the sample is small. The work accomplished demonstrates that sea levels have been differential, pointing perhaps to tectonic activity having been a factor is determining where these deposits are located as well as sea level fluctuations tied to glaciation and deglaciation (J. Baichtal: pers. comm.). There is considerable local variation. Reynolds Crk Archeological Reporr 10/10196 page 4 Dating the fossil marine shell provides valuable benchmarks regarding the placement of past shorelines, yet it is presently impossible to accurately predict the ages and locations of sites relative to elevation above sea level. In general, as suggested by Fladmark (1975), it appears as though throughout the Holocene, the land-sea interface was in a state of flux, no doubt wreaking havoc on the biotic and human communities. Cultural Overview Although the prehistory ofPrince ofWales Island may be extended as far back as 10,000 or more years, the ethnographic record speaks primarily to cultures who inhabited the region during the historic period. Only passing reference bas ever been made to people who may have preceded the TIingit (Swanton 1914). The population dynamics contribute to a poor understanding of past land use patterns, particularly on the southern half of Prince of Wales Island. In the latter part of the 18th century the Haida invaded south Prince of Wales Island from the Queen Charlotte Islands. displacing the Tlingit (Krauss 1956:206; Niblack 1890:385; Olson 1967:3). Because ofthis proto historic break of a group of people from their traditional land base, there are many sites located on south Prince of Wales Island which have been discovered by the author of this report for which there is no prior knowledge or history. This is one reason why an archaeological survey was deemed to be important, even though no archeological sites were reported to be present at the mouth ofReyno Ids Creek. Historical events are better recorded in this area. It was subject to a rush to mine copper in the early days of the twentieth century. In 1902, the Alaska Copper Company constructed a community at the head of Copper Harbor, which indents the north shore of Hetta Inlet (Balcom 1965:40). Reynolds CrkArcheo/Qgical Report 10/10196 page 5 By 1902 the community, called Coppermount, had been established at the head of Copper Harbor. It included a wharf, a smelting plant, a power plant, a sample mill, an aerial tramway 6,000 feet long,. bunkers, a sawmill, a blacksmith and machine shop, store and warehouse, assay office, and compressor plant. In addition, there was Globe Fishing and Packing Co., George Moffett's hotel and saloon, other mining company offices, and a post office. The population stood at 150 (polk: 1908:179-180; Wright and Wright 1908:97). All of the necessary machinery at the mines and the smelter was run by water power derived from Reynolds Creek that was transmitted 1000 feet by a 22-inch pipe line to the compressor plant, where two water wheels developed 300 horsepower. Operations ceased in 1906 to reorganize the company, and never re~ed (Balcom 1965: 40; Wright and Wright 1908:97-98). In 1907, the populace moved en masse to nearby Sulzer, abandoning Coppermount (Balcom 1964:40). Project Description This project involves putting a draw-down hydroelectric facility at outlet of Lake Mellon (fig. 1). A powerhouse will be built on the north side of Reynolds Creek near its outlet at the lake. A transmission line will be built on the north side of Hetta Inlet. It will cross to Jumbo Island, and thence to Prince of Wales Island at Deer Bay. The transmission line will then parallel the existing road on the north side to Hydaburg. The transmission line will be constructed completely within existing or proposed timber harvest unit boundaries and will be above the IOO-foot elevation above sea-level except near Deer Bay, which has been clearcut. The staging area for project work will be on the north shore of Copper Harbor near its head. Archeological Survey In August, 1989 a one-day archeological survey was performed of lands at the head of Copper Harbor by this author. The north shore of Copper Harbor where once stood Coppermount has all been logged and filled to provide a base for Sealaska logging facilities (fig. 2). Clear cuts then come right to shore at the northeast head of the harbor. Only about IOO-feet of old-growth Reynolds CrJcArcheolcglcal Repcn 10110196 page 6 timber remains at the head of Copper Harbor north of the mouth of Reynolds Creek (fig. 3). There was considerable sign of springboard logging. Soils overlie rounded cobbles disclosed in dry overflow channels. Drainage is variable because of the presence of sloughs in the woods. Level, well drained sections were tested with shovel probes but disclosed no indication of subsurface remains. Reynolds Creek rises abruptly to the power house locale without any real indication of terraces or fossil marine shell in the streambed. There was no indication of wooden pipe for water lines, structural remains, or rusted equipment or machinery. The shoreline was thoroughly surveyed, and this was facilitated by an extreme low tide. There were no petroglyphs, canoe landings, or fish traps, either represented by stone alignments or remnants of wooden stakes. There was also no early twentieth century debris, such as shards of glass or china, or rusted cable or equipment. Absolutely no remains of Coppennount exist at this site. It seems likely that recent activities in the area may be responsible for the total absence of remams. The proposed transmission line will run along a steep slope at or above the 100-foot elevation, most of which has already been clearcut. The route was surveyed from the air and this archeologist is of the opinion that there is no potential for the route to impact cultural resources. No cliffs that may have sheltered humankind at an earlier point in time were sighted along the route, which is significant because this is karst topography. The power house site also appears to have no potential for disturbing any remains. Conclusions It does not appear as though the proposed hydroelectric project will have any impact on cultural resources. A systematic, on-the-ground archeological survey of the high potential area did not find any remains. An aerial survey over the proposed transmission line concludes that the possibility for sites to be found along the route is negligible, and any that may have been present have since been destroyed by logging activities. If any cultural resources, denoted by surficial historical finds, subsurface shell remains, or totally black, friable soils are discovered during the Reynolds Crk Archeolcgica{ Reporr 10/10196 page 7 course of construction, all work in the vicinity of the find should be suspended until consultation and mitigation measures. as set forth in 36 CFR 800. have been completed. Reynolti!l eric Archeological Report 10110196 page 8 References Cited Arndt, Katherine, Russell Sackett, and James D. Ketz 1987 A Cultural Resource Overview oj the Tongass National Forest, Alaska. Parts 1 and 2. GDM Inc.: Fairbanks, Alaska Balcom, Mary 1965 Ghost Towns ojAlaska. Adams Press: Chicago, lll. Fladmark, Knut 1975 A Paleoecological Model jor Northwest Coast Prehistory. Archaeological Survey of Canada. Paper No. 43. Mercury Series. National Museum of Man: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Heusser, Calvin 1952 Pollen Profiles from Southeastern Alaska. In Ecology Monographs 22:331-352. 1960 Late Pleistocene Environments ofNorth Pacific North America. Geographical Society Special Publication No. 35. Mayewslci, P .A, G.H. Denton, and T.l Hughes 1981 Late Wisconsin Ice Sheets of North America. In The Last Great Ice Sheets. John Wlley and Sons: New York. Mobley, Charles M 1984 An Archaeological Survey of 15 Timber Harvest Units at Naukiti Bay on Prince oj Wales Island. Tongass National Forest, Alaska. Report to USDA Forest Service, Ketchikan Area under Contract No. 53-0109-3-00152. Niblack, Albert 1890 The Coast Indians ojSouthern Alaska and Northern British Columbia. U.S. Natural History Annual Report for 1888. 225-386. Olson, Ronald L. 1967 Social Strocture and Social Life ojthe Tlingit in Alaska. Anthropological Records, Volume 26. University of California Press: Berkeley and Los Angeles, California Polk, RL. 1907-Polk's Alaska-Yukon Gazetteer and Business Directory 1907-1908. RL. Polk and Co.: Seattle, W A. Reynolds CrkArcheolcgical Repon 10/10196 page 9 Swanton, John R 1908 Social Condition, Beliefs, and Linguistic Relationships oj the T1ingit Indians. Johnson Reprint Co.: New York. Twenbofel, Williams S. 1952 Recent Shorelines Changes Along the Pacific of Coast of Alaska. In American Journal oj Science. Vol. 1250, No. 7:523-548. Warhaftig, Clyde 1965 Physiographic Divisions ojAlaska. Geological Survey Professional Paper 482. US Government Printing Office: Washington, D.C. Wright, Fred Eugene and Charles Will Wright 1908 The Ketchikan and Wrangell Mining Districts, Alaska. U.S. Geological Bulletin No. 347: Washington, D.C. Reynolds CrkArcheological Report 10/10{96 page 10 \ t NORTH SCALE 1" = 1 Mile " I ](~q;;-O \ ~i \\ ,';\~ Fig. 1: Map of Project Area Reynolds CrkArcheological Report 10110{96 page 11 Fig. 2: View of past site of Coppennount. Fig 3 Mouth of Reynolds Creek, Copper Harbor Note clearcut extreme left. !'?<iynoiJs eric .lrcn<]oioglcai 8t!port 10,10196 pag~ 11 Application for License APPENDIXF PERMIT/CERTIFICATION APPLICATIONS iVovember 1997 Reynold> Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Prf{ject No. 11480 Application for License APPENDIXF PERMIT/CERTIFICATION APPLICATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS APPLICATION FOR WATER RIGHT SECTION 10/404 PERMIT APPLICATION FISH HABITAT PERMIT APPLICATION APPLICATION FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY OR EASEMENT SECTION 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION COASTAL PROJECT QUESTIONNAIRE AND CERTIFICATION STATEMENT November 1997 Reyno/ds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 Application for License APPLICATION FOR WATER RIGHT November J997 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Prr4ect No.1 J480 November J 2, 1997 Mr. John Dunker Alaska Department of Natural Resources Divison of Water 400 Willoughby, Suite 400 Juneau, AK 99801-1724 Subject: Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Request for Amendment of Water Right -LAS 19845 Dear Mr. Dunker: On July 20, 1995, Haida Corporation applied for a water right for a withdrawl from Lake Mellen (Reynolds Creek) for a run-of-river hydroelectric facility (LAS 19845, copy attached). The requested amount was 30 cubic feet per second (cfs). On behalf of Haida Corporation, we wish to increase the total quantity requested to 90 cfs. : Several other features of the project have also been modified since the original application was submitted. These are summarized in the following table. Feature Previous Current Penstock diameter 34in 42 in Length of penstock 5,700 ft 3,200 ft Dam length, height and width L 100; H 10; W 15 (ft) L 20; H 8; W 24 (ft) Head 400 ft 758 ft (net) Water storage 3,840 acre-ft 600 acre-ft The location of the proposed powerhouse has also moved from Section 4, T. 77 S., R. 85 E. to Section 3, T. 77 S., R. 85 E. Copper River Meridian. An updated project description and figures showing the current project layout are attached. HDR Engineering is the designated agent for Haida Corporation for permitting activities. Please contact me at (425) 453-1523 or Mark Dalton at (907) 274-2000 with any questions about this request or the project. Sincerely, Z~:GiI~C. Paul Berkshire, P.E. Project Manager Attachments cc: John Bruns, Haida Corporation Mark Dalton, HDR Alaska HDR Engineering. Inc. Suite 1200 Telephone 500 108th Avenue, N.E. 425453-1523 Bellevue. Washington Fax Employee-owned 98004·5538 425453·7107 / STi:\TE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES j.' DIVISION OF WATER o S<xII.hooontl'104 ~n B-S01.IU-t Region o NOf'ttl<tm R~n "400 WUloughby 3700 AIrport Way AncnOOOQ«.. AX ~10 4th Floor F"jrbW\b. AK 99706 P.O. Box 107005 (907) 1S2·2STS Jun_u.; AK 99601 (9<JT) 451·2700 (v: 562·138-' (907) "65-.:l4OO fax.: 451·2751 fax:: $S6.-295" APPLICA1l0N FOR WATER RIGHT I 1. APPLlCANT INFORMATION Haida Corporation Fuli legal name(s) Co-owner {!ull legai name} : Social Security or Federal Tax 10 # (optional) Social Securirv or Federal Tax 10 # (optional) P.O. Box 89 Hydabu~g, AK 99922 Mailing Address City, State and Zip (907) 295-3721 Home Telephone Number Business/Daytime Telephone Number I 2. LOCAl10N OF WATER USE: Powerhouse Provide the legal description of the property where the water will be used: Lot Block ASLS, ATS, or US Survey Subdivision Name r . p'_S_E--:-::-_1/4,___S_E_1/4 __4_--, _7_7_S____ 85E ,-,opper .•J. ver Aliquot Pans Section Township Range Meridian .... Do you own or lease this propeny? YES__ NO~ It yes, attach a signed copy of the patent, deed, or lease; OR If no, you may not be eligible to apply for water rights. Contact your ONR regional office for advice. I 3. LOCATION OF WATER SOURCE: Diversion Is the source of water within the boundaries of the same property as described in Section 2? YES __ NO~ If yes, skip the rest of section 3 OR If no, complete the following section giving the legal'description of the water source. __ , __--..J, Lot Block ASLS. A TS. or US Survey Subdivision Name SW'1/4 SE 1/4 3 77S SSE CoooeT" Riy~'"----''------' Aliquot Parts SectIon Township Range Meridian Do you own or lease and have nght of acx::ess to this property? YES __ NO-L If yes, attach a signed copy of the patent. deed, lease, or document(s) granting accQSS. OR If no, you will need to obtain a right of access to this property to obtain water rights. It the water source is on stal land. you must file an application for a right-of-way permit with the appropriate ONR office listed above. -- --- • 4. SOURCE INFORMATION Is your water source groundwater (ie. a well)? YES __ NOl If yes. check one of the following well types: Drilled [J Driven [I Dug l ] Total depth. in feet _____Static water level, in feet,____ Diameter Attach a copy at the well log if available OR Is your water source surface water? YES_X_ NO __ If yes, check one of the following: Stream (J River [ J Lake hI Spring [J Geographic name (if unnamed. state so) Lake He lIen (Reynolds Creek) • 5. LOCA1l0N MAP Attach a complete 1:63 360 (inch to mile) USGS map, 1:25,000 USGS map, or a subdivision plat identifying the section comers, township, range, and meridian and indicate the following on it: • Point of water withdrawal. impoundment. or diversion AND • Route of water transmission AND • Point of water use AND • Property boundary for the area of water use . • 6. COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT AREA? Is this appropriation within a Coastal Zone Management Area Plan? YES Y NO ___ If yes, and you are using more than 1.000 GPD from a surface source or 5,000 GPD from a subsurface source, you need to submit a completed Coastal Zone QUestionnaire. If no, disregard. For more information on Coastaf Zone Areas call the Division of GovemmentaJ Coordination; Anchorage 567-6131. Fairbanks 451·2819. Juneau 465·3562. I 7. METHOD OF TAKING WATER (complete the following table) Pump YES NO X Gravity YES X NO Ditch Yes No X __NoReservoir Yes X Dam Yes X NO Pump intake inches Hours workina Pipe diameter Length of pipe Hr/day ?U inches -:';O{\("I ft. (take point to use point) Pump output GPM Length of pipe ft. (from pump to point of use) Head 800 fL ,l H W ft. I Diversion GPM or CFS __ft.L H W Water storage AF l@100 H 10 W 1t; ft. Water storage ~?RO AF UGllmUons: GPM -Gallons per Minute AI-= Acre t"eet {32~.&l1 liallonsJ CFS = CubIC t-eel per ~econa I • 8. WATER QUANTITY AND USE . Ex~9d date for system to bG completely dellela(XKl s umme::,. 1 CC: f "";:>,'" 1 ... '" ";-"- Fill out the chart below if you are proposing to use water for one of these uses. For all other uses. describe the type of use and explain how much water is requested by showing calculations, elc. COMMON WATER USES AND STANDARD QUANTITIES i I , TYPE(S) OF HOW MANY STANDARD TOTAL MONTHS OF USE QUANTITY QUANTITY USE REQUESTED . FROM THRU Fully pluJ'1"1b&d stngle lamlty It Homes x 500 GPO I ::: 1 GPO I' I Fully plumbed alngle lamlty with I I I 1'mother-irHaw' apartment If Homel> x 750 GPO I = GPO Partialty plumbed slngie lamity I # Homes I x 250 GPO I ::: I GPO I I Unplumbed s:lngle family 1 If Homes x \ 75 GPO I = I GPO I I I , I I I IDuplex or Triplex If Bldgs. x I '1000 GPO = I GPO Fourplex and larger If Units I x 250 GPO I = I .GPO I Mobile Home ParI< 1 If Units I x I 250 GPO I I GPO I II = Motel or Resort \. # Rooms \ x: 150 GPO I = I GPO I I Cattle (not dairy COWS) I If Cows I x: I 12 GPO I = I GPO I Dairy Cows I If Cows I x I 35 GPO I = I GPO I Horses I it Horses I x 15 GPO I = I GPO I Poultry or Rabbits I 1# Animals I x: 0.5 GPO I = 1 GPO I Dogs (KennelliZ) 1# Dogs I x 1 GPO \ ::: GPO \ Crop Irrigation (if acres or sq. ft.): If Acres I x 0.5 AFY I ::: AFY I Work Camps If People I x 50 GPO I = GPO I ·OtherY{aterUses:.______ __ __ __ ~~.~o~n~.:~o~n~s~u~m~o~~~i~v~e~.~~~u~n~-~o~f~-_r~~~v~e~rh~y_a_·r_o e_l_e_c t_r_~_·_C D~O_W~e~r~~2~e~n~e~~~a~t~i~o~n~:__ use. -rear ':,ound. at ;0 CPS (S52 1 AF!' ennltlons: GPO· gallons per day AFY· acre leet per year CFS· cubic leet per second Fully plumbed single lamilv -Water piped into the house lor domestic uses. Hot water heater. flush toilet and irrigation 01 up to , O.OQ( sq.ft. 01 yard and garden are included. Partially plumbed single family. Water piped into the house for limited domestIC uses. Generally no hot water heater and no water !lush toilet inducied. Unplumbed single famlty . No water piped anto Ute house. Water is hand cameo. "Other W«ter Use... Quantities of water requesteo over the standard amounts must be ac::orroanled with justification lor the addillonal w I '. 9. FE.ES 50.00 FOR USE OF 5,000 GPO OR LESS. S , 00.00 FOR USE OF MORE THAN 5,000 GPO BUT LESS THAN 30,000 GPO. S 200.00 FOR USE OF 30,000 GPO OR MORE BUT LESS THAN 100,000 GPO. S 300.00 FOR USE OF 100,000 GPO OR MORE BUT LESS n-IAN 500,000 GPO. S 500.00 FOR USE OF 500.000 GPO OR MORE BUT U:SS n-IAN 1.000.000 GPO. S 1.DOO.OO FOR USE OF 1,000,000 GPO OR MORE EXCEPT ... (see next line} S 1,500.00 FOR USE OF 1.000.000 GPO OR MORE, OUTSIDE OF THE HYDROLOGIC UNIT FROM WHICH IT WAS REMOVED (based on current USGS Hydrologic Unit Map of Alaska), S 500.00 FOR USE OF ANY QUANTITY OF GLACIER ICE. Attach payment wrth application (Use table below to determine fees if your quantity is not in GPO). WA.TER~TJ.8LE 5..000 OP'().. l<l,OOO QPo100.00<1 QPO,. S4<l.OOO OP-o1.000.00<1 0P1).0 .01 CFS ,0$ Cl'$ 0.2 CI'S O.B CFS I.S CFS .l.<7 QP>.l 2Il.B.JCPM 6Sl.4 QPM ;:I.(7:20P" 6l)-<..t GP>.l 5..60 N'Y :l3.GO AFY "2.0 AFY s.s.o.1 AFY 1121l.1 AN .C2AFO ,()g~ 0.:1 IJ'O I.SAFO J.I AFO ,01 ... ,001.1 0.1 M O.S I.< 1.0'" ~-: . C;:S-CUBIC FE.e'JSECONO of>I,I.. ClA.U.ONSfI,./lN\JTE AFY -~E';;ETf'(E.<.R AFV-ACRE-FEETJOA Y u.. I.UUJON G.AU.ONSIOJ.Y 10. SIGNATURE For this application to be complete it must include: _..J Com~!eL"d ~"ld.s:.iSr:=d Appl~tion F.ol'ln. . _..J USGS Map (inch to mile) or Subdivision Plat (Section 5). _..J Doed to proporty or possessory interest (Section 2). _,J Wei-! L.oo if applicable (Section 4). _,J L&gal Acces.& Documents if. applicable: ie. Rightso()(.Way or Ear.oments (Section 3). _" Co_tal Zone QUMotionn:aire if applicable (Section 6). _" Filing Fee (Soction 9). The information presented in this application is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I understand that per 1 1 Me 93.040 and 11 AAC 93.050 additional information may be required by the Division of Water to adiudicate this application. Failure to provide requested infonnation could resutt in this file being closed. SIGNED: (3 AAA_"U_ ~( One applicant only DATED:' 7/~ I 0 /7".; { Bruce Cook C.E,O, Name (please print) Title I 11, STATEMENT OF BENEAC1AL USE OF WATER IS YOUR WA1ER SOURCE AND WATER USE FULLY DEVELOPED AT THIS TIME? YES_ NO V If yes, sign the following affidavit of use in the presence of a notary. Date system completed ____ OR If no, skip this section. I. eertHy under penalty of perjury that the above is a true and accurate statement of the extent to which the above water use has been fully deve:Oped and am ilsing :he stated quantity of water . UNITED STATES OF AMERICA In. SLIrte of AI_ka ) This IS to CQl1Jty lIlat on !tie day 01 _________. 19 ___ belon; me personally ap~ ~_______________known by me to be lIle person name<.1 in and ....no eX&C1JtGd Itlis d:lcument and ac:knO'MedgGd voluntanly Sl9nlOg lne s.atne. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF. I have hefGunlO set my hand and affixed my offical seal. lne day and year I!\ Ihis document first aoove wmtsn. Notary Public in and lor lne StaIQ 01 AIaSl(.a My eomrrus:sion expiro:s: Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Project Description The proposed Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project is located on the southwest side of Prince of Wales Island in southeast Alaska, approximately 10 air miles east of Hydaburg. The project will consist of a small diversion dam at the outlet of Rich's Pond (Lake Mellen), an intake, a bypass pipe, a steel penstock, a powerhouse, a tailrace to return water to Lower Reynolds Creek, a switchyard, up to 500 feet of new access roads, and approximately 10.9 miles of 34.5 kV overhead transmission line. The facility will be constructed in two phases. In the first phase, the diversion/intake (dam), penstock, access roads, transmission line and a 1.5 MW powerhouse would be constructed. In the second phase, the powerhouse would be expanded and an additional 3.5 MW unit would be installed, increasing the project capacity to 5 MW. Phase I average annual energy production would be 11,500 MWh, increasing to 23,500 MWh when Phase II is completed. The facility will operate almost entirely in a run-of-civer mode, generating electrical energy based on system load and available streamflow. The following are the physical specifications for the project structures and components: (1) The diversion dam will be constructed near the outlet of Rich's Pond, a small SUb-basin at the outlet of Lake Mellen. The crest of the dam will be at elevation 876 feet mean sea level (finsl). The diversion structure will be grouted riprap with a concrete core cutoff wall. The crest length of the structure will be approximately 20 feet and the section will act as a weir with uncontrolled overflow when the lake is above elevation 876 finsl. The new surface elevation of Rich's Pond will be approximately 6 feet higher than the existing elevation. (2) The intake will consist of a small concrete structure located on the left side of the diversion. The front of the intake will be protected by a trash rack. Stoplog slots located downstream of the trashrack will provide a means to dewater the intake during periods of maintenance. (3) A bypass pipe to provide unintenupted flow to the bypass reach downstream of the diversion will pass directly through the center of the diversion structure. (4) An above-ground, 3,200-foot-long, 42 inch diameter welded steel penstock will convey water from the intake to the powerhouse. The penstock will cross from the left to the right side of Reynolds Creek approximately 500 feet upstream of the powerhouse. At this location, the pipe will have a clear span of about 40-50 feet. A crane will be used to place the pipe and there will be no need to operate equipment in the creek. (5) The powerhouse will be an insulated, pre-engineered metal building on a concrete slab foundation. It will be located at the approximate location of the anadromous barrier of November 1997 1 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Reynolds Creek. The powerhouse will sit on an excavated bench at or about elevation 110 fmsl, approximately 20 feet above the ordinary high water mark of Reynolds Creek. The site will be excavated in anticipation of Phase 2 construction space requirements, approximately 40 feet by 100 feet. (6) A riprap lined tailrace channel will extend about 80 feet from the powerhouse to Reynolds Creek. Three cubic yards of rip rap material will be placed below the ordinary high water mark of Reynolds Creek. (7) The switchyard at the powerhouse will consist of a pad-mounted disconnect switch and a pad-mounted step-up transformer. (8) A network of roads have been or are being developed in the project area to support logging activities. These roads will provide access to hydroelectric facility construction areas. It is anticipated that less than 500 feet of project-specific road will need to be constructed. Access roads constructed in conjunction with the project will be of the same d<:.sign as the primary logging roads. (9) An overhead 34.5 kV transmission line will follow the access road from the powerhouse and along existing logging roads that extend from Copper Harbor north along Hetta Inlet. The line will make an overhead crossing of Hetta Inlet via Jumbo Island and then follow an existing road to Hydaburg. Total length of the transmission line will be approximately 10.9 miles. Poles will be designed as tangent line structures on about 300 foot centers. Poles will be set from the road. Design of the line will also incorporate the latest raptor protection guidelines and collision avoidance devices to protect migratory birds. (l0) Materials for the diversion and any additional road that may be required will be obtained from the powerhouse site excavation. Spoils will be wasted on access roads. Most of the project is not located in wetlands or other waters of the US. Approximately 0.3 acres of wetland or waters of the US will be filled or excavated or both. An additional 0.6 acres of wetlands will be cleared to install the transmission line. The diversion dam at Rich's Pond will raise the water level by approximately 6 feet, inundating a relatively steep shoreline, but will result in minimal change in the pond's surface area. Water levels will fluctuate depending on power demand and inflow, but the new water level will be close to the pond's natural high water leveL The new water level will diminish the surface area ofa small islet in Rich's Pond. November 1997 2 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project ARC'" OC(AH , '" ,. ~ 4' '-b ~ PAClrtC OC(.AN LOCA TION MAP \') VICINITY MAP THIS QRAW.NG I~ A PART 13 THE: APPLICA nON f~ llC(NS( u~ 8'f l ..{ UNtl(R~Ctl(O Ito!') _ D,n or 199'1 HAlOA CORPORA nON APPUCAnON fOR LICENSE REYNOlDS CREEK HlDRO£LECmlC PROJ(rT f ERC PROJECT NO, t) 4S0 PROJEC I LOCA nON AND VlCINIT'l' 'AAP EXHIBIT ~ HOR E~gi~~~i~9: Inc. feR, D~ NO ~ 1 --=- , '" ... , ~ \ :\ ., ,11/, ,.""'.'~\\ UrI' ,~ ~1" [I >:'. .' -~, ."'.':-I'. /'i. : .,:' \ / < ,:,Ill\ .. JI/I : t';)' \-,~,, \, ! ... "0 u'. tJlH flOW ''':',// /') .</<~/ ----.\.~m -' / , P(NStOCK' INSlll[""" PIP( ~l).f ~fl(:[ Pt,l,rt ... PLAN o· U(NI~tM INSTR[AL4 flO" 'HtH e:. ()f?Ifl([ PtA T[ ~tj.rul ~... 1'-0' ~ i ~r((l ..... _ ,'-0' INTAKE DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION ~_~~9N ED YS".f-O· TJtA~PAO IS • PART ('IT ruE ,.,'ppllc.-nOH fOR UC[H$( VHO(RS<;1f[O rHrS D. 'f Of HAlOA CORPORA nON APPLICA nON fOR LICENSe( RE'IlIQlOS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROXCT fERC PROJECT NO 11<80 INTAKE SITE PLANANO SECTIONS EXHIBIT r: -3 ~~'!~!;~,~~e(ln9, Inc feRe OWe, NO. (;Strur HQ( S~C}lON (7\\ " d ~O ,---::-) ..J '" " ~ w i!: o " r= ~ "'" [---l ___1-- ~ ~ -,-----t----+-----------1-- '''' o --i-- 8 8~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~! ~-~ ~ ~ 2 ~ ! ¥ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ;e ~ ~ l: ~ " PENSTOCK PROFILE (IN FEET) 1-.100· THIS ()R.WI~C 1$ A PART Of THC ,IN>t.tCAl1ON f"01 ll((N$[ uAD£ 61' TH( UND(RSlCNeD HilS OA1" or ____ _ ... ,'. P(NSH)(J( "~. P(H'SIOClt In~. CONCP(l( ptH')roclli'srrn P,(NSIOOC n;;t:;:; lO.,1-,. _~ ~cr·_:J~ SI,IPPUlJ 'SUf'POIH HAIOA CORPORAllON APPLICA nON rOR LICENSE REYNOlDS CREEK .IYO~O£lECTRIC PROJ[C! rERe PROJ[CT NO.•I<SO T'!'PICAL ~OCI( eOlI (hP) PENSTOCK y .... ~. -0· SUPPORTS 6kxxxI ' 4 fT(l .,: .. l'-O' ~ i J"" )'j' .. t' o· 1~((Cl l-·'Q(f PENSTOCK PROfiLE AND SUPPORT DETAILS EXHIBIT F-4 HOR fl'lQiourinQ. Inc rERe owc_ NO t ~ 't> ~ ~;J " ,," . \ ',,",",''., .\'"\,,,/,.,. \~'.>(\\~\\ ... '0 1'/ I ~ 1/1 l; fRIOUfARY OIi'QHAt-------... (;R(,)oJr;o \It,( -~':;;~~c,;., "" ~~.SngN (-"l ,. ~...J ' ...~ .. l" ~O· ~ 4< ," _ 40''" sm: PLAN IiI 1'> t. ~ IH'S: 0.'1"'....',..<., -S'" P~~1 or ,,,' ..t'f'~'C .. hQtI PO\l,fRHQUSE ".~I){ e~ 1..[ 'JIIO(RSI(;N(O tHIS 0"" Of ''1'1. HAIOA CORPORA nON APPlICAnON FOR lICEN$.[ Rt rnOLOS CREEK flYORO£lEC lRIC fERC PRO.ECI NO 1\ 480 POWtRHOUSE SITE PLAN AND EXHI(3IT F--5 !!~~__ ~~9;ne~~i_~<J!__I~_c:,--_ f(Re owe NO. APPRO. U. '1QO SEC110N POIlt£RHOUSf SEC110N THROUGH -0-}'&'.1 -0'. '"fur jfUf r~ lrC('/!)! PROJEC' , "'-. \ \ Application for License SECTION 10/404 PERMIT APPLICATION November 1997 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 November 18. 1997 Mr. John C. Leeds, III Project Manager Attn: CENPA-CO-R-E Regulatory Branch U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska District P.O. Box 898 Anchorage, AK 99506-0898 Re: Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Corps of .Engineers Permit Application File Number 9-950127 Dear Mr. Leeds: Haida Corporation (the Applicant) is seeking a License from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for the proposed Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project. To support the licensing process. a Corps of Engineers (Corps) Permit is required. On behalf of Haida Corporation, HDR Engineering. Inc. encloses a completed perm it application for your review and processing. It is our understanding that this application and supporting materials also serve as application for the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) water quality certification of the Corps Permit, in accordance with Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. TllUS, a copy is of this application is being submitted concurrently to ADEC. The final Application for License and Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment, to be filed with the FERC near the end of November 1997, will be provided to you at that time. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call me at (425) 453-1523. Sincerely, HDR ENGINEERING, INC. Michael V. Stimac, P.E. Manager. Licensing and Environmental Services Enclosure cc: John Bruns, Haida Corporation David C. Sturdevant, ADEC h: \hyd·\I'eYllo!tlsipl!rlllils\,·o('. doc HDR Engineering, Inc. Suite 1200 Telephone 500 108th Avenue. N.E. 425 453-1523 Bellevue, Washington Fax Employee-owned 98004-5538 425 453· 7107 Department of the Army Permit Application Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project (ITEMS J THRU 4 TO BE FILLED BY THE CORPS) 1. APPLICATION NO. 2. FIELD OFFICE CODE 3. DATE RECEIVED 4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETED (ITEMS BELOW TO BE FILLED BY APPLICAN1) 5. APPLICANT'S NAME Haida Corporation 8. AUTHORlZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE HDR Engineering, Inc. 6. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS Haida Corporation P.O. Box 89 Hydaburg, AK 99222 Contact: John Bruns 9. AGENT'S ADDRESS HDR Engineering, Inc. 500 -108th Avenue NE, Suite 1200 Bellevue, WA 98004-5538 Contact: Mike Stimac 7. APPLICANT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE (907) 285-3721 (FAX)(907)285-3722) 10. AGENT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE (425) 453-1523; (FAX)(425) 453-7107) 11. STATEMENT OF AUTHORlZATION I hereby authorize HDR Engineering, Inc. to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing ofthis application and to furnish, upon request, supplemental information in support of this permit application. '\JA ~C2/tnA/k.. II t 1~~'1 a () APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE NAME, LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY 12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project 13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOWN Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; Hetta Inlet 14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS N/A 15. LOCATION OFPROJECT Prince of Wales Island, Alaska 16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRlPTIONS, IF KNOWN T. 77 S., R, 85 E., Sections 3, 4, 5; T. 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections 5, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35, 36; T. 76 S., R. 84 E., Sections 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33; Copper River Meridian 17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE By surface: EITHER, take the road heading northeast out of Hydaburg to Deer BaylHetta Inlet and continue by boat to Copper Harbor, OR take the road heading northeast out of Hydaburg to Deer BaylHetta Inlet, cross Hetta Inlet by boat, get back on the logging road system and drive south approximately 3.3 miles to Copper Harbor and Reynolds Creek, OR take the road heading northeast out of Hydaburg to Deer BaylHetta Inlet and continue on around the Inlet on the logging road system (when completed) until the project site is reached. By air: Fly 10 miles east from Hydaburg by floatplane or hel icopter to Copper Harbor to access Reynolds Creek. Page 1 Department of the Army Permit Application Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project 18. NATURE OF ACTIVITY See attached project description and figures. 19. PROJECT PURPOSE The purpose of the project is to generate electricity using a renewable energy source. In the short term, the project will meet the electrical power needs of Hydaburg and, in the long term, the project would help meet the electrical power needs of Prince of Wales island. The project will reduce the community's dependence on fossil fuels for electricity generation. Construction is scheduled to begin in June 1999 and be completed by June 2000. USE BLOCKS 20-22 IF DREDGED ANDIOR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED 20. REASON(S) FOR DISCHARGE Disturbanee to the bottom and banks of Rich's Pond near its outlet is necessary to install a diversion and intake. Excavation of the bank of Reynolds Creek near the powerhouse is needed to install the tailrace. Up to 500 feet of new road could be constructed, some in wetland, to connect logging roads with project components. For most of its length the overhead transmission line will follow existing logging roads and where the logging roads cross wetlands, segments of the overhead line may also be located over wetlands. Transmission poles will be set from the road. The transmission line will include an aerial crossing ofHetta Inlet via Jumbo Island. 21. TYPE(S) OF MATERIAL BEING DISCHARGED AND THE AMOUNT OF EACH TYPE IN CUBIC YARDS Materials discharged into wetlands and other waters of the US will include concrete and talus, rock, and minimal quantities of silt. The total volume offill material to be placed to construct the diversion will be approximately 75 cubic yards. A large component of this will be loose rock excavated from the bed of the pond to clear the area for construction of the concrete cut-off wall. The material excavated will be used to complete construction of the diversion. Additional material would be obtained from the powerhouse site or local borrow pits. Up to 3,500 cubic yards of additional fill may be placed to construct access roads. No fill will be placed to install the transmission line, but the poles may be installed in wetlands. Approximately 10 cubic yards of material will be removed from the bank of Reynolds Creek below the ordinary high water mark. where the tailrace discharges to Lower Reynolds Creek. Fill material below the ordinary high water mark will consist of approximately 3 cubic yards of riprap used to line the tailrace channel. 22. SURFACE AREA IN ACRES OF WETLANDS OR OTHER WATERS FILLED Fill and excavation activities for the diversion and tailrace will occur in < 0.1 acres ofwaters of the US. This includes excavation of materials from the bed and bank of Rich's Pond, construction of a diversion and intake, and excavation of materials from the bank of Reynolds Creek for connection of the tailrace to the creek. Logging of the project area by Sealaska Corporation is scheduled to be completed prior to construction ofthe hydroelectric facility. The road development plan indicates that roads built for logging operations will be located close to the proposed hydroelectric facility components. It is estimated that up to 0.34 acres of additional wetland would be filled for construction of access roads, should any be required. The transmission line will cross wetlands on Jumbo Island where no road exists or is proposed and larger trees in up to 0.6 acres -of wetland will be removed but no fill or excavation will occur. The diversion dam at Rich's Pond will raise the water level by approximately 6 feet, inundating a relatively steep shoreline, and permanently flooding less than an estimated 1.0 acre of wetlands. Other vegetation that will not interfere with the transmission line will not be removed. 23. IS ANY PORTION OF THE WORK ALREADY COMPLETE? Yes No X , IF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK 24. ADDRESSES OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS, LESSEES, Etc. Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbody Sealaska Corporation One Sealaska Plaza, Suite 400 Juneau, AK 99801-1512 25. LIST OF OTHER CERTIFICATIONS OR APPROVALSIDENIALS RECEIVED FROM OTHER FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL AGENCIES FOR WORK DESCRIBED IN THIS APPLICATION. AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL IDNUMBER DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED Federal Energy Application for License for 11480-000 Will be submitted Regulatory Comroission a Major Water Power by 11130197 Project 5 MW or Less Page 2 Department of the Army Permit Application Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project AK Division of Govemmental Coordination AK Department of Environmental Conservation AK Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water AK Department of Natural Resources, Division ofLand AK Department of Fish and Game ACMP Consistency Determination Section 401 Water Quality Certification Water Right Easement Fish Habitat Permit Not yet assigned Not yet assigned LAS # 19845 Not yet assigned Not yet assigned Concurrent with this application Concurrent with this application July 1995; Amendment sub mitted 11/12197 Concurrent with this application. Concurrent with this application 26. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that the information in this application is complete and accurate. 1 further certify that 1 possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the duly authorized agent of the applicant. ??1/~-SIGNATUREOAGENT- The application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly authorized agent if the statement in block 11 has been filled out and signed. 18 U.S.c. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction ofany department or agency ofthe United States knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick:, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both. Page 3 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Project Description for Coastal Project Questionnaire, Corps Permit, and Habitat Permit The proposed Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project is located on the southwest side of Prince of Wales Island in southeast Alaska, approximately 10 air miles east of Hydaburg. The project will consist of a small diversion dam at the outlet of Rich's Pond (Lake Mellen), an intake, a bypass pipe, a steel penstock, a powerhouse, a tailrace to return water to Lower Reynolds Creek, a switchyard, up to 500 feet of new access roads, and approximately 10.9 miles of 34.5 kV overhead transmission line. The facility will be constructed in two phases. In the first phase, the diversion/intake (dam), penstock, access roads, transmission line and a 1.5 MW powerhouse would be constructed. In the second phase, the powerhouse would be expanded and an additional 3.5 MW unit would be installed, increasing the project capacity to 5 MW. Phase I average annual energy production would be 11,500 MWh, increasing to 23,500 MWh when Phase II is completed. The facility will operate almost entirely in a run-of-river mode, generating electrical energy based on system load and available streamflow. The following are the physical specifications for the project structures and components: (1) The diversion dam will be constructed near the outlet of Rich's Pond, a small sub-basin at the outlet of Lake Mellen. The crest of the dam will be at elevation 876 feet mean sea level (finsl). The diversion structure will be grouted riprap with a concrete core cutoff wall. The crest length of the structure will be approximately 20 feet and the section will act as a weir with uncontrolled overflow when the lake is above elevation 876 fInsl. The new surface elevation of Rich's Pond will be approximately 6 feet higher than the existing elevation. (2) The intake will consist of a small concrete structure located on the left side of the diversion. The front of the intake will be protected by a trash rack. Stoplog slots located downstream of the trashrack will provide a means to dewater the intake during periods of maintenance. (3) A bypass pipe to provide uninterrupted flow to the bypass reach downstream of the diversion will pass directly through the center of the diversion structure. (4) An above-ground, 3,200-foot-Iong, 42 inch diameter welded steel penstock will convey water from the intake to the powerhouse. The penstock will cross from the left to the right side of Reynolds Creek approximately 500 feet upstream of the powerhouse. At this location, the pipe will have a clear span of about 40-50 feet. A crane will be used to place the pipe and there will be no need to operate equipment in the creek. November 1997 I Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project (5) The powerhouse will be an insulated, pre-engineered metal building on a concrete slab foundation. It will be located at the approximate location of the anadromous barrier of Reynolds Creek. The powerhouse will sit on an excavated bench at or about elevation 110 fins I , approximately 20 feet above the ordinary high water mark of Reynolds Creek. The site will be excavated in anticipation of Phase 2 construction space requirements, approximately 40 feet by 100 feet. (6) A riprap lined tailrace channel will extend about 80 feet from the powerhouse to Reynolds Creek. Three cubic yards of riprap material will be placed below the ordinary high water mark of Reynolds Creek. (7) The switchyard at the powerhouse will consist of a pad-mounted disconnect switch and a pad-mounted step-up transformer. (8) A network of roads have been or are being developed in the project area to support logging activities. These roads will provide access to hydroelectric facility construction areas. It is anticipated that less than 500 feet of project-specific road will need to be constructed. Access roads constructed in conjunction with the project will be of the same design as the primary logging roads. (9) An overhead 34.5 kV transmission line will follow the access road from the powerhouse and along existing logging roads that extend from Copper Harbor north along Hetta Inlet. The line will make an aerial crossing of Hetta Inlet via Jumbo Island and then follow an existing road to a point approximately 1.4 miles northeast of Hydaburg where it will connect with an existing powerline. Total length of the transmission line will be approximately 10.9 miles. Poles will be designed as tangent line structures on about 300 foot centers. Poles will be set from the road. Design of the line will also incorporate the latest raptor protection guidelines and collision avoidance devices to protect migratory birds. (10) Materials for the diversion and any additional road that may be required will be obtained from the powerhouse site excavation. Spoils will be wasted on access roads. Most of the project is not located in wetlands or other waters of the US. Approximately 0.3 acres of wetland or waters of the US will be filled or excavated or both. An additional 0.6 acres of wetlands will be cleared to install the transmission line. The diversion dam at Rich's Pond will raise the water level by approximately 6 feet, inundating a relatively steep shoreline, and permanently flooding less than an estimated LO acre of wetlands. Water levels will fluctuate depending on power demand and inflow, but the new water level will be close to the pond's natural high water level. The new water level will diminish the surface area of a small islet in Rich's Pond. November 1997 2 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project ARCflC <Jee",.. ~~-~4(. \. . ~ .~ ,? ALASKA \ ." ,• { \~ c;::J I' ;:1::1'''''"'''''0(\4~·~i~.,~L-",,:t~ • , ~~_"u 1;:/0 <vI 0' .i~ ~ At" $_ J< -"'1\AJ . Y "-lU.c~ .~~;f.:':.... ' )" ! ~ ...-./'¥!) "-,.. P"':lfIC OttA'" LOCATiON MAP ~ VICINITY MAP Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owners: Haida Corporation, SeaJaska Corporation REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Vicinity and Location Map FIGURE 1 OF 9 LOCATION: Prince of Wales (sland, Alaska WA TERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; Hetta Inlet T. 77 S., R. 85 E., Sections 3, 4, 5; T. 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections 5, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35, 36; T. 76 S., R. 84 E., Sections 28, 29, 30, 31, 32,33; Copper River Meridian 11197 'i " S Clly of Hyda6uT9 Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, Sealaska Corooration ! F #--l ~~u_.161) --__::::-'7~<:;;.7~~.~-1. -"~m" Approx. Scale: I" = 3,070' Wetlands boundaries shown are approximate. REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRlC PROJECT Project Area Wetlands (1 of3) FIGURE20F9 l4ll1 !'131 ,I' I LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska WATE!p30DY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; He t ta Inle t T. 77 S., R. 85 E., Sections 3, 4, S; T. 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections 5, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 3 S, 36; T. 76 S., R. 84 E., Sections 28, 29, 3D, 31, 32, 33; Copper River Meridian 11197 '::1:_ ~i f.. :.1 I-11 " ~ '; I " i -.---.--~.---~.----- .' ~I" "', ,~,,,,,-__..__.__. \ ..,-~ / ( l-f)) ")) }6/ I " ,. \ r 1 I i J ) I. I . \ I.....,.}~~' , :> .,..-"""--./ ,.-.. ----- I Approx. Scale: I" ~ 3,070' Wetlands boundaries shown are approximate, LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, AlaskaHaida Corporation REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRlC PO Box 89 WATERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond)PROJECTHydaburg, Alaska 99222 and Reynolds Creek; Hetta Inlet Project Area Wetlands T. 77 S., R. 8$ E., Sections 3, 4, 5; (20f3)Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. T. 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections 5, 6, 7; Property Owner: Haida Corporation, T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35, 36; Sealaska Corporation T. 76 S., R. 84 E., Sections 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33; Copper River Meridian FIGURE 3 OF 9 11197 Lake M",Ilen /J ( V( //'if t '"\.\\ 'l I (\ l } \f +" ,,/ Jr-"'f",,,~"""'" ) \ \ ~ ~ . '~-'''' --/' -\--\ I' ~LOCQNC;J .. . . .. ...-': )1»... -.. ROAO-(-rrP)~-"':"'"... ~, *-.....:~~~-...... ~.. ~ " ....... ~ '--'---....-=...-,;:<-~ ......-" j ~ ,~-~ ,, ,~.~# ~~ Appro=<, Scale: I"; 1,093' Wetlands boundaries shown are approximate. Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, Sealaska Corporation --..... -----\~ 1." ~ REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Project Area Wetlands (3 of3) FIGURE 4 OF9 LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska WATERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; Hetta Inlet T. 77 S., R. 85 E., Sections 3, 4, 5; T 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections " 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35, 36; T. 76 S., R. 84 E., Sections 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33; Copper River Meridian 11197 -- ._--------880 TRASH",,"CK smUCTVRE n I~ ~~~-==---_d'':o___ "",'''''' u '" : ;I qJ ,'I:;d-'--'-1-- - --'------'-'--- 12 .... ..,IN. INSTR(AU rlOw PIP( ~n-t OR'flcr PLATt ' ,/ '" ) ,/ ,''''"y'' , / / ' ' / ' --_/ .. /' ___ J , "" ' I L~~~~~m I L---------- INUKE ..? ! ItCl ~ I Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, Sealaska Corporation REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Diversion Site Plan FIGURE 5 OF9 LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska WA TERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; He t ta Inle t T. 77 S., R. 8S E., Sections 3, 4, 5; T. 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections 5,6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35, 36; T. 76 S" R. 84 E" Sections 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33; Coppe1' River Meridian 11197 I \ I J) j'" ! / I ) // ,/~ IJ/-/'/ '--- LAKE MELLENidr!Jir~~~-~~~7=~~~~: ~ ::::::==:::::- - PRE-PROJECT NWS OHW RICH'S POND 870"0 874.0 LAKE MELLEN 876,0 879.0 EL v IRICH'S POND POST-PROJECT NWS 876,0 876,0 OHW 879.0 879.0 Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, Sealaska Corporation REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRlC PROJECT Rich's Pond -Change in Water Elevation Plan View FIGURE 6 OF 9 LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska WATERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; He t ta Inle t T, 77 S., R. 8S E., Sections 3, 4, S; T. 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections S, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 3S, 36; T. 76 S., R. 84 E" Sections 28,29,30,31,32,33; Copper River Meridian 11/97 v ~III. I L5 it 'I ..I BI.lTl!RflY VALVE PENSTOCK 5TOPlOC SLOT v v &. CREST El. 877.0 EL 876.0 ~ROCK DEE:;l~ATED \ TO BE ~ (tROUT HOlE ( T'IP) AIR VENT HANORAIL SEC1l0N ® EL. 879.0 OHW GROUTED RIPRAP 12·' t.lINIMUM INSTIlEAM FLOW PIPE WITH 8'~ ORIFICE PLATE SECTION ED kx.WJtJ t 1i fLIT OHW879.0 NWS 876.0 MIN. POOl 874.~ (APR.-IIA'I MIN. POOL 872.0 (..uN.-MAR.) lRASHRACK INTAI<E STR'UC1\JR£ EL. 879.0 OHW SPlUWAY ~ PENSTOCK INTAKE DOWNSTREAM ELEVA 1l0N Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, Sealaska Corporation REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRlC PROJECT Intake Profile and Sections FIGURE 7 OF9 LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska WATERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; Hetta Inlet T. 77 S., R. 85 E., Sections 3, 4, S; T. 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections 5, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35, 36; T. 76 S., R. 84 E., Sections 28,29,30,31,32,33; Copper River Meridian 11/97 I '0'. TAJt.~...ct ........ Il. 000 ~J . I 'r,en Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, A1aska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, Sealaska Corporation -. t. I • I ..." ".t \ \ '"" \ I \ 1/1 ,- 1/1 \ J./ '''-.. / '--'0'1-""gv...y ","/.,,/ /7 ){L_ ,/---- m "" ".,"-. " '''., <'''"\, ""\', ,q'::l , , \/ '-. :\.','\ \ \ "-. \ \MIOJu.~ ""","0 ''''' -\_ \\ ,'-. \\\\\ / \ \, \'.. ~ "'-. \.... ".. ~ POWERHOUSE SITE PLAN Ii -g. 'S..,. ' ...... 0· 'k:J.d 'j r ,.(11 ~(.~~oON CD REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Powerhouse Site Plan and Section FIGURE 8 OF9 LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, A1aska WA TERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; Hetta Inlet T. 77 S., R. 85 E., Sections 3, 4, 5; T. 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections 5, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35, 36; T. 76 S., R. 84 E., Sections 211,29,30,31,32,33; Copper River Meridian 11/97 -.----r------==+A4=""::;::1 "e1:;:!OPTICAL 1 [' r ";r ~r,~~";oc> -rrP" ..... r ,Y TYPICAL ROAn SECTION Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, Scalaska Corporation TYPICAL A~RIAL CROSSING STRUCTlJRI~ REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRlC PROJECT Access Road and Transmission Line FIGURE90F9 a .ti a.. , " , ~ a +-'" ~ I w :r ~ g £: VI ;;J. U '...,~ .,.. N i i ,..,i <61 I IIo.----J TYPICAL TANGENT STRUCITRE LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska WATERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Crcck; Hetta Inlet T, 77 S., R. 85 E.. Sections 3, 4, .5; T. 77 S, R. 84 E., Sections 5,6,7; T 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35,36: T. 76 S., R. 84 E., Sections 28, 29, 30, 31,)2, 33; Copp~r River Meridian I SHIELD WIRe: 34,5 KV TRANSMISSION f~m=m=- , J 1197 App!ication for License FISH HABITAT PERMIT APPLICATION November 1997 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Projecl No. 11480 November 18, 1997 Alaska Depat1ment of Fish and Game Habitat and Restoration Division 2030 Sea Level Drive, Suite 205 Ketchikan, AK 99901-6067 Re: Reynolds Creek Hydroc1cctric Project Fish Habitat Permit Application Dear Sir/Madam: Haida Corporation (the AppLicant) is seeking a License from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for the proposed Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project. To support the licensing process, a Fish Habitat Pem1it is required. On behalf of Haida Corporation, HDR Engineering, Inc. encloses a completed application tor your review and processing. A copy of the final Application for License and Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment. to be filed with the FERC near the end of November 1997, \\111 be provided to you at that time. (f you have any questions or require additional information, please call me at (425) 453-1523. Sincerely, HDR ENGINEERING, INC. Yiichael V. Stimac, P.E. Manager, Licensing and Environmental Services Enclosure cc: John Bruns, Haida Corporation It: \hyd1reynoldsipermils'adjg, doc HDR Engineering, Inc. Suite 1200 Telephone 500 l08th Avenue. N.E, 425 453-1523 Bellevue. Washington Fax Employee-owned 98004-5538 425 453-7107 GENERAL WATERWAYIWATERBODY APPLICATION ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME Habitat and Restoration Division 2030 Sea Level Drive, Suite 205 Ketchikan, AK 99901-6067 A. APPLICANT: 1. Name: Haida Corporation 2. Address: P.O .Box 89, Hydaburg, AK 99222 Telephone: (907) 285-3721 Contact: John Bruns 3. Contractor: Not yet selected Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc., 500 -108th Ave. NE, Bellevue, WA 98004-5538 Contact: Mike Stimac Phone: (425) 453-1523 Fax: (425) 453-7107 E-mail: mstimac@hdrinc.com B. TYPE AND PURPOSE OF PROJECT: Hydroelectric facility. See attachment prepared for Coastal Project Questionnaire for a detailed project description and drawings. This application is for construction of a diversion at the outlet of Rich's Pond (Lake Mellen) and work required to connect the tailrace from the powerhouse to Lower Reynolds Creek. Anadromous fish are present in the lower reach of Lower Reynolds Creek but none are in Rich's Pond. C. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: Rich's Pond (Lake Mellen) and Reynolds Creek, Prince of Wales Island Waterbody Anadromous Township, Range, USGS Name Stream # Section, Meridian Quad Reynolds anadromous reach is #10420 (barrier to T. 77 S, R. 85 E, Craig Creek anadromous fish at El. 95, approx. 1,300 ft Sections 3 & 4; CRM (A-2) from stream mouth) Lake Mellen not designated anadromous, contains T. 77 S, R. 85 E, Craig (Rich's resident population of grayling Sections 3; CRM (A-2) Pond) D. TIME FRAME FOR PROJECT: June 1999 -June 2000 E. CONSTRUCTION METHODS: 1. Will the stream be diverted? Yes XX No How long? The penstock will permanently divert water around the bypass reach ( a distance of approximately 3,000 feet) to the powerhouse site before it is returned to Lower Reynolds Creek. Phase 1 of the project will divert up to 19.5 mgd. Ultimately following the construction of Phase 2, up to 58.5 mgd will be diverted. Construction of the dam/intake at Rich's Pond will take approximately 3 months. Temporary water diversions will occur during construction. A cofferdam and culverts will be used to Fish Habitat Permit Application I Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project isolate water from in-stream construction activities. No in-water work is proposed to connect the tailrace to Reynolds Creek. 2. Will stream channelization occur? Yes No xx 3. Will the banks of the stream be altered or modified? Yes XX No Describe: The bank of Rich's Pond in the vicinity of the dam will be recontoured to provide equipment access to the pond for construction. Permanent access will be maintained for operations and maintenance. Rock will be removed from the bank and spoils will be wasted on the access road. The bank oflower Reynold's Creek will be excavated to connect the tailrace with the creek. The tailrace will be left plugged with native material until construction of the outlet is complete. 4. List all tracked or wheeled equipment (type and size) that will be used in the stream (in the water, on ice, or in the floodplain): Tracked excavator (3-4 yd bucket). How long will equipment be in the stream? Three months. The timing of in stream work will comply with any timing restrictions stipulated by ADFG. 5. a. Will material be removed from the floodplain, bed, stream, or lake? Yes :xx No Material will be excavated down to native rock to construct the dam. A concrete core cutoff wall will be poured in place and then the excavated native rock will be placed back around the core. Additional rock may be required to achieve final contours. The rock will be obtained from the powerhouse site. The footprint of the disturbed area will be approximately O.lacres. Material will also be removed from the floodplain of the creek to construct the tailrace. b. Will material be removed from below the water table? Yes :xx No Up to 8 feet. Is a pumping operation planned? Yes No XX 6. Will material (including spoils, debris, or overburden) be deposited in the flood plain, stream, orlake? Yes :xx No Amount: The diversion will be constructed with approx. 75 cubic yards of concrete and rock. Disposal site location(s): Within lakebed. Fish Habitat Permit Application 2 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project 7. Will blasting be perfonned? Yes XX No No blasting will occur in the stream channel or lake bed. 8. Will temporary fills in the stream or lake be required during construction (e.g., for construction traffic around construction site)? Yes No XX 9. Will ice bridges be required? Yes No XX F. SITE REHABILITATIONIRESTORATION PLAN: The banks of the creek and pond disturbed by construction activities would be contoured to blend with adjacent undisturbed areas and the new construction. Existing vegetation would be retained wherever possible to minimize the area of exposed soil. Disturbed areas will be left to revegetate naturally after construction is complete, or, if more immediate stabilization appears necessary, lined with large rock or seeded with grasses. Appropriate BMPs would be implemented to protect waterways from sediment-laden runoff. G. W ATERBODY CHARACTERISTICS: Width of stream: 30 feet (at site proposed for diversion) Dept~ of stream or lake: 2 - 4 feet Type of stream or lake bottom (e.g., sand, gravel, mud): talus and rock Stream gradient: 0% at diversion site H. HYDRAULIC EVALUATION: 1. Will a structure (e.g., culvert, bridge support, dike) be placed below ordinary high water of the stream? Yes XX No If yes, attach engineering drawings or a field sketch, as described in Step B. For culverts, attach stream discharge data for a mean annual flood (Q=2.3), if available. Describe potential for channel changes or increased bank erosion, if applicable: Channel changes will be as previously described for the diversion structure at the outlet of Rich's Pond and at the confluence of the tailrace from the powerhouse with Lower Reynolds Creek. Increased bank erosion is not anticipated at either site. Design features will eliminate or minimize this concern. 2. Will more than 25,000 cubic yards of material be removed? Yes No xx If yes, attach a written hydraulic evaluation including, at a minimum, the following: potential for channel changes, assessment of increased aufeis (glaciering) potential, assessment of potential for increased bank erosion. Fish Habitat Permit Application 3 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ALL INFORMATION PROVIDED ON OR IN CONNECTION WITH THIS APPLICATION IS TRUE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. Date Fish Habitat Permit Application 4 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Project Description for Coastal Project Questionnaire, Corps Permit, and Habitat Permit The proposed Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project is located on the southwest side of Prince of Wales Island in southeast Alaska, approximately 10 air miles east of Hydaburg. The project will consist of a small diversion dam at the outlet of Rich's Pond (Lake Mellen), an intake, a bypass pipe, a steel penstock, a powerhouse, a tailrace to return water to Lower Reynolds Creek, a switchyard, up to 500 feet of new access roads, and approximately 10.9 miles of 34.5 kV overhead transmission line. The facility will be constructed in two phases. In the first phase, the diversion/intake (dam), penstock, access roads, transmission line and a 1.5 MW powerhouse would be constructed. In the second phase, the powerhouse would be expanded and an additional 3.5 MW unit would be installed, increasing the project capacity to 5 MW. Phase I average annual energy production would be 11,500 MWh, increasing to 23,500 MWh when Phase II is completed. The facility will operate almost entirely in a run-of-river mode, generating electrical energy based on system load and available streamflow. The following are the physical specifications for the project structures and components: (1) The diversion dam will be constructed near the outlet of Rich's Pond, a small sub-basin at the outlet of Lake Mellen. The crest of the dam will be at elevation 876 feet mean sea level (finsl). The diversion structure will be grouted riprap with a concrete core cutoff walL The crest length of the structure will be approximately 20 feet and the section will act as a weir with uncontrolled overflow when the lake is above elevation 876 finsL The new surface elevation of Rich's Pond will be approximately 6 feet higher than the existing elevation. (2) The intake will consist of a small concrete structure located on the left side of the diversion. The front of the intake will be protected by a trash rack. Stoplog slots located downstream of the trashrack will provide a means to dewater the intake during periods of maintenance. (3) A bypass pipe to provide uninterrupted flow to the bypass reach downstream of the diversion will pass directly through the center of the diversion structure. (4) An above-ground, 3,200-foot-Iong, 42 inch diameter welded steel penstock will convey water from the intake to the powerhouse. The penstock will cross from the left to the right side of Reynolds Creek approximately 500 feet upstream of the powerhouse. At this location, the pipe will have a clear span of about 40-50 feet. A crane will be used to place the pipe and there will be no need to operate equipment in the creek. November 1997 1 Reynolds Creeic Hydroelectric Project (5) The powerhouse will be an insulated, pre-engineered metal building on a concrete slab foundation. It will be located at the approximate location of the anadromous barrier of Reynolds Creek. The powerhouse will sit on an excavated bench at or about elevation 110 finsl, approximately 20 feet above the ordinary high water mark of Reynolds Creek. The site will be excavated in anticipation of Phase 2 construction space requirements, approximately 40 feet by 100 feet. (6) A riprap lined tailrace channel will extend about 80 feet from the powerhouse to Reynolds Creek. Three cubic yards of riprap material will be placed below the ordinary high water mark of Reynolds Creek. (7) The switchyard at the powerhouse will consist of a pad-mounted disconnect switch and a pad-mounted step-up transformer. (8) A network of roads have been or are being developed in the project area to support logging activities. These roads will provide access to hydroelectric facility construction areas. It is anticipated that less than 500 feet of project-specific road will need to be constructed. Access roads constructed in conjunction with the project will be of the same design as the primary logging roads. (9) An overhead 34.5 kV transmission line will follow the access road from the powerhouse and along existing logging roads that extend from Copper Harbor north along Hetta Inlet. The line will make an aerial crossing of Hetta Inlet via Jumbo Island and then follow an existing road to a point approximately 1.4 miles northeast of Hydaburg where it will connect with an existing powerline. Total length of the transmission line will be approximately 10.9 miles. Poles will be designed as tangent line structures on about 300 foot centers. Poles will be set from the road. Design of the line will also incorporate the latest raptor protection guidelines and collision avoidance devices to protect migratory birds. (10) Materials for the diversion and any additional road that may be required will be obtained from the powerhouse site excavation. Spoils will be wasted on access roads. Most of the project is not located in wetlands or other waters of the US. Approximately 0.3 acres of wetland or waters of the US will be filled or excavated or both. An additional 0.6 acres of wetlands will be cleared to install the transmission line. The diversion dam at Rich's Pond will raise the water level by approximately 6 feet, inundating a relatively steep shoreline, and permanently flooding less than an estimated 1.0 acre of wetlands. Water levels will fluctuate depending on power demand and inflow, but the new water level will be close to the pond's natural high water level. The new water level will diminish the surface area of a small islet in Rich's Pond. November 1997 2 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project •• ARC"l'Vl{AIt ,..]0 I-/~-~~--'r'~ \ , " ~ ~ '( ALASKA " ~ \ ,'" \( r'~C( ";i"~'~,u""u• '" -'SF" ~" ""1"",~~>c3. C"" ~I ,.' s., '~ ~~ '." ,'. ~o'~t(AN' If;l :: I rIC \:j VICINITY MAP Haida Corporation REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PO Box 89 PROJECTHydaburg, Alaska 99222 Vicinity and Location Map Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owners: Haida Corporation, FIGURE 1 OF 9 Sealaska Corporation LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska WATERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; Betta Inlet T, 77 S,' R, 85 E" Sections 3,4, 5; T. 77 So, R. 84 E., Sections 5, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35, 36; T. 76 S .• R. 84 E., Sections 28.29, 30.31.32.33; Copper River Meridian 11/97 ..•.p " " r ~il i3f-oq Approx. Scale: I" 3,070' Wetlands boundaries shown arc approximate. .~-"" - : I C.ly 0/ Hydaburg Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, Sealaska Corooration REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Project Area Wetlands (I of3) FIGURE 2 OF 9. LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska W A TERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; He t t a In 1 e t T. 77 S., R 85 E, Sections 3, 4, 5; T. 77 S, R. 84 E., Sections 5, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34,35,36; T. 76 S., R. 84 E, Sections 28, 29,30,31,32,33; Copper River Meridian 11197 ,, ,. 1, .~"------..:_\ 1; ( .~:~\\:! I ,J:~ "i~ i i \_. \ ~ I'~ " 1 ·' ~"~'---. ?~ 1$011-..... ->.-.0 __• ~~(loI,- --""" ~ "_ (J.snNC 1 , 111o,,0 -.---~ Approx. Scale: 1" 3,070' Wetlands boundaries shown are approximate. Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, Sealaska Corporation REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Project Area Wetlands (20f3) FIGURE 3 OF 9 LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska WA TERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; Hetta Inlet T. 77 S., R. 8S E., Sections 3, 4, 5; T. 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections 5, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35, 36; T. 76 S., R. 84 E., Sections 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33; Copper River Meridian 11/97 \ I / '\. ..... ~~...) -~ LOGQN<;~ ""'... -~ 1\. RO~+rYP)~;J~~ ~ .... "'.L~ ~.._;.. __ ..... ~ ~ ~,~ .'. ,. ~~ ~~---- ......,;,. :'---000 ~"'--I 1 !b-_-+ \~ , -~--... "'~_J-'__ .-.,. Approx. Scale: I" 1,093' Wetlands boundaries shown are appro)(imate. Haida Corporalion PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporalion, Sealaska Corporation \ I \ ( Loke 'Aellen ((r 1 1// /1 ( IF ,-I' ,0# ~" REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRlC PROJECT Project Area Wetlands (3 of3) FIGURE 4 OF 9 LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska WATERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; Hetta Inlet T. 77 S., R. 85 E., Sections 3, 4, 5; T. 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections 5, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35, 36; T 76 S., R. 84 E., Sections 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33; Copper River Meridian 11197 -- 880 ,/ , -" ~~- ------ -++-~----...--- Sl(n P[NS1OCK 41? f ItCl ~ Haida Corporation REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRlC LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 PROJECT Diversion Site Plan WATERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; Hetta Inlet Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, T. 77 S., R. 85 E., Sections 3, 4, 5; T. 77 S., R. 84 E, Sections 5, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35, 36; Sealaska Corporation FIGURE 5 OF 9 T. 76 S" R. 84 E., Sections 2&, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33; Copper River Meridian 11197 ~ \ \ ) \ J ~J)) .......---..- '\ ' __ J \ \ '---f('~. ) J I '---I '" _._-- J - LAKf M[LL[N EL. v IR1CH'S POND ,,--'~-~'-' ~ -Z,'" .. ---------- ," . ...... , ...:....-~-="'" "'-.-::-::;:,..., "'''-~~ '-./-----_. - PRE-PROJECT NWS OHW RICH'S POND 870.0 874.0 LAKE MELLEN 87§JJ 879.0 POST-PROJECT NWS OHW 876.0 879.0 ", 876.0 879.0 -. ' .~~....-----.----------------/" Haidu Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, Sealaska Corporation REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Rich's Pond -Change in Water Elevation Plan View FIGURE 6 OF9 LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska WATERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; Hetta Inlet T. 77 S., R. 85 E., Sections 3, 4, 5; T. 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections 5, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35, 36; T. 76 S., R. 84 E, Sections 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33; Copper River Meridian 11197 INTAJ<E STRUCTURE EL. 879.0 OHW SPlUWAY ~ CREST EL 677.0 EL 87&.0 AlR V(NT HANDRAil ~t I wI 1 .. I _ 'L OHW 879.0 eUTTER'LY VA-LV( PENSTOCK NWS 876.0 MIN. MIN. HANDRAIL POOL 874.~ (APR.-MAT) POOL 872.0 IJJN.-MAR.) lRASHRACI< SECllON ([) EL. 879.0 OHW ."NII.IUI.I INSTFI(AM FlOI'< ""TH S".. OFllrlC( PLA T( P£NSTOCI< / INTAKE DOWNSTREAM ELEVAllON ~ ... , ... 9 ? If'm T " EL. GROUTED RIPRAP 12" PIPE GROUT HCX£ SECllON El) Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, Sealaska Corporation REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Intake Profile and Sections FIGURE 7 OF 9 LOCATION: Prince ofWalcs Island, Alaska W A TERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; Retta Inlet T. 77 S., R. &5 E., Sections 3, 4,5; 1. 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections 5, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35, 36; 1. 76 S., R. &4 E., Sections 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33; Copper River Meridian 11197 I 90" UJIJtAct -""~ Q. kx;yJ 'r'"' Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, Sealaska Corporation '0 '1. 'l. ~ ~ ~ "!~I ' I ACCess #lOAO1/1 \,/1 \ /,/ -". -j /1/ '.,au IART /:1 .p /rl.LL __ ,,-- '-., " . \ ... ore 'lACoC(O -' ,.... \\ "~tO~"" """ """""~[\ \ \ " / "0 POWERHOUSE Silt: PLAN :g i t,-.,0' 'kuJ r r"" :~,~n.ON CD REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Powerhouse Site Plan and Section FIGURE 8 OF 9 LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska W A TERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; Hetta Inlet T. 77 S" R. 85 E., Sections 3, 4, 5; T. 77 S., R, 84 E., Sections 5, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35, 36; T. 76 S .• R. 84 E., Sections 28, 29, 30, 31,32,33; Copper River Meridian 11/97 I [' "1' '~(~r,~~tOC> __-==MiiiC T ~, ~ TYPICAL ROAD SECTION Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, Sealaska Corporation TYPICAL AEI{IAL CROSSING STRLlCTlJl{E REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRlC PROJECT Access Road and Transmission Line FIGURE 9 OF 9 5_ QPnCAl !'BfR1-l ------r-SHIELD WIRE01II '" j+-34 5 KV T'lAN5MISSION 01 <f) ~j-,..,'" .... ~ w J: ''''1 .r> '" i ,I ~;:;:;III-,n: ~nT=:r:::::: I -1,c:l11= IiF:::I ; I=:TI= '.n j <i) ! -1 ---~ rVPIC:\L T.'\,'\(.I-:YI STIH,CTlIH. LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska WATERBODY Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creck; Hetta Inlet T 77 S, R. 85 E, Sections 3, 4, 5; T. 77 S, R. 84 E, Seclions 5. 6, 7; 76 S. II RJ E. Sections 3·1. 35, .16. T 7(, ~ ,R g,j F . Secliol1s 28. 29. 30 . .11 ..12 ..1.1'. Copper River ~leridjall 1 97 Application for Licellse APPLICATION FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY OR EASEMENT November 1997 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Pr~iecl No. 11480 November 18, 1997 Alaska Department of Natural Resources Southeast Region 400 Willoughby, #400 Juneau, AK 99801 Re: Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Application for Right-of-Way or Easement Dear Sir/Madam: Haida Corporation (the Applicant) is seeking a License from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for the proposed Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project As part of the authorization process for the project, on behalf of Haida Corporation, BDR Engineering. Inc. encloses a completed Application for Right-of-Way or Easement and $100 application fee for your review and processing. A utility easement is requested for the project's 34.5 kV transmission line where the line will make an aerial crossing of Betta Inlet via Jumbo Island. The remainder of the transmission line will be constructed on private property and will follow the access road from the powerhouse along existing logging roads that extend from Copper Harbor north along Hetta Inlet and then, on the west side of Hetta Inlet, follow an existing road to a point approximately 1.4 miles northeast of Hydaburg where it will connect with an existing powerline. Total length of the transmission line will be approximately 10.9 miles. See t'igure 1 for more infonnation. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call me at (425) 453-1523. Sincerely, HDR ENGINEERING, INC. Michael V. Stimac, P.E. Manager, Licensing and Environmental Services Enclosure cc: John Bruns, Haida Corporation II: Ihyd\reynolds\permits\dnr. doc HDR Engineering, Inc. Suite 1200 Telephone 500 108th Avenue. N.E. 425 453-1523 Bellevue, Washington Fax Employee-owned 98004-5538 425453-7107 STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF LAND ( J Northern Region [ 1 Southcentral Region r1 Southeast Region 3700 Airport Way 3601 C Street Suite 1080 400 Willoughby. #400 Fairbanl<s, AK 99709 Anchorage. AK 99503-5937 Juneau, AK 99601 (907) 451-2705 (907) 269·8552 (907) 465·3400 APPUCATION FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY or EASEMENT (R/W/E) AS 38.05.850 Non-rerundable $100.00 Application Fee ADL' __~___ (\:IbetiDM ... ..,._>HAIDA CORPORATION Applicant Name.. Doing Business As PO BOX 89 HYDABURG .AA 99222 Mailing Address I ) (907) 285-3721 Ci~ 92-0045956 Sttle Zip Home Phone Work: Phone Social Security and/or Tax 10 if IS applicant a nonprofit cooperative association? [J Yes HNo'· If yes. are you applying for an exemption under AS 38.0S.850(B)? [ ] Yes [ ] No If yes, please sUOmit prOOf Of nonprofit status (e.g. by.(aws, artides of incorporation, tax statement). Legal OescrtptionILocation of activity: HETI'A INI.Er, PRINCE OF WALES ISLAND'--__________ Meridian CRM ,TownsT1ip 76 S', Range 84 E. • SeeIfon.1L ..§YL1/4 -=.....114, Section.1L £is 1/4...:=:::..-1/4, Township • Range , Section --==--==-1/4 ~114, Section -=--=-1/4 _=:_J/4, (m"01"_~"..-s) Total length of applied tor PJVIIE teet: 3,:300 Total width ot applied for RlW/E feet _~lOI.A("")____ Acres encompassed by RNIIE: 6 9 (43,560 SQUare leet = 1 acre) Purpose of Right-of.WayIEasement, (e.g. Utility. Road, B(idge, Airstrip/Airport. Driveway, Trail. Drainage). and type of anticipated traffic, (e.g. plane. truc.k. heavy equipment): Explain UTILITY EASEMENT FOR OVEmEAD TRANSMISSIOO LINE TO SUPPIX PelVER FID1 THE REYNOLll3 CREEK HYDFOELECl'RIC PFOJECT '10 HYDABURG. Are you applying for a PUblic ANIlE? H Yes (1 No Private R/W/E? (] Yes I) No (A.ntumI Fee Requhd lor plivate RJWlE) State briefly the s1aJidardS and methods of construction: i.e., regulated standards, winter trajl. dirt trail. gravel road, paved road, etc.: clearing by hand, dearing/construction by mechanical equipment (state type of equipment to be used, e.g. J.D. 350. 944 F.E. loaoer, hydro axe, 0-8). or establish by use only. THIS IS AN AERIAl (BOSSING OF HETTA I~I ET ~Q WORK WIll OCCIIR WITHIN THE WATER OTHER THA~ POSSIBI Y \ISiNG A BARGE TO SnUtllG THE CABI E BETWEEN THE TRANSMISSION TOWERS LOCATED ON PRIVATE I AND THE TRAfliSMISSION lINE WII! BE CQNSTRIICTED ACCORDING TO INDUSTRY STANDARDS, SIMILAR TO THOSE UTILIZED BY ALASKA POWER AND TELEPHONE. THE METHOD OF CONSTRUCTION WILL ~f,PRJ ~f.e1oDJl~U~~~,IJi1e.~d To~~~W DgllflC:les Date Stamp: 102-112 (Rev. 2194) ___ __________________________ _ Is this an existing use? [ J Yes J{>I No If yes, provide dOCumentation vertfying exiSting use, such as easement aUas, affidavItS attesting to use and existence. pictures, etc. Construction to begin:____JUNE 19_9_9 Construction to be completed by: ........;;;JUNE==-....:2:..;:0;..;;0.;.0________________________ Other permits or authorizations aQ)IiecJ tor in conjunction with thIS proposed project: _____________ CORPS OF ENGIt-.1EERS, SEC. 10/404 'PERMIT; DIVISION OF OOVERN1'-lENTAL CCORDINATION COASTAL c<::NSISTENCY DETERr-UNATIOl>T; ALASKA DEP~1ENT OF FISH AND GAME HABITAT PERMIT; ALASKA DEPARI'ME:NT OF ENVIIDNr:lE2-ITAL CONSERVATICN SECITON 401 ~ERTIF ICAT10N: WATER RIGHTS If It1iS authoriZation is ·granted. I agree to construct and maintain the improvements authorized in a workmanlike manner, and to keep the area in a neat and sanitary condition; if ttle rignt-ot-way or easement improvements are to be constructed across leaseCllandS, I agree to reimburse the lessee lor aJl damages to crops and improvements, to the extent of the construction of this light-of-way or easement. and to comply with all the laws. rules, and regulations pertaining there1D; and provided tunner tIlat upon termination or relocation of the right-of-way or easement for whiCh appliCation is being made, I agree to remove or relocate the improvements and restore the area without cost to the state and to the satiSfaction of tile Director of tne Division of Land. Ansen a USGS map (scale at 1:93,360) or , stat. statut plat shOWinG tn. location of tile right-of-way or easaftlllnt, and en envil'Cllmantaf risk assessment queslionMiN (form 102-4008A). The final fJl'lllltiftg of tho right-of-way or eU8ment will be contingent upon CWr naceipt of a plat Cloplcting the post amsO'UCtion location ot tn, imPm'Alment9. If ¥DUloppiiCation Is ep,taYlld. instl\letiotla 'Of tho compl.tion of the plat wlll 1M provided l1) you, or can tie pidlld &II' at any of our otfiCB$. AS 38.C5.03S(a, ~U.dinldr:lrw cItIcide __Information I. nMcted to pf0C8$8 an IIPplicati on for tho saJ$ or UA of .liIland .no "'1I1:IUf'CQ.t. This Information Is made. part of tho atato public 'enG I'tCOrda and becomes public Infot'metion undor AS 01.25.110 end 01.25.12:0 (uNla tno information qualifie, for contidllfttiality Unci" AS 38.05.035(')(11) and confidentiality i. rwqu.etod,. Public information Ie open to inepactlon by you Ql any membet of tIat public. A person wtIt.I is th, subject of NInfoImation may c::heIIengo IlII 8CCUf1I.Cy Of complttenaa undar AS ........'10, by giving a Wl'itten <lo.scription of the dtfIIl8ngtdlnfarmaliOP. ltIl cttangu. nlIOdeCI to COlTect it. and a mama ond add,.... when. ttl. ponon c:;an ~.rwadwd. F1ilee s~ln.nts /ltPde in an application for 8 benefit IIf. punlahablo "ndor AS 1 1 .~'.:z1 O. 102·112 (Rav. 2/94' STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF LAND APPUCANT ENVlRONMENTAL RISK QUESTIONNAIRE The purpose at this questionnaire is to help clarity the types of activities you propose to undertake. The questions are meant to help identity the level of environmental risk that may be associated with the proposed activity. The Division of Land's evaluation of environmental risk for the proposed activity does not imply that the parcel or the proposed activity is an environmental risk from the presence or use of hazardous substances. Through this analysis, you may become aware of environmental risks that you did not know about If so, you may want to consult with an environmental engineer or an attomey. HAIDA COR-PO RAT I ON Applicant Name Doing Business As PO BOX 89 HYDABURG 99222 Address City State Zip ( ) ( 907 1 285-3721 JCHN BRUNS Home Phone Work Phone Contact Person NOl'E: FOR QUESTIONS ON APPLICATION I PLEASE CONTACI' Describe the proposed activity: MICHAEL V. STIMAC, HDRENGINEERING, 425/453-1523 INSTAIl.AN OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINE ORIGINATING AT REYNOLIl3 CREEK, PRINCE OF WAlES ISLMTD, AND TRAVELING ACRCES HE'ITA INlET VIA JlJM30 ISLAND TO HYDABURG. ytIE LINE WILL SUPPLY PCWER FROM 'll:lE REYNJLIl3 CREEK HYDRO PIDJEcr. In the course of your proposed activity will you generate. use, store, transport. dispose of, or otherwise come in contact with toxic and/or hazardous materials, ami/or hydrocarbons? Yes [] No k1 If yes, please list the substances and the associated quantities. Use a separate sheet of paper, if necessary. Pago1 of 21O2-4OO8A (Rev. 1 QJg1) It the proposed activities involve any storage tanks. either above or below ground. addre~ the following questions for each tank, Please use a separate sheet of paper, if necessary, and, where appropriate. include maps or plats: a. Where will the tank be located1_N_/_A _________________________ c. What will be the tank's size in gaJlons1.;.N../.;;.;A________________________ d. What will the tank be used for? (Commercial or residential purposes?) ...:N.;.:./..;.A~___________ e. Will the tank be tested for leaks? ...;N~/.;;.;A;....______________________ f. Will the tank be equipped with leak detection devices? Yes [ ] No [ ]. If no, describe: _N;.,./A______ Do you have any reason to suspect, or do you know if the sita may have been previousiy contaminated? Yes [] No (2p.( ff yes, please explain: ________________________________ I certity that due diligence has been exercised and proper inquiries made In completing this questionnaire, and that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. -Appli Date lQ2..cooaA (Rft'. 10181) P..2012 ", £L <{ 2 >I Z U > '"~ ... '" 0 ...-" <.> '" ... CL <{ ~ Z 0 i= <{ U 0 ....J Application for License SECTION 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION In accordance with Section 40 1 of the Clean Water Act, application must be made for certification from the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation that the project will comply with the Clean Water Act, the Alaska Water Quality Standards, and other applicable state laws. By agreement between the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Department of Environmental Conservation, application for a Department of Army Pennit to discharge dredged or fill material into navigable waters under Section 404 ofthe Clean Water Act may also serve as application for State Water Quality Certification. An application for a Section 404 permit was submitted to the COE in November 1997, which triggers the application for Water Quality Certification. Acknowledgement of receipt of the COE application by Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, will be provided as soon as it is received. lllovember 1997 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 Application for Licellse COASTAL PROJECT QUESTIONNAIRE AND CERTIFICATION STATEMENT November J997 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 1 J-180 November 18, 1997 Ms. Jennifer R. Garland Project Review Coordinator State of Alaska, Office of the Governor Division of Governmental Coordination P.O. Box 110030 Juneau, AK 99811-0030 Re: Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Coastal Project Questionnaire and Certification Statement State LD. No. AK 9708-14JJ (NEPAflnformational) Dear Ms. Garland: Haida Corporation (the Applicant) is seeking a License from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for the proposed Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project. To support the licensing process, a determination that the project is consistent with the Alaska Coastal Management Program is required. On behalf of Haida Corporation, HDR Engineering, Inc. encloses a completed Coastal Project Questionnaire, Certification Statement and supporting permit applications for the project for your review and processing. A copy ofthe final Application for License and Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment, to be filed with the FERC near the end of November 1997, will be provided to you at that time. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call me at (425) 453-1523. Sincerely, HDR ENGINEERING, INC. Michael V. Stimac, P.E. Manager, Licensing and Environmental Services Enclosure cc: John Bruns, Haida Corporation David C. Sturdevant. ADEC iJ:'.hydlre)'rlOldsipermi(slgar/and.doc HDR Engineering, Inc. Suite 1200 Telephone 500 108th Avenue. N.E, 425 453-1523 Bellevue, Washington Fax Employee-owned 98004-5538 425453-7107 Coastal Project Questionnaire and Certification St Please answer all questions. To avoid a delay in processing, please call the department if you answer "yes" to any of the questions related to that department. Maps and plan drawings must be included with your packet. An incomplete packet will be returned. APPLICANT INFORMATION 1. Haida Corporation (Attn.: John Bruns) 2. HDR Engineering, Inc. (Attn.: Mike Stimac) Name of Applicant Agent (or responsible party if other than applicant) PO Box 89 500 -108th Ave. NE, Suite 1200 Address Address Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Bellevue W A 98004-5538 City State Zip Code City State Zip Code (907) 285-3721 (425) 453-1523 Daytime Phone Daytime Phone (907) 285-3722 (425) 453-7107 Fax Number Fax Number PROJECT INFORMATION Yes No 1. This activity is a: new projectD modification or addition to an existing project If a modi lcation do you currently have any State, federal or local approvals related to this activity? D D Note: Approval means any form ofauthorization. If "yes," please list below. Approval Type Approval # Issuance Date Expiration Date 2. Has this project ever been reviewed by the State of Alaska per the ACMP? 0 D Previous State I.D. Number: AK Previous Project Name: Project currently/previously reviewed under State ID No's. AK9708-14JJ, AK9502-02J, and AK9604-12J . (Note: Permit applications for a dock in support of this project were submitted in 1996 and a consistency determination (Hetta Inlet 13, AK 9608-14JJ) and corps permit (1-960303, Hetta Inlet 13) were issued.) PROJECT DESCRIPTION I. Attach the following: a detailed description of the project and all associated facilities; a project timeline for completion of all major activities in the proposal; a site plan depicting all proposed actions; other supporting documentation that would facilitate review of the project. Note: If the project is a modification, identifY existing facilities as well as proposed activities on the site plan. Proposed starting date for project: 6/1/99 (construction) Proposed ending date for project: 6/1/2000 (construction) Coastal Project Questionnaire -1- Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project ---------------------------------------------------- 2. Provide a brief description of your entire project and ALL associated facilities (access roads, caretaker facilities, waste disposal sites, etc.). Construct a hydroelectric project. A diversion dam and intake will be installed at the outlet of Rich's Pond and water will be conveyed through an above-ground 3,200-foot-Iong penstock to a powerhouse on Lower Reynolds Creek. A tailrace will discharge water back into the creek. Up to 500 feet of new access road may be constructed, depending on the location of proposed logging roads. Approximately 10.9 miles of overhead transmission line will extend from the powerhouse to an existing power line located near Hydaburg. A detailed project description is attached. PROJECT LOCATION 1. Attach a copy of the topographical map with the project location marked on it. See Figures 2 of9, 3 of9 and 4 of9 2. Location of project (include nearest community or name of the land feature or body of water. Identify township, range and section): Prince of Wales Island Township Range Section Meridian LatitudelLongitude Intake, penstock, powerhouse, tailrace, and transmission line T. 77 S. R. 85 E. 3, 4 CRM Transmission Line T. 77 S. R. 84 E. 5,6, 7 CRM T. 77 S. R. 85 E. 4,5 CRM T. 76 S. R. 83 E. 34,35,36 CRM T. 76 S. R. 84 E. 28,29,30,31,32, CRM 33 3. The project is on: [8J State Land* D Federal Land [8J Private Land D Municipal Land ·State land can be uplands. tidelands. or submerged lands to 3 miles offshore. See Question #/ in DNR section. 4. The project is located in which region (see attached map): D Northern D Southcentral [8J Southeast D State Pipeline Coordinator's Office Yes No 5. Is the project located in a coastal district? [8J D If yes, please contact the district representative listed on the attached sheet. 6. Identify the communities closest to your project location: Hydaburg FEDERAL APPROVALS 1. Is the proposed project on U.S. Forest Service (USFS) land or will you need to cross D 0USFS lands for access? Does the cost of the project exceed $250,000? D D If yes, have you applied for a USFS permit or approval? Date of submittal: D D Coastal Project Questionnaire -2- Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Yes No 2. Is the proposed project on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land or will you need D ~ to cross BLM lands for access? D Does the cost of the project exceed $250,000? D . If yes, have you applied for a BLM permit or approval? D D Date of submittal: 3. Will you be constructing a bridge over tidal (ocean) waters, or navigable rivers, streams or lakes? D ~ If yes, have you applied for a U.S. Coast Guard pennit for a bridge? o DDate of submittal: 4. Will you be dredging or placing structures or fills in any of the following: tidal (ocean) waters, streams, lakes, wetlands*? If yes, have you applied for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) permit? D Date of submittal: Concurrent with this submittal (Note: Your application for this activity to the Corps ofEngineers also serves as your application to DEC.) *lfyou are not certain whether your proposed project is in a wetlands. contact the U.S Corps ofEngineers. Regulatory Branch at (907) 753-2720 for a wetlands determination (outside the Anchorage area call toll free 1-800-478-2712.) 5. Have you applied for a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit? D Date of submittal: A general stonnwater pennit for construction activities will be required. (Note: For information regarding the need}or an NPDES permit. contact EPA at (907) 271-5083.) 6. Will you have a putrescible waste discharge within 5 miles of any public airport? D 0 If yes, please contact the Airports Division of the Federal Aviation Administration at (907) 271-5440. 7. Does the project include a nonfederal power project affecting any navigable body of water or located on federal land? Or, is utilization of surplus water from any federal government dam proposed? (Power projects consist of dams, water conduits, o reservoirs, powerhouses, and transmission lines.) Transmission line will cross navigable waterway. If yes, have you applied for a pennit from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission fX1 (FERC)? Preliminary permit issued December 27, 1994. ~ o Date of submittal : Application for I icense will be submitted by 11/30/97. (Note: For information. contact FERC, Office ofHydropower Licensing. at (202) 208-0200.) 8. Have you applied for pennits from any other federal agency? Agency Approval Type Date Submitted DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION (DEC) APPROVALS? 1. Will a discharge of wastewater from industrial or commercial operations occur? D o Will the discharge be connected to an already approved sewer system? D o Will the project include a stormwater collection/discharge system? D o Coastal Project Questionnaire -3- Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Yes No Do you intend to construct, install, modify, or use any part of a wastewater (sewage or greywater) disposal system? D o a) If so, will the discharge be 500 gpd or greater? D Db) If constructing a domestic wastewater treatment or disposal system, will the system be located within fill material requiring a COE permit? D D If you answered yes to a or b, answer the following: 1) How deep is the bottom of the system to the top of the subsurface water table? 2) How far is any part ofthe wastewater disposal system from the nearest surface water? 3) Is the surrounding area inundated with water at any time of the year? D D 4) How big is the fill area to be used for the absorption system? (Questions 1&2 will be used by DEC to determine whether separation distances are being met; Questions 3&4 relate to the required size ofthe fill ifwetlands are involved Do you expect to request a mixing zone for your proposed project? D (([your wastewater discharge wiil exceed Alaska water quality standi1rds, you may applyfor a mixing zone. Ifso, please contact DEC to discuss itiformation required under 18 AAC 70.032.) o ** Do you plan to store or dispose of any type of solid waste resulting from this project? D (Note: Solid waste means drilling wastes, garbage, refuse, sludge, and other discarded material, including solid, liquid. semi-solid, or contained gaseous material resultingfrom industrial, commercial. and agricultural operations. andfrom community activities.) •• All refuse, garbage, and construction debris will be removed from the site and disposed at an approved facility. Will your project require the application of oil, pesticides, and/or any other broadcast chemicals to the surface of the land and/or the waters of the state? D a. Will you have a facility that will generate air emissions from processing greater than five tons per hour of material? D b. Will you have one or more units of fuel burning equipment, including flaring, with a heat input rating of 50 million Btu per hour or more? D c. Will you have a facility containing incinerators with a total charging capacity of 1,000 pounds per hour or more? D d. Will you incinerate sludge? D e. Will you have any of the following processes? D Asphalt plant D Coal preparation facility Petroleum refmery 0 Portland cement plant Petroleum Contaminated Soils Cleanup -4- Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Coastal Project Questionnaire ---------------------------------------------- 7. 8. 9. 10. Yes No f. Will your facility use the following equipment? DD Diesel internal combustion engines? (fotal capacity eq~a1 to or greater than 1,750 kilo walls or total rated brake specific horsepower greater than 2,350 bhp) D Gas fired bOilers (Total heat input rating of 100 million Btu per hour) D Oil fired boilers (fotal heat input rating of 65 million Blu per hour) D Combustion turbines (fotal rated power output of 8,000 Hp) g. Will your facility bum more than the fol . ng per year in stationary equipment? DD 1,000,000 gallons of fuel oil 35,000 tons of coal D 900 million cubic feet of natural gas h. If you answered "yes" to any of the above questions (6 a-g), have you installed, replaced or modified any fuel burning or processing equipment since 1977? D D Will you be developing, constructing, installing, or altering a public water system? D lB a. Will your project involve the operation of waterborne tank vessels or oil barges that carry crude or non-crude oil as bulk cargo, or the transfer of oil or other petroleum products to or from such a vessel or a pipeline system? D b. Will your project require or include onshore or offshore oil facilities with an effective aggregate storage capacity of greater than 5,000 barrels of crude oil or greater than 10,000 barrels of non-crude oil? D c. Will you be operating facilities on the land or water for the exploration or production of hydrocarbons? D Ifyou answered NO to ALL questions in this section, continue to next section. Ifyou answered YES to ANY of these questions, contact the DEC Regional office for information and application forms. Please be advised that all new DEC permits and approvals require a 30-day public notice period. Based on your discussion with DEC, please complete the following: Approval Type: Section 401 Water Quality Cert. Date Submitted: Concurrent with this and Section 404 submittal Does your project qualify for a general permit for wastewater or solid waste? n 0 If you answered yes to any questions and are not applying for DEC permits, indicate reason bclow: (DEC contact) told me on that no DEC approvals are --~--.-~~--~~-= -------------required on this project. Reason: D Other: _________________________________________________ Coastal Project Questionnaire -5- Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project DEPARTMENT OF FISH & GAME (DFG) APPROVALS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Yes No Will you be working in, or placing anything in, a stream, river or lake? (This includes 0Dwork in running water or on ice, within the active floodplain, on islands, the face of the banks or the tidelands down to mean low tide.) (Note: Ifthe proposed project is located within a Federal Emergency Management Agency Zone, a Floodplain Development Permit may be required. Contact the local municipal government for additional information and ajloodplain determination) Name of0 stream Driver, or o lake: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond), Reynolds Creek Will you do any of the following? DPlease indicate below: o Build a dam, river training structure or o Alter or stabilize the banks? instream impoundment? o Mine or dig in the beds or banks? o Use the water? o Use explosives? D Pump water out of the stream or lake? D Build a bridge (including an ice bridge)? o Divert or alter the natural stream channel? D Use the stream as a road (even when frozen), r){l Block or dam the stream (temporarily or or crossing the stream with tracked or ~permanently)? wheeled vehicles, log dragging or excavation o Change the water flow or the water channel? equipment (backhoes, bulldozers, etc.)? o Introduce silt, gravel, rock, petroleum D Install a culvert or other drainage structure? products, debris, chemicals, or other Construct a weir? organic/inorganic waste of any type into the D Use an instream structure not mentioned water? here? Is your project located in a designated State Game Refuge, Critical Habitat Area or State Sanctuary? D 0 Does your project include the construction/operation of a salmon hatchery? D 0 Does your project affect, or is it related to, a previously permitted salmon hatchery? D 0 Does your project include the construction of an aquatic farm? D 0 If you answered "No" to ALL questions in this section, continue to next section. Ifyou answered "Yes" to ANY questions under 1-3, contact the Regional DFG Habitat Division Office for information and application forms. Ifyou answered "Yes" to questions 4-6, contact the DFG at the CFMD division headquarters for information and application forms. Based on your discussion with DFG, please complete the following: Approval Type: Fish Habitat Permit Date Submitted: Concurrent with this application Coastal Project Questionnaire -6-Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project 7. If you answered yes to any questions and are not applying for DFG pennits, indicated reason below: D (DFG contact) told me on _________ that no DFG approvals are required. Reason: ___________--'-_____________ DOther: DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (DNR) APPROVALS Yes No 1. Is the proposed project on State-owned land or will you need to cross State-owned land 0Dfor access? ("access" includes temporary access for construction purposes) Note: In addition to State·owned uplands, the State owns almost all land below the ordinary high water line ofnavigable streams, rivers and lakes, and below the mean high tide line seaward for three miles. 2. Do you plan to dredge or otherwise excavate/remove materials on State-owned land? D0Location of dredging site if other than the project site:._____________ Township Range Section Meridian 3. Do you plan to place fill or dredged material on State-owned land? Location of fill disposal site if other than the project site: D0 Township Range Section Meridian Source is on : Dstate Land DFederaI Land DPrivate Land DMuniCipal Land 4. Do you plan to use any of the following State-owned resources: D0 D Timber: Will you be harvesting timber? Amount: D Materials such as rock, sand or gravel, peat, soil, overburden, etc.: Which material? Amount: Location of source:D Project site[] Other, describe: Township Range Section Meridian 5. Are you planning to use or divert any fresh water? 0 D Amount (gallons per day): Phase 1 -19.5mgd (max.) Phase 2 -58.1 mgd (max.) Source: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond} Intended Use: Power generation 6. Wilt you be building or altering a dam? 0 D 7. Do you plan to drill a geothennal well? 0D Coastal Project Questionnaire -7- Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Yes No 8. At anyone site (regardless ofland ownership), do you plan to do any of the following? D Mine five or more acres over a year's time? D 0 D Mine 50,000 cubic yards or more of materials (rock, sand or gravel, soil, peat, overburden, etc.) over a year's time? D Have a cumulative unreclaimed mined area of five or more acres? If you plan to mine less than the acreage/amount stated above and have a cumulative unreclaimed mined area of less than five acres, do you intend to file a voluntary D[8J reclamation plan for approval? 9. Will you be exploring for or extracting coal? D[8J 10. Will you be drilling for oil/gas? D[8J Yes No 11. Will you be investigating or removing historical or archaeological resources on State-owned land? D[8J 12. Is the proposed project located within a known geophysical hazard area? D[8J 13. Is the proposed project located in a unit of the Alaska State Park System? D[8J Ifyou answered "NO" to ALL questions in this section, continue to certification statement. Ifyou answered "YES" to ANY questions in this section, contact DNR for information. Based on your discussion with DNR, please complete the following: Approval Type: Water rights Date Submitted: 7/95; 11/97 (amendment requested) Easement Concurrent with this application 14. If you answered yes to any questions and are not applying for DNR pennits, indicated reason below: D (DNR contact) told me on no DNR approvals are required. Reason: [8J Other: Infonned by John Dunker, Div. of Water, on 10/28/97 that a DNR dam safety pennit is not required because this project will be licensed by the FERC. Please be advised that the CPQ identifies permits subject to a consistency review. You may need additional permits from other agencies or local governments to proceed with your activity. Coastal Project Questionnaire -8- Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Certification Statement The infonnation contained herein is true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I certify that the proposed activity complies with, and will be conducted in a manner consistent with, the Alaska Coastal Management Program. ~~ /8 NIJr/lSm85( t:t7 Signature ofApplicant or Agent Date Note: Federal agencies conducting an activity that will affect the coastal zone are required to submit a federal consistency detennination, per 15 CFR 930, Subpart C, rather than this certification statement. This certification statement will not be complete until all required State and federal authorization requests have been submitted to the appropriate agencies. To complete your packet, please attach your State permit applications and copies of your federal permit applications to this questionnaire. Coastal Project Questionnaire -9-Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Project Description for Coastal Project Questionnaire, Corps Permit, and Habitat Permit The proposed Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project is located on the southwest side of Prince of Wales Island in southeast Alaska, approximately 10 air miles east of Hydaburg. The project will consist of a small diversion dam at the outlet of Rich's Pond (Lake Mellen), an intake, a bypass pipe, a steel penstock, a powerhouse, a tailrace to return water to Lower Reynolds Creek, a switchyard, up to 500 feet of new access roads, and approximately 10.9 miles of 34.5 kV overhead transmission line. The facility will be constructed in two phases. In the first phase, the diversion/intake (dam), penstock, access roads, transmission line and a 1.5 MW powerhouse would be constructed. In the second phase, the powerhouse would be expanded and an additional 3.5 MW unit would be installed, increasing the project capacity to 5 MW. Phase I average annual energy production would be 11,500 MWh, increasing to 23,500 MWh when Phase II is completed. The facility will operate almost entirely in a run-of-river mode, generating electrical energy based on system load and available streamflow. The following are the physical specifications for the project structures and components: (1) The diversion dam will be constructed near the outlet of Rich's Pond, a small sub-basin at the outlet of Lake Mellen. The crest of the dam will be at elevation 876 feet mean sea level (finsl). The diversion structure will be grouted riprap with a concrete core cutoff wall. The crest length of the structure will be approximately 20 feet and the section will act as a weir with uncontrolled overflow when the lake is above elevation 876 fins!. The new surface elevation of Rich's Pond will be approximately 6 feet higher than the existing elevation. (2) The intake will consist of a small concrete structure located on the left side of the diversion. The front of the intake will be protected by a trash rack. Stop log slots located downstream of the trashrack will provide a means to dewater the intake during periods of maintenance. (3) A bypass pipe to provide uninterrupted flow to the bypass reach downstream of the diversion will pass directly through the center of the diversion structure. (4) An above-ground, 3,200-foot-Iong, 42 inch diameter welded steel penstock will convey water from the intake to the powerhouse. The penstock will cross from the left to the right side of Reynolds Creek approximately 500 feet upstream of the powerhouse. At this location, the pipe will have a clear span of about 40-50 feet. A crane will be used to place the pipe and there will be no need to operate equipment in the creek. November 1997 1 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project (5) The powerhouse will be an insulated, pre-engineered metal building on a concrete slab foundation. It will be located at the approximate location of the anadromous barrier of Reynolds Creek. The powerhouse will sit on an excavated bench at or about elevation 110 finsl, approximately 20 feet above the ordinary high water mark of Reynolds Creek. The site will be excavated in anticipation of Phase 2 construction space requirements, approximately 40 feet by 100 feet. (6) A riprap lined tailrace channel will extend about 80 feet from the powerhouse to Reynolds Creek. Three cubic yards of riprap material will be placed below the ordinary high water mark of Reynolds Creek. (7) The switchyard at the powerhouse will consist of a pad-mounted disconnect switch and a pad-mounted step-up transformer. (8) A network of roads have been or are being developed in the project area to support logging activities. These roads will provide access to hydroelectric facility construction areas. It is anticipated that less than 500 feet of project-specific road will need to be constructed. Access roads constructed in conjunction with the project will be of the same design as the primary logging roads. (9) An overhead 34.5 kV transmission line will follow the access road from the powerhouse and along existing logging roads that extend from Copper Harbor north along Hetta Inlet. The line will make an aerial crossing ofHetta Inlet via Jumbo Island and then follow an existing road to a point approximately 1.4 miles northeast of Hydaburg where it will connect with an existing powerline. Total length of the transmission line will be approximately 10.9 miles. Poles will be designed as tangent line structures on about 300 foot centers. Poles will be set from the road. Design of the line will also incorporate the latest raptor protection guidelines and collision avoidance devices to protect migratory birds. (10) Materials for the diversion and any additional road that may be required will be obtained from the powerhouse site excavation. Spoils will be wasted on access roads. Most of the project is not located in wetlands or other waters of the US. Approximately 0.3 acres of wetland or waters of the US will be filled or excavated or both. An additional 0.6 acres of wetlands will be cleared to install the transmission line. The diversion dam at Rich's Pond will raise the water level by approximately 6 feet, inundating a relatively steep shoreline, and permanently flooding less than an estimated 1.0 acre of wetlands. Water levels will fluctuate depending on power demand and inflow, but the new water level will be close to the pond's natural high water level. The new water level will diminish the surface area of a small islet in Rich's Pond. November 1997 2 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project 10 Task Name Submit FERC License Application 2 Receive FERC License 3 Begin Construction ~Award Turbine/Generator Contract 5 Begin Commercial Operation Project:Reynolds Creek Date: Tue 11/18/97 REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT MILESTONE SCHEDULE Finish Wed 11/26/97 Mon 2/1/99 Mon 2/1/99 :.2/1 Thu 4/1/99 Thu 4/1/99 .4/1 Thu 4/1/99 Thu 4/1/99 .4/1 Thu 6/1/00 Thu 6/1/00 .6/1 Milestone. Page 1 2 Q2 ARCf,t' ;J((AI# ,• " ALASKA ~ ,4 .. Of c~(PA:,r/c O«(AI'I LOCATiON MAP Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owners: Haida Corporation, Sealaska Corporation REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Vicinity and Location ~ap FIGURE 1 OF 9 VICINITY MAP LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska WATERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; He t t a I nle t T. 77 S., R. 85 E., Sections 3, 4, 5; T. 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections 5, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35, 36; T. 76 S., R. 84 E., Sections 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33; Copper River Meridian 11/97 ~_:__ .:..::.2.: __ r " S flQt.t<I'4..I'I("',Of<IJ -, ·'1OAtovII~ CUt,." "0111(' .,..-t Clly of Hydaburg Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, Sealaska Corooration 7= ~I{~_~. 'y~~U l:~ l~ n _.. pSSle 1f84 Approx. Scale; I" = 3,070' Wetland~ boundaries shown are approximate. REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Project Area Wetlands (1 of3) FIGURE 2 OF 9 ul» .--~ ~ I LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska WATERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; He t ta Inle t T. 17 S., R. 85 E, Sections 3, 4, 5; T. 17 S., R. 84 E., Sections S, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35, 36; T. 76 S., R. 84 E., Sections 28, 29,30,31,32,33; Copper River Meridian J 1/97 ;:';; ~~-\~;;:;~ t-~-;l--,'fj----4.'--=----' I '. -j , ..'!i:" C(i ~ i .il f "'!~ i I 'h "1' ! , -II .~ \ \ ----,...~" 1/ \' ~i ( \ I ~ \ --"",,--,) / /:,~ -;~";\'l"""" fI()Ai)("'J "; Approx. Scale: I" D 3,070' Wetlands boundaries shown are approximate. Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, Sealaska Corporation REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Project Area Wetlands (20f3) FIGURE 3 OF9 LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska WATERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; Hetta Inlet T. 77 S., R. 85 E., Sections 3, 4, 5; T. 17 S., R. 84 E., Sections 5, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E" Sections 34, 35, 36; T. 76 S., R. 84 E., Sections 28, 29, 30, 31, 32,33; Copp.:r River Meridian 11/97 l ,#I'''''''~-(;'\ I / , ,~ ",* ~ .~ '" 1 --... I \ .,. \ 4' \ ~-'\ .." ------~..... +\ ' •~--~LOCQI'I(#I' '!t...-RO~,(~)I ~ ~7...... ~.I .. _ ...-::..: ... _ ....:--" ........ .... ~--.......".---""'~ I ........... "" \, , --~,Ip\-.."~, ~-"" ~-~ '*-.... Approx, Scale: '" ',093' Wetlands boundaries shown are approximate. Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, AJaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, Sealaska Corporation j \;) .. '. " '/ " , J,'!Is' i !fiJi/, '~'L0'r(-) II ( I ff lake M'21l1en /~/ .~/./,/ ,.;¥ ;;;.\ ~ REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Project Area Wetlands (3 of3) FIGURE 4 OF9 LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, AJaska WATERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; He t t a I nle t T. 77 S., R. 85 E., Sections 3, 4, 5; T. 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections .s, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35, 36; T. 76 S., R. 84 E., Sections 28, 29, 30, 31, 32,33; Copper River Meridian 11197 . -._------------........., 880 \ , , ---.------- ..... _------- ---------- --+-+---<~----~--------- /"y/ // ' / ' ,/ J' J / / / ;I' /" ,," / ----_../ ,,/ --~ / __ ....".:0_ -<---<-<-- STU!. PCNSTOCI< u-. t.lHi. INSTR(.... flOW PIPE M rH OfIlnc( PLAT( , -J rIU' ~ Haida Corporation LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, AlaskaREYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRlC PO Box 89 WATERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond)PROJECTHydaburg, Alaska 99222 and Reynolds Creek; Hetta Inlet Diversion Site Plan T. 77 S., R. 85 E., Sections 3, 4, 5;Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. T. 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections 5, 6, 7;Property Owner: Haida Corporation, T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 3S, 36; Sealaska Corporation T. 76 S., R. 84 E., Sections 28, 29,30,31,32,33; Copper River Meridian FIGURES OF9 11197 DIVERSION· [RICH'S POND LAKE MELLEN PRE-PROJECT POST-PROJECT NWS OHW NWS OHW RICH'S POND 870.0 874.0 876.0 879.0 LAKE MELL~,--876.0 879.0 876.0 879.0 .,--_.. Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, Sealaska Corporation REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Rich's Pond -Change in Water Elevation Plan View FIGURE 6 OF 9 LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska WATERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; Hetta Inlet T. 77 S., R. 85 E., Sections 3, 4, 5; T. 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections !5, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R 83 E., Sections 34, 3!5, 36; T. 76 S., R. 84 E., Sections 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33; Copper River Meridian 11/97 SEC110N (!) EL. 879.0 OHW ~ GROUTED RIPRAP 12', t.lINIIIU'" INSTlIEA.I.I rLOW PIPE ....,TH 6'0 ORIFICE PLATE PENSTOO< GROUT HOU SECTION ED It:4TAKE DOWNSTREAM ELEVA 11 ON 8umRflY VA.LII! ~ OHW879.0 '<1 NWS876.0 oi. ""N. POOL 87".!> (APR.-t.lAlI ""N. POOL 872.0 (JJN.-MAR.) TRASHRAQ( INTAl<E STR\JClURE EL. 879.0 OHW SPlLLw.... V v CREST EL. en.O EL 876.0 ~"'" ""'~""\TO 8E EXCA ~ GROUT HOI..£ (T'IP) ~ t 'jFnT Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, Sealaska Corporation REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Intake Profile and Sections FIGURE 7 OF 9 LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska WATERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; Ret ta Inlet T. 77 S., R. 85 E., Sections 3, 4, 5; T. 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections 5.6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35, 36; T. 76 S., R. 84 E., Sections 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33; Copper River Meridian 11/97 _110< \ \ " "><'\/'" U. ".0 OllhO_U.\ \ \ "-', \\\\/..~ ~ \, \\\\ ,eo POWERHOUSE SITE PLAN :I 'iI 1, ~ '·.'0' kJuuJ 'f"" 'k;xj r ,. lUI ~~_~n,ON ED I Haida Corporation PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 Agent: HOR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner: Haida Corporation, Sealaska Corporation '. 1', ~ I • I ~ ~ \ 1/1 '-.\ ~ \ /Ji' \ -" //I;I~-m,gv,.•• '-----. /.j/ ",0 0L ;' / ..1...._---. ./ / /-_._-. m REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRlC PROJECT Powerhouse Site Plan and Section FIGURE 8 OF9 LOCATION: Prince of Wales Island, Alaska WATERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; Hetta Inlet T. 77 S., R. 8S E., Sections 3, 4, 5; T. 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections 5, 6, 7; T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34, 35, 36; T. 76 S., R. 84 E., Sections 28,29,30,31,32,33; Copper River Meridian 11197 II ..=:l. o .ri '0 .. o "1'~I +--I h.-:::::Y I 8 :r ~ u :;)e: v> .... \5 ~ ~1 '"" .ri N '~l II ,I OPTICAL !'IBER SHIELD WIRE 345 KV T~ANSMI$SION I I[' . ! T Lr ~r.i~:OC> _~idi1Xli I ~, ~ TYPICAL ){OAD SECTION r~m=m=-TYPICAL AI~RIAL CROSSING STRUCTURE ~ TYPICAL TANGENT STRUCTl'RE Haida Corporation REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PO Box 89 Hydaburg, Alaska 99222 PROJECT Access Road and Transmission Line Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc. Property Owner; Haida Corporation, FIGURE 9 OF 9 Sealaska Corporation LOCATION; Prince of Wales Island, Alaska WATERBODY: Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; Hetta Inlet T. 17 S., R. 85 E., Sections 3, 4, 5; T. 71 S., R. 84 E. Sections 5.6,7; 1. 76 S., R. 83 E.• Sections 34, 35, 36; T. 76 S., R. 84 E.• Sections 28. 29,30.31.32. 33; Copp~r River Meridian 11'91 Department of the Army Permit Application Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project (ITEMS I THRU 4 TO BE FILLED BY THE CORPS) I. APPLICATION NO. 2. FIELD OFFICE CODE 3. DATE RECEIVED 4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETED (ITEMS BELOW TO BE FIllED BY APPLICANT) 5. APPLICANT'S NAME Haida Corporation 8. AUTHORlZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE HDR Engineering, Inc. 6. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS Haida Corporation P.O. Box 89 Hydaburg, AK 99222 Contact: John Bruns 9. AGENT'S ADDRESS HDR Engineering, Inc. 500 -108th Avenue NE, Suite 1200 Bellevue, W A 98004-5538 Contact: Mike Stimac 7. APPLICANT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE (907) 285-3721 (FAX){907}285-3722) 10. AGENT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE (425) 453-1 523; (FAX){425) 453-7107} II. STATEMENT OF AUTHORlZA TION I hereby authorize HDR Engineering, Inc. to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish, upon request, supplemental information in support of this permit application. VA c;-a/!A/~~ /! LIi. /'1 .9 () APPLICANT'S SIGNArURE I D-;PE NAME, LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY 12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project 13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOWN Lake Mellen (Rich's Pond) and Reynolds Creek; Hetta Inlet 14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS N/A 15. LOCATION OF PROJECT Prince of Wales Island, Alaska 16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN T. 77 S., R, 85 E., Sections 3,4, 5; T. 77 S., R. 84 E., Sections 5, 6, 7: T. 76 S., R. 83 E., Sections 34,35. 36; T. 76 S., R. 84 E., Sections 28, 29. 30,3),32. 33; Copper River Meridian 17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE By surface: EITHER, take the road heading northeast out of Hydaburg to Deer Bay/Hetta Inlet and continue by boat to Copper Harbor, OR take the road heading northeast out of Hydaburg to Deer BaylHeua Inlet, cross Hetta Inlet by boat, get back on the logging road system and drive south approximately 3.3 miles to Copper Harbor and Reynolds Creek, OR take the road heading northeast out of Hydaburg to Deer BaylHetta Inlet and continue on around the Inlet on the logging road system (when completed) until the project site is reached. By air: Fly 10 miles east from Hydaburg by fioatplane or helicopter to Copper Harbor to access Reynolds Creek. Page I Department of the Army Permit Application Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project 18. NATURE OF ACTIVITY See attached project description and figures. 19. PROJECT PURPOSE The purpose of the project is to generate electricity using a renewable energy source. In the shon tenn; the project will meet the electrical power needs of Hydaburg and, in the long term, the project would help meet the electrical power needs of Prince of Wales Island. The project will reduce the community's dependence on fossil fuels for electricity generation. Construction is scheduled to begin in June 1999 and be completed by June 2000. USE BLOCKS 20·22 IF DREDGED ANDIOR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED 20. REASON(S) FOR DISCHARGE Disturbance to the bottom and banks of Rich's Pond near its outlet is necessary to install a diversion and intake. Excavation of the bank of Reynolds Creek near the powerhouse is needed to install the tailrace. Up to 500 feet of new road could be constructed, some in wetland, to connect logging roads with project components. For most of its length the overhead traJ!nission line will follow existing logging roads and where the logging roads cross wetlands, segments of the overhead line may also be located over wetlands. Transmission poles will be set from the road. The transmission line will include an aerial crossing of Hetta Inlet via Jumbo Island. 21. TYPE(S) OF MATERIAL BEING DISCHARGED AND THE AMOUNT OF EACH TYPE IN CUBIC YARDS Materials discharged into wetlands and other waters of the US will include concrete and talus, rock. and minimal quantities ofsilt. The total volume of fill material to be placed to construct the diversion will be approximately 75 cubic yards. A large component of this will be loose rock excavated from the bed of the pond to clear the area for construction of the concrete cut-offwall. The material excavated will be used to complete construction of the diversion. Additional material would be obtained from the powerhouse site or local borrow pits. Up to 3,500 cubic yards of additional fill may be placed to construct access roads. No fill will be placed to install the transmission line, but the poles may be installed in wetlands. Approximately 10 cubic yards of material will be removed from the bank of Reynolds Creek below the ordinary high water mark where the tailrace discharges to Lower Reynolds Creek. Fill material below the ordinary high water mark will consist of approximately 3 cubic yards ofriprap used to line the tailrace channel. 22. SURFACE AREA IN ACRES OF WETLANDS OR OTHER WATERS FILLED Fill and excavation activities for the diversion and tailrace will occur in < 0.1 acres of waters of the US. This includes excavation of materials from the bed and bank of Rich's Pond, construction of a diversion and intake, and excavation of materials from the bank of Reynolds Creek for connection of the tailrace to the creek. Logging of the project area by Sealaska Corporation is scheduled to be completed prior to construction of the hydroelectric facility. The road development plan indicates that roads built for logging operations will be located close to the proposed hydroelectric facility components. It is estimated that up to 0.34 acres of additional wetland would be filled for construction of access roads, should any be required. The transmission line will cross wetlands on Jumbo Island where no road exists or is proposed and larger trees in up to 0.6 acres of wetland will be removed but no fill or excavation will occur. The diversion dam at Rich's Pond will raise the water level by approximately 6 feet, inundating a relatively steep shoreline, and permanently flooding less than an estimated 1.0 acre of wetlands. Other vegetation that will no! interfere with the transmission line will not be removed. 23. IS ANY PORTION OF THE WORK ALREADY COMPLETE? Yes No X •IF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK 24. ADDRESSES OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS. LESSEES. Etc. Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbody Sealaska Corporation One Sealaska Plaza, Suite 400 Juneau, AK 99801-1512 25. LIST OF OTHER CERTIFICATIONS OR APPROVALSIDENIALS RECEIVED FROM OTHER FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL AGENCIES FOR WORK DESCRIBED IN THIS APPLICATION. AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL JDNUMBER DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATEDENJED Federal Energy Application for License for 11480-000 Will be submined Regulatory Commission a Major Water Power by 11130/97 Project 5 MW or Less Page 2 Department of the Army Permit Application Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project AK Division of ACMP Consistency Not yet assigned Concurrent with Governmental Determination th is application Coordination AK Department of Section 401 Water Quality Not yet assigned Concurrent with Environmental Certification this appl ication Conservation AK Department of Water Right LAS # 19845 July 1995; Natural Resources, Amendment sub Division of Water mitted 11/12197 AK Department of Easement Not yet assigned Concurrent with Natural Resources, this application. Division of Land AK Department of Fish Fish Habitat Permit Not yet assigned Concurrent with and Game th is application 26. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certifY that the information in this appl ication is complete and accurate. I further certifY that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the duly authorized agent of the appl ican!. __?4,/~ SIGNATURE OF AGENT The appl ication must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly authorized agent if the statement in block II has been filled out and signed, 18 U,S.C, Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any uick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both. Page 3 GENERAL WATERWAYIWATERBODY APPLICATION ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME Habitat and Restoration Division 2030 Sea Level Drive, Suite 205 Ketchikan, AK 99901-6067 A. APPLICANT: 1. Name: Haida Corporation 2. Address: P.O .Box 89, Hydaburg, AK 99222 Telephone: (907) 285-3721 Contact: John Bruns 3. Contractor: Not yet selected Agent: HDR Engineering, Inc., 500 -108th Ave. NE, Bellevue, WA 98004-5538 Contact: Mike Stimac Phone: (425) 453-1523 Fax: (425) 453-7107 E-mail: mstimac@hdrinc.com B. TYPE AND PURPOSE OF PROJECT: Hydroelectric facility. See attachment prepared for Coastal Project Questionnaire for a detailed project description and drawings. This application is for construction of a diversion at the outlet of Rich's Pond (Lake Mellen) and work required to connect the tailrace from the powerhouse to Lower Reynolds Creek. Anadromous fish are present in the lower reach of Lower Reynolds Creek but none are in Rich's Pond. C. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: Rich's Pond (Lake Mellen) and Reynolds Creek, Prince of Wales Island Waterbody Anadromous Township, Range, USGS Name Stream # Section, Meridian Quad Reynolds anadromous reach is #10420 (barrier to T. 77 S, R. 85 E, Craig Creek anadromous fish at El. 95, approx. 1,300 ft Sections 3 & 4; CRM (A-2) from stream mouth) Lake Mellen not designated anadromous, contains T. 77 S, R. 85 E, Craig (Rich's resident population of grayling Sections 3; CRM (A-2) Pond) D. TIME FRAME FOR PROJECT: June 1999 -June 2000 E. CONSTRUCTION METHODS: 1. Will the stream be diverted? Yes XX No How long? The penstock will permanently divert water around the bypass reach (a distance of approximately 3,000 feet) to the powerhouse site before it is returned to Lower Reynolds Creek. Phase 1 of the project will divert up to 19.5 mgd. Ultimately following the construction of Phase 2, up to 'S8Smga will be diverted. Construction of the dam/intake at Rich's Pond will take approximately 3 months. Temporary water diversions will occur during construction. A cofferdam and culverts will be used to Fish Hahitat Permit Annlication / Rp.vn()/d~ rrpPK Hvdrnp/prtrir Prniec/ isolate water from in-stream construction activities. No in-water work is proposed to connect the tailrace to Reynolds Creek. 2. Will stream channelization occur? Yes No xx 3. Will the banks of the stream be altered or modified? Yes XX No Describe: The bank of Rich's Pond in the vicinity of the dam will be recontoured to provide equipment access to the pond for construction. Permanent access will be maintained for operations and maintenance. Rock will be removed from the bank and spoils will be wasted on the access road. The bank oflower Reynold's Creek will be excavated to connect the tailrace with the creek. The tailrace will be left plugged with native material until construction of the outlet is complete. 4. List all tracked or wheeled equipment (type and size) that will be used in the stream (in the water, on ice, or in the floodplain): Tracked excavator (3-4 yd bucket). How long will equipment be in the stream? Three months. The timing of in stream work will comply with any timing restrictions stipulated by ADFG. 5. a. Will material be removed from the floodplain, bed, stream, or lake? Yes XX No Material will be excavated down to native rock to construct the dam. A concrete core cutoff wall will be poured in place and then the excavated native rock will be placed back around the core. Additional rock may be required to achieve final contours. The rock will be obtained from the powerhouse site. The footprint of the disturbed area will be approximately O.lacres. Material will also be removed from the floodplain of the creek to construct the tailrace. b. Will material be removed from below the water table? Yes XX No Up to 8 feet. Is a pumping operation planned? Yes No XX 6. Will material (including spoils, debris, or overburden) be deposited in the flood plain, stream, or lake? Yes XX No Amount: The diversion will be constructed with approx. 75 cubic yards of concrete and rock. Disposal site location(s): Within lakebed. Fish Habitat Permit Application 2 Revnolds Creek Hydroelectric Project 7. Will blasting be perfonned? Yes XX No No blasting will occur in the stream channel or lake bed. 8. Will temporary fills in the stream or lake be required during construction (e.g., for construction traffic around construction site)? Yes No XX 9. Will ice bridges be required? Yes No XX F. SITE REHABILITATIONIRESTORATION PLAN: The banks of the creek and pond disturbed by construction activities would be contoured to blend with adjacent undisturbed areas and the new construction. Existing vegetation would be retained wherever possible to minimize the area of exposed soil. Disturbed areas will be left to revegetate naturally after construction is complete, or, if more immediate stabilization appears necessary, lined with large rock or seeded with grasses. Appropriate BMPs would be implemented to protect waterways from sediment-laden runoff. G. W ATERBODY CHARACTERISTICS: Width of stream: 30 feet (at site proposed for diversion) Depth of stream or lake: 2 - 4 feet Type of stream or lake bottom (e.g., sand, gravel, mud): talus and rock Stream gradient: 0% at diversion site H. HYDRAULIC EVALUATION: 1. Will a structure (e.g., culvert, bridge support, dike) be placed below ordinary high water of the stream? Yes XX No If yes, attach engineering drawings or a field sketch, as described in Step B. For culverts, attach stream discharge data for a mean annual flood (Q=2.3), if available. Describe potential for channel changes or increased bank erosion, if applicable: Channel changes will be as previously described for the diversion structure at the outlet of Rich's Pond and at the confluence of the tailrace from the powerhouse with Lower Reynolds Creek. Increased bank erosion is not anticipated at either site. Design features will eliminate or minimize this concern. 2. Will more than 25,000 cubic yards of material be removed? Yes No XX If yes, attach a written hydraulic evaluation including, at a minimum, the following: potential for channel changes, assessment of increased aufeis (glaciering) potential, assessment of potential for increased bank erosion. Fish Habitat Permit Application 3 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ALL INFORMATION PROVIDED ON OR IN CONNECTION WITH THIS APPLICATION IS TRUE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. Date Fish Habilat Permit Application 4 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project STATE OF ALASKA OEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF LAND { J Northern Region [ J SouthcentTai Region [1 Southeast Region 3700 Airport Way 3601 C Street Suite 1Q80 400 WUloughlly. #400 Fairbanks, AK 99709 Anchorage, AK 99503·5937 Juneau, AK 99801 (907) 451-2705 (907) 269-8552 (907) 465·3400 APPUCATION FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY or EASEMENT (RlW/E) AS 38.05.850 NOlH'efundable $100.00 AppUc.ation Fee HAlDA CORPOAATION Applicant Name· Doing Business As PO BOX 89 . HYDABURG AK 99222 Mailing Address City State (907) 285-3721L l 92-0045956 Home Phone Work Phone Social Security and/or Tax 10 # IS applicant a nonprofit cooperative assocIation? [1 Yes :{qCNo'. It yes. are you applying for an exemption under AS 38.05.850(B)1 [ JYes ( JNo If yes. please suomit proof of nonprofit status {e.g. by..{aws, articles of incorporation. tax statement). Legal DescriptionILocation of activity: HETrA INLE'I'J PRINCE OF WALES ISIANuD___________ Meriaian cm .Townstlip 76 S" Range 84 E •• Secuon.dL ...§l'L1/4 -=-1/4, Section ~~1I4 -=-114, Township - • Range -,Section--=:-...=-1/4 -=-114. Section-=--==-114 ..::=.-1/4. {COdI ___eu.-.f/ Total length of applied tor RIW/E feet: 3,000 Total width ot applied tor R/VtI/E feet: -...10....01--___ Acres encompassed by ANIlE: 6 9 (43,560 ~fee[ = \ aera) Purpose of Right-of.WaylEasement. {e.g. Utility, Road. Bridge. Airstrip/Airport. Driveway, Trail. Drainage}. and type of anticipated traffic, (e.g. plane, truck. heavy equipment): Explain urrLITY EASEMENT FOR OVEmEAD TRANSMISSrCN LINE TO SUPPUl PavER Fl{)M THE REYNOLD3 CREEK HYDIDELECI'RIC PIDJECr 'TO HYDABURG. Are you applying for a Public R/W/E? H Yes [J No Private RlW/E? (] Yes 11 No (A.nrwaI Fee Reql1!r,,:Uor private ANIlE) State briefty the standardS and methOds of construction: i.e., regulated standards. winter traj/, dirt trail, gravel road, paved road, etc.: clearing by hand. clearing/construction by mechanical equipment (state type of equipment to be used, e.g. J.D. 350. 944 . F.E. loader, hydro axe, 0-8). or establish by use only. THIS IS AN AERIAl CROSSING OF HETJtI INLET NO WORK WIll OCCI/R WITHIN THE WATER OTHER THA~ POSSIBI Y IISING A BARGE Te STRING THE CABI F BETWEEN IHF TRANSMISSION TOWERS I neATED ON PRIVATE I AND THE TRANSMISSION lINE WIll BE CONSTRIICTFD ACCORDING TO INDUSTRY STMDARDS. SIMILAR TO THOSE UTILIZED BY ALASKA POWER AND TELEPHONE. THE METHOD OF CONSTRUCTION WILL ~f 1 PRJ ~f.c9,oo,.v~ fU.~~~~,IJilie.~d T~~~~W agencies De[. Stamp: 102·112 (Rev. 2/94) IS thiS an exiSting use? [1 Yes ~No If yes, provide dOCumentalion venfying existing use, such as easement atlas, affidavItS ,. attesting to use and exiStence. pictures, etc. Construction to begjn:,~_JUNE___19_9_9____________________________ Construction to be completed by: ----'JUNE ______________~________________---'2_0 00 Other permits or aulhorizations apcJIied for in conjunction with this proposeo project: ______________ CORPS OF ENGINEEFS, SEC. 10/404 PERMIT; DIVISION OF GJVERNNENTAL CCORDINATION roASTAL <XNSISTENCY DEI'ERr·1INATIONi ALASKA DEPARrMENT OF FISH AND GAME HABITAT PERMIT; ALASKA DEPARrMENT OF ENVIrorIltE:1TAL CONSERVATICN SEcrION 401 ~ERTIFICATWN: WATER RIGHTS If ttlis authoriZation is granted. I agree to construct and maintain the improvements authoriZed in a workmanlike manner, arn:l to keep the area in a neat and sanitary condition; if the rignt-of-way or easement improvements are to be ccnstructed across leasea landS, I agree to reimburse the lessee tor aJl damages to crops a.nd improvements, to the extent of the construction of Ihis right-of-way or easement. and to comply with all the laws. rules. and regulations pertaining thereto; and provided furtner that upon termination or relocation of the right-of-way or easement for whiCh appliCation is being made, I agree to remove or relocate the improvements and restore tne a.rea without cost to the state and to the satisfaction of the Director of the Division of Land. Anach a USGS IrUIp (sc:aJe af 1:63,36Q) or a .sblto statuS plat showing tho Iocati.on of the right-of....yor easam.nt, and an envil'Ol'ImtntBJ risk aues.smcnt questiotllWI'I (form 101-4008A). Th& final gmnting of tho riaht-ct-way 0(' easomeflt will be contingonl upon our receipt of 8 plat doplctlng the post COMtnlctiOI'l locatJon of Ute impItlvement9. It y01.ll' application Is appra1led. instructions for tho completion of the plat will b9 provtdod to you, or can be piCk8d up at any of our offica&. AS 38.D5.035(8) au~""diredl:Jrto dKide wtIIIt Information Is nHCfed to prOC8$' an applieetion for tho uJ. or u_ at .ta.. htnd end r ..ourc:os. This Information Is mad... part of the stall public 'end "corda and MOO"''' public InforrnGtion und., AS 08.25.110 and n.2S.12Q (Unlvu tho irrfarmation qualifie. for confidl-ndality undlM' AS 38.OS.03S{a)(lI) end confidttntSaUfy i. nlqu08ftd). Public Information la open to inapctlon by you 01 My matnbM of thAt pu~ A ~wt\o i.e th. sub~of thIIln1c1m$tion may duIIleng. Ita aecurac:.y or comploten...under AS 44..".'10. by giving aWTitten do.saipticn of ItHtdr8l'ltn9ec1lnformlltiOf\ the cttang •• nClCldod to COlnel it. and 8 nama and addrlll" wh.,,.ltIa PiII,,"n caA be fe8Chad. FeIIlQ statements I'ft$de in an application for a b$nefit ar. punlahable under AS t 1 • .55.21 O. 102-112 (FlaY. 2194) STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF LAND APPUCANT ENVlRONMENTAL RISK QUESTIONNAIRE The purpose of this questionnaire is to help clarify the types of activities you propose to undertake. The questions are meant to help identify the leve! of environmental risk that may be associated with the proposed activity. The Division of Land's evaluation of environmental risk for the proposed activity does not imply that the parcel or the proposed activity is an environmental risk from the presence or use of hazardous substances. Through this analysis, you may become aware of environmental risks that you did not know about If so, you may want to consult with an environmental engineer or an attorney. HAIDA CORPORATION Applicant Name Doing Business As PO BOX 89 HYDABURG 99222 Address City State Zip ( ) ( 907 ) 285-3721 JCHN BRUNS Home Phone Work Phone Contact Person NOIE: FUR QUESTIONS ()N' APPLICATIOO I PLEASE c)NrAcr Describe the proposed activity: MICHAEL V. STIMAC, HDRENGINEERING, 425/453-1523 INSTAILAN OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINE ORIGINATING AT REYNOI.J)3 CREEK I PRINCE OF \'<7AlES ISIANC AND TRAVELING ACRCSS HETTA INlET VIA JUMBO ISLAND ro HYD..ZlBURG. THE LINE WILL SUPPIX PCWER FR:M '!HE REYNJI.lS CREEK HYDRO PIDJEcr. In the course of your proposed activity will you generate. use, store, transport dispose of, or otherwise come in contact with toxic and/or hazardous materials, and/or hydrocarbons? Yes [] No ~ If yes, please list the substances and the associated quantities. Use a separate sheet ot paper. if necessary. Page 1 of 2102-4OO8A (Rev. HW1) ----------------------------------------------- If the proposed activities involve atty storage tanks, either above or below ground. addre~ the following questions for eac. tank. Please use a separate sheet of paper, if ne(;essary, and, where appropriate. indude maps or plats: a. Where will the tank be located? _N_I_A__________________________ b. What will be stered in the tank? N/A c. 'tIthat will be the tank's size in gallons? ..,;;N;;I.I..;.A;;.-._______________________ d. What will the tank be used for? (Commercial or residential purposes?) ..;;.N..,/_A_____________ e. Will the tank be tested for Jeaks? -:N~V..;;.A.;.._...________________________ 1. Will the tank be equipped with leak detection devices? Yes ( ] No [ ]. If no, describe: _N;.,./A______ Do you have any reason to suspect. or do you know if the site may have been previously contaminated? Yes (] No [¥. If yes. please explain: ________________________________ I certify that due diligence has been exercised and proper inquiries made In completing this questionnaire, end that the foregoing is true and correct to the best at my knowledge. Date 102004008A (R.v. 10181) Page 2 of 2 ", Application for License APPENDIXG AGENCY CONSULTATION November 1997 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC PIY4ecI No.1 1480 Appendix G -Agency Consultation APPENDIXG AGENCY CONSULTATION Table G-l lists, in chronological order, the general agency correspondence that has been developed as of November 19, 1997, for the Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Proj ecl. All of the referenced letters, doclUnents and meeting notes are presented in this Appendix. As part of the Applicant-prepared EA process. monthly progress reports have been developed that include minutes of meetings, telephone call records, transcripts from public meetings, and correspondence. The progress reports are distributed to the FERC and the participants and interested parties in a manner that is open to the public view. This information is made available at convenient locations for review by the public at the offices of the Haida Corporation, the Craig Public Library, and the FERC. Additionally, a Communications Protocol was established that stipulated that any communication (oral or written) with FERC staff would be documented, filed with the Commission, and made available for public review. That docrunentation is also included with the monthly status reports. The status reports are listed in Table G-2 but are not included in this Appendix. Reynolds Creek HydroelectriC Project November 1997 G-l FERC Project No. 11480 Appendix G -Agency Consultation TABLE G-l CHRONOLOGY OF GENERAL AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE FOR THE REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Date From To Subject 2/2/95 Christine Valentine, Jack Goldwasser, IME Comments on Initial ADGC Consultation Review Document 2117/95 Judith Bittner, DNR Jack Goldwasser, IME Comments on Initial Consultation Review Document 3/9/95 Steven Zimmerman, Jack Goldwasser, IME Public Meeting Attendance NMFS r-3/24/95 Sue Wolf, DOl Louis Chauvin, IME Response to Haida Corp's Preliminary Pennit 3/24/95 Robert Grimm, AP&T Jack Goldwasser, IME Comments on Initial Consultation Review Document 5/3195 Steven Zimmerman, Jack Goldwasser, IME Comments on Initial NMFS Consultation Review Document 5/5/95 William Garry, DNR Jack Goldwasser, IME Comments regarding Recreation Mitigation 5/8/95 Gordon Nelson, DOl, Jack Goldwasser, IME Comments on First-Stage USGS Consultation Pkg. and Proposed Study Plan 5115/95 Nevin Nolmberg, Jack Goldwasser, IME Comments on First-Stage USFWS Consultation Pkg. and Proposed Study Plan 5115/95 James Durst, ADF&G Jack Goldwasser, IME Comments on First-Stage Consultation Pkg. and Proposed Study Plan 5/22/95 Christine Valentine, Jack Goldwasser, lME Comments on First-Stage ADGC Consultation Review 8/1195 Andrew Grossman, Jack Goldwasser, IME Interagency field examination of NMFS Reynolds Creek Tamra Faris, NMFS 8/23/95 James Durst, ADF&G Jonathan Houghton, Biological Study Plans Pentec 10/17/95 James Durst, ADF&G Jonathan Houghton, 1995 Biological Study Plan Pentec Detailed Comments 11/13/95 Nevin Holmberg, Jack Goldwasser, lME Supplement to Comments of USFWS May ] 5, 1995; Clarification of Data Needs 12/22/95T Reuben Yost, ADT Jack Goldwasser, IME Hydaburg Highway Paving Reynolds Creek HydroelectriC Project November J997 G-2 FERC Project No. J1480 Appendix G -Agency Consultation TABLEG-l CHRONOLOGY OF GENERAL AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE FOR THE REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Date From To Subject 2/12/96 Agency, Tribe~ Fred Springer, FERC Preparation of a Draft Organization, or Environmental Assessment Individual Addressed 2112/96 Fred Springer, FERC Jack Goldwasser, IME Waiver of Commission Regulations 2116/96 Glen Martin, AP&T Jack Goldwasser, IME Request for Robert S. Grimm, AP&T to be part of Collaborative Team 3/6/96 Steven Zimmerman, Jack Goldwasser, IME No significant impacts regarding NMFS anadromous fish species and other living marine resources 3/7/96 Steve Brockmann, Jack Goldwasser, IME Comments on Pentec letter USFWS 3111196 Mike Strzelecki, FERC Jack Goldwasser, IME Comments on Scoping Document 1 3/19/96 Nevin Holmberg, Jack Goldwasser, IME Comments on Pentec's letter of USFWS 1/5/96 3/26/96 Robert Loescher, Jack Goldwasser, IME Request to be placed on Sealaska Collaborative Team 4/3/96 James Durst, ADF&G Jack Goldwasser, IME Collaborative Team and ADF&G Contacts 4/15/96 Jennifer Garland, Distribution List Transmittal of Scoping ADF&G Jack Goldwasser, IME Document Mike Strzelecki, FERC John Bnms, Haida 4/22/96 Michiel Holley, COE Jack Goldwasser, IME Comments on Scoping Document 1 and Draft Preliminary Environmental Assessment 6/6/96 Jeff Davis, ADF&G Jack Goldwasser, IME Comments on Scoping Document 1 and Draft Preliminary Environmental Assessment 6/19/96 Jennifer Garland, ADGC Jack Goldwasser, IME Coordination of the informational NEP A review for the second stage consultation Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 G-3 FERC Project No. 11480 Appendix G -Agency Consultation TABLE G-l CHRONOLOGY OF GENERAL AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE FOR THE REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Date iTo Subject 6/24/96 From Jack Goldwasser, IME . Comments on Scoping NMFS Steven Zimmerman, Docwnent 1 and Draft Preliminary Environmental Assessment 7/1/96 Jack Goldwasser, IME Areas of concern regarding ongoing analysis of Reynolds Creek 7/5/96 Jeffrey Davis, ADF&G Steve Hoffman, Hydroacoustic survey to verify ADF&G Mike Haddix, ADF&G grayling populations 7/11/96 Jonathan Houghton, Jeffrey Davis, ADF&G Concerns regarding 1996 Pentec Monitoring Plan 7/31/96 Mike Haddix, ADF&G Steve Hoffman, Hydroacoustics to Estimate ADF&G Grayling Populations in Swnmit and Mellen Lakes 8/15/96 Mike Haddix, ADF&G Jack Goldwasser, IME Grayling surveys 8/21/96 Bradley Baur, ADF&G Jack Goldwasser, IME Comments on the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 1/13/97 Nevin Holmberg, Jack Goldwasser, IME Written response on two aspects USFWS of current hydropower proposal 7/18/97 Michael V. Stimac, Lois Cashell, FERC Issuance of Scoping Document HDR 2 8/20/97 Michael V. Stimac, Agencies Issuance of Draft Application HDR for LicenselPreliminary Draft Environmental Assessment for review and comment 8/27/97 Jennifer R. Garland, Michael V. Stimac, Second Stage Consultation ADGC HDR 9/18/97 John C. Leeds, II Michael V. Stimac, Comments on Draft Application COE HDR for License and Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment 11/12/97 Paul Berkshire, HDR John Dunker, ADNR Request for Amendment of Water Right 11/18/97 Michael V. Stimac, John C. Leeds, III Transmittal of Application for HDR COE COE Permit 11118/97 Michael V. Stimac, Jennifer R. Garland, Transmittal of Coastal Project HDR ADGC Questionnaire and Certification Statement Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 G-4 FERC Project No. 11480 Appendix G -Agency Consultation TABLE G-l CHRONOLOGY OF GENERAL AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE FOR THE REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Date From , To Subject 11118/97 Michael V. Stimac, HDR ADF&G Transmittal ofFish Habitat Permit Application 11/18/97 Michael V. Stimac, HDR ADNR Transmittal of Application for Right-of-Way or Easement 11118/97 James Durst, ADF&G Michael V. Stimac, HDR Comments on Draft Application for License and Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Acronym Definitions: ADF&G ADGC ADNR ADT AP&T COE DNR DOl FERC Haida HDR IME NMFS Pentec Sealaska USFWS Alaska Department of Fish and Game Alaska Division of Governmental Coordination Alaska Department of Natural Resources Alaska Department of Transportation Alaska Power & Telephone U.S. Anuy Corps ofEngineers Department of Natural Resources U.S. Department of the Interior Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Haida Corporation HDR Engineering. Inc. Intermountain Energy National Marine Fisheries Service Pentec Environmental, Inc. Sealaska Corporation U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 G-5 FERC Project No. 11480 Appendix G -Agency Consultation I TABLEG-2 MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORTS FOR THE REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Date Issued Period Covered 6/1/96 February -May 1996 7/10/96 June 1996 8/7/96 July 1996 9/6/96 August 1996 10/9/96 September 1996 11/8/96 October 1996 12/10/96 November 1996 1/8/97 December 1996 2110/97 January 1997 6113/97 February -May 1997 7/15/97 June 1997 8111197 July 1997 9/5/97 August 1997 10/13/97 September 1997 11/7/97 October 1997 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project November 1997 0-6 FERC Project No.1 1480 J J \ j j 0 ,j J ! J .~ J J j J j J J J J OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET DIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAl.. OFFICE 3601 .C" STREET. SUITE 370 ANCHORAGE. AlASKA 995()3.S930 PH: (907) 561-6131IFAX.: (907) 561-6134 Mr. Jack Goldwasser InterMountain Energy, Inc. 115 Airport Drive P.O. Box 421 Cave Junction, OR 97523 1!1 CENTRAL OFFICE P.O. BOX 110030 JUNEAU. AlASKA 9981100300 PH: (907) <l65-35S2/FAX.: (907) .ces.3075 February 2, 1995 TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR o PlPEUNE COORDINATOR'S OFFICE >411 WEST >4TH AVENUE. SUITE 2C ANCHORAGE. AlASKA 99501·2343 PH: (907) 27W~AX:(907) 2n.0690 Dear Mr. Goldwasser: SUBJECT: REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC -FIRST CONSULTATION FERC Project #p-1l480-000-AK Initial Consultation -STATE ID #AK9502-02JJ The Division of Governmental Coordination received the information that you submitted for the initial consultation review of the Reynolds Creek hydroelectric project. The site for the proposed project is on Prince of Wales Island near Hydaburg. As the process for obtaining a FERC license requires extensive preapplication assistance, this review is informational in nature. The purpose of this review is for the reviewers to provide you with information about the resource values of the project site, the potential for the project to cause environmental impacts, and to help identify if further studies are necessary. The information provided during this review should assist you in developing the FERC application. A consistency review per the Alaska Coastal Management Program will occur when all permit applications and public notices required for the project are received. When FERC officially accepts the hydroelectric application, a public notice will be issued by that agency. As you know, the second consultation stage and informational review will occur before the State's consistency review commences. The purpose of the second consultation review will be for reviewers to comment on how their concerns were addressed and to identify permits. The enclosed project information sheet includes a State ID #AK9502-02JJ. Please refer to this number in any future correspondence regarding this review. Appropriate materials have been distributed to participants for their review and comments. Review milestones are also indicated on the enclosed project information sheet. These deadlines were set in accordance with FERC requirements. Sincerely, ~~ Christine Valentine Project Review Coordinator cc: Haida Corporation, Applicant Steve Meyers, COE, Anchorage Nevin Holmberg, FWS, Juneau Valerie Payne, EPA, Anchorage Project Distribution List / TONYKNOWLE~GOVERNOR ! / i i DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES I 3601 CSTREET, SUITE 1278 I ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503-5921 DIVISION OF PARKS AND OUTDOOR RECREA T/ON I PHONE: (907) 762-2622 OFFICE OF HISTORY AND ARCHAEOLOGY FAX: (907) 762-2628 February 17, 1995 - File No.: 3130-1R FERC subject: Project P-11480, Reynolds Creek Hydro Jack Goldwasser InterMountain Energy, Inc. P.o. Box 421 ~~=~~~~~ J~~ .,. ~:,,~. :.J 115 Airport Dr. Cave Junction, OR 97523 Dear Mr. Goldwasseri Thank you for the Initial Consultation Document on the referenced project. FERC regulation,s and section 106 of the National Historic Act (see 36 CFR 800 for details) require that historic and archaeological sites be identified, evaluated, and taken into account in the development of projects such as this. Presently, our office has little information on this area. Three sites are currently known in the area of potential effect (information enclosed). The potential to find additional historic mining sites is very high between Copper Harbor and Jumbo Island. The potential to discover prehistoric archaeological sites is also high especially in Copper Harbor, an u'nnamed bay about 0.5 miles north of Copper Harbor, upper Hetta Inlet, and Deer Bay. A detailed historic and archaeological survey of the project area will need be to be completed as part of the FERC licensing process. A list of consultants who may be interested in this type of work is enclosed for your convenience. Please contact Tim Smith at (907) 762-2625 if there are any questions or if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, 0.~ JEB:tas oith E. Bittner state Historic Preservation Officer 1970·1995 (",.,l........ r ....",; .... _ "')c v ___ .... ~ AI ........ r.._ rA_#_ n __t._ .(},:~ .... ,' ,.. .. I r UNITEO STATES OEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service P.O. Box 21668 Juneau, Alaska 99802-1668 March 9, 1995 Mr. Jack Goldwasser InterMountain Energy 115 Airport Drive RE: Public MeetingI P.O. Box 421 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric ., Cave Junction, Oregon 97523 Project, FERC No. 11480-000 I, Dear Mr. Goldwasser: Thank you for your letter notifying us of the public meetingI scheduled for March 14, 1995, regarding the above referenced project. Due to personnel and funding constraints, my staff will be unable to attend. 1 We appreciate your efforts to coordinate with us, and look forward to working with you as your plans progress. l - SiiKelY~)__""'=='".:~r-'~__"_'___ l ~.Zi Ph.D. Chief, Prot I Managemen I. L L I l L L United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT ALASKA STATE OFFICE 222 W. 7th Avenue.1#l3 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99513·7599 AA-77375 2344 (932) MAR 2419$ Mr. Louis Chauvin InterMountain Energy, Inc. 115 Airport Drive P.O. Box 421 Cave Junction, Oregon 97523 Dear Mr. Chauvin: This is in response to your March 3, 1995, inquiry regarding the Haida Corporation's Preliminary Permit for the Federal Energy -Regulatory Commission (FERC) Permit No. 11480 (P-11480). In your letter, you requested confirmation that the Power Site Classification (PSC) No. 192 is in full force and effect at this time, as to the lands surrouniiing Lake Mellen and Summit Lake; more particularly that portion of the PSC that affects section 310fT. 76 S., R. 85 E., and sections 2 and 3 ofT. 77 S., R. 85 E., Copper River Meridian (CRM). According to the Department of the Interior's As~ociate Solicitor, Division of Energy and Resources (see the enclosed memorandum to the Assistant Secretary, Land and Water Resources, dated October 27, 1977), regarding the susceptibility of power sites to selection by Alaskan Native corporations and the applicability of Section 24 of the Federal Power Act to the conveyance of any such selections, ..... Section 24 and the procedures established thereunder do not apply to lands within any power site classification, power site reservation, power project or license application." In other words, under the authority of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA), land within a power site classification can be conveyed without being subject to Section 24 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), and the classification would have no force or effect on the conveyed land. All of the land in sections 2 and 3 of T. 77 S., R. 85 E., CRM, that was within PSC No. 192 (with the exception of any portion of Mineral Survey No. 886), was conveyed to Sealaska Corporation on August 22, 1983, pursuant to the ANCSA, and that conveyance (copy of conveyance document enclosed) was not made subject to Section 24 of the FPA. Likewise, a conveyance of any of the land within section 31 of T. 76 S., R. 85 E., CRM, which was reserved pursuant to the Haida Land Exchange (Public Law Nos. 99-664 and 101·626), would not be subject to Section 24 of the FPA because the conveyance is under the authority of the ANCSA. 2 As per your request, we are also providing you with a copy of current Master Title Plats (MTP) of the areas in question. Please note that, although the PSC No. 192 notations are still shown on the plats. the PSC does not have any affect on those lands that have been. or will be conveyed under the ANCSA. . I hope this information has been helpful to you. If you have any more questions, or if we can be of further assistance, please contact Shirley Macke of my staff at (907) 271-5477. Sincerely, k~SueA.WoU~~=-~---- Chief, Branch of Land Resources 3 Enclosures 1 -Memorandum to the Assistant Secretary (6 pp) 2 -Conveyance Document (2 pp) 3 -MTP's (3) cc: Sealaska Corporation One Sealaska Plaza Suite 400 Juneau,Alaska 99801 (J l ( ------_.. ----.•.• * ............ -•• "-' ~.--.-.---- co. United States Department of the Interior omCE OF THE SOLICITOR WASHL'\:GTO:-t. D.C. 20240 IN R.EP'l..Y fIIEF'ER TO. OCT :7 1517 ~Ol As.istzult Sec:=etary, Land and Wate: Resources From: Associate Sollcitcr, D.1vision of .E:zlarqy ak-~sourCc.s -. l.flsh.,. Subj z Susceptibility of power sites to selection 'by Alaskan llat.ive corporations and the appUC2bill ty of -----section 24··of the Federal Powe.: Act to the conveyance of any sucb selections You h.a.V8 asked -now are conveyances to corporations a.ffected by power site classifications and reserves aDd projects? ( 1. Power site claasi£ic~tion lands included in conveyances..-a. Subject to section 24 FPA. b. Not aubj ect to section 24 2. Power site reserve lands included in conveyances. a. Subject to s8ctiO.u 24 PPA b. liot subject to aectio.u 24 3. Power project lands i.ucluded i.u conveyances. a. Subj ect to section 24 F'PA b. Hot subj ect to aection 24 On Daccc.be: la.. 1971., the Alaska liat.iva Claics Settlement Act (A::CSA) becace l.3:v (43 U.S.C. 160l). ~sections of that Act =ada 'Withdrawals fo:: reqional and vill.aga selections, i.e•• 43 U.S.C. 1510 (a) (1) and 1615(21.). One section, 430.S.C. 1610 (a) (3), authcri:ed the Secreta.ry to make withdrzs:wals for . t ! regional and village selectioDs wbenaver the lands withdrawn .• under section LG10(a) (1) were inaufficiene. The language in each sectioD describing the lands withd.rawn or which may be wi thd:awn is dif:e.rl'!llt and it ia believed thae those differences a.:::e relevant to the questions you have asked. -.-.... ( ~: . L\ ( .. .--.-------0 ... ., c 43 U.S.C. l.602 (e) contains the defi.nition of public lanc:la .. t:.hat term is used in AUCSA. Zt prorldess • (e) 'public lan.d.s· means all Pedual lands and interests therein located in Alaska exceptz (1) the smallest practicable tract.. as det:ermined by the Secretary, encl.oai.nq 14.1:1(:1 act:ually used in connection with the adr:t1 ni stration of any Pederal installation, and (2) land selections of the State of Alaska which have been patented or te.ntatively approved under section 6 (q) of the Alaska S t:at:eb.ood Act, as amended (72 Stat. 341, 77 st:at. 223), or i.dent.1.fied for selection by the State prior to JaJluary 17, 1969,· 43 U.S.C. 1610 (a) (1) provides:---_.. -. _ _. Cal (1) 'rba fol.lOrii.nq public l.anc:la are withdrawn .. aubject to valld e:x.istinq r.ig'hts, £rca all forms of appropriation under the. public land lAwa. l.nclud inq tha min~ nq and mineral laaainq .laws • and from aelect.:ion u..nder the Alaska St:atahood Act. as amendeds CA) The lands in each toWnship that encloseS' all or part of any Native villaqe .iClenti.fied pursu ant. to subsection [b) of this sect.ion:(~ (8) The lands in each township t:ba.t .is C01ltiqu 011S to or c::o:z::ne:s en. the toWnship that. encloses aU . or pa%t of such Native vi.llaqer and ee) The lzulda in each tcwnship that is contigu ous to or corners on a township cont,,; nj nq l..ands withdrawn by pa.::aq:aph (8) of this au.baectien.. . ·~ll fo11cwi.cq lands are excepted from such withdrawal.s l.anda ill the l1ationa.l Pa.:k System and la.n.c:1a Ui.thdrawn .:. or reserved for 'national defense parposes other than. ...:'.-:-..::,...•. Baval Petroleum Reserve UUmbe.red 4.· . . ..:.-:::::: '.: '.' ." ~ .:" .....:~....;:........ .. :rn:a the lanquaq8 of section 1610 (a) (1) it is clear that aJ.l'. :. :::" ;~:. public .lands as that t~is defined in section 1602 (e) are, . ,...' vithdr~n exceptz Ca) national de£ense lands: (b) National .. Park Systems lands: (c) tha scalleat practicable tract of land enclosing t..'1.ose lands actually used in connection with any Pederal. .i.nstal.la.ticn. --..----. '. . .' rl I ( (----_._-_..... . . .... (C" . o '!ha 'Withdrawal in 1610 (a) (1) therefore includes reserved and appropriated lands such as those in a power Bite reserve, power site classification or a power project regardles8 of whether it wa1 instituted by the COrps of Engineers (alE), the Al.c::tska PO"tIIIU Adoi nistration (APA), or a. priva.te licensee before the Federal Power CQmm; ssion (FPC:). Since the with dl:awal is zeade subj ect to valld exist..i.:lg rights and. the conveyance of the land will. be made subject to 43 U.S.C. 1613,(q) t.ha selecting cor'[X)ration wlll take the land subj ect to any outstanding leases, licenses, permits, or :ighta-of-way that have been granted to any llcensea. '1'he lands actually used in connection with any Federa..l proj ect are e.xc.luded fran the selection by virtue of the terms of section 3(8). On the other hand, 43 U.S.C. 1610 (a) (3) (A) provide., -If the Secretary dete:mines that the landa withdrawn by sWlsectiolls (a) (1) and (2) hareof are insuf£icien.t to permit a Village 0: RacJi:onal. Ccl:poration to select the acreage it is e.nti.tled to se.lect, the Secretary shall wl.thdraw three "times the deficien~% from the llearest unreserved, vacant and unappropriated public lanes. In mak.1ng this withdrawal the Secretary shall, insofar a!l possible, wi thC.ral'l public landa of a character similar to theae 011 which thevi.llaqa is l.ocated' and in order of thai:r prcx:tmi ty to the center of the Native village, Provided, ~t if the Sec::etary, pursuant to aectic::1 1616, and 1621 (e) of this title detel:m.inea there is a . Deed to expand the boundaries of a llationzr.l Wildlife .Refuge to replace any acra8.ge selected :I..: the l-li1dllfe Refuge System by the Village -co.rpo::at1on the with.c1rawal 'under this saction shall not incluc:!e lands in the Refuge.· As can be seen. this section excludes from the lands that may be withdra.wn by the Secretary lanc!a which are reserved, occupied, or ap!?ropriated.. Section 24 of thIS Pederal Power Act, 16 u.s.c. ::!la, and thIS dC!finition ot reae.rvations in 16 U.S.C. 7~ eacn make it clear that power site classifica tions, power site reservation and power projects all constitute both renCl:'VCltions one appropriations. Tho taking' of .pubUc 3 .l .' n ( (0" __• _0_ • _ •. _. -_. -_____---___-_____________ . ... ... c o I I I ° ( • lands by flocCing or by the ccnst..."'"Uct.i.on of' t:rm:umdssion Unes ",itbcut the £orca..l withdrawal of those Unes by classification or res~rvtttion nevertheless constitute appropriations. 50~ t:ilCO!: v. Jac:i-:!:on, 39 U.S. 496 (la39) 7 Gri::ar v, Uc:D::;)well, 73 U.S. 363. 3CO (lBG7), and 44 L'D 513. Since only un.re::crvcd f vacant and unat??ropria.ted lands could be withdrawn by th~ Sccrctnry under 43 U.S.C. 1610 (a) (3) and Gince the .Natives could only select :f:oc lands ld.thdrZ1'Wll under ~3 U.S.C 1610(a) or 43 V.S.C 161S(~) (r.oe 43 U.S.C. 1611(a) . and (cl, and 43 U.S.C. 161S(~». any rcuervation. occupation. or appropriation is autc~atic~lly e~cluc~d from a withdrawal unda% 43 u.s.c. 1610(~) (3) as boinq unauthori:cd. Consequently, no power aito classi£icntion. power sito reserve, power project or land reserved by vir:ue of the fil.i.nq of a license with the l"PC pu.:nuant to 16 u.s .C. Bla Ctul be included within any deficiency withc.:awal. ... Xn those areas withdrawn by 43 U.S.C. 1610 (a) (1) or 43 U.S.C. 1615 (a) tho COnqress itself withdrew the lAlilCis and z::t:.do them. avail6lble. for llative celection. Note that section 24 of the Pederal Power Act~ 16 u.s.c. alB. prov~des for the FPC to dete:c:::ine wlU.c.'l lands will be open for settlement entl:y or selection and for that agency to riete~ne the tQ:m~ and conditions that will be included in any patent. '.rh.at section providesl -Any lands of the United States included in any proposed proj ect under tho provisions o~ 1!Iections 792,'19'; 79S-BlS. and a20-323 of th.ia tit:l.o shall f=c= the date of fili.nq of o.pplicat.1on the:e.for De .:esuved uoc enUj"', location, or other disposal Wlder the laws of the United States until othe.:r:wiae d.iracted by the coc::::tission or by Conqrc:ra. Notice that such .application has been mads, t0gether with the date .Of .fil..i..rlg thereof and a descript:..ion of the lands of the Dnited SUt08 af.fccted th.creby, shAll be £iled in the: lcca.l land office fo: tho district in 'Which such land:s are located. Hhenever the coc=is~on shall dC!t~e that the va.lue of any lands of the Un!tcd State!! 80 applied fo:. 0: heretofore er hcrc~fter rascrvad or cl~ssified as power sitos, will not :bo injured or Ciest:oyed for the purposes of ~er ~Qvclo~~n t by location, e.D.t.l:y, or oclcctioll cnt.'!.:l.r the p~lic bnd lawa, 4 ( (.J ...-------------------------- ( ( o the Sec:reta.ry of the Interio:, upon notice of such dcter.cin~t1on~ shal1 declare such 1anda open to location, entry, or selection. for such ()u:pose 0: pu.r.,a.ces and uncler such rcstrictions as thc Cor::r.U.ssion r::a.y det:t:l::1.nc. subject to and with a :eserv~tion of tho risht of the United Sta.tes or it.:l po::t:U.ttees 0: licensees to c.nte: . upon, oCC'.l!':t, ;md use any pcu:t or all o.f said land!l ncccc!lnry, in tho judgt1ent of the Com cission, for tho purposes of sections 752, 793. 795-01a. and C20-C23 of this title, ,...hi:h right. r.;b.:::Ll.l. be EC-:~essly rese.:ved in eYtrr'Y patant issued for such !:ndsl and no claim or :isht to cccpensa tion ::::h:s.ll acc:r'l:c free the oCC'.lpz:r.tion. or use o:f ;my of said l:mcs for said pu:poses. The United States or any llccnae.e :0': any such lands hereunder may ante..: thc:eupon .f== the pa:z:p:sses of sections 792, 793. 795-819, and 820-023 of tlda titJ.e, upon pal-"m~nt of any d=a.qos to c::ops. b1dJ.dinqs, 0': other improvamcnt:J caused thc.rcl::ly to the C\..me:' tha.rcof. or upon qiving a sood and suff.icie.nt bond to the United States fo:: the use ::md benefit of the! ownar to secu:e the payment of such d:::1aqes as mny be dete.:l'li.ned and fixed in an action b:ouqht upOn thQ bond in a court of ccmpe:t.ent ju.:isdiction. said bond to be! in the form p:esc::i!:Ied.by the ecr:ri anen t Provided, ~at locations, entries, selections. 0= £.il.iJ:lc;;s hereto:ore cade for !anLls reserve.d as water-. power sites, c.: in connection with water-pawsr develor;:cent.. or el.cct:ical trZ!l.n~.ission CZlY proceed to approval or patc:lt under and subj ect to the l.1J:.itat1ons zmd conditions .in this section cont::1ined. P::avided £u:thcr. That befo::c any lands applied for, or he..:etc:fore or he:eaftc.r reserved, or cl.assi!,io.d as powe.r sites, are daclarcd o~ to l.ocZltion, entry, or selection by the Secretary of the Intcric:, notice of. intention to 'cake such daclaration shul be given to the! Governor of the S tata 'Within 'Which such J.zLnds are loca~ed, and scch State shall h:lV'C! ninety days .fro::l tho c.:atc of such noticCl wi t.hi..n which -to -file, under ::my sti3.tutc or rcgula~. tion al'plic4l.blc:: !:.h.c:cto. an application for 5 .. ". .. ... ( ( - ((.......... ." the rc::serv3.tion to the State, or any polltica~ subdivision thereof. of any lanes rC~Q~ as a ric;ht-of-w4:Y for :1 publlc higln·:OlY or as a source of c~teri~s £or the construction &nu rn~ten~ce of such. JUCjhways, l1lld a copy o£ such tl?plicat.ion sha.l~ be filed with. tho. Feduu PO"Acr COmcission: and any location. entry. or selt'!ct.:.oD of such lands. or BUl;)sequcnt ?Olta::t thereof. ch:l.l. be subj ect to an? ri~ht3 ~:::ntC!d the Stato pursuant to such appllcZlt:.ion. By virtue of the di~=~Qnces of the t'W'O !,%:ocesscs it i::l conc~uded that aection 24 and the procedures es:ab~~~cd thereunder do not a:pply to J.a.nas wi:hin :my power site classi:ica:1on. power site reservation. powcr ~oject or licanse appllcat:.ion. As we have inCic:s.tcu p:cviously, any BcJ.e.cticn by tll'!! Hat!vas ~ill be ccnveyca sub;ect to al~ the riqhts. p::ivi~eqes, and the obllq~tion::s Qf eny outstanding pcu:::it or llccnse issued by the FPC. Any ~da actually beinq usea by th:1 APA 0:: COE will not bC! ccnvayed. Any lantls needca for the futtl:c use of the APA or COE for easem=nt::s cay be rc:.e%'V1!a by tha Sccreta:z:y unc.u t.h3 proccaurea of-43 U.S.C. 1.6l6 (b). cc: Docket Section DER-SOL RF Reqiona.~ SOL. Anchorage DEB. Rl' SD.. ,LU·l, Alaska. DER-Mccarthy~ D1.rector If BL.'1 DER-Lana Use DJ:A Xirton (2) SOL:GF.Kirtcn:=~:~O/2l/77 x4667 6 r , I AA-14015 INTERIM CONVEYANCE WHEREAS Sealaska Corporation is entitled to a conveyance pursuant to Secs. 14(h)(S)(B) and 22(j) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of December 16, 1971, as amended (43 U.S.C. 1601, 1613(h)(6)(B), 1621(j», of the surface and subsurface estates in the following described lands: Copper River Meridian, Alaska (Unsurveyed) The unconveyed portion of Mineral Survey No. 419B,' Alaska, known as the Chicago and Dakota mill sites, situated in the Copper Mountain Mining District, which lies wi thin five hundred (500) feet of the center of Reynolds Creek. Containing approximately 4.40 acres. The unconveyed portion of Mineral Survey No. 1523B and Mineral Survey No. 684-B, Alaska, known as Betta Mill Sites Nos. 2 and 3, situate in the Ketchikan Mining District, which lies within Mineral Survey No. 419B and that portion of the Betta Mill Site No.3, which lies within five hundred (SOD) feet of the center of Reynolds Creek. Containing approximately .06 acres. ~-. Copper River Meridian. Alaska (unsurVeyed) T. 77 S., R. 65 E. Sec. 1, that portion within Power Site Classification 192, excluding Mineral Survey No. 1524; Sec. 2, that portion within Power Site Classification 192; Sec. 3, that portion within Power Site Classification 192, excluding Mineral Survey No. 866; Sec. 4, that portion within Power Site Classification 192, excluding Mineral Survey No. 419-A and Mineral Survey No. 419-B; Sec. 9, that portion within Power Site Classification 192, excluding Mineral Survey No. 419-B, Mineral Survey No. 884-5, and Mineral Survey No. 1523-5; Sec. 10, that portion within Power Site Classification 192; Sec. 11. that portion within Power Site Classification 192. Containing approximately 1,196 acres. Aggregating approximately 1,200 acres. NOW !<NOW YE, that there is, therefore, granted by the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, unto the above-named corporation the surface and subsurface estates in the land above described; TO HAVE AND TO BOLD the said estates with all the rights, privileges, immunities, and appurtenances, of whatsoever nature, thereunto belonging, unto the said corporation, its successors and assigns, forever. Interim Conveyance No. Date AUG 22 1983 A-1401S The qrant of the above-described lands is subject to: 1. Issuance of a patent after approval and filinq by the Bureau of Land Manaqement of the official plat of survey confirminq the boundary description and acreaqe of the lands hereinabove qranted; 2. Valid existinq riqhts therein, if any, includinq but not limited to those created by any lease (includinq a lease issued under Sec. 6(q) of the Alaska Statehood Act of July 7, 1956; (46 U.S.C. Ch. 2, Sec. 6(q»), contract, permit, riqht-of-way, or easement, and the riqht of the lessee, contractee, permittee, or qrantee to the complete enjoyment of all riqhts, privileqes, and benefits thereby qranted to him. Further, pursuant to Sec. 17(b)(2) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of December 16, 1971 (43 U.S.C. 1601, 1616(b)(2» (ANCSA), any valid existinq riqht recoqnized by ANCSA shall continue to have whatever riqht of access as is now provided for under existinq law; and 3. Requirements of Sec. 22(k) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of December 16, 1971 (43 U.S.C. 1601, 1621(k», that, until December 18, 1983, the portion of the above-described lands located within the boundaries of a national forest shall be manaqed under the principles of sustained yield and under manaqement practices for protection and enhancement of environmental quality no less strinqent than such manaqement practices on adjacent national forest lands. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersiqned authorized officer of the Bureau of Land Manaqement has, in the name of the United States. set her hand and caused the seal of the Bureau to be hereunto affixed on this 22nd day of Auqust, 1983 in Anchoraqe, Alaska. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Chief, Br~h of ANCSA Adjudication Interim Conveyance No. Date AUG 22 1983 2 --- ----- ------------------- 5 ~ UNSURVEYED TOWNSHIP .76 SOUTH RANGE 85 EAST OF THE COPPER RIvER MERIDiAN, ALASKA PROTRACTION DtAG""!.( NO. CRl6-iZ Of'FlCAL!. Y ofILE:D 3124n980 STATUS OF PUBUC DOMAIN LAND AND MINERAL TITLES 4 8 'I' R N c r'-------- I ~ '--, L._._.., ! IG· L-. L---i 21 E' S ~WIO 29 28 A-lIOO ;' 3 II E I I / 15 .I-\ 14 . I 1 \}_._-_._- I 22 610 I r '--'-2G! '4L.___. II' I._~NJ D IL._. ~~~-. A-'IIO 35 36 635 ~ w, ~ L. .s.t?=.-.J r'§!:;. \.. \ MI~P_..:-........ mOEX TO SEGREGATEO TRACTS • i-.......~y TIIACT 110 T • Ke SllIIOM_ - ~ . fPD ilfHl&s EffECTING OtSPQSAL !Jii' USE OF '; . tN«NTFED (4M2S IffZZmA!t7V Fee aASStF(CArtCtt J./fNER4lS.ICATfR AMl/OfI OCHffl. PUBLIC Pr.BPoSES~7 12 RIf£Efi TD INDEX .;ze AISCEl.l ~S ~U-12. \, £1Ifif'9 r,. 11'11 rDlIg!!-,SS IF IWlo P ----,'----13 ----------_..------------------.!-._-- ---.---- ---'-------,~--------~ ...~-.--.~----.. -, ----------_.,.----._-_.---_._--------.. ------,-------------._ <., e D."" I ,I / (I .-J. Lo', 'm3'4G.020·" -r tpt IOf-&26 "< Lcn~. 13Z·Z4'.qO.41<l"W Jo.l'~."'" :!-WJJ~A"'1 .A,H",UJ UAI".HT l"hoI. ..t.c .. dw ~'.. _--.of J '1"1..... .-. ........-.1...f ......... .SCALE'-'-'-.L -- ------- ----------------------- ------------------------- UNSURVEYED TOWNSHIP 77 SOUTHt:~NGE 85 EAST OF THE. COPPER RIVER MERIDIAN r ALASKA ~..-r; .-s:'tCtYCrriB WiI8tIJI MOO}" &PIdAUJ few SJo19&J _ . . ~..•. '" .." ..... _'.". __._ .. ~_.,~, .. :;.... ;: __ -.. ... -_._----.'.~-~-----. PRINCE \ It:zn M$4r.t..... ll;.~/"'1"QI1:" T D \ em ~"7---"",~ (/ 3-.4$ ~----Old~!ld~~ ~ ~--~---- STATUS OF PUBLIC DOMAIN t-LANO-ANO-MINERAL TITl.ESI . j MTP SUPPL SECS 354 INOEX TO SEGREGATED TRACTS ___ SUIWO' ~ II KCflW:TMO T - fflR ORDe'HS UFECnI'f(; PlSI>QSAL OR I./Sc OF t!NID€NTlF'iEP lANDS /!17?;'tl!t'AWN roR CLASSI fJCAT/ON.NfNEJIUlS.WATCR AND/M OTH.t;!!. I'UI1I,IC PU/F'OSES. ReFER ro INDO: OF Jl/SCEZLANCOUS DOCtJ'¥ENTS • .illSgel Wdl PL92'zm 121810971 Lend v:.) AAG9SI-C A~·c VISeI AoIn GIl c"';lobi. Ian6s .... thin SuI>I>I not ~;,s"",tifie<t IOC' StI cd SeaIasIo PriOrit, Z SeI iiAI696S-Et! Es...,..t po.a_t 10 Sec I7ltll;)) ~92-203 141181:!;?] -Seok:ska .~!------------------.------- 4 ! ----_._._--------------- J CV"'l(H-;-;t;-J··----Sy-»··, ---.:.."-::Ir----- 5(;> ,\ t 1'186 r--".-....-.. ALASKA POWER & TELEPHONE COMPANY P.o. BOX 222·191 OTTO STREET PORT TOWNSEND. WA96358 (205) 38~-1733 • (800)982·0135 FAX (205) 385-5177 March 24, 1995 Haida Corporation cI0 Jack Goldwasser InterMountain Energy, Inc. P.O. Box 421 Cave Junction, OR 97523 Re: Reynolds Creek Waterpower Project FERC project No. 11480-000-AK Dear Mr. Goldwasser: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above referenced project. At the meeting you indicated that comments must be received by March 27, 1995. The Joint Agency Meeting was held March 14, 1995 in accordance with CFR18 Part 4.38 (b)(2). It appears that CFR18 Part 4.38(b)(4) allows us 60 days following the Joint Meeting in which to comment unless this is extended by resource agency or Indian tribe for an additional 60 day period. Because I was ~lRable to attend the joint agency meeting I would like a copy of the audio recording or transcript promptly forwarded in accordance with CFR 18 Part 4.38 (b)(3). We would also like to be added to the co.nsultation list for this project. As you know, AP&T will be the purchaser of the power generated by the project by virtue of being the public utility providing electric service to the area. AP&.T holds Certificate of Convenience and Necessity No.2, issued by the Alaska Public Utilities Commission under AS 42.05. The statement required by CFR 18 Part 4.38 (b)(vi) pertaining to seeking benefits under section 210 of PURPA was omitted. Your letter to me, dated March 6, 1995 indicates you are seeking status as a qualifying facility, in any case please revise or supplement your first stage consultation packet with the required statement. Our preliminary comments are endosed. We will be reviewing the material supplied and we will provide any additional comments as soon as possible. 1. The proposed operational mode leads us to believe that the lake levels will be modified. Please describe the modification (i.e. 5 foot draw down) and provide a lake draw down analysis. This modification of the lake level may require additional studies to predict the effect if any upon the resident Arctic grayling population of the lakes. In addition, CFR 18 Part 4.38 (b)(v) requires that copies of all records used to derive the flow data used in the applicants haid.1323 pa~ 2 .mgineering calculations accompany the first stage consultation packet. Please forward this required information. 2. We are interested in the studies that are anticipated to be conducted in regards to the historical and archeological resources of the area. It appears that the area may have significance due to the early mining that occurred in the area and that several of these feature may be impacted by the project. 3. We are interested in the studies you are proposing in regards to the recreational resources of the area. It appears that the area may be used for recreational and subsistence activities because of the abundant fisheries and wildlife present· in the area. . 4. We analyzed ·data available to us to eStimate the present worth of the proposed project as compared to the diesel alternative. Our analysis was certainly not comprehensive or complete, but did indicate serious financial and economic concerns. Our analysis indicates a negative present worth of over $8,000,000 over the 50 year life of the project. The levelized annual ne~ cost of the project appears to be about $747,000. Given the population of Hydaburg of less than 500 the net annual cost of the project on a per capita basis is about $1,500. For a family of four, the additional cost in economic terms would be about $6,000 per year more than the amount paid for electric power under the (diesel) base case. 5. As the purchaser of the power from the project we are concerned about the financial and economic feasibility of the project. We request that economic studies be conducted by the permittee to determine if the costs, both project costs and costs associated with the impact on the surrounding area, are justified by the economic benefits generated by the project. In addition, a financial feasibility is needed to show that the electrical rates to our ratepayers are not adversely affected by the project. Both the economic and financial feasibility will require the completion of a load forecast, we will be glad to assist the permittee in this regard. Our concern is based upon the current load in the Hydaburg market of only 1,500,000 KW-HR per year. The permittee has indicated that the cost of the project may be $6,000,000. If this is the case the project will yield electrical rates of about 60 cent per kilowatt hour. The current base rates in Hydaburg are 16.25 cents per kilowatt hour which indicate the rates will need to be raised 2750/0to support the project. Because of the serious nature of our concerns pertaining to the basic economics of the proposed project, we request that all consultation efforts and the consequent costs to the permittee and the resource agencies be suspended until such time that the permittee can demonstrate economic and financial feasibility. We believe it prudent to require these studies first. This will reduce the efforts haidal2.1 pare 1 and costs incurred by the permittee, resource agencies and the public, in the event the project is unable to demonstrate financial and economic feasibility. Sincerely, Robert S. Grimm President cc: ROBERT W. LOESCHER SEALAlASKA CORPORATION ONE SEAlASKA PLAZA SUrrE400 JUNEAU, AlASKA 99801-1276 ALASKA PUBUC UTIunES COMMISSION 1016 WEST 6TH SUrrE400 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 DIRECTOR DCRA..oMSION OF ENERGY 333 WEST 4TH AVENUE SUrrEZ20 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501-2341 BRUCE COOK JR HAlDA CORPORATION PO BOX 89 HYDABURG, AlASKA 99922 CITY OF HYDABURG POBOX HYDABURG, AlASKA 99922 FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF HYDRO POWER UCENSING 810 FIRST STREET, NE WASHINGTON, DC 20426 GREGORY F. GRIFFITH DISTRICT RANGER u.s. FOREST SERVICE CRAIG RANGER DISTRlCT P.O. BOX 600 CRAIG, AK. 99921 NEVIN D. HOLMBERG FIELD SUPERVISOR U.s. FISH & wu.nUFE SERVICE S.E. ALASKA ECOLOGICAL SERVICES 3000 VINTAGE BLVD .. tt.201 JUNEAU, AK. 99801·7100 STEVE ZIMMERMAN ACTING CHIEF PROJECTED RESOURCES MANAGEMENT NATIONAL MARJNE FISHERIES SERVICE P.O. BOX 21668 JUNEAU, AK. 99802-1668 JOAN DARNELL. ACTING CHIEF DMSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUAUTY ALASKA REGIONAL OFFICE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 2526 GAMBELl.. STREET ANCHORAGE, AK. 99503-2892 LARRY BROCKMAN ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR MSWD-136 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 1200 6TH AVENUE SEATTLE, WA. 98101 STEVE MEYERS, CHIEF, SOUTHERN UNIT PERMIT PROCESSING SECTION REGULATORY BRANCH U.S. ARJIY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ALASKA P.O. BOX 898 ANCHORAGE, AK. 99606-0898 HAROLD SElTZ CHIef HYDROLOGIST u.s. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY JUNEAU FIELD HEADQUARTERS P.O. BOX 21668 JUNEAU, AK. 99802 LORRAINE MARSHALL PROJECT COORDINATOR OFFICE OF ntE GOVERNOR DIV. OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION P.O. BOX 110030 JUNEAU, AK. 99811~030 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEI National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service P.O. Box 21668 ( .Juneau, Alaska 99802·1668 May 3, 1995 I I I Jack GoldwasserI InterMountain Energy, Inc. P. O. Box 421 115 Airport Driver Cave Junction, Oregon 97523 Dear Mr. Goldwasser: I. The National Marine Fisheries Service has reviewed the first stage consultation package and proposed study plan for the [ Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) NO. P-11480-000. The study plan addresses power development diversions on Lake Mellen (option A) and on Summit Lake (option B). We offer the following Comments.I General Comments: Lower Reynolds Creek provides spawning habitat for pink, chum,11 and coho salmon. NMFS favors the proposed run of the river options which would return tailrace waters to Reynolds Creek upstream of identified anadromous fish habitats. If only one of the options is pursued, we would likely prefer the Summit Lake option due to the potential for Lake Mellen to buffer construction impacts from downstream anadromous fish habitats. The presence of indigenous resident fish in the reaches between Summit Lake and Lake Mellen would be an important factor. Specific Comments: Diversion projects tend to result in construction related siltation, dewatering of streams during filling of reservoirs,Ii reduction of stream temperatures, and loss of bed load alluvial gravels necessary for replenishing spawning habitats. Diversions can also serve to moderate low flow periods and preventI desiccation of active spawning beds. The proposed habitat mapping and sampling for fish in all reachesI and lakes is commendable. I A number of additional issues should be addressed in the study. Additional information pertaining to the project should include: 1) Siltation problems and potentials for control. 2) Water control regimes to allow filling behind dams without dewatering downstream reaches. 3) Relationship of power generation needs to maintaining inundation of active spawning beds and other critical habitats during critical seasons. 4) Water regimes and engineering approaches to assure that water temperatures entering anadromous fish habitats are not altered. 5) Structural provisions that will assure that optimum discharge is maintained during periods of shut-down for either maintenance or inspection. To pursue these issues, an instream flow methodology study would be required on all reaches containing anadromous fish spawning and rearing habitat. We appreciate your efforts to coordinate the preliminary planning of this project with our staff, and hope that you will keep us informed as your studies progress. Sincerely, I~J:L Steven T. Zimmerman, Ph.D. Chief, Protected Resources Management Division cc: USFWS, Juneau ADFG, Douglas FERC, Portland I I DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF PARKS AND OUTDOOR RECR£A TION May 5, 1995 Mr. Jack Goldwasser InterMountain Energy, Inc. 115 Airport Dr. I P.O. Box 421 Cave Junction, OR 97523 RE: Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric project,I Dear Mr. Goldwasser: TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR 400 WILLOUGHBY JUNEAU, ALASKA 99801-1381 PHONE: (907)465-4563 FERC No. P.114800-000 This is to advise you that the Division of Parks and Outdoor! Recreation will defer all matters of recreation mitigation on this project to the surrounding land managers. Specifically, the u.s. Forest Service will need to assure public recreation needs are, considered. We will not be sending any further comments on the project. Thank you for the opportunity to see the First Stage Consultation Package. cc: Mary Kowalczyk, Ketchikan Ranger 1970·1995 10-..1371.H Celebrating 25 Years of Alaska State Parks •• I II •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • United States Department of the Interior c.s. GEOLOGIC:\LSCRYEY Water Resources Division 4230 University Drive, Suite 201 Anchoraget Alaska 99508-4664 May 8,1995 Jack Goldwasser Intermountain Energy Inc. 115 Airport Drive P.O. Box 421 Cave Junction, Oregon 97523 Dear Mr. Goldwasser: We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the hydrologic components of the proposed Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project (FERC no. P-11480-000). We have reviewed the infor mation provided in the "First-Stage Consultation Package and Proposed Study Plan" dated January 26, 1995, your letter dated April 19, 1995, and have the following suggestions: • Page 1 "Summary of Proposed Study Plans-Hydrology" Comment: This section indicates stream flow data will be collected for two years. Please be aware that we recommend a minimum of five years of data to estimate mean annual flows. If estimates for extreme flows are desired, such as low flows or flood flows, a minimum of 10 years are recommended for reliable results. Collection of precipitation data, as described in this section, should enhance hydrologic knowledge and improve any future hydrologic estimates at these sites. • Page 8 2nd Paragraph Comment: Extending the data for Reynolds Creek at the Lake Mellen Outlet and at the Summit Lake Outlet by using statistical regression analysis with Fish Creek could produce 1a..-g9 errors. Oply two complete years (and two partial years) of hydrologic re('()rd~.re AVRil able at the Lake Mellen outlet and four complete years (and two partial years) are available at the Copper Harbor site. Extending this limited data using 71-years of data collected at Fish Creek is risky. We recommend a more detailed error analysis be completed for this sta tistical analysis and the expected error be published as part of any data analysis. • Page 13 This discussion may need to be revised after the detailed error analysis of the regression analysis. Correct rounding of the CFS values discussed may also need to be revised. In summary, little data has been collected would be of great value to may State and Federal Agencies as well as private consulting firms. During the preliminary phase of this project, the USGS would like to discuss quality assur ance and data base storage aspects of the data being collected. In the event this project moves to a full FERC licence, the USGS reserves the right to assess any streamflow requirements defined by FERC during the licensing stage and assure the quality of data being collected. If you would like to discuss USGS involvement in current data collection efforts or have additional questions or comments, please call Harold Seitz at 907 586-7216, Ken Thompson at 907786·7115 or myself at 907 786-7100. Sincerely, Gordon L. Nelson District Chief GLN/sks cc: Harold Seitz FERC United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDUFE SERVICE Southeast A1aslca Ecological Services 3000 Vinag<: Blvd.• Suite 201 JURC2U. A1aslca 99801-7100 IN IIW'LY Il.ER.Il TO: May 15, 1995 Jack Goldwasser InterMountain Energy, Inc. P.O. Box 421 115 Airport Drive Cave Junction, OR 97523 RE: Reynolds Creek Waterpower Project, FERC preliminary Permit No. P-114BO-OOO Dear Mr. Goldwasser: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the ~First-Stage Consultation package and Proposed Study Plan for the Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project, PERC Preliminary Permit No. P-114BO-OOO-AK" near Hydaburg, Alaska. We offer the following comments for consideration. The proposed Reynolds Creek project will be located on Reynolds ~reek, Prince of Wales Island, Alaska. As a result of previous reconnaissance studies, two development options were selected for evaluation. Both options will be a run of-river hydroelectric facility, requiring a limited storage impoundment for project power operation. Option A, Lake Mellen development, and B, Summit Lake development, would raise the surface elevation eight feet after construction of a 10-foot high dam. The Service believes this proposal would alter instream flows in Reynolds Creek. Reynolds Creek is an anadromous fish stream providing spawning habitat for pink, chum, and coho salmon and rearing habitat for coho salmon. Dolly Varden char probably use Reynolds Creek for spawning and rearing. In 1962, Arctic grayling were planted in Summit Lake. Many of these fish migrated from Summit Lake to Mellen Lake where a stable population may now exist. The Service recommends anadromous and resident fish populations in the study be identified so that appropriate protection and mitigation plans can be provided. A detailed analysis of instream flow requirements for fish populations inhabiting Reynolds Creek should be conducted. The Service believes that this analysis is necessary to obtain basic chemical, physical and biological information to protect instream flow needs. It is important to consider how flow reduction could affect water depth, current, temperature, nature of substrate, water quality, cover, subsurface flow and the use and value of the affected area to aquatic organisms. Also, it is recommended that an analysis of water level fluctuations in Mellen and Summit Lakes be conducted to determine adverse impacts and determine mitigation for resident fish. The location and description of devices or gages which will be used to monitor compliance with minimum flows in run-of-the-river operations should be identified and a monitoring plan submitted for review. Black bear, wolf, mink, river otter, beaver, Sitka black-tailed deer and other mammals are found in the project area. A detailed analysis of their use of the proposed project vicinity, identifying impacts that could affect them, and development of a mitigation plan to address those impacts should be provided for review. There is a potential for the project to adversely impact bald eagle nest trees and other raptor nest sites that may occur in the project vicinity. The Service recommends a thorough survey be conducted to identify nest sites, especially if blasting is anticipated. Disturbance of eagles, their nest, or their eggs is a violation of the Bald Eagle Protection Act 16 U.S.C. 668 668d). The enclosed booklet, uBald Eagle Basics" is provided to help the applicant design the project to protect bald eagle nests. The project vicinity may also support spring and fall concentrations of waterfowl, shorebirds, and other raptors such as Peale's peregrine falcon. Appropriate surveys and analysis of their use and potential impacts should be addressed as well. Based on information currently available, the endangered American peregrine falcon may occur in the project vicinity as transients, primarily during seasonal migrations. This species was delisted on October 5, 1994. However, the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA) (16 U.S.C. 1531 ~~.), requires that such species be monitored for five years following delisting. If evidence acquired during this monitoring period indicates that threatened or endangered status should be reinstated, the Service may use the emergency listing authority of the ESA. At the end of the five year monitoring period, the Service will decide to either relist, continue to monitor, or end the monitoring. The following comments regarding Category 2 species are offered as technical assistance for your consideration. Category 2 species are those for which there is information indicating the species may qualify for endangered or threatened status, but further evaluation is needed. The category 2 candidate species that may occur int he proposed project area are: Common Name Scientific Name 1( marbled murrelet BrachyramPhus marmoratus northern goshawk Accipter gentilis harlequin duck Histrionicus histrionicus spotted frog ~pretiosa Alexander Archipelago wolf Canis ~ligoni olive-sided flycatcher ContQPUs borealis Thurber's reedgrass Calamagrostis crassiglumis lenticular sedge ~lenticularis v. dolia Surveys should be conducted to determine the status of these species in the project area. The Service will advise the applicant should any new information. become. available which could affect__ thEt:-proposed proj.ect. The enclosed list, "Endangered, Threatened, and Candidate Species in Alaska, January, 1995", is being provided for your information. It should be noted that survey methods are designed to determine species occurrence. Many species, due to their seasonalitx of occurrence, cryptic behavior, or low population levels are extremely difficult to detect. Survey findings may fail to detect occurrence of listed species and should not automatically infer species absence. Occasionally, situations may require a more intensive sampling approach coupled with an examination of museum records and current literature before an on-site status determination is made. The Service is concerned about aerial transmission lines and their potential impacts on birds. Buried transmission lines are preferred since they would minimize or eliminate impacts on both aesthetic and avian resources. If aerial transmission lines are used and if they cross migratory bird corridors, rivers or lakes, they should be equipped with markers to minimize the potential for bird strikes. Powerlines designs that minimize the chance of avian impact not only save birds but also minimize maintenance costs and power outages for utility users. For technical assistance in designing and constructing transmission lines to prevent bird collisions, the Service recommends "Mitigating Bird Collisions With Power Lines: The State of the Art in 1994". A copy of this document can be obtained by calling Edison Electric Institute publications number at 1-800 EEI-5453 or writing to: Edison Electric Institute, 701 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington D.C. 20004-2696, and requesting Item #06-94-33. For assistance in designing and constructing transmission lines to prevent bird electrocutions, the Service recommends, "Suggested Practices For Raptor Protection On Power Lines, The State of the Art in 1981". A copy of this publication can be obtained from Raptor Research Foundation, C/O Department of Veterinary Biology, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101. The Service encourages the InterMountain Energy, Inc. To consider all practical alternatives and conduct an independent feasibility and cost effective comparison study of other energy producing options. Other alternative options that should be considered individually and/or in combination include, but are not limited to: increasing the energy producing capability of existing hydroelectric plants presently servicing Hydaburg; and developing a conservation program for Hydaburg customers. Net cumulative impacts on the environment of all projects and proposals in the vicinity of the project should be considered. CUmulative impacts are defined as those impacts which result from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present and reasonable foreseeable future actions (e.g., logging, mining, road construction, outdoor recreation, sport and subsistence hunting and fishing, etc.). ,f / TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR ! i DEPARTMENTOFFISHANDGAME I P.O. BOX271 I KLAWOCK; ALASKA 9992!HJ271 I PHONE: (907) 755-2485 DIVISION OF HABITAT I FAX.: (907) 755-244C & RESTORA TION May 15, 1995 Jack Goldwasser InterMountain Energy, Incorporated Agent for Haida corporation , Post Office Box 421 Cave Junction, Oregon 97523 Re: First-Stage Consultation, Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric project FERC Number P-114800-000 Dear Mr. Goldwasser: In response to your request for comments concerning the proposed study plans for the Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) offers the following: General Comments: The document is general and quite vague with respect to proposed studies pertaining to wildlife, fisheries, hydrologic characteristics, and the descriptions of potential changes that will result from the construction, and short-and long-term operation of the project. For evaluation purposes, we need to know exactly what the applicant proposes to do within the watershed. The project evaluation should identify anticipated effects upon fish and wildlife resources from the direct and indirect project modifications of the existing conditions, including roads, housing facilities, and presence of labor crews. We request that the applicant conduct detailed studies which thoroughly evaluate existing fisheries, habitats, stream flows, lake levels, and potential changes to each. Pre-, during, and post-construction plans are required. Plans for emergency shut downs and maintenance are also needed. If mitigation alternatives are presented, the cost and specifics should be identified and a plan for placing adequate funds in escrow presented. Very specific information, some of which is summarized below, should be incorporated into these studies. Detailed study plans for collecting, analyzing, and reporting this information should be submitted to the ADF&G, and other concerned 11-K87 Jack Goldwasser 2 May 15, 1995 agencies, for review, as should plans for monitoring all project phases. Fisheries: summit and Mellen lakes represent 2 of 14 known Arctic grayling lakes in southern Southeast Alaska. Our records have very limited information on the fisheries 'within this watershed. Current ADF&G staff have not been to the watershed. The lower reach of Reynolds Creek has been documented as an anadromous fish stream (no. 103-25 10420), and produces coho, pink, and chum salmon. 1. A periodicity chart of all known fish species and life phases for the affected portion of the water body should be generated, including lake and stream reaches upstream and downstream of the reach directly affected. 2. An Arctic grayling population study (including abundance estimate and length distribution) should be conducted in Mellen Lake, and in Summit Lake if 'damming this water body is proposed. Hydrology: The ADF&G currently has essentially no stream flow or lake level records from this watershed. 3. continuous flow (cubic feet per second [cfsl) data and analysis requirements to evaluate the effects of a proposed flow modification should include: long-term mean annual and monthly flows, monthly duration analyses, one-in-two year peak flow, long-term instantaneous peak discharge, low-flow discharge analyses, and flood stage identification. 4. Current water allocation data and information should be requested and secured from the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water, for all waters that contain point(s) of take from anadromous and resident fish streams and lakes. Specifics such as quantities of water approved (cfs), uses, and date of priority are needed. Pending water rights actions should also be identified. 5. Water chemistry data should be collected over time, including pH, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, water temperature, specific conductance, suspended sediments, and other pertinent water quality data which may be affected by the project or proposed flow modifications. 6. Plans for stream gaging, and continuous monitoring of reservoir levels and water temperature are required. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments at this early project stage. If you have any questions, or need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. ../.:: \. r_.;"r~ :' ":, f:'",:. '::'; i TONYKNOWLE~GOVERNOR\\.~), ~!: ;':', ~ i '. ~. I' ,~'fi \ ~. , IOFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR , i ; ;OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET f DIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION 'J!:L) CENTRAL OFFICE CI PIPEUNE COORINDA TOR'S OFFICECI SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE ( P.O.8OX110030 411 WEST4THAVENUE.SUrrE2C3601 "C. STRE£T. SUITE 370 JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811"()o30 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501-2343 ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99503-5930 PH: (907} 465-3S621FAX: (907) 465-3075 PH: (907) 271-43361FAX: (907) 272-0690PH: (907} 56Hi131IFAX: (907) 561-6134 May 22, 1995 Mr. Jack Goldwasser InterMountain Energy P.O. Box 421 Cave Junction, OR 97523 Dear Mr. Goldwasser: SUBJECT: REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT STATE ID NAK9502-02JJIFERC PROJECT #p-1l480-000 FIRST STAGE CONSULTATION REVIEW The Division of Governmental Coordination's (DGC) has completed coordinating the State of Alaska's informational review of the Reynolds Creek hydroelectric project .. Haida Corporation proposes to construct a hydropower facility on Reynolds Creek, off Hetta Inlet, Prince of Wales Is. Two development options, Option A -Lake Mellen and Option B Summit Lake, are being analyzed. Both options would involve a 1,600 kW capacity facility and a transmission line between the remote site and Hydaburg. "\. We are at the Preliminary Permit/First Stage Consultation phase of the FERC review. As the process for obtaining a FERC license requires extensive preapplication consultation, the First Stage Consultation review was informational. for the purpose of the agencies providing resource information about the project area to assist in completion of the FERC application. The State's comments on the First Stage Consultation document were due on May 13, 1995. This office received comments from the Alaska Department ofFish and Game (DFG) and Natural Resources (DNR). The DFG sent comments directly to you. A copy of DNR's comment was faxed to you recently by this office. At this point in the FERC review, various study plans will be prepared. The study plans will be reviewed during the Second Stage Consultation review. State and federal permit requirements will also be identified during the Second Stage Consultation review. The State's coastal consistency review can commence when DGC receives: (1) a Coastal Project Questionnaire, (2) copies of all necessary state and federal permit applications, (3) supporting information, including maps and drawings, which describes the project, (4) an Alaska Coastal Management Program public notice is made, and (5) FERC officially accepts the license application and the application is public noticed (this usually occurs at the Third 1"\" I'I"~' U '; Stage Consultation phase of the FERC review). If you have any questions regarding this letter or the Alaska Coastal Management Program, please contact me at 465-3177. Thank you for providing an opportunity for the State to participate in the FERC process. Sincerely / ~~ Christine Valentine Project Review Coordinator cc: Joan Hughes, DEC, Juneau Lana Shea, DFG, Juneau Jim Durst, DFG, Klawock Elizaveta ShaduralJim Anderson, DNRlDOL, Juneau John Dunker, DNRlDOW, Juneau Marvin Yoder, Coastal Contact, Hydaburg FERC, Washington D.C. n:\closed\reynold1. fin UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMER( National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service P.O. Box 21668 Juneau, Alaska 99802-1668 August ~, ~99S MEMORANDUM FOR: Record FROM: Andrew Gross~ an~amra Faris Protected Resources Management Division SUBJECT: Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. ~~480-000 On July 20, ~99S, the National Marine Fisheries Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game participated in an interagency field examination of Haida Corporation's proposed Reynolds Creek hydroelectric project. Haida Corp. is considering two development options. Option A would involve a ~O-ft high dam on Lake Mellen, a penstock paralleling a cascading reach of Reynolds' Creek, and a powerhouse and tailrace returning discharge back to the anadromous fish-, occupied reaches of the Creek. Option B would involve a ~O-ft high dam on the higher elevation Summit Lake with the powerhouse and tailrace waters discharged just above Lake Mellen. Haida Corp. wants approval for both options. Prior to examining the Reynolds Creek drainage, a meeting was' convened in Hydaburg to allow agency biologists to discuss a diverse array of resource issues with consultants from Inter Mountain Energy and pentec. The following persons were in attendance: Jack Goldwasser, Inter Mountain Energy, Cave Junction, OR. Jonathan Houghton, Pentec Environmental, Inc. Seattle Julie Stofel, Pentec Environmental, Inc. Seattle Christopher Estes, Sport Fish. Div., ADFG, Anchorage Jim Durst, Habitat Div. ADFG, Klawock Glenn Freeman, Sport Fish Div., ADFG, Ketchikan Vicki Davis, USFWS, Ketchikan Steve Brockman, USFWS, Ketchikan Tamra Faris, PRMD, NMFS, Juneau Andrew Grossman, PRMD, NMFS, Juneau Issues raised at the overview meeting included feasibility of the project, land ownership, indigenous and· introduced fish species, occurrence of recreational and subsistence fishery uses, potential occurrence of spotted frog, potential occurrence of bull trout, affects of construction on neotropical migrant birds, and impacts associated with road construction, operations, and monitoring of the hydroelectric facility. The consultants did indicate that Sealaska Native Corporation owned most of the ...~ surrounding land, and that they would be logging it. ... {~~ 'i 9 t....q, " ..l' ~""i:I" Most of the lands along Hetta Inlet have already been logged or are currently being logged. Major concerns included 1) protection of anadromous fish habitats (all agencies), 2) protection of introduced populations of Arctic. grayling (ADFG), . 3) surveys for the occurrence of spotted frogs, northern goshawks, and other Endangered Species Act candidate species (USFWS) . The group was shuttled to the mouth of Reynolds Creek in Copper Harbor on Hetta Inlet. Participants followed a trail up the creek past an old USGS gaging station to cascades sufficiently high and swift as to preclude significant further upstream migration. Consensus was reached on this upstream limit of anadromous fish habitat and the lowest acceptable location for tailrace discharge. Since this was above the consultants' selected site for the tailrace, some reevaluation of potential alternative powerhouse locations would probably be necessary. The damming of Lake Mellen was of concern due to the possible presence of spotted frogs and also the potential loss of grayling' spawning habitat. A large pond immediately below the lake would be the actual location of dam and inlet to the penstock. This pond contains Arctic grayling 'and numerous rough-skinned newts along the shoreline. Raising the water level 8 ft would raise and expand the pond into Lake Mellen. Christopher Estes wanted additional data collection on Lake Mellen which would require further remote sensing instrumentation. Jack Goldwasser expressed concerns that value of information sought did not justify the additional expense. Raising the level of Lake Mellen may have more impact than qn Summit Lake. If the pond below Lake Mellen is dammed, the control point for the lake would probably remain near the present lake outlet. If the lake itself is dammed and diverted, discharge to the pond would be curtailed, and emergent palustrine wetlands around the lake would be inundated by rising water levels. This scenario could destroy habitats used by spotted frog (if present), rough-skinned newt, and spawning Arctic grayling. Because of the bedrock outlet occurring at the proposed Lake Mellen dam site, there probably isn't a lot of gravel moving down from the lake. Houghton thought that almost all gravel was transported from tributaries to the salmon spawning areas. Option B would assure that gravel transport is not a factor and that lower water temperature resulting from tapping subsurface waters are rewarmed in Lake Mellen before entering anadromous .fish rearing areas. Summit Lake displays evidence of a more variable water level, possibly due to ice dams in the small outlet. However, Summit Lake has steep rock walls on most sides, and what little grayling spawning habitat that exists in gravel-lined inlet drainages, may. be not be replaced at the higher elevations of an impounded lake.. Furthermore, fluctuations in the lake level, resulting from drawdown, would likely eliminate or reduce egg survival. A rather preliminary assessment of the Lake Mellen and Summit Lake options suggests that Summit Lake would be less likely to impact fishery resources while affording the applicant more ' flexibility in locating powerhouse and tailrace facilities. Water levels in Summit Lake appear more naturally variable, and there is less low-gradient shoreline habitat (although that which is available may be very important to some organisms) . Fluctuations in instream flows from Summit Lake would be mitigated by the reservoir effects of Lake Mellen and the lower pond, assuring more continuous flows to anadromous fish habitats in the lower creek. The inlet of upp~r Reynolds Creek into Lake Mellen may provide grayling spawning habitat. Surveys should verify this. A penstock and powerhouse from Summit Lake could be planned to .. '. assure that the tailrace discharge continues to maintain instream habitats. The field trip wrapped up about 6 pm with a return of participants to Deer Bay and Ketchikan. cc: J. Goldwasser J. Houghton F/AKC-Dahlberg ...... ,j . \ . ~ : ..:. ~ ., ~:,~. .I \ TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR _. .-, - • f ••.. .J ....... '.-= ~ '-'..::::-' ~..: "';'...J '1,...,. DEPARTMENTOFFISHAND GAME P.O. BOX 271 KlAWOCK; ALASKA 999254J271 PHONE: (907) 755-2485 DIVISION OF HABITAT FAX: (907) 755-2440 & RESTORA TION August 23, 1995 Mr. Jonathan Houghton, Senior Biologist Pentec Environmental, Incorporated 120 Third Avenue South, Suite 110 Edmonds, W A 98020 Dear Mr. Houghton: Re: Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Biological Study Plans We are in receipt of your August 9, 1995, letter concerning the 1995 Biological Study Plans for the Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project. Thank you for the preliminary results and discussion summary. Specific comments on the topics raised in your letter will be forwarded to you in the near future under separate cover. Sincerely, 2::D:W~ -r Habitat Biologist cc: Lana Shea, ADF&G H&R, Douglas Jack Gustafson, ADF&G H&R, Ketchikan Christopher Estes, ADF&G SF/RTS, Anchorage Glenn .Freeman, ADF&G SF, Ketchikan Vicki Davis, FWS, Ketchikan Tamra Faris, NMFS, Juneau 11-K87 ~0/19/95 11:24 FAX 206 775 4682 PE~~C ENVIRO~~ ~~* MOl~TAIN E~~RGY f(zj OO~ ----~~~~~~~~~~~~~~----~ i -;. ,._"t::c:::T-1'i"-9!5 TUE :16:22 Kla....ock HCI.~cher'\f ".02 tONY KNOWlES" GOVERNOR DEPABTMENrOFFISHANDGAME DIVISION OFHABITAT & RESTORA TION October 17, 1995 Mr. 10nathan. Houghton, Senior .r~iologist Pentec Environmental, InCOIpO~ 120 'lbird Avenue South, Suite 110 Edmon0s 7 WA 98020 Dear Mr. Houghton: Re: Reynolds Creek Hydroe1ectrl.c Project (FBRC Project No. 11480) 1995 Biological Study Plans Detailed Comments This letter contains the specific comments noted in my AUi\Jst 23, 1995. letter acknowledging'receipt of your August 9, 1995. Reynolds Creek Hydmelectrlc-199S Biological SbJ.dy Plans letter. These comments \¥-ere coordinated with the Ketehikan office of the Division of Sport Flsh, and with the Statewide. Instrea.m Flow Coordinator. The interagency field. trip of lu1y 20, 1995, provided a helpful overview of the project area and potential components. The broad ..brush biological evaluations done by that time were also he1pful. The Alaska Department of rlSh and Game (ADF&G) believes that it is now approprlate to initiate more detailed studies to provide a basis for evaluation of the proposed project. Specific field studies need to be conducted, and detailed documentation provided, to provide an accumte assessment of current ("pre-project") conditions. Por reference, see also our Fmt-8te.ge Consultation comments of May 15, 1995. It is our understmding that Haida Corporation has yet to decide whether Option A. Option B, or both, or some combination thereof will be pursued. Therefore. the ADF&.G mllSt at pre6e11t review conducted and proposed studies assuming all components of the project wiD. be built. The potential bypass of watel' around at least a portion of the stream reacll between Summit Lake and I...ake Me11en is of pa.rticu1ar eoncem because of possible effects to important Arctic grayling (grayling) habitat, as is potentia1l.ake level change effects on grayling spawning habitat throu&hout the lake systems. 11..Q1 10/19/95 11:30 FAX 206 ii5 4682 PE!Ii'TEc ENYIROXl1E -....... MOVKT.UN E;\ERGY tgjUUJ p.es Mr. Jonathan Houghton 2 October 17, 1995 For further evaluation purposes, we need to know exactly what Raida COlpOration proposes ..,.to do within the watershed. We request that detailed studies be conducted which thoroughly I. evaluata existing fisheries, habitats, stream flows, lake levels. and potential. changes to each.. i Pre-, dwing, ~post construction plans are requizecl. Plans tOr emergency shut downs and I maintenanee are also needed. If mitigation alternatives are presented, the costs and specifics I· Ishould be identified arid a plan specified for placing those :funds in escrow. 1995.BiQIo:iOO StudY FJans Comm@ts I L , P1eli mi om ResultS I : ! . It is difficult for the ADF&.G to adequ.a1cly evaluate the prelitninuy data. provided, without I Lfurther documentation. Please provide exact dates of sampling, numbetS and locations of I minnow tIaPSt length of time traps soaked, bait used, whether traps wel.'8 unmodified or had •I inlets enlarged, and numbers and life stages of fish captured. Data for elect:rofishing, hook and line, or other sampling methodologies should be similar. Maps showing sampling Ilocatiot;lS' wow.d also greatly assist us. For fulul.'e :refenmce, it may be helpful to conec:t and I' pi:'eser:Ve voucher specimens of fish species and life st3ge& captw:ed. Please forward a copy of your co11ecting penn!t to me at your convenience. LmYer ~YllQlds ~J1lc ADF&G disagrees with yow: assessment that juvenile coho salmon are absent from this reach. During the July 20 field visit, Glenn Freeman of , ADF&G used a small dip net to capture four jtIYenne fish in the distributary (cross connection) from. stream no. 103-25-10400 a short disrance upstream of its confluence with Reynolds Creek. 'I'bree of these fish were subsequently identified as coho salmon fry by ADP&'G staff. As notec:1 during discussions we had July 20 while upstream of the gag1n,i station, the ADF&G recommend that the early September adult salmon surveys you mentioned in your August 9 letter be supplemented by SUIVeys in October to better.understand migration pattems and habitat use of this portion of Reynolds Creek by pink and coho saI.m.cm. To better identify tJSe of these stxeam reaches by coho salmon and other fish species, we request use. of unmodified GG:etl_type minnow traps baited with Betadine-aea.ted salmon eggs, using a wsatu:ralion-methodology wherein each stream reach would be trapped with several traps coQcuaently. This should be done during both summer and early fall to bettct: define seasonal use pattmns. It appears that 1995 is an unusual year £or adult salmon returns. Pink salmon have been returning later than usual, with few xetunu to many smaller streams. Coho salmon returns al'8 spotty, and the run timing is also atypical. . La.:lg:s and t1,Qp;.r Re)!notds Creek: No mention is made of itayling presence or absence in tll~_9.!lt1et basin of I...ake Mellen. The ADF&G captured two adult grayling with hook and line in this baSin -during the-July 20 field inspection. Did your sampling produce simUar results? . 10/19/95 11:30 FAX 206 775 4682 PENTEC ENVIRON'lfE ...... MOUl'-'TAIN ENERGY !4J 004 OCT-17-~5 TUE 16:24 KI4WC~k Hd~Gher~ 9977552449 P.04 " Mr. Jonathan Houghton 3 October 17, 1995 We very recently came upon some additional information on grayling stocking and assessment in this system (etJpyenclosed). Omyling were stocked. in Summit Lake and La:k= Marge in the 196tk, and eontinued to be present in those lakes and Lake MeUen 10 to 15 years later. The report notes the limited available spawning habitat. in these lakes, making ic::f.Mti6cation and evaluation of spawning areas very important. Also unknown is the potential role of Lake Marse in pnxiucins grayling wblch might drop down into Summit Lake. or Lab Mellen. It will be very important ID have comprehensive data on the location and abundanee of all ~ylipg habitats (spawning, young of the year rearing. imma h1 te rcating. etc.)·in. any areas potentially affeeted by this projedt. Site-specific studies and approprlate modelliug need to be underta.ken .which provide deCailed comparisons of existing and with-project fish habitats, and any likely effects upon.,gmyJjng populations. Am~Comments There seems to be some confusion regarding Christopher Estes' recommendations concerning instteam flow. Based on the ADF&G's current und~diog of the proposed project, it does not seem that the Instream Flow Incmmental Methodology (1FIM) is 'W'21t2tlted. Howevet, witb...ptOject flows should remain within the tanp of natw:a11ong..term variability for each. stream reach, and take into considexation the seasonal use patQ.ws and life. histm:y sm;es of the fish in the aiIe¢te.d reaches. To teiterate what the ADF&G xequesteci during the luly 20. site visit, we need additional infcrmaJion on overall water balance, potential temperature changes:> and any projected deviations from the natural tates of water discharge from the lake systems dm::ing construction or operation of the project. These data should include long-term water level records for each lake and discharge data for each stream. reach. The ADF&.G remains uncertain as to whether the project should be described as a run of the rivet facility I in light of our understanding of potential modifications to lake and. pond ~ su:rfac.e. elevations. We again refer you to our May 1S t 1995, rirst-Stage Consultation comments, wblch provide an overview of required fisheries and hydroloiic data., and recommendations on study plans. Need for GmyUD 2 Populatign Estimate The Division of Sport F'OO hypothesizes the graylini b:ansplanted. to these lakes were inlet stn:am spawnen. 'Ihetefore. the re1ati'\1ely Hmi.ted inlet stream habitat must be thorougbly surveyed to doeument use, or lack of use, by the current grayling populations. From your comments. it appears you have concluded that Summit Lake no longer supports a grayling population. As discussed above, ADF&G documents show that the Summit I...al= -popUlation existed for at 1cast-1Syears •. EiLhergn.yling-wCI:e_successfullyspa'Wtlirtgin__ . Summit Lake during that period, or in Lake Marge with regular "drop downII to Summit PE!'.'TEC EN\' IRONME ......... MOllriTAIN ElIi"ERGY raJ 005 10/19/95 11:31 FAX 206 ii5 4682 ge775S244a Mr.lonathan Houghton 4 Ocrober 17, 1995 I.ake. We do not agree that enough appropriate data have been collected to safely conclude that Summit Lake no longer contains or supports grayling. Rather, we feel that a. significant effort needs·to be expended in da.ta collection in the Summit ~syttem. In light of the historical data., and contintling discussions with departmental grayling expertsl the. Division of Sport Fish has revised their data needs. Summit I..ake and all its tributaries nC:ed to be thorougbly surveyed for the presence of a fishable population and uti1intion by grayling tiu:oaShout their life phases. An acceptable aItentative to the-requested mark recaptum abundmu:e estimates would be hydroacoustic surveys. Such a survey could be aocomplished in Summit Lake for less than $3,000. . Detailed,' comprehensive grayling spawniilg surveys need to be condu~beginning in 1990J in all ~within the Reynolds Creek drain.age accessible to grayling. This may require survey8 (1Vt:r several weeks, since grayling s.PaWning is highly correlated with watu tcrnpera.tgn; and temperature may vary from (mlet) stream to stream. Spawning may well occur shortly after the spawning areas become ice free. Use of small rye nets at the inlet streams may be helpful. All areas surveyed should be mapped and a detailed na..rm.tive provided. We are not comfortable using the mid-summer distrlbution of young-of-the-yea.r fish as an analog to areas used 'by spawning adults. Your letter seems to suggest that some loss of existing 5pa.wrung habitat could in SQI!.le manner be compensated for by the creation of new shallows if tala:. levels are raised. Such water surface. e1.evatiOft changes wonld indeed flood portions of shoreline, leading to death and decay of tei:t:estrla.t vegetation. However, the time fi:zme for such a conversion from. terrestrial vegetation to gravel spawning habitat would be quite lengthy, and entail many generations of grayling. For that reason, the ADF&G does nat believe it is appropriate to suggest that creafion of new shallows might mitigate. for loss of' existing potenlial spawning habitat. Other Comments and Infonnation Lower Reynolds Creek (stream number 103-25-10420) is cataloged for pink, chum. and coho salmon.. This is at least partially based on an August 23, 1979, survey of the stream by ADP&G comm=::cla1 fish. staff (copy enclosed). The survey noted the presence of pink: salmon adults D:mn the intertidal area up to about 160' upstream of the old gaging station (approximatdy 1,250' upstream of the high tide line), and the presence of coho salmoD. fry in the lower sb:eam teaches. Escapement surveys sinc.e then have noted an a.verage of lO,OOQ.. 20,000 pink salmon (maximum 110,000) using Reynolds Cteek, with intermittent use by a small number of chum salmon (copy enclosed). Stream number 103-25-10400 paralI.c:ls lower Reynolds Creek, and is Qltaloged for pink salmon. A distributary from this stream enters Reynolds Creek about SOOt upstream of the high tide line. Based on the capture of coho salmon fry in this distributary, stream number 103-25..10400 is also to be considered as cono salmon habitat. 10/19/95 11: 32 FAX 206 ii5 4682 PENTEC E!I.'VIRONME ........ MOUNTAIN ENERGY I4J 006 90??!5!S2440 1='.06 Mr. Jonathan Houghton s October 17, 1995 Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments at this stage of the project. If you have any questions. or need additional ~formati01\, please contact me. SinCC:tCly, Enclosures· C!C! Lana Shea, ADF&.G H&R., Douglas Jack Ous:tafson 7 ADF&G R&R, Ketchikan Glenn Preeman, ADF&G SP. Ketchikan* Chrlstopher Estes, ADF&F SPIRTS, Anchorage· VICld Davis, PWS, Ketchikan Tamra Faris, NMFS, Juneau rack Goldwasser, 1MB" Cave Junction' Lois .cashell, FER.C t Washington· • =with Enclosures i ~ II • • • • • • • • • • • • United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Southeas, Alaska Ecological Scrvice$ 3000 Vintage Blvd., Suite 201 Juneau. Alasiu 99801·7100 IN REPLy REI'EJt TO: November 13, 1995 Mr. Jack Goldwasser InterMountain Energy, Inc. 115 Airport Dr. P.O. Box 421 Cave Junction, OR 97523 Re: Reynolds Creek Hydropower project #11480 Dear Mr. Goldwasser: Thank you for your letter of October 10, 1995. The U.S. Fish and wildlife Service appreciates your continued coordination with this office. To adequately plan and monitor the proposed hydropower facility, detailed information on fisheries and hydrology will be required. This letter supplements our comments of May 15, 1995, and is intended to clarify data needs. The goal of data collection is to provide a scientific basis for predicting impacts associated with the proposed action and any suggested alternatives, and to establish baseline values against which we can compare post-project conditions. Existence of detailed pre-project data will be extremely valuable should problems with fisheries or other resources be detected after project construction. Use of lower Reynolds Creek by pink and chum salmon was documented by your consultant, Pentec Environmental, on a September 10, 1995, field visit. Upstream movement of adult salmon was effectively blocked by cascades approximately 85 meters above the U.S. Geological Survey gaging station located approximately 300 meters from the mouth of the stream. Return flows from the power plant are proposed to be released immediately below this series of cascades. During the interagency site visit on July 20, 1995, salmonid fry later identified as coho salmon were captured with a dip net by Alaska Department of Fish and Game personnel. In this area, coho spawn later than pink salmon, so the early September visit could easily have missed them. October surveys are used by ADF&G, and are recommended for verifying spawning adult coho. Further discussions of salmon use of the stream should include coho as a species potentially affected by the proposal. Water quality characteristics of the return flows, such as temperature, pH, gas saturation, etc., must be suitable for discharge into a salmon spawning area. Please provide an analysis of how the discharged water will compare to water naturally 9ccurring in the stream at the discharge point. II Discussions among the resource agencies, you, and Pentec, continue on the level of detail required concerning the Arctic grayling population in Summit Lake, Lake Mellen, and Reynolds Creek. Field work done to date includes an unknown amount of minnow trapping, electro-fishing, and hook-and-line sampling in and near the lakes. Grayling have been found in Lake Mellen, and immediately upstream and downstream. Likely spawning habitat in Reynolds Creek near a small pond above Lake Mellen (Interlaken Pond) has been identified. No grayling have been found in Summit Lake, although the ADF&G documented a population in this lake in 1982. The species was originally established in the drainage by transplants to Summit Lake in 1962 and 1967, and to Marge Lake in 1968. Grayling are primarily insectivorous. Therefore, minnow traps baited with salmon roe, as described in the Pentec study plans, are unlikely to capture the species. Electro-fishing along the lake shore is also likely to fail if the investigator's presence frightens away any fish. Hook-and-line fishing is often effective for grayling, but does depend on finding receptive fish, which can take some time. We do not know how much effort has been expended trying to verify presence or absence of grayling in Summit Lake. We are not yet ready to accept that the species is gone, however. Gill nets are effective sampling tools, but they are not recommended because they kill most or all of the fish captured. Other fish traps are available, some of which may be useful. We believe, however, that the ADF&G's suggestion to use hydroaccoustic sampling to assess stocks in the lake may be the most cost effective approach (October 17, 1995, letter from Jim Durst, ADF&G, to Jonathan Houghton, Pentec). Such sampling might be combined with hook-and line sampling to verify that fish detected by the hydroaccoustic gear are in fact grayling. Beyond a simple presence/absence verification, the Service believes that additional information on the grayling population is required. Habitat use and population status are both important, for the reasons given in the opening paragraph. Spawning habitat appears to be the most limited resource for this population, so identification of spawning sites is a priority. Graylirig usually spawn just as the ice breaks up in the springl. Field surveys to identify all spawning areas, perhaps supported by helicopter, should be done at that time. Because the two lakes probably have different ice break-up times, as do different inlet streams within each individual lake, survey effort should be spread over several days or weeks to ensure that all potential spawning sites are visited at the appropriate time. Rearing habitat may also be limited, especially for the Summit Lake population. Further field investigation is warranted. Important rearing areas between Summit Lake and Lake Mellen, which appear to contribute fish to the Lake Mellen population, should be carefully delineated, and the effects of various project scenarios evaluated. Bypass of water from Summit Lake could dramatically affect this habitat if not carefully planned. Raising Lake Mellen may also impact the rearing area. Estimates of flows required to maintain suitable spawning and rearing habitat in this area should be ·Scott, W.B., and E.J. Crossman, 1973. Freshwater fishes of Canada. Fisheries Research Board of Canada. Bulletin 184, Ottawa.966 pp. • • I provided. Another likely rearing habitat is the outlet basin below Lake Mellen. The effects of inundating this habitat should also be evaluated. i Your August 4, 1995, analysis of draw-down rates for the two lakes makes a I strong case for dismissing draw-down as a source of impact for the fish populations. Maximum draw-down is estimated at 16 days per vertical foot for Lake Mellen, and 45.5 days per foot in Summit Lake. • Of greater concern is the initial, essentially permanent, ra1s1ng of the. lake level(s) by approximately eight feet. This has the potential to inundate established spawning and rearing areas. Replacement of suitable spawning habitat, in particular, is not assured. We strongly recommend an analysis of • how a new lake level is likely to affect specific spawning and rearing areas. We also request an analysis of project alternatives that do not incorporate a lake level increase. Other hydroelectric projects in Southeast Alaska, similar to Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project in many respects, use lake i taps drilled through bedrock, or siphons. A low-head diversion structure that does not result in a lake-level increase also appears feasible. We believe that much concern over the grayling population could be alleviated by simply designing the project to avoid what appears to be a substantial impact.I •• Potential effects of reduced flows from Summit Lake on spawning gravels should also be evaluated. Existing flows transport and maintain spawning gravels. How will the supply of gravel be affected by a diversion at Summit Lake? Are there project modifications or alternatives that will improve the gravel supply? In all project plans, stream flows should not be significantly reduced in • spawning habitats between the initiation of spawning and the emergence of fry from the gravel. Instream flow proposals must be specific in this regard. The need for a grayling population estimate has been discussed for several months. Pentec's August 9, 1995, letter stated that a mark-recapture study to I estimate the population size would be too expensive and time consuming, and of low reliability. No suitable alternative is suggested. •• Our combined efforts to minimize impacts to fish habitat will hopefully result in long-term maintenance of a healthy grayling population. Unless we monitor the population, however, we will not know what effects the project has had. It is likely that by modifying stream flows, lake levels, and habitat availability, we will have some effect on the grayling population(s). If significant impacts are detected, remedial action may be necessary. The Service, therefore, believes that some index to population size and health I should be developed. Ideally, we will agree on a method that will provide a cost-effective, sensitive, and reliable indication of whether the population sampled is larger, smaller, or similar to the pre-project population. Standardized transects using the hydroaccoustic gear discussed above are one possibility. We recommend that the feasibility of this method be evaluated. Catch rates in standardized traps, or counts during spawning periods, are additional possibilities. A sample of 20 to 30 fish should also be examined annually, for five to 10 years post-construction. Body condition should be evaluated by a standard • method, such as Fulton's condition factor, to help detect trends in the health of individuals in the population. Such an evaluation could use fish caught by hook and line, and does not require killing of the fish. Barbless hooks are recommended to minimize mortality. Annual monitoring of age-class distribution for five to 10 years post construction would be very helpful to verify that successful reproduction continues. Such sampling is typically done with variable-mesh or graded-mesh gill nets, which kills most or all fish captured. We recommend against letal sampling such as this, because we do not know how secure the fish populations are in each lake. Traps such as fyke nets could, however, provide a sample of live fish. Aging could be accomplished by scale annuli examination, without killing the fish. We believe that this is a reasonable approach, given the potential impacts of the proposed design. The Service remains available to help you plan the hydropower facility. We will be happy to evaluate any proposal you may offer to provide a suitable index to population size and health. If you have any questions, please contact Steve Brockmann at (907) 225-9691. r;;;;h,~ Nevin D. I!olmberg 7 Field Supervisor cc: ADF&G, Klawock, Ketchikan FERC, washington, DC (Attn: Michael Strzelecki) NMFS, Juneau Pentec Environmental, Edmonds, WA 2J3agenal, T.B. and F.W. Tesch. 1978. Age and growth. Pp. 101-136 in T.B. Bagenal, editor, Methods for assessment offish production in fresh waters, 3rd ed. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, England. I I· DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES I SOUTHEAST REGIONIPRECONSTRUCTION -ENVIRONMENTAL I December 22. 1995 I TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR 6860 Glacier Highway Juneau. Alaska 99801·7999 PHON E: (907) 465-4498 FAX: (907) 465-3506 TEXT: (907) 465-4410 I Re: Project 71814 Hydaburg Highway Paving I Jack Goldwasser Rocky Mountain Energy P. O. Box 421 Cave Junction. Ckegon 97523 I' Dear Mr. Goldwasser: Thank you for the information regarding the Reynolds Creek Hydropower Project, FERC No. I I 1480. In view of the fact that the design for the hydro project is not to the point where a transmission alignment can be detennined. I agree it is not possible to coordinate your project with our project at this time. Please put me on your mailing list so I can keep abreast of the I development of the project. I appreciate your assurance that if the transmission lines are routed parallel to the Hydaburg Highway. they will be located within our easement adjacent to the road. This in itself will help to keep the environmental impacts to a minimum. I The latest draft of the State Transportation Needs List has Hydaburg Highway Paving scheduled for 1999. Our Regional Planning Section hopes to get this moved up to 1997. In the event that construction of the transmission lines will occur the same season as the paving project, we can both work to coordinate construction to minimize environmental impacts. particularly to the I many fish streams crossed by the route. If you have any questions about the development of the paving project, please call me at 907I 465-4524. Thank you for your assistance. • Sincerely • • .~~~ • Reuben Yost Project Environmental Coordinator • cc: Bill Ballard. Regional Environmental Coordinator Tracy Moore. Project Engineering Manager •2SA.T34LH FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, 0 C,20426 Project No. 11480-000 FEB 12 1996 Haida Corporation Reynolds Creek Project TO THE AGENCY, TRIBE, ORGANIZATION, OR INDIVIDUAL ADDRESSED: InterMountain Energy, agency for Haida Corporation, plans to prepare a draft environmental assessment (DEA) on the potential Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project (Preliminary Permit No. 11480), located on Prince of Wales Island, Alaska. Pursuant to section 2403 (b) of the Energy Policy Act of 1991 (Act), Haida Corporation would file the DEA with their license application. To facilitate this, InterMountain Energy, by letter filed January 16, 1996, requested that some of our regulations be waived. In essence, InterMountain Energy has asked that certain of our post-filing requirements for scoping and requests for agency and public comments be moved to the pre-filing stages. This would allow for a coordinated process whereby preparation of the application occurs along with preparation of the DEA. Under this process, your opportunities for commenting will not decrease, but their timing will change. In addition, some of the information that is traditionally found in the license application will be found in the DEA. Perhaps the most important feature of this process from your perspective is that when the final license application is filed it will be accompanied by a DEA (in lieu of exhibit E). This will only be possible with the substantial prefiling involvement of the Commission staff, federal, state and local agencies, non governmental organizations, and the public. The Commission will not endorse or in any way sponsor the license application or DEA. Once the final license application and DEA are filed with the Commission, the Commission staff will independently review the application and DEA for compliance with the Commission's regulations and other pertinent laws and regulations. After an independent review and analysis of InterMountain Energy's application and DEA, the Commission will issue a DEA for public comment. The Commission will decide at the end of the licensing process and NEPA process whether to license the project and, if so, under what conditions. My decision on each of InterMountain Energy's requests is found in the attached letter. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Vince Yearick at (202) 219-3073. Sincerely, Fred E. Springer Director, Office of Hydropower Licensing Attachment cc: Mailing List - FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D. C.20426 Project No. 11480-000 Haida Corporation Reynolds Creek Project Jack Goldwasser InterMountain Energy, Inc. FEB 12 1900Agent, Haida Corporation 115 Airport Drive, PO Box 421 Cave Junction, OR 97523 Dear Mr. Goldwasser: Thank you for your letter filed January 16, 1996. In that letter, you requested that I waive certain Commission regulations to facilitate the preparation of an applicant-prepared environmental assessment (EA) for the proposed Reynolds Creek Project. Essentially, I have granted your request for waiver. My decision on each request is detailed below, a copy of which is being sent to all parties on the project mailing list. As you know, applicant-prepared EA's are a new option, created by legislation. Our goal in cases where the applicant has chosen this option is to facilitate the filing of an EA and application that are as complete as possible, without being redundant. As such, even though I am waiving the Exhibit E filing requirement because the EA will essentially substitute for it, all information that is required to be included in the application but not typically included in one of my staff's EA's still needs to be filed. To help avoid delays in processing your application, you should take the necessary steps, prior to filing the application and EA, to secure a water quality certificate under section 401(a) (1) of the Clean Water Act, and a coastal zone consistency certificate under the Coastal Zone Management Act. These steps should be documented in the application. Section 4.32(b) (7)--Additional Study Requests The Commission normally issues a notice of tendering, which includes a request for additional scientific studies, within 60 days of when the final application is filed. In this case, the opportunity to request additional studies will occur at the same time that comments are submitted on scoping -30 days after the scoping meeting. Please note that the scoping meeting should be scheduled 30 days after scoping document 1 (50-1) is ~ssued. Therefore, all stakeholders will have 60 days from the ~ssuance of 50-1 to submit comments and any additional study requests. Comments on scoping and any additional study requests should be sent directly to InterMountain Energy with a copy to the Commission. Study requests should conform to the requirements in 18 C.F.R. section 4.32(b) (7). Any dispute over additional study requests which cannot be resolved by InterMountain Energy and the requesting party, should be forwarded to the Commission. Accordingly, I am waiving section 4.32(b) (7) of the Commission's regulations in this case to the extent that it requires additional study requests to be filed after the license· application is filed. We will, however, still issue a notice when the final application and DEA are filed, soliciting interventions, final terms, conditions, and comments. Section 4.34(b)--Notice of Ready for Environmental Assessment (NREA) Section 4.34(b) of our regulations requires that an NREA, be issued. The NREA initiates the environmental review process and provides a 60-day opportunity for agencies and others to file final comments, and recommended terms and conditions. In this case, however, the environmental review process will begin and the DEA will be completed before the application is filed. Since the environmental review would be almost complete when the application is filed, there isn't a need for a NREA. Instead of an NREA, agencies and other stakeholders will be asked for preliminary terms and conditions when they receive a draft license application and a preliminary DEA. This will allow InterMountain Energy to incorporate these comments into the DEA that will be filed with the Commission. Therefore, I am waiving section 4.34(b) to the extent it requires issuance of a NREA. As I note above, we will issue a notice when the final application and DEA are filed, soliciting interventions, final comments, and final recommendations. It is extremely important that all stakeholders review and comment on the draft application and preliminary DBA which will be issued by InterMountain Energy, and provide preliminary recommendations or terms and conditions, if they haven't already done so at that time. These preliminary recommendations are critical to the development of the DEA and final license application. Again, these preliminary recommendations or terms and conditions, should be sent directly to InterMountain Energy with a copy to the Commission. Section 4.6l(d)--Exhibit E (environmental report) You've asked that both the 4.41 and 4.61 sections of our regulations, which require an Exhibit E (environmental report), be waived. From our review of your filings to date, it would appear that only section 4.61 applies to the project alternatives in your proposal. Therefore, I am waiving Section 4.61(d} to the extent that the DEA will substitute as the Exhibit E. In this case, you will file a DEA that will contain most of the information required in the Exhibit E of the final license I I I I I I I I I I I I application. However, all information (unless specifically waived herein) that is required to be included in the application, but not typically included in an EA, still needs to be filed. This includes, for example, functional design drawings, implementation and construction plans and schedules, cost estimates, and sources and amounts of financing regarding any proposed mitigation measures or facilities. 4.38(f)--Consultation You've requested that portions of section 4.38 of our regulations dealing with consultation be waived. This section requires, among other things, documentation in the license application of the three-stage consultation process, and a discussion of consistency with comprehensive plans. In other applicant-prepared EA cases, potential applicants are relying on periodic progress reports to document agency and public consultation, instead of documenting the consultation process in the application. These progress reports include documentation of communications among the applicant, FERC staff, and the stakeholders and are filed with the Commission on a monthly basis with a copy to the FERC environmental coordinator, and all interested parties. These monthly reports also include minutes of meetings, periodic conference calls, transcripts from public meetings, and comment letters. I recommend that you begin this type of procedure, and summarize your attempts to comply with the three-stage consultation process in the monthly progress reports. In essence, you will be acting as a clearinghouse for all communications among the stakeholders. Including this information in the application would be redundant. Further, a section on consistency with comprehensive plans will be included in your DEA. This section will include, for each relevant plan, a discussion of how and why the project would, would not, or should not comply with plans as defined in section 2.19 of the Commission's regulations, including any relevant agency or Indian tribe's determination on consistency. Therefore, I am waiving section 4.38{f} to the extent that it requires you to document the consultation process in the license application and to include a discussion of consistency with comprehensive plans. In order to ensure that entities who haven't received the progress reports (ie, aren't on your mailing list) can fully participate in this proceeding, you must summarize the three-stage consultation process in the application and make available the progress reports to entities that request them. Communications and the Collaborative Team It is very important that the agencies and the public are aware of the procedures that will be used in this case, and are 3 kept appraised of their opportunities to provide comments. Therefore, your proposed approach of establishing a collaborative team is a good idea. The collaborative team should consist of a representative of all pertinent state and federal agencies, non governmental organizations, and other interested persons. It is especially important that any federal land managing agencies whose lands your proposal may affect be a part ·of the collaborative team. Such agencies may also want to cooperate in the development of the EA, which is their option under the National Environmental policy Act (NEPA). You will need to work out your proposed communications protocol with the collaborative team. Once this protocol has been approved by the team, please file documentation of their approval with the Commission. Please note that the communications protocol must stipulate that any person's communication (oral or written) with FERC staff will be documented, filed with the Commission, and made available for public review. Such documentation can be included with the monthly progress reports you will be filing. Public Access to Project Information In addition to the scoping document; the periodic monthly progress reports, the DEA, and draft license application should all be made available for public review. Your proposed locations seem reasonable. Schedule I understand your desire to keep the process moving quickly. However, since we will ultimately be using your proposed scoping, and your DEA to help meet our responsibilities under NEPA, we would like the opportunity to review and provide advice on both documents before they are issued for comment. As such, our, and any cooperating agency's review, should be factored into your schedule. We are in the process of assembling an interdisciplinary team to work on your project, and will be reviewing your draft scoping document soon. However, before the scoping document is issued, we would like to see that a collaborative team has been formed, and that the team agrees with your approach to the licensing process. Also, please review the attached draft APEA process flow chart, and make sure that your schedule includes the steps listed therein. 4 • • • We look forward to assisting you in any way possible. Please address any future correspondence to Mr. John Clements, Director, Division of Project Review. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Vince Yearick at (202) 219-3073. Sincerely, Attachment ••• • 5 -------..~ .........~-DRAFT Stage I Consultation, APEA Proces~; 60 days Applicant OIcldes to do !'PEA Work wfIh AppIkant.nd oIh« pe,," & Slit up Communlc:lllonni Proeoc:.l, MOA's NotIc. ofG'~ In_ntto File _/ FERC S.11ds SIIft' T..m to Work WIIh Applicant GenenIt.. AppIkantl Mtlllina Litts 1.t Stlge & NEPA Scoplng Meeting AppIlcent Sends FERC Responds LeU" to FERC 10 W.1vIIf Requesting W.IY" LlItMf Applicant M.III ISCDIo AIIP.rtIn 1It Stage Meeting Only 30-60 days Key Appllcent CondUds 60 days Commentl DUIt11t SIIIgI on ISCD & InlllliFERC Publlcl,t,oenc:yr=-r Study ReqUHfaResponslbnltl.. MMling~~ ~II II' II' a.J II II II aJII .' III ',_ .t. ~lIlrf II II ~~ -...... Applicant Conducts First Field S..lOn OfStud~ . Stage II, APEA Process Applicant JMIII 30 days 6') daysAddltlonlll Study StudyRMulb ReqUMtllssuedto All PIIrtIM NEPA Scoplng Meeting Occurred In Stage 1 NEPA Seoplng Meellng Old Not Oc~ur In Stage 1 ApplCllnt Iss.... 60 daysRequest" Addlllonal Stud'" InSDI Mall Study RMUIb & SOl to A1tPartiM Applicant Conducts Sh VI,,, & NEPA Scoplng Key 30 days Me«lng Fom!IIIor~ DIIputt RMOIuIon IfNMded ComIYIentI Oft AddIIIonII Study Requlltlo.... CommtntI Oft ScopIng& Additional Study Req....... O"" Forma' or Informal OIaputa Resolution IfNMded -- ... .. ..-... ... --- --OllAn - ...... Stage II continued, APEA Process 90 days Commrontl by 4-8 months AppIlclnt Distributes POE'A & OrallllclnH AppliC. to an PI""\I tor R.vt.w/CCJmIMnt and ( ,.qUltts p,tllmlnlry harms and condlllon. \. '04(1) and 401 wac) .AGenc'"' OOO's POEA R4IYIMcI to toRftOIve Hold MMlnas Includl AMIyIlI of DlNg'..lMnts Aganc:y Prellm1Mry onPOEA RICOf'hI1'IeI'Id Key FERC COIiImIt1tI bY (( AganclftlNQOrlnPOtlllbllllln , AppllCl1n1l • II r•,.. ... • • .IJ• '.'.JI • !. Stage III, APEA Process FERC Staff RevI __ Fln.llicen.. Application lind OEA tvr Adequ.cy 30·45 days Appl~ntFII" DEA&FIn.1 --LlcenM Application....... wllhFERC ~I FERC ........ AccepIIII'IC4I ~. Nolle. Requn1Ing Int.~.& RlIquHtlt Final T & C 61,) days lntMventions FHIdI • f----t. jAgenc:yT&C --"I .ndAppllcanl's 1 05 days \ R"ponII Du. FERCStllfr FERC Stall'ModIfIMDEA ........ including final DEATerms &Condllloml 30 days -;: ~ i -Staff Incorporalin Commenta Ind Pr•.,.r" FEA - K.y FERCIIIU" FEA llc.n..0nIer IMuId Sdon 10m If Appllcabl. b FERCApplicant~ Rtsponslblllllts Rtsf)C)"~lbllltIHJ ( AG.:::=Ocom~tri ( ALASKA POWER &; TELEPHONE COMPANY PO. BOX 222 • 191 OTTO SiREET PORT TOWNSENO. WA 98368 13601385·1733' 18001 982-0136 fAX 13601 385·51 n February 16, 1996 Jack Goldwasser InterMountain Energy, Inc. Agent, Haida Corporation 115 Airport Drive, P.O. Box 421 Cave Junction, OR. 97523 Re: FERC Project No. 11480·000 Haida Corporation Reynolds Creek Hydro Project Dear Mr. Goldwasser: As a part of your request to FERC to create a II co li aborative team" I would like to request that Robert S. Grimm-President, Alaska Power & Telephone Co., P.O. Box 222, Port Townsend, WA. 98368 be included as a non governmental organization and interested person on this team. As a power utility on Prince of Wales Island we will have constructive input for the EA process and the collaborative team. Sincerely, ~2>'7,;;L. Glen D. Martin Technical Writer cc: Fred E. Springer -FERC UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service P.O. Box 21668 Juneau, Alaska 99802-1668 March 6, 1996 Mr. Jack Goldwasser: InterMountain Energy, Inc. 115 Airport Drive P.O. Box 421 I: Cave Junction, OR 97523 Dear Mr. Goldwasser: We have reviewed your letter of February 22, 1996 and subsequent memorandum of March 4, 1996. We appreciate your efforts to assure thorough coordination of this proposed project with all interested parties. I The National Marine Fisheries Service is reasonably assured that this project, as proposed, can be completed and operated without significant impacts to anadromous fish species and other living marine resources under our jurisdiction. We will continue to be1 available for technical assistance on these issues, including review of environmental assessment elements, proposed studies, sampling protocols, and operational requirements. However, dueI, to personnel and funding constraints, we would prefer to work in an arena whereby we can concentrate our time and efforts on issues affecting our jurisdictional resources. Whether that is1 possible in the context of the Collaborative Team depends upon what you envision. It might be best for my staff to participate only in those teleconferences in which agenda items specificallyI. address anadromous fisheries. If this is acceptable, you may expect our continued participation1 involving all resources under our jurisdiction. Again, we appreciate your efforts. Our contact for this project remains Andrew Grossman, Protected Resources Management Division, (907)I 586-7358. Sincerely,I _~)=~tt--_ I Steven T. Zi~ rman Chief, Protec ed Resources Management Division ~~ ,/ I" ~l (~~J I '~ "'r,'......,r;,"it'" cc: USFWS, DGC, DNR, DEC, Juneau ADFG, Douglas EPA, CoE, Anchorage 1 , F.l United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Ketchikan Ecological Services Suboffice 624 Mill Street Ketchikan, Alaska 99901 MEMORANDUM To: lack Goldwasser, InterMountain Energy, Inc. From: Steve Brockmann. Fish and Wildlife Biologist Through: Vicki Davis, Senior Biologist Described below are items requested in the Service's November 13. 1995, letter to you, which -"were not adequately addressed in Pentec's January 5, 1996, response. Among the Service's requests was an analysis of how water quality of return flows would compare to water naturally occurring in the stream at the discharge point. Characteristics named were "temperature, pH. gas saturation, etc." Pentec's letter indicates that water temperatures varied from 17.s C at the outlet pond below Lake Mellen to 16.2 C at the . anadromous fish barrier and at tidewater during the July site visit. Project flows are expected to be warmer and of greater volume, especially during the winter, which is anticipated to result in greater survival of intra gravel salmon. A temperature gage will be installed in Lake Mellen in late winter, 1996, to provide additional data for modelling potential thermal effects fo the project. Other water quality parameters should be considered. Gas supersaturation can be fatal to flsh when \vater under pressure is released. What are the dissolved oxygen and nitrogen levels of the water where it is proposed to be removed from Lake Mellen, and what effect will the penstock and turbine have on gas levels? How do these gas levels compare to those narurally occurring at the proposed discharge point? What effects are likely to result? Other chemical properties of the water should also be evaluated. Will pH be affected? What influence are the penstocks and turbine likely to have on chemical makeup of the water? Future analyses should present a more thorough evaluation of how the discharged water will compare to water naturally occurring in the stream at the discharge point. The Service supports additonal surveys in 1996 to determine the stams of grayling in Summit Lake and Lake Marge. Methods proposed include additional hook-and-line sampling, electrofishing, and watching for rising fish during feeding periods. Please specify a minimum level of effort (hours) for each of the activities proposed. If a fish population is found. in Summit Lake, further discussions will be necessary regarding project design and operation to '" avoid. minjmjze and compensate for impacts. . P.2 MAR 07'96 07:20F'r1 U S FISH &, WILDLIF"E Potential effects of modified flows from. Summit Lake on spawning gravels should be evaluated. Existing flows transport and maintain spawning gravels. How will the supply of gravel be affected by a diversion at SUmmit Lake? Are there project modifications or alternatives that will improve the gravel supply? Another likely spawning and rearing habitat is the outlet basin below Lake Mellen, The effects of inundating this habitat should be evaluated. The Service requests that scales taken from the sampled fish be examined and age-class distributions be reported annuaUy. We have additional comments on project design and operation as presented in Pen1eC 'S letter, that were not raised in our November letter, but have been stimulated by the latest proposal. We will discuss these during our teleconference. If you have any questions, please contact Steve Brockmann or Vicki Davis at (90?) 225-9691. 2 ~~~ MOU~~Al~ E~ERGl ~001FERC/OHL i'PR03/11196 15:45 fr202 219 0125 I -5 41 -5''12.. -2 I f ~ :F'ED~ E~GY REGu:x::..A.TORY COM:M:I:SS:I:ON TELECOPY MESSAGE (Facsimile) -Machine No. 202., 219-0125 'l'IK!:_____ ro: ~<1C\;'. Go IJwGt~er OFFICE: rnkr MOlJn.J.a.'rl £"="7' ?BON:E: ___-I-,+l ____ .. . .. OITI~:_-_·__~~____~------------~_--~!'-,.-,!~~c_,__~ <~~.. __ SUBJECT: SD.1. Sc.op 109 (1 M t1U II ~ This transmi tt.a~ consists of cover sheet p~us ~pages. pqriJ~j 01) a I ,St (,n c(ve;/JI?.:J~--------------~;II BVrr\puS k.:>~ SL':'/"'S.t~). "'IS IS cY/{7ad , r,;~It t:-S I .... _v __ .... v Jack and Lou: Following are our comments on scoping Document 1 for the Reynolds creek Project (FERC No. 11480). GBNERaL COHMBftS 1. There is no need to provide information on the alternatives that you eliminated, only your final proposed project; this will alleviate any confusion between the alternatives. If you want to address the other alternatives, do so in a separate section entitled "Alternatives Considered, but Eliminated from Detailed study," and only briefly. But for this scoping document, you only need to present your porposal. 2. You have attached a draft of your PDEA --as Appendix B - to the scoping document; You may do this, but it's getting way ahead of the game, especially since the issues haven't even been scoped yet for that document. You may not want parties to comment on that document until you prepare a completed version. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Make sure the titles match those in the text verbatim; some do not. 2. Add you sUbsections under the Scoping section. 3. "Geology and Soil Resources" needs to be added to the Resource Issues section. SECTION 1.0 --INTRODUCTION 1. Since your project is 5 MW or less, you will be working under section 4.61 of the Commisison's regulations, not 4.41 as you state in paragraph one. SECTION 2.0 --SCOPING 1. In section 2.1, add as a bulletpoint to your list of scoping purposes: "identify how the project would or would not i contribute to cumUlative effects in the Reynolds Creek Basin." ., You will probably need two scoping meetings --one for rencies, the other for the public. 3. Before this document goes out, you must nail down the specifics of both the seoping meetings and the site visit: dates, locations, time!, etc.· These specific details must be included on the~pin~ notiee~s well. '5"202 219 0125 FERC/OHLIDPR +-H )IOU!\'TAIN ENERGY 14J00303/11/96 15:47 4A Vince Yearic~s no longer working on the project; instead, add my name as the FERC contact: Michael strzelecki Office of_Hydropower Licensing Federal Ene~ Regulatory Commission 888 First street, HE Room 52-70 Washington, DC 20426 (202) 219-2827 SECTIQN 3.0 --RBQUBST FOR IHrORKATION 1. " .sc~ing comments will be d~e 30 days after th~ fina~\scoping meetin .. . . ... SEC~ :ON 4.0 --PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 1. Again, remove all information on the alternatives not selected, this to avoid any confusion (th;s confused some reviewers here).. 7'l/..{.o n~ P~1 ~ 2. The project must be propsoe for ei~~; ~.~-MW or 5.0 MW. Beginning in section 4.1, and t roughout the document, these two figures are used intercha Consultation and licensing must be based on one proposed ca , and the project must be constructed to that capa t.' T efore, use one consistent capacity figure throughout e document. . 3. In section 4.1, you state that the project will "provide interconnection with a transmission line extending to Hydaburg," which may ~ound like the transmission line is existing. Actually, you will be constructing a transmission line into Hydaburg. Please clarify to avoid confusion. 4. In section 4.1.1, please identify whether any federal lands are included within the project boundary. If your project is indeed 1..-5 MW (not 5.0 MW), and there are no federal lands involveq, then a project boundary map is not required. Exhibit 1. can be removed. If your project is 5 MW, a project boundary must be d@' 'neated, and exhibit 1 must ~emain. 5. ve sections 4.1.2 and 4.1.3 to avoid confusion. 6. _tem 6 of section 4.1.5, pl~~~~~~~~~ year in which I you ~ projecting the enrgy nee 7. In item 7 of section 4.1.5, long-term expansion options to which you refer • .. 8. In "4.2.1 General Desciption of Project operation," you call the project run-of-river, yet in the same section to discuss useabledrawg~~torage at summit Lake. It sc ..,mds like this is 03/11/96 15:48 '5'202 219 0125 FERC/OHLIDPR ........ MOUNTAIN ENERGY 141004 actually nd should be categorized as such in the scopi 9. The last paragraph on section 4.2.1 states that "Other than natural lake level fluctuations, there will be no drawdown operation ..... Natural lake level fluctuations are not considered drawdown operations. 10. We have the following comments on table 1: • only one dam is detailed, but the project has two dams; add the details of the second dam. • page 9 has the dam listed as 17 feet, but here it's only listed as 10 feet; • please provide number of penstocks proposed and the lenqth of each; • according to the tables, the lake surface elevations will be raised by 15 feet, and the corresponding surface areas will only increase by 0.3 and 0.1 acres, respectively. This must mean the shores are practically vertical. is this true? • project cost is $6M, not $6MM. Exhibit 1, the project area map, should only present your proposed alternative, not the ones eliminated from study. 11. In section 4.3, add the following to your list of mitigation measures: "develop and implement a cultural resources management plan as necessary to protect cultrural resources during project construction and operation." . 12. In section 4.3, the transmission line is described as 12 miles long, . where'as table 1 lists it as 10 miles; please clarify. On that same mitigation measure, please specify whether you ose to offer both collision and electrcution mitigation on~at transmission line.t SECTION 5.0 --SCOPE OF CUMULATIVE •••• 1. Generally, the major comment here is that issues should be identified directly and'succintly, as you have done in the Aquati~ Resources section (bulletpoints are recommended). Include as many· issues as possible, realizing they can~be eliminated if parties don't consider them a viable issue. 2. In section 5.1..1., the title should be "Resources with the Potential of Being cumulatively Affected." . 3. In section.5.1.1, Add t'water quality" and "loss of old growth forests" to the list of resources with the potential of being cumulativ:~ly affected (~it:tl the enti:reba~.in being their 141005 03/11/96 15:49 '5'202 219 0125 FERC/OHLIDPR geographic scope). Logging and mining activities may also affect those ·two resources. 4. section 5.1.3. states that the temporal scope of impacts will by analyzed 30 years into the future: for original licenses, this number should be 50 years. 5. section 5.2.1 Geology and Soil Resources does not identify any specific issues. An· example of a specific issue would be "Effects of construction on sedimentation in Reynolds Creek and all downstream waters (Copper Harbor, Hetta Inlet, etc.)." If you can identify any such geologic issues for this project, present it bY bulletpoint; if not, just write "no issues identified." 6. Please add the following issues under Aquatic Resources in section 5.2.2: • effects of project intake on resident and anadromous fishes; • effects of project flows on transport of spawning gravels in lower Reynolds Creek; 7. For the third bulletpoint that you have identified in section 5.2.2, please add the following redlined text: • Effects of the project streamflow in the reach access fis~~ and resultant effects on rear1ng. 7. In section 5.2.3 Terrestrial Resources, remove the the last sentence of the first paragraph (no issues regarding ••• ), and then-identify the. following issues: • whether the transmission line woudl be a collision hazard to birds, particularly the large spring and fall concentrations of waterfowl, shorebirds, and raptors in Hetta Inlet; • whether the transmission line would be an electrocution hazard to raptors, and othe birds with large wing span; • the effects of raising the water level of Lake Mellen and summit Lake on wetlands and riparian vegetation, and the wildlife dependent on these habitats; • effects of project construction and operation on black bear, mink, river otter, Sitka black-tailed deer (including its migration), bald eagles, and neotropic migrant birds; and • effects the access road would have on fish and wildlife species by facilitating subsistence and recreational fishing and hunting pressures. U~/ll/!:IO .I..'-l • ..lV U"V";' _.J.v V...l._ .... 8. You state that no state or federal threatened, endangered, or sensitive species occurs in southeastern Alaska. The U.S. Fish and wildlife Service says that the American peregrine falcon may occur in the area as transients primarily during seasonal migrations (letter dated July 25, 1994). Although the FWS is proposing to remove the American peregrine from the list of threatened and endangered species (60 Federal Register 34406, June 30, 1995), it is still officially listed as endangered. Therefore to comply with the requirements of the Endangered Species Act, at present you would still need to address this species in the EA. This can be done simply by quoting FWS's July 25, 1994 letter stating that American peregrine will occur in the project area as transients, but the FWS does not antiCipate any impacts from the project on these birds. You identify very specific types of impacts as the principal concerns for seven candidate species that may occur in the area. other effects including impacts of habitat alteration or loss on foraging and cover requirements and di$turbance on reproductive behavior also may adversely affect these species. All effects should be addressed and dismissed if insignificant. up the entire section with one bulletpoint issue: You can sum o Whether project construction and operation woo following federal Category 2 candidate species 1 affect the Alexander Archipelago wolf (Canis lupus ligoni), Queen Charlotte northern goshawk (Accipiter qentilis laingi), marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus), olive-sided flycatcher (Contopus borealis), Harlequin duck (Histrionicus histrionicus) and Thurber's reedgrass (Qalamagrostis crassiqulumis). The principal effects of concern for each species follows: wolf--impairment of movements along traditional routes and increased access to trappers; northern goshawk, marbled murrelet, and olive-sided flycatcher--removal of potential nest trees; Harlequin duck -modification of instream flows; and Thurber's reedgrass- flooding of habitat. 9. sections 5.2.6 (Recreation and Land Use) and 5.2.7 (Socioeconomics) essentially have no issues identified at this time. Therefore, replace your text with nno issues identified." 10. Change section 5.2.8 to read Ucultural resources may be affected by the project. A historic and archeological survey will be conducted of the project area in a manner acceptable to the Alaska state Historic Preservation Officer." SECTZON 6 --ENVZRONHENTAL ASSESSMENT PREPARATION SCHEDULE 1. Add the target dates for when you expect to (1) mail out your PDEA out to parties on the mailing list, which will be well after scoping: and (2) file your PDEA and license application with the Commission. FERC/OHLIDPR ~~~ MOUNTAIN ENERGY ~OO'i03/11/96 15:52 'a'202 219 0125 SECTION 7 --DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OUTLINE 1. Under III. A. 3. Mandatory requirements, remove the subsections with bulletpoints. SBCTION 8 --MAILING LIST . 1. Please add most recent mailinq list. Finally, to reiterate what we said previously, we did not comment on your preliminary draft environmental assessment which is attached as Appendix B, since it would be premature to do so at this time. All issues need to be identified before the document should be reviewed. Also, don't forget to add a notice of scoping to the cover of this scoping document when you mail it to the parties on the mailing list. -- United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Soumeast Al2Sk:a Ecological Services 3000 Vintage: Blvd•• Suite 20 I Juneau. Aluu 99801-7100 IN R,f.PLY REFER TO: March 19, 1996 Mr. Jack Goldwasser InterMountain Energy, Inc. P.O. Box 421 Cave Junction, OR 97523 Re: Reynolds Creek Hydropower Project (FERC No.,11480-000) Dear Mr. Goldwasser: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has reviewed Pentec Environmental's (PE) letter of January 5, 1996, addressing our concerns with the Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project. The final paragraph of PE's letter indicates that a meeting would be convened in January or February to resolve any outstanding issues. We, therefore, withheld comments until the meeting could be arranged. After the proposed meeting was postponed several times, the Service participated in two conference calls (March 8 and 18, 1996) with you, John Houghton of PE, and Jim Durst, Glen Freeman, and Steve Hoffman of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. This letter summarizes the Service's remaining concerns, as discussed. PE's letter describes a modified project design, evaluates impacts associated with that design, and proposes a biological monitoring protocol. An attempt was also made to address the Service's earlier requests (letter of November 13, 1995) for an analysis of pre-and post-project water quality at the discharge point. Water quality parameters named for evaluation included temperature, pH, and gas saturation. PE's letter indicates that during the July site visit, water temperatures varied from 17.5 C at the outlet pond below Lake Mellen to 16.2 C at the anadromous fish barrier and at tidewater. During the winter months, post-project flows are expected to be warmer and of greater volume, which may result in increased salmon egg survival, but also an earlier hatching date. A temperature gauge will be installed in Lake Mellen in late winter, 1996, to provide additional data for modeling potential thermal effects of the project. Please advise when the gauge will be installed. The models developed should attempt to predict the temperature of the post-project water, and the effect of that discharge on water temperatures in the spawning and rearing area. Long-term effects of accelerated development of eggs and fry need to be considered in the analyses. Gas supersaturation can be fatal to fish. A model should be developed to compare the pre-and post-project dissolved oxygen and nitrogen levels of the water in Lake Mellen to that at the discharge point below the turbine. Define what effects any changes in oxygen and nitrogen levels will have on fish resources. The project description provided in PE's letter indicates that the tailrace will be "near the anadromous fish barrier.-The discharge should be above the barrier, to allow the discharged water to equilibrate in the cascades of the barrier. The Service supports additional surveys in 1996 to determine the status of grayling in Summit Lake and Lake Marge. Methods proposed and levels of effort for hook-and-line sampling, electrofishing, and watching for rising fish during feeding periods should pe specified. Hydro-acoustic sampling tech~iques ,to quantify presence or absence of fish instead 'of hook-and-line is recommended. If a fish population is found in Summit Lake, further coordination will be necessary regarding project design and operation to avoid, minimize, and compensate for project impacts. Reynolds Creek between Lake Mellen and Summit Lake appears to have the most important spawning and rearing habitat. PE's letter indicates that minimum flows of 25 cfs will be provided for grayling spawning. It is not clear if all water transmitted between Summit Lake and Lake Mellen will flow through the natural stream channel, or if a penstock will be constructed between the two water bodies. A penstock and powerhouse are shown in this area on the project map included with'PE's letter, but these components are not described in the Revised Project Description. If this penstock and powerhouse are still being considered, their effects on in-stream flows should be described. water releases from the dam at Summit Lake should be done gradually, to minimize effects of the project on juvenile fish and eggs. Reduction of flows while eggs are incubating in spawning gravel can cause major losses. Field work should verify not only the important spawning and rearing areas, but also the timing of spawning and fry emergence. This information is needed to design a water-release regimen that will provide stable flows throughout the incubation period. Potential effects of modified flows from Summit Lake on spawning gravels should be evaluated. Existing flows transport and maintain spawning gravels. The supply of gravel may be affected by a diversion at Summit Lake. Another area of likely spawning and rearing habitat is the outlet basin below Lake Mellen. If investigations show this area to be used by spawning/rearing fish, the effects of inundating this habitat should be evaluated. The removal method of population estimation (Zippin 1958) proposed by the applicant requires capture of a significant portion of the population to obtain reasonably precise estimates. The Service recommends that an estimate within 15% of the actual population be provided, and the level of effort required to attain this level of confidence be specified. Hook-and-line sampling of adult grayling in Lake Mellen may provide fish for an analysis of condition factor (length/weight relationship), but it is not likely to provide reliable information on population size. The method may also be biased against some age classes t so construction of age-class distributions from these fish is not ideal. However t if the sampling is done in a consistent manner t it may be possible to detect changes in post-project recruitment. Scales from the sampled fish should be examined and age-class distributions be determined and reported annually. The Service remains available to assist. and will evaluate any proposal which may provide a suitable index to the greying population size and health. If you have any questions, please contact Vicki Davis at (907) 225-9691. n;;:q~ Nevin D. Holmberg J1 Field Supervisor cc: ADF&G, Klawock, Ketchikan FERC, Washington, DC (Attn: Michael Strzelecki) NMFS, Juneau Pentec Environmental, Inc., 120 Third Ave. S., Suite 110 Edmonds, WA 98020 KTN-ES March 26, 1996 One Sealaska Plaza Suite 400 Juneau, AJaska 99801-1276 (907) 5S6 -1512 FAX (907) 5S6 -1826 Mr. Jack Goldwasser InterMountain Energy, Inc. P.O. Box 421 Cave Junction, OR. 97523 RE: Reynolds Creek (FERC) License Application Dear Mr. Goldwasser: Sealaska understands the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has authorized Haida Corporation and InterMountain Energy to use an alternative process for preparation of the FERC license. It is our understanding that a "collaborative team" has been established per the FERC authorizations. Sealaska Corporation respectfully requests that it be included on the collaborative team for the hydro project at Reynolds Creek. Mr. Richard Harris should be the party as listed as the team member for SeaIaska Corporation. Thank you for this consideration. Sincerely, Executive ice President Resource Management cc: Leo H. Barlow Richard P. Harris Bill Bumpers FERC DEPARTMENTOFFISHANDGAME I DIVISION OF HABITAT / & RESTORA TION April 3, 1996 Mr. Jack Goldwasser, Project Manager InterMountain Energy, Incorporated Post Office Box 421 Cave Junction, OR 97523 Dear Mr. Goldwasser: I Re: Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 11480) Collaborative Team and ADF&G Contacts TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 271 KLAWOCK. ALASKA 99925-0271 PHONE: (907) 755-2485 FAX: (907) 755-2440 The Alaska Department ofFish and Game (ADF&G) is in receipt of your letter ofFebruary 22, I 1996, inquiring of our interest in participating on a "Collaborative Team" composed of resource agency staff, nongovernmental organizations. Haida Corporation staff and consultants, individuals, and the FERC. The Team's primary goal will be to approve study plans for the I Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project. ADF&G staff participation in the Collaborative Team will include Christopher Estes, myself, and I Steve Hoffman or his alternate Glenn Freeman. Addresses and telephone numbers are: I Christopher Estes I Statewide Instream Flow Coordinator Alaska Department of Fish and Game . Division of Sport Fish I Research and Technical Services 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage. AK 99518-1599 I (907) 267-2142, fax 267-2422 James D. Durst I Habitat Biologist Alaska Department of Fish and Game Habitat and Restoration Division I P. O. Box 271 Klawock, AI< 99925-0271 (907) 755-2485, fax 755-2440 t1.f(a7 I Mr. Jack Goldwasser 2 April 3, 1996 Steve Hoffman Glenn Freeman Ketchikan Area Management Biologist Fishery Biologist Alaska Department ofFish and Game Alaska Department ofFish and Game Division of Sport Fish Division of Sport Fish 2030 Sea Level Drive, Suite 205 2030 Sea Level Drive, Suite 205 Ketchikan, AI< 9990 I Ketchikan, AK 9990 I (907) 225-2859, fax 225-0497 (907) 225-2859, fax 225-0497 Please copy all correspondence to the ADF&G concerning this project to mysel£: .Mr. Estes, and Mr. Hoffinan. We also request that the distribution list for each mailing be identified, so we may know what other parties are involved with this project. In the past, it has been unclear who has been sent what materials. If you have any questions. or need additional information. please do not hesitate to call. Habitat Biologist cc: Lana Shea Flanders, ADF&G H&R, Douglas Jack Gustafson, ADF&G H&R, Ketchikan Steve Hoffman, ADF&G SF. Ketchikan Christopher Estes, ADF&G SFIRTS. Anchorage Mike Strzelecki. FERC. Washington Vicki Davis, FWS, Ketchikan Andy Grossman, NMFS. Juneau Rick Hams, SC, Juneau :MEMORANDUM STATE OF ALASKA OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR Governmental Coordi.nation To: Distribution List Date: April 15, 1996 Telephone: Fax: 465-3177 465-3075 From: Jennifer Garland'r Project Review Coordinator Subject: Reynolds Creek Hydro 2nd Consultation AK 9604-1911 Attached is a scoping document for Haida Corporation's proposed Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project. This is 2nd stage consultation of the FERC process. This document has been prepared to satisfy the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Therefore, the State should review this document in accordance with NEP A and provide comments and suggestions on the full range of issues and plans presented. The NEPA regulations (see 150l.1 of 40 CPR) emphasize that cooperative consultation among agencies should occur before preparation of the environmental document, rather than agencies submitting adversary comments on the final document. This consultation should identify environmental effects and values in adequate detail (so they can be compared, per section 1501.2, to economic and technical analysis). The purpose of the enclosed document is to identify the significant issues related to a proposed action. The State should take this opportunity to preliminarily address potential ACMP consistency issues of this project. In your response, comments relating to the project's consistency with the ACMP should be identified separately from the NEPA comments. Please comment directly to InterMountain Energy with a copy to DGC. Attachment cc: Jack Goldwasser, InterMountain Energy, Inc. Mike Strzelecki, PERC John Bruns, Haida Corporation DISTRIBUTION LIST Reynolds Creek Hydro Project -2nd Stage Consultation AK 9604-1 2JJ Dave Sturdevant, DEC, Juneau Lana Shea Flanders, DFG, Juneau Jim Durst, DFG, Klawock Jack Gustafson, DFG, Ketchikan Bill Ballard, DOT/PF, Juneau Mike McKinnon, DOT/PF, Juneau Elizaveta Shadura, DNR, Juneau John Dunker, DNR/DOW, Juneau Bill Garry, DNR/DPOR, Juneau Judith Bittner, DNR/SHPO, Anchorage The Honorable Eugene Natkong, Mayor, Hydaburg Rick Harris, Sealaska Corporation, Juneau Ron Wolfe, Klukwan, Inc., Juneau The scoping document was distributed directly to reviewers by InterMountain Energy, Inc. If you need a copy of the document, contact InterMountain Energy immediately. Public meetings are scheduled for May 6, 1996 in Hydaburg and Ketchikan. For more information on these meetings and a site visit, contact InterMountain Energy or DGC. TONY KNOWLES. GOVERNOR ~u ~u~ (Q)~ ~[L~~~ OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR. CENTRAL OFFICE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET CONSISTENCY REVIEW UNIT DIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINA T10N 240 MAIN STREET, SUITE 500 P.O. Box 110030 JUNEAU, AK 99811 CONTACTS DEC Dave Sturdevant ......... 465-5276 Fax: 465-5274 DFG Jim Durst ............. 755-2485 755-2440 DNR John Dunker . . . . . . . . . . . . 465-2533 586-2954 DISTRICT: Eugene Natkong ...... 285-3761 285-3760 COE Mike Holley . . . . . . . . . . . . (800) 478-2712 753-5567 PROJECT INFORMA nON SHEET PROJECT ITILE: Reynolds Creek Hydro Project -2nd Stage Consultation STATE 1.D. NUMBER: AK 9604-121J DGC CONTACT: Jennifer Garland Phone: 465-3177 Fax: 465-3075 APPLICANTIPROPONENT: Haida Corporation AGENT: Jack Goldwasser Phone: 503-592-2187 Fax: 503-592-2188 DIRECT FEDERAL ACTION: No REVIEW TYPE: NEPA-SCOPING (200 Stage Consultation) ACI1VITY TYPE: HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT LOCA nON: Nearest Coastal District: HYDABURG Project is OUTSIDE the District Boundary District Plan Approved: Yes REVIEW SCHEDULE: Other REVIEW MILESTONES: Day 1: ...................................... 04/15196 Comments Due To Agent with copy to DGC: ...... on or before 06/05196 PROJECT PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED UNDER STATE I.D. NO. AK 9502-02 1st stage consultation STATE APPROVALS (AGENCY, APPROVAL TYPE AND NUMBER): nla FEDERAL APPROVALS (AGENCY, APPROVAL TYPE AND NUMBER): nla I I I I. I I II DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ALASKA P.O. BOX89S ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99506-0898 REPI.YTO ATTeNTION OF: Regulatory Branch East Section 9-950127 Mr. Jack Goldwasser InterMountain Energy, Inc. Post Office Box 421 Cave Junction, Oregon 97523-0421 Dear Mr. Goldwasser: This is in response to your March 15, 1996, letter, which was received in this office on March 27, 1996, requesting our comments concerning the proposed Reynolds Creek Hydropower Project located below Lake Mellen approximately 10 miles east of Hydaburg, Alaska. Attached to your letter were copies of your Scoping Document 1 and Preliminary Environmental Assessment. Your proposed project was reviewed pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors act of 1899. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 requires that a DA permit be obtained for certain structures or work in or affecting navigable waters of the United States (U.S.), prior to conducting the work (33 U.S.C. 403). Section 404 of the Clean Water Act requires that a DA permit be obtained for the placement or discharge of dredged and/or fill material into waters of the U.S., including wetlands, prior to conducting the work (33 U.S.C. 1344). For regulatory purposes, the Corps of Engineers defines wetlands as those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Navigable waters of the U.S. are those waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide shoreward to the mean high water mark, and/or other waters identified as navigable by the Alaska District. Hetta Inlet is a navigable water of the U.S. Based on our review of the information you furnished and available to our office, we have determined that your proposed project would involve work in and/or placement of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S. under our regulatory jurisdiction. Additionally, your proposed project would involve work over or under a navigable water of the U.S. Therefore, issuance of an individual DA permit is required prior to conducting your proposed work. -2 Enclosed is a copy of our Regulatory Program Applicant Information Pamphlet, including a permit application. This pamphlet is designed to assist you in applying for a DA permit and provides general information and guidance on how to complete the permit application. For informational purposes, a copy of this letter is being sent to the agencies and individuals on the enclosed list. This jurisdictional determination is valid for a period of five (5) years from the date of this letter, unless new information supporting a revision is provided to this office before the expiration date. Nothing in this letter shall be construed as excusing you from compliance with other Federal, State, or local statutes, ordinances, or regulations that may affect any proposed work. To determine your satisfaction with the evaluation of our permit applications and other requests, please complete the enclosed questionnaire. OUr interest is to determine whether we need to improve our service and how that can best be accomplished. Your efforts and interest in evaluating our Regulatory Program are much appreciated. We appreciate your cooperation with the Corps of Engineers' Regulatory Program. Please refer to file number 9-950127 in future correspondence. If you have any questions concerning this determination, you may contact this office at the above address, ATTN: CENPA-CO-R-E, or call me at (907) 753-2720, toll free in Alaska at (800) 478-2712, or by FAX at (907) 753-5567. Sincerely, J~~;I..J£:. ~£~y Michiel E. Holley I Regulatory Specialist Enclosures • • • • • I .. I I I I i • • • • • • """ ill Copies Furnished: w/o enclosures Ms. Amy Crook Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, Region I 410 Willoughby Avenue, Suite 105 Juneau, Alaska 99801-1795 Ms. Lana Shea Regional Habitat Division Alaska Department of Fish and Game Post Office Box 20 Douglas, Alaska 99824-0020 Ms. Lorraine Marshall Office of Management and Budget Division of Governmental Coordination Post Office Box 110030 Juneau, Alaska 99811-0030 Environmental Protection Agency 222 West Seventh Avenue, # 19 Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7588 Mr. Nevin D. Holmberg Field Supervisor U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Service/Juneau 3000 Vintage Park Boulevard, Suite 201 Juneau, Alaska 99801-7100 Dr. Steven T. Zimmerman Chief, Protected Resources Management Division National Marine Fisheries Service Post Office Box 2-1668 Juneau, Alaska 99802-1668 Mr. Andrew W. Pekovich Alaska Department of Natural Resources Southeast Regional Office 400 Willoughby Avenue, Suite 400 Juneau, Alaska 99811-1724 Ms. Judith Bittner Alaska Department of Natural Resources State Historic Preservation Office 3601 C Street, Suite 1278 Anchorage, Alaska 99503-5921 cormnander (oan) 17th Coast Guard District Post Office Box 25517 Juneau, Alaska 99802-5517 I TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR • I • i , ;., t I, '!: . , . • I '. I' , :, I~ " ,: ~ ~ , . ,I ;: 2030 SEA LEVEL DRIVE, SUIT[ 205DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GA~IE KETCHIKAN. ALASKA 99901-5067 .' PHONE: (907) 225·2027, FAX: (90i) 225-2670DIVISION OF HABITAT AND RESTORA TlON 6 June, 1996 Mr. Jack Goldwasser InterMountain Energy 115 Airport Dri ve . P.O. Box 421 Cave Junction. Oregon 97523 Re: Scoping Comment!i. Reynolds Creek Project, FERC No. 11480 and AK 9604·] 9JJ, Alaska. Mr. Goldwasser: The Alaska Department of Fish and Gan1C (AlJF&G) has r~vlewcd the Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Seoping Document 1 (SD 1) and Draft Preliminary Environmental Assessment (DPEA). The AOF&G is submitting the following comments. The ohjt:cti vc of this review is to provide our analyses of iuformation presented ill your documents and when appropriate provide infurmation to replace, supplement. or lnodify the information prescntc . Accordingly, our review concentrates on yuur presentation of fish alld wildlife distribution and timing by life phase within the project area. The goal of our participatioll in this process is to prevent negative impacts to fish and wildlife resources and 1he habitat that sustains them. 1f negative impacts cannot be avoided and tho project is still considered acceptable. we will identify the appwpriatc mitigation measures. If the project is approved, It will also be necessary t(l monitor project impacts during and following construction. Fish and Wildlife Resources Lower Reynolds Creek: Lower Reae" As stated in the UPEA. Lower Reynolds (.'.'cck is n cataloged anndromous stream (103-25-10420) per as 16.05.870 und has been classified as n water body important for the spawning nf pink and chunl si.llm.on and the spawning and renring of cohn salmun. We do not concur with the OPEA statement (page 3 8)~ based on one year of discontinuous sampling, that 617/96Jack Goldwasser 2 there j s no consistent use of this reach by coho salmon juveniles. The confirmed presence of juveniles by ADF&O personn~1 supports the Anadromous Fish Catalog and tbe consistent use of this str~am by c(.)ho salmon. Anadromous habitat extends upstream from lhe mouth lower Reynolds Creck to approximately 280 feet above the USGS gauging stalion (No. ]5072000)alld within the tl1ajor tributary, entering from th~ north, to this reach. Lower Reynolds Creek: Upper Reac/, The upper reach of Lower Reynolds Creek extends from the upper limits of anadromous habitat to the outlet of Rich's pond \.... ich is just below the outlet of Lake Mellon. This high-gradient reach supports residenl cutthroat trout within plunge pools of this narrow canyon. Rit!h's Pond and Lake Mel/on ]n the early 1960's the Af)F&G introduced Arctic grayling (Thymallus arctfeus) into the Reynolds Creek wuten;hed. Because of the amount of time and money required to enhance this system, the small number of grayling populations in Southeast Alaska, and the potential for this to become a popular sport fishery; grayling are considered a significant resuurce in this system. We concur with the DPEA statement that grayling are abundant within Rich's Pond and Lake MeHon. Spawning is assumed to occur in the short section (160 ft) of Reynolds Creek directly abuve where it flows into Lake MeHon from Interlaken Pond. However, exact spawning locatiulls and times are unknown for grayling within the Lake Mellon, Rich's Pond sub-drainages. More information should be obtained through spring and summer (1996) sampling, by Pentec Environmental Inc.. of the lower portions of Reynolds Creek to confirm spawning and to ubtain juvenile population estimates of this reach. Interlaken Pond and Upper Reynolds Cree' Based on the data provided by Pentec Environmental Inc., resident grayling are extensive throughout Interlaken Pond and tJpper Reynolds Creek including Jack and Julie's Ponds. Grayling spawning occurs within a braided portion of Upper Reynolds Creek and small springs above Jack's Pond. Oruyting also spawn in tributaries to Interlaken Pond. Summit Lake Grayling were present in Summit Lake in 1982, roughly 20 years after their introduction. Although the DPEA (page 27) states that grayling are absent in Summit Lake. the AUF&G believes that the sampling methods were not adequate to determine presence or absence. Spring (1996) sampling of two small 6/7/96Jack Goldwasser 3 tributaries that are potential spawning locations and !.\ummcr hydroacoustic surveys of Sumlnit Lake should determine the presence ur ahstmcc of grayling. Transmission Corridor The transmission corridor borders Cooper Inlet crossing the inJct at Jumbo Island. The corridor then border~ an unnamed cataloged anadron10us stream (l 03-25-1 0150) and the Hydaburg River (cataluged stream # 101-25-1040). Wildlife Resources We concur with the DPRA slatement (pages 21 and 22) that the Renold~ Creck area provides habitat for black bear. Sitka black-tailed deer. and smaJ/ furbearers. Habitat also is available for bird species ineludillg marbled n1urrelets. northern goshawks. bald eagles. and olive-sided flycatchers. We also agree that "there are large: old-growth Sitka spruce trees ill the lower reaches of Reynolds Creek that are potential marbled murre let nest trees." The lack of response to female goshawk wail call does not rule out lhl! potential for goshawk nests to be present. The maximinlunl range of respon~~ lo tapped calls may be 1,600 feet but the majority of r",spouses occur within 100 to 200m (Kennedy ct al. ]993). Potential Impacts Lower Reynoldl Creek: Lower Reach Potential impacts to Lower Reynolds Creek aquatic resources include modification of flows. loss of habitat. and gas supersaturation of tailrace water. Flow modification could be exacerbated by the cumulative effect of clear-cut logging within this watershed. Modification of flows coulll impact the anadromous portion of Reynolds Crcck by altering the relationship helween stream energy and suhstratum size distribution. and dewatering spawning grave) and could also affect fish passage depending upon timing of flow reductions with respect to fish periodicity by life phase. High energy flows could remove the small diameter substrutum important for the spawning and incubation of anadromous fish. The project design will place an impoundment at the outlet of Rich's Pond. Flow will be diverted through penstocks to the turbines. Flow to the penstocks will be the difference between inputs from the surrounding drainage. minus losses due to evaporation and manipulated release!\ into the bypass reach. Flows in excess of turbine capacity will enter the bypass reach. Flows into the penstocks wilJ not he augmented by withdrawing water from luw in the Rich's Pond impoundmenl. Impacts due to altered hydrology are evaluated through analysis of Figures 9 through 11 of the DPEA. which depict expected pre-and post-prllject Lower Reynolds Creek Flows Jack Goldwasser 4 617/96 for three different flow regimes. The DPEA states that cumulative impacts could include logging within this watershed. Tin'lher harvest can alter the hydrology through a number of different mechanisms. The DPEA discussion of hydrology should include estimates of changes in hydrology due to timber harvest. In general, it does not appear, based on lhe proposcd operation and without estimates of timber harvest effects un hydrology. that the post-project fJows will have a negative impact on anadromous fish. 111 order to avoid potential cumulative impacts we would suggest that Haida Corporation (or Sealaska) declare the Reynolds Creek Watershed "off limits" to any future logging plans. ADF&G permits will be required for flow modification of habitat in this anadromous stream. The cvaluation of permit applications. and the permit conditions, will be based on the proposed rinal operation plan. Thesc permits will require that the Reynolds Creek hydroelectric project be designed and operated so as nut to degrade the naturally occurring anadromous and resident fish productivity of this system. More specific stipulations will be developed and included in our permits when the applications arc processed by the Divhdoll of Governmental Coordination in the state's final consistency review. Activities which deviate from any approved plan shaH requirc further review and written approval, in the form of a permit amendment. prior tn lhe modification of a project aeti vity. Loss of anadromous habitat could occur due to the location of thc tailrace. Tailrace location is not clearly identified in the SOl or DPl!A. It may be shown in Figure 2 of the DPEA but the figure is 110t legible. Separate topographical figures for each of the 7 project site~ of Figure 2. as well as their location on this larger sealc map, should be part of the final EA. These figures should clearly state the proposed tailrace loeatiun. As stated during previous correspondence, the ADF&G rccommends that the tailrace be located above all anadromous fish habitat. Gas ~upersaturD.tion has been shown to be detrimelltal to .i uvenile salmon ids. The potential for gas supersaturation and possible mitigation measures should be addressed. Lower Reynolds Cretk: Upper Reach Thc provision of flows for this reach as outlincd in the l>PEA (page 8) appear to be adequate to provide habitat for the resident fish wilhin this rcach. However. we can not support this porti(}n of the project until we see more detail on exactly how these flows are to be provided. 6/7/96 Jack Goldwasser 5 Rich's Pond and Lake Meloll Construction uf an outlet dam and raising luke levels by 4 ft has the potential to inundate grayling spawning habitat, disrupt spawning migrations, and reduce juvenile rearing habitat. We will bc unahle to comment on these putential impacts until the 1996 study plan is completed. Interlaken. Pond and Upper Reynolds Creek The aquatic rcsources of this reach pl)tentially could h~ impacled hy disruption of flows and altered temperature regime. Current and projected strcamfJows are shown in Figures 3 through 5 of the DPRA. These figures should show both pre and post-project estimated lake surface elevation. However, the projectcd flow regime appears to be adequate to maintain grayling habitat within this reach. We support the proposal for providing unregulated flow in this reach through f1 1.5 foot diameter opcning located "low in the dam". However, we would like to see more detail on the elevation of the opening in relation to dam height and proposed watcr levels and the mathematical relationship between water levels and outlet flow. Grayling spawning is believed to he related to water temperatures. llypolimnetic water withdrawal from Summit Lake may alter Upper Reynolds Creek water temperature regimes. Changes in water temperature l:ould alter grayling spawning times and egg development rates. In order to estimate the effect of hypolimnetie water withdrawal on Upper Reynolds Creek water temperatures, we would need to know the seasonal temperature prnfi Ie nf Summit Lake and the relationship between lake water levels and the dam outlet. Summit Lake temperature profiles could be obtained manually or by securing temperature data loggers at 1 meter intervals in the luke. Summit Lake Variation~ in Summit Lake water levels could significantly affect grayling spawning and rearing within this system. Results from the 1996 recommended study plan should allow us to determine the presence ()T absence of fi!;h in this system and their spawning locations. Transmission Corridor The DPl!A does not specify the exact location of thc transmission corridur. More specific information is required before comments can be made concerning potential impacts to fish and wildlife. ~pecifie details on how avian/powerline interactions are to b~ avoided should be included in the EA. To the extent possible, the transmission lines should be moved upslupe. This will increase beach-fringe habitat and reduce uvian/poweriine interactions. The exact locations of current and proposed roads. streams, wetlands, and timbcr harvest units should be demonstrated. ADF &G permits wi II be required for all construction activities crossing anadromous stTl!ams. The Reynolds Creek project has the potential to affect wildlife resources through increased access through direct habitat Inss (i.e., blockage or alteration) and through indirect effects. Increased aCCess to the an~a through access routes or transmission line rights-of·way, could lead to increased hunting or trapping pressure on Sitka black-tailed deer and grey wolves, alld probahly to a lesser extent, black bears and furbearers. The amount of rightpof-way clearing needed to construct the transmission line could potentially affect critical deer winter habitat. The "quick cruise" method of assessing deer habitat quality (Kirchhoff and Hanley 1992) should be used on all areas proposed for clearing, including the penstock and associated features. We do not feel that the increased access provided hy timber harvest and other activities should be considered as jllstificatiun for the additional potential impacts caused by this project. Rather; the:;;e previous impacts should be considered cumulative and suggests a higher value to any remaining habitat. Summary We do not believe that one ()r two years of catch-per-ullit-effort data 011 a discontinuous basis will be adequate t(, determine statistical differences in pre· and post-project Lake Mellon grayling p<.>pulatiolls. The DPEA confirms the presence of this resource and future ahsence will be assumed to be project related. At thi' time, effort may be better spent on more detailed analysis of Lake Mellon grayling spawning times and spawning l<.lcations and the relationship between the timing of grayling spawning and water temperatures. These data are more important for the evaluation of putential project effects to the aquatic resources within this catchment. Once more information is available concerning the potential effects of this project on grayling populations Hnu their habitat. we will be happy to discuss potential pre-and post-project monitoring plans. The additional information requested prior to evaluation or this project is as follows. 1. Evaluation of the cumulative effect lIf Jogging on the hydrology of the ReynoJds Creek catchment. 2. Exact location of the lai trace. 3. Exact method proposed to maintain flows in the bypass reach of Ltlw~r Reynolds Creek. 617/96Jack Goldwasser 7 4. Arctic grayling spawning locations and juveni Ie recruitment for the Lake Mellon/Rich's pund population. 5. Diagram demonstrating the location of the Summit lake outlet ill relation tQ dam height. 6. Estimated pre-and post-project Summit Lakt! surface water elevation. 7. Relationship between Summit Lake surface water elevation and outlct discharge. 8. Seasonal Summit Lake temperature profiles ncar proposed dam site. Estimates of seasonal post-project Upper Reynolds Creek water temperature!> in relation to grayling spawning. 9. Methods and re£uhs of 1996 study plan to determine the presence of grayling in Summit Lake and their potential spawning locations. 10.The potentia! for, and possible mitigation of, gas supersaturation. 11.Exaet location of transmission corriduf including location of any anadromous stream crossings. wetlands. roads, and timber harvest areas. 12.Documented methods on how avian/powerline interactions are to be avoided. t 3.Mitigation alternatives 14.PJans for monitoring during and post construction lS.Plans for financing monitoring and mitigation such as establishing an escrow account. We support Haida CQrporation's desire to obtain a more cost cfficiel1t and clean source of energy and hope that proper project design call meet our goal to maintain healthy aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Sincerely, Jeff Davis IIabitat Biologist cc; MikeStrzelecki. FERC John Bruns. Haida Corporation TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR OFRCEOF~NAGEMENTANDBUDGET DIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE &iT CENTRAL OFFICE PIPELINE COORDINATOR'S OFFICE C1a P.O. BOX 110030 411 WEST4THAVENUE, SUlTE2C3601 'C' STREET. SUITE 370 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501-2343 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503-5930 JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811-(X)3O PH: (907) 271-4317/FAX: (OO7) 272..(}690PH: (907) 269-74701FAX: (OO7) 561-1J134 PH: (S07) 465-35621FAX: (907) 465-3075 June 19, 1996 Mr. Jack Goldwasser, President InterMountain Energy, Inc. REYNOlDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJ. Agent for Haida Corporation 08537-001-002 249 P.O. Box 421 FILE: ~.4 .) =po \:h Cave Junction, OR 97523 Dear Mr. Goldwasser: SUBJECT: REYNOLDS CREEK HYDRO -SECOND STAGE CONSULTATION AND NEPA PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS:MENT SCOPING The Division of Governmental Coordination (DGC) has completed the coordination of the informational NEPA review for the second stage consultation of the Reynolds Creek Hydro Project on June 6, 1996. We hope that the information provided by State commenters and the public will be helpful in the preparation of the Environmental Assessment and license application. A review for consistency with the ACMP will commence when the project descriptiop and plans wi.ll no longer be subject to design and implementation changes, and DGC has received copies of applications for all necessary State and federal pennits (including the FERC license application). We look forward to working with you during this process. Sincerely, 9~Ld~ Jennifer R. Garland Project Review Coordinator cc: ** _Dave.Sturde.v.ant,..DEC,.Juneau ** Jim Anderson, DNR, Juneau ** Jim Durst, DFG, Juneau ** 'John' Dunker,-DNRlDOWM, Juneau Robert S. Grimm, Alaska Power & Telephone 01-A35LH ,~;., ",.",.,.d ,\"" "U ",·4i"'-........... n.·.• t-,r n UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service P.O, Box? 1668 Junoau. Alaska 99802-1688 ML. Jack Goldwasser: Il1terMountain Enc.r:qy, lnc. J15 Airport Driv~ RE: Reynulds Creek Hydroeleclric ft .. O. B(')~ 421 P.ro'ject, Pl.';;:,l ilr,inilry l·:h Cave Junction, OR g'/ b23 D~ar Mr. Goldwasser: We have reviewed the Reynolds Creek HydroelecLr'ic; P~'()j ecl Seoping Document 1 and Pre) imiu21ry r:nvironmcmtal A!::isessment (El\.). We nffer the following comments. Qeneral Comments: J'he product of this eftort musl inc 1ude dosed ptive inlormation on the locations of fishery t'esource5 within t!1e project area. This would include detajled and accuralu maps with all sampling areas {e.Q., Jack's ?ond) cleal.-ly identifjed. Maps should be of sufficient resolution tu accurately identify those fncility locatjons which may impact. :fish habitaLs. 'The relationship to spawning and rearing habitats and pruposed facility plac~mont is not clear from lhe text. Limited'spawning habjtat.s ncar the mcmlh of the creek are highly vulne.t:ab1e to dewate:ring 'vlilh fluctuating discharge. These arcas Rhould be mapped with some precision. Specific Comments: Preliminary EA, Section 1J.4.2.2 Operation. Aquatic Life, page 01. states, If Water wi 11 be !:cturned to Lhe strC!am near the impassibl e bart"ier to upst.ream mi gratioIl that was identified during the July fiold visit ••.. " Jt has been the understanding of the Nati.onal Marine Fjsheries Service that. water would be returned above this barrier. Tai)ra~e discharge below the barrier would eliminate anadromous fjsh habitat. The proposal sno-ur-cr-be clarified. I Thank you for the "ppor.tuni ty to review the.'::;€: p:n-:1 i minary documents. OUt' contact for: Lhis proj ect i~ .Ll,n.drow Grossman, Protected Resourc~s Management Divjsion, (907) 586-1358. Steven'!'. .j ltllr' rmc=.!n, Ph. D. Chief, Protected ReAourcos Managemer:t ]); vi sion cc: ADFG, Klawock USFWS, .Juneau TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR ; I: 2030 SEA LEVEL DRIVE. SUITE 20:;.DEPARTMENT OF FIS)I ANII (.AME KETCHIKAN. ALASKA !JillJU1 606/ PUONE: (907) 225·2027 FAX: (907) 22/)-20/0DIVISION OF HABITP; T AND RE~TORAT~ON I July. 1996 , Mr. Jack Goldw..usc; InterMountain Energy 1 15 Airport Dri vc P.O. Box 421 Cavc Junction, Oregon 97523 Re: Reynolds Creek Project, FERe No. 11480 and AK 9(104-19.1.1, A \usk ..\. tvlr. Goldwasser: This lctter is to COUnt'In ..H1<.I enter into the record s(>lllC arcas of concern the Alaska Department of Fish and Uamc has related to ongoing cllHllyscs of the Reynolds Creek Watc,;rshed grayling fishery. We arc encouraged hy your del\ire and willingness to design the proposed hydl'<.lelectric project in a manner that will reduce potcntin\ impacts to this significant resource. The results from lh!! spring surv~ys have not documented thc spawning. locations of Lake Melloll grayling. In our previous correspondence. we suggested early and frequcnt sampling of potential spawning strCtUllS to determine timing Hud lucalion (8 Mar.ch 1996 Tclt!l!l1ufcl'cnce). In addition, spawning timing in rclHtiollship with lakt:-w~l1er levels and temperatures was to he proviueu (& Murch 1996 Telcc()nference). This information is essential in e"~tlualing potential impacts due to increasing Lake Mellon su ..face clcvHtiun (cvC'1l within its normltl rl.tng~ of variability). Hecause inlet spawning Illay have been missed. we can not support the <4ssumption that l.ake Mellem production is from 1nterlakcn area spawning wi~t confirmation. 1f juvenil~ fish arc not found in the inlet stream this~ we will have no information with whieh tu evaluate the potential impacts of this project Oil Lake Mellon, We have consi~tcntly stated that hook ..and-linc ~ampling i~ not an adequate 5ampling method and, therefore. arc not convinced that fiflh arc absent from Summit Lake. If hydroacoustic meth()d~ revcal (t substantial grayling _population in Summit I.ake we will h(1ve no infoJ'tlHHioll on reproduction f9r lhi~ system . ..spawning locations and liming. in relutiol1 to estimatcd water surface levels. will bc required if ~t gntyling population is discovered in Summit l.ake. ll-K84lH ~ .. ' ..:.. .... After furth~r discussion with Ruh<..,rt Clark (ADH.i grayling Srl.~4.:jali~q methods for ptc, (1IH1 post-project monitoring data collc(.,tioli will need to bc modified. The variability as!Svl.:ialcd with ]H'lok-and-lim: Hud fykc nets is too high for population ind~xing. Sampling I'hollid include fykc nL~ts (and possibly hook~and-Iinc) ror agc/ll:nglh analysis, <lIld hydro~c;(.lustic to estimate abundul1cc. Sincerely, j "..., r'l:{.H ;J. Jeffrey C. Davis I P.Ol ...JUI-.!.J.-::::iI6 ul:Q.7P MEMORANDUM TO: Steve Hoffman Area Sport Fisheries Management Biologist Division of Sport Fisheries Ketchikan Office State of Alaska CATe July 5. 1996 TEI.f!PHOIIIE NO: 225-5095 SUBJECT: Hyroacoustic survey to veritY grayling populations The best time to conduct these surveys wiu be late in the summer or early raIL If grayling are present in these lakes, the highest population densities will occur at this time. We also must assume that grayling are the only species of fish present in the lakes. The total cost if we do two lakes will be 54500 plus the air charter cost. If fixed wing can be used it will require two Doha Beaver for each survey. The second or third week of September would be the most suitable time for us. If it's necessary to complete prior to then, we cou1d probably do it. but the cost must be increased cost by $500. This increase would be a result of adjusting personnel. The following is a cost crackdown of the combined surveys: PersoMel $3000 Supplies tapes.. batteries. fuel. food 500 Tape analysis 500 Misc. expenses 200 TOTAL 54200 TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR I n ~ fr--., 11J (: '\ I 1,.t("'..I l.,. '.i l j'; : ~ '/"'" ". :' \ ' ,I !U \ ; t : .J ~ ',\'.; /\ \ ! ~~ ~ Ir.l!· !r'-'-"'\'.'-' U U L::::lu Ij'~ L! u U \J i I { 2030 SEA LEVEL DRIVE. SUITE 205 IDEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME KETCHIKAN, ALASKA 99901-6067 PHONE: (S07) 225-2027 , DIVISION OF HABITAT AND RESTORATION / FAX: (907) 225·2676 11 July, 1996 Dr. Jonathan P. Houghton Pentec Environmental Inc. 120 Third Avenue South, Suite 110 Edmonds, WA 98020 I have received your correspondence discussing the monitoring plan for Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project. The, 1996 sampling plan -confirms the project as discussed through the recent teleconference. Our concerns have been reduced to three areas/topics: Lake Mellen, Summit Lake, and project monitoring. Lake Mellen. May sampling failed (to my knowledge) to document a significant grayling spawning population in the inlet stream. Based on ~he collection of some spawning fish, this area is presumed to be the major spawning stream for the lake population. If the summer population estimates fail to produce 'significant numbers of juveniles, we still will have no information available to determine whether this project will impact grayling spawning. We are'then: left with the assumption that the Lake Mellen population is produced from Interlaken area migration. Is this a viable assumption or have we failed to determine where Lake Mellen grayling spawn? If juvenile fish are not captured, I would suggest that you consider testing the hypothesis that Lake Mellen production is the result of upstream immigration. If this could be confirmed, the effects of elevated lake levels on grayling spawning would not be applicable. Summit Lake. Determining the project effects will depend on whether there is a population of grayling in this lake. Obviously if no grayling are detected in the hydroacoustic study, then we will have no objections to this portion of the project. However, if grayling are detected, then we will have no information available to evaluate potential impacts. Post-Project Monitoring. Post-project monitoring should allow us to determine whether the hydroelectric project has negatively impacted the grayling population in Lake Mellen (and potentially Summit Lake). A hydroacoustic study is probably the best method to obtain an abundance estimate in this lake. We still feel that hook-and-Iine sampling is not an effective method for accessing population age structure. This method " .. VOJ"f' U 7/15196Dr. Jonathan P. Houghton 2 probably underestimates the lower age classes. We would encourage you to use fyke nets to obtain a subsample for age-class estimations. My primary concern is with the statistical evaluation of potential differences in pre-and post-project abundance estimates. I assume that you plan to use a t-test to compare mean abundance estimates. There are two problems that I can currently identify. First, we will have only one year of pre-project data. Was the 1996 abundance estimate high or low? It is was unusually high than we are likely to see a smaller population in 1997/8. We will have to assume that differences in the population are due to the project and instigate some type of mitigation. If the 1996 estimates are low we may not be able to detect project induced impacts. Unfortunately, I see no alter~ativ~ but tei live with one year of pre-project data. Second, I am" concerned with the power of the performed test. If the variance of the summation "removal estimates and the hydroacoustic studies are high, then a finding of no significant difference will have little meaning. Prior to agreeing with a monitoring plan I would like to see power analysis based on the variance observed in the 1996 data. If the power of the tests is low, we may need to select a difference in means that we will establish as indicating population difference. However, this can be discussed fur:ther at a future date. Jeffrey C. Davis cc. Mr. Nevin D. Holmberg, USFWS Mr. Steve Zimmerman, NMFS /Mr. Jack Goldwasser, InterMountain Energy Mr. Steve Hoffman, ADFG, Ketchikan P.02 MEMORANDUM State of Alaska TO: Steve Hoffman DATE: July 31,1996 Division of Sport Fisheries Area Management Biologist FAY. NO: 247-5095 TELePMONE NO; 225-5095 FROM: Mike Haddix SUBJECT: Regional Limnologist Division of Commercial Fisheries Management and Development Ketchikan Office J'd like to make certain that everyone involved is clear on what can be accomplished in regard to using hydroacoustics to estimate the grayling populations in Summit and Mellen lakes. When first consulted, the need was to verifY the presence offish in Summit lake. the presence of suspended fish targets in the lake could be determine by carefully surveying the take with the acoustic equipment .A survey of this type would not provided any quantitative information, but simply a good indication as to whether fish are present.. Now the need has shifted from simple verification of the presence offish in Summit lake ,to a grayling population estimate in Summit and Mellen lakes. These are two quite different tasks. There are a number of assumptions that must be meet when using acoustics (0 estimate the grayling populations in these lake..... The fish must be distributed in such a manner that a high percentage of the population will be available as targets for the acoustic equipment. It is tor this reason that hydroacoustic equipment with a downward looking transducer has not been useful in estimating trout populations in lakes with littoral areas on which a significant portion of the population occurs. Littoral areas also may have assemblages of rooted aquatic plants which interfere with and hide fish targets. Large log jams and other types of floating debris may also hide fish from the acoustic signal. Also fish must not be on the surface, they need to be at two meters or more. We assumed that during mid day grayling may be off of any littoral areas in deeper water and could be counted. Although they must be deep enough to not avoid the boat path an thus the acoustic cone. Even if all assumptions are met we will be providing only an estimate of tish in the lake. It seems to me that other sampling methods could provide a more useful information than a hydroqacoustic population estimate. Trap and lor experimental gill nets may provide a sample of the population that would indicate changes in the age structure ofthe population. Such data might be more useful in defining changes due to physical alterations to both spawning and rearing habitat. If you wish to discuss this further please contact me anytime. lfit is determine that a hydroacoustic -,population estimate is what is needed, we can conduct one on Summit lake I haven't determine yc;t whether I consider Mellen lake to be a safe place to land with fixed wing aircraft. Aug-Ol-96 lO:12A Memo to Jack Goldwasscr cc Glenn Freeman t Sport fish Jon Houghton. Pentec Jack Goldwasser T nter Mountain Energy Inc. Jeff Davis, Habitat 2 AUG-15-96 THU 9: 32 AM KTN LIMNO LAB FAX liO. 9072475095 STATE OF A~ FAX TR~NSMJTTAL COVER DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME LImnology Sec lion DIVISION OF COMMERCIAL FISHERIES 2030 Sea level Drive. Suite 205 MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT Ketchikan. AK 99901-6073 Phone (907) 225·5095 Fax (907) 247·5095 Dllte:M2..6 No. or Pages including cover sheet ~ To: ~Zh C l<.. G, l! I d ():rtk§ ~er Frout: Remarks: G ~ ~I \ ,:.. 4:; AUG-15-96 THU 9:33 AM KTN LIMNO LAB FAX NO. 9072475095 P......::.2___ DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME DIVISION OF COMMERCIAL FISHERIES MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT TONY KNOWLES. GOVERNOR 2030 S ..LeVlt/~. Suite 205 KETCHIKIW. AX n901 PHONE: (90." 225-5095 FAX: (tOT) 247-1iOQ6 :Mr. Jack Gold wasser InterMountain Energy, Inc. Dear Mr. Gold wasser We will not be abJe to conduct the proposed hydro acoustic population estimates ofgrayling in Summit and Mellen lakes as planned. Other previously unplanned commitments of our personnel and . equipment will preclude its use for these surveys this year . I've submitted a contract for the work to our administrative section for approval. Ifit gets approved then we could possible reschedule for next field season. 141002 i lU. ,<)., 'A:L • It' I .'. I I, ,"!; ItI:.1 I, d.: . ,I l'J! II t I FA! 206 778 9411 PENTEC ~IRONIE .. 06121196 10:34 .. ':;.:. . .~ ~ ,.'.. ~ .. : ....... .. . . : .:: .. ... ~..; DIVISION OF HABITAT A '0 RESTORA nON lack Goldwasser IntermoWltain EnerJY Inc . . P.O. BOl: 421 Cave JUIlCtiOn, OIl 9752.3 Mr. Goldwasser: The Alasb Dcpanmellt of Fish ~d Game (ADF&G) has received your memorandum of 23 July 1996 an is providb:al the: followi118 ;Qmm.entS. The purpose. of tho Natioxzal En rOIlDll1ltal Policy Act o-."I!P A) is to identify any potential 8nvironme tal impa.~i. of a. proposed project and to ."alua.te thtse impacts ill relatio ahip to the proposed actioll and altefDativel. The AOP'&G i. res ouible tor muagiug and maintaining fi.h ad wildlife populations within e st6te. To meet this responsibility we review projects and d.etermine if trectl to fish ud wil4U£e can be . mbrlmizecl or eliDslDated. As stated through previous corre pOllcience, in ordor to eval\1.:r:c pot=tial. projc(;t effects on grayling popul tions we have requested th&t the location u.G timing of gray1inS &pawniq tie identified.. This infor:tllation. will be C0221pared. ~itb estimated change. in lake .levels to evaluate potential impa;t&. The reque.t for this information a.nd your response is documentod. hi the Prel.i.n1inuy EnvironDlll1w Allellm.ent. ItADF&:G Sport Fish Division offioia.ls ha.vo raised concerns about potential impact. to a viable grayling popUla.tion in u.pper Reynolds Creek buin by tWins 1&kc lovels to aocommodate hydropower diversion ancllor Itorale. now up studio. bema couducted a.t this time will describe gra.yling lake) populations iUld spawning ateas and provide the basis tor e ulting this CQACern." (pirst M.onthly lleport1 APEA Process, run 1996). At this time we still have little in rmatiOIl concerning grayling spawning Ioca.tions and timing. All of the' ormation-that we are a.ware of is summarized below. A sultLmary re ort detailing the exact looations visited on each .amplina date (for both 5 pIing .eascDI), sampling effort (time shockedlfi&had). and the number. b:e. and reproduetiv. sta.tus of ea.;h • i~_;. I ~ ; • , ! t' 1 1,11 f 1 'I; 1 till . : I I ITII ,: 1'1/ 11 jl I(lI UUJPENTEC ENVIRONMEFAX 206 778 941710:34 lack (7oJd~.er 2 8121/96 . captured filii would be extreme y helpful in evaluating the currellt information available. . lUch f. Polid In 1995 D.UIIlerous juvenile graylin, Were seen in the outl~t of Rich's pond (pentec, 17 Oot 1995). On 7 M· Y 1996. OQe male., which exuded milt. was captUred in the stream reach co ectip.g Lake Mellen to Rich's Pond. This location supports a high POpuli Oll ot grayling. "Spawning ma.y occur i11 the Sl:ream reach between the po d and Lake Mellen or fish may migra.te throuih Lut Mellen to the inlet of Reynolds Cr.ok to spawn (poutec, 17 lune 1~96). Lake Malle. Ialet (ReYJlold. C ek) Ia 1995, one grayling fry (UAm to mean age...() fish] and on~juvenile ["ssuDled to be &ge-l+ fish] Wel oaptured in this stream. (PEA. 191m. 1996), On 7 May 1996, two rip males were captured. in thi. inlet stream ud other fi.h were seen moving way from the electrical <nu:rcnt.. No fry/juvenile grayling were captUred It this location in 1996 (penteo 17 June 1996). On.21 May 1996. one fish was railcd in ~ pool but eluded C;&pturc (Pentec, 13 ·June 1996). "Spawniq is estimated to o,cur betweeJllate Aprll through MIY with hatchirlg aft~r the fint of lunen (pentec. 17 lunf' 1996). Interlake. I.let In IP95 try (mean length 55.2 n=-13) were C&ptured. in the Interlaken lul.t (PeDte~. 17 Juno 1996). lu • c gn.yIing also 'Were seen in thil reach (pattee. 17 JUll. 1996). In 1996, 3 ,rayting try wore ca.ptured in Reynolds Croek, direet1y above the Intotllk area.. laC:k l Poad• In 1.995, 7 filh ·were captured in e inlet streams to 1~k.'s Pond (Pentecll 17 JUDe 1996). On 21 May 1996. ne luge female was caught iJ1 the pond., .00. "lSI were mractcd with prel' reo SUlDJIllt Lake 'Inlet Stre.... No fty/juvea.i1e are reported for p leutial.pawning Itreams cllterin& SUsnmit Lake (Pentec. 17 Iune 1996). No fish were believed to bo in this stream. until the July 1996 surveys. Northeast inlet sttelm was sho~kcd aad no fish were ••en. Angling ill th. lako near the mouth failed to capture any fish. .In May of 1996. the wenem inlet Itreams were "ot acc.ssed (pentec 7 May 1996 Suryey). SUDlmit LlI.ke inlot stroa.a:al Were not sampled inlU110 of 1996 (Pentec. 13 lune 1996). liU. , ... ..J VU' ': ." ." iii 004pSNTSC ENVIRONlilB 03/21/96 10:35 3 8/21/96lack ao!dw&SJet Lake Mar._ The 1~96 spring Il:Mpling ofL • MarSe (22...23 April, 1 May, 21 ~Y. 7 June) captured one ripe malo a d a smaller (probable female), IJlgling captured no fish (prmteo 17 lu 0 1996). I"str••m Spawning end u • Rearing Baaed. on the informmolllu . ad above, it is hypothesizltd that there ia little or no spawning occuning 'u the inlet streams to Lake Mellen cd Sununit Lake that will be imp' ed by this project (pentec, 23 July 1996). Support for this hypothesis is b ed 011 the assumption tbat the sampling "conducted could not have mill ,d both adult apawniJ1g and fry/juvenilea rearini. Acceptance of this hypothelis" has led to the assumption that basin-wide production is the re.ult of spawning in the Interlaken Inlet, Iaok.'s Pond Inlets, and Lake Matle ~ributarle,. All ofthes. areas Ira outsIde of the locatioM that could be potentially impacted by the proposed project. While embra.cing this aIJUlUptioZl w0:uId alleviate 1llany of our concerm, there i"little suPportinl cloeumentatioll. We are Jlot convinoed. that grayIiq spawning is DOt 0 ccurring in the inlet to Rich'. Pond. Lake Mellen. and ets to Summit Lake. Based. OU the infonnatioll available, there is ·donee that IODle spawning oCcurs in these locations. A male exuding milt u been oapnu-ed in IUch's Ponel and arayJing abundance appears to b millest in this location. Fry. juvenile grayling, anci ripe adults were c ptured in the"Lake Mellen Inlet. On 22 July 1'996, ADF&G personnel 0 erved 16 juvenile (presumed to bo young .. of,:,the-year) grayling off of tha outh of the northwest tributary to Summit Lake. Whilo tho numbers of spa mIlS a.dulu and reari.ug fry ob.erved at thl.e loemolll appear low, they do not differ largely from. the numbers obtaiued at the aSlumeel hiihly ductive areal: Interlaken Inlet, lack's Pond.., and Lake Marie. " A eunory litenture review of gr~ytin8 apawni.na ud rlaring ethology sunelts that the .amplina regime II1&y have milled grayliAa spawnmi. Sempeski and Gaudin (1995a) toad that aou1t gr&yliu.g hold ill pools below .pawning lites~ briefly MDVin& to Ipawniq IocanoDS" anel then returning to pools. In addition, most spawniq aettvity occurred. in the afternoon aDd night. Therefore, araylina may move from lakes to spawning locatioAI in the evenina and then qnickly returrl to"the lakes. The daytimo·sampling regime conductod would miss thil behavior. Emergent srayling fry primarily reside in areas wherc'v oeities are lell than 20 C!Ilfse~ (Sempe.ki and Gaudin 1995b). Personal Db ervation of potontial rearing looation~ in .the Reynold, Creek ciraiuap sua .,t that thil type ofhtbitat i. rare in potential spawning 5treaml. the cfore, grayUng fry may misrato to the sloW velocity areas within the re eiving lakes after emergence rather thB.1l .rearing within spawning streams. Deleray and Kaya. (1992) natc. KYoung I"jJ006pENTEC ENVIRONHEFAX 208 778 9417 08/21/86 10:35 laCk Goldwasser 4 8/2.1196 fr01l1 inlet-spa.wning popu!atio ,of the .pecic. r.A.rctic Graylina'l typiaally have.an early de.cent to the 1 e, ranging from immediately after swlmnp (Kru8e 1959, Lund 1974, Well 1976) to within ,,,veral weekJ (Nelson 19S4). This behavior i ••'tIPPO ad by the obsetvation OIffy in the lakes and ponel. investipted by Pent o. In addition, grayling juveniles woro ob$Crvod in Suuunit Lake marsins by ADF&G personnel omy in the oarly . moming. If srayling fry are migrating to lakes/ponds directly after OlS1crgence then they would have avoided capture through the sampling resime conducted. OUf confidence in tho sampling results is further reduced by the fact tha.t multiple sampling by Pentee failed, to document fish in Summit Lake. A recent investigation of Summit ll.ake by ADF &.0 captured. over 100 grayling from Summit Lake in 4 day. us· g a combination of fyke nets, hoop traps, IlId hook"8J1d ..line lampling. Lake Spawning and "aarln We agree ·that this hypothelis m y h&~ UttIe merit. However, in your most Gllrrent correspondenoe (23 luly 1996). you ltate that "'no reports of this life history style have been foun in the literature." We have seen very few pubUcatiolll cited and If a litera e search o~ graylinlJ 1lf. history haa boen conductoc1 we 'Would be in.tereate in receiv.inS .. copy of those cita:ti.oDl. Down,',..am MigratIon As atated previously IGceptance of the asaumption that production. does not come from htlet SU'eem spIWDiq or lake-shore sp&wuina lead.. to tho "hypothesis tha.t present sraylins popula.tiOIll are the result of spawning in. tht'Lake Marge outlet. stream and DUsration dOWJl5t:ream to Summit Lake aad Lake Mellen. This hypotheli~ is supported, in PU4 by the pretence of fish in. Lake Mellen. However. • hypotbeais has not boen tested. It is not known what portion oftotal oduction. could b. a.ttributed to migration versua lake tributary Ip :wnlnl. ~., If miaration from Summit Lake to Lake Mellon auam-anta Reynolds Creek production then th.e dam construe d lot tho outlet of Summit Lake may oause a m.igration barrier. As per 16.05.840. every dam. or other obltruatioll. built by any per.on a.c DIS a Itream frequented by .Ilmon or other fish ,hall-be provided with a durable and efficient fishway and a. deviae for efticieDt passallS for do 11.tream miara:u.tl. Therefore. an v. obstruction to fi.h pan_ge 'Would e a violation of AS 16.05.840. -/\ UD1D..terrapted fisA pusalO mu.t b ensured. I I! 'i,1 ! '"it i,' j' 'I I I 'J;: I" I : II: 1tI006 PENTEC ENVIRONMEFAX 206 118 9417 , 08/21196 10:36 .. . lack GoldWa.,er , 5 8/2.1/96. ' IttJpact·AiI.,'y.,. At t~.'pr,eaern time auc1 witli the iDfomll.uon availablo. you Ire proposing that'th.~ Foject l;e initiated with a. mouitorml and miti,ation plan in plaae. With the iilfori:na~ou availa.hle at this time. the potlUltial impacts from this ~~~~~~ . 1. InimUitOll of Biehts P and J1.e:ynolds Cre,k between Rich:rs Pond and'Lake Mellen. ThiI ula. result in the 10.1 of'the most' pr~d~cdve'habitat ideJt' ~d to thia elate: lUch"'s Pond; In a.dd.itiOD ' ,~y, sp~wuinl habitat in e atroam rOllGh cODDeot1ng Rich'5 Pond' to Lake Men..and ,at tho 0 _ ollUeh"s Pond would be lost.. The ' p.ortioD. oitoial rcprodu~ on and reariq habitat lost is wtkuoWn. 2. IuundAtion,of·thc lleynol Creek inlet to Lake Mellen. As lake , water'levels ,would not e * utural occurring maximum hip w...~er" the pomon olto 'pawllin! habitat los$ is,estiIna.ted to bo,. • atmJDlm~. 3. Inund~ation'of SUmmit L Ipawaing strO&m.l. ne PEA (page S) , statei "that file wtalled cWn will raise the lake elevation'14 feet, fi'o~'l.318 ~o.1.332 feat. Even 1lD.der the dry year estimate. (PEA pase~ll).'1ake surface elovation will. be 12 to 1~ feet &bove current el,.v"iio.ns~ .This.may eliminate all spaWDina in S.ummit Lake . tn1iUtuy-:S#c&ml. The portion ot total Summit Lake production"lost ilWIDon . 4.' ~td1cnOll"Q£the'dam 'at Summit Like likely wU1 "eptively affect' DJt.srlti.o~from Summit L e to M.llen Lab. This will a.dversely . d'f~.;my au'pent-don 0 Lake Mollen productioll through , , migri.tion. . Baed. on ilie 4JropOleci actiOll an &Itomativel presented in the Seopiq . Doc~ent,1 ad a1;l a~abl.info mation, we are uJUt.ble to support ~a propo••ct .•otloit. It is also our b dthat tho.project as propO'I.d: does ·not c ••t the ;~azi4~d required for all tm'Vironinental all.ument of a find.i.ng of no 'Iipl~cant impaot.. , , ' . '. . ... Alt.tnatlv••" ! •• s.~ lSO~.l(c)'-n. NEPA peoce I, intended to help public officials malc.e doci,tonl '~~t #e'baaed Oll undcrlimding of enviroumental conseqUences, 8JJ.d take .actiO.DI that'protect, restore, and ODhance the environment.'It At the preacnt ii11ie' we do Dot have enough information to 'Ulson stipulations , that win help .to':prote= till. reloutco. In addlucm, we have 1\0 aiternativei to choo·.~ trom'ex~ep~ for the proposed .!LotiOI1 Illd DO action. Balda. Co~oration'.'proposed altemative presented in Seoping Document 1 (l S March 1996) is slPffica.ra.t1y difl'erent than tho two optioD.l presented in the initid c~nsultiDg dOl;Umcnt. We 'c find DO document .. tioD. explaining why these alternaiiv.1I werodiscarc1ed. moe the da.m 011 Lako Mollen is ' designed ju&t~to.t,diversion, we see 0 need to r&lS6 the lake level to a I • i I PENt'EC ENVIRONHEFAX 206 778 9417·08/21196 10:37 6 8/2.1196Jack Goldwuser hiaher eleYatioL A Imanor eli eni.on dam. 0\1. Lak. Mellen would avoid iJllJ,Uda.tiilg lUch's Pond and ynold5 Creek between lUch's POlld aDd. Lake Mellen. Sa.ed on Pipre 4 III 5 ot the PEA, durini an average water year thelowelt elevatioD. of Summi Lake would be 1327 feot. 9 feet a.bove the current lake level of 1318 feet Therefore, d\lrina a normal water year there iI 9 foot of oxca.. stora • SVln during .. low w&ter year the lowelt ostunated post-projeot elevatl is 1323 f.et~ 5 feet above current lake levell. I II the project app1i.;a.tion is apprQved and we all'ee with the proposed qlouitoring aad mitigation. then we are faced with the pott)Qtial for 10ug term taaintenance of a natural reaource that currently is self sustaining, For 6XampJe~ if in three year. the population of grayling has d.eclined then a mitigation p~an is initiated and we Igree to atock Lake Josephine:. then this population must be monitored IS weU as the i.ey'llold~ Creek population. What If the Lako losephine tmhFceDlettt iii not successful? This scenario loads to lOBI-term monitoring d CDhancement that could become very expensive. A mitigation plan t supplement the Reynolds CrCCl'k population will be initiated because the po ula.tien i. no lOllger self lustalning. Does . tm mean that' we continue to ouitor ltoyD.olds Creek lf8.yling and cahan" the ,population centUm 115111 Both of theso Iccunas ••em 1IU1ch more .~eniivc than cletermiDiD. how the population·will be aff'eetod by the' profect and coming up with via e .opdons., . Therefore we suggest CDlllidera:tion. ot the foUowin, p tllbic altemativot. 1. Teat.the' hypothesil that pro etion itt Lake Mollen and Summit Lake is tb:-result of migratioD from. e Intedakenllackw• Pond and Lake Marge baw. 1£ production could . e aecountec1 tor by miaratiou.. then the majority of our concerns woUld be recineld. This could be a.ccompllsho4 by (1) determining that no or limited spawnina is occurring in the Rich'. Poil4 Inlet 'aad Summit Lake Inlet S'Cr~1 or (2) documenting lipifioillt aLigration ltom Lake Marget Summit Lake, and rack's Pond. DQcuJUCllti:41 spawnilla locatioD. could b. acco:npU.hed by pl.a.cing lIlultiplo fyko cets AOar ihe mouw of ,pawning streams early in. the IPrla.a. TlJ.o collection or mi~tiDI spawnillg fish 5hould be aUgmented by visual oblervations .of nUs a.ting adult.. Other suitable methods 'co~d be c:1etermineel through thorotllh literature soarch by the applicant. ' 2. Modify tbe project to Option proposed in the Fint StaJe Consulting Packago. ThIs project was in ially described as a Imall (10 8:) dam and nm.-of..the-river project. The am would rai... the .urfa.cc elevation of Lako Mellen to a. c:onBt&l'lt. hi her. lc....el to divert water into the penato·ck.. Baseel 011 the requi emont for 30 cfs and. the hydrogr.phs pt..entecl{paae 16. PEA) the bin. could run at full operation for 1 , '.'}I Li •• rENTSC ENVIRONl[EFAX 208 778 9417 :08/21/ge 10:37 laek Goldwasser 1., 8/21196 mon of the year. While I nus.y impact the lUQhlls Pond sub-bum overall basin impacu will be minimizad. t The belt alternative would be to follow the NEP A process. This iuclud.es providittg alttraativo project desips during initial scopingt eonc1uctiq ': ' ",seereft to d.etermine potential onviroa.mdtal ialpactl. and deciding all an altern&tive. The Reynolds Creek project hu followed a different process. Two alternatives were prolent~ in the initial co11!11lting package. PO~eJ1tial euvironmental con . s were ideutifled. The two initial . alternatives were replaced by t e proposed altomadve alld no action iJ1 Scoping Docume11t 1 ~ ud rele ch hu not adequately identified potential impacts of tho proposed altern IV8_ , '. We are not in oppOSition to d loplag alternate enerlY source, for . ... . ~: : Ryd&burg and Pnnce ofW&les land butwo alao do nat thhtIc tha.t· development shoUld relult iJl 8.V idahLe IOlles of aquatic and terresuial resources. By workiul toaeth we feal that m alternative can be found .': tha.t will accommodate both of ur objec:tives ad thl.t thia can. be...: I.ccompliahcd by followin, tho A process_ Rowever. this will involve .eriau.ly investigati1ll altern • es I11d ad.equately uaossi.na potential environmental ilnpaotl. AI you ave a b.tter undoCitand.ing of the project BO&lI we hop. thac you al&O can luggelt some alternatives tha.t will meet . : our gO&r of maiIltaininl a healthy. self-mltaiuing Btl.yling population iil the Reynolds Creek Balin. . Sincerely" t7~t)- J'efl.'roy C. Da.vis leDlpaki. P., del P. GUAIm. 1995a. BabiClt IfdecrtiOD. by I"yliJJr-L Spawning bbitaU. 'Joumal af F1I1I.:8101 47=2~6·:l65. Sem;pc:cki. P. ud P. Gallc.:lhl. It'Sb. b!tat solOctioSl bYI'R11b,-II. Prelhnfnary tecul" onlamI aJlct juvOJ&Ue ytlmt habitats. Journal of fish. Bialogy 47:34'-349. DelorlY. M. A. • .and C_ M. IC&1a. 199 • Labwar4and 4ow:ustroam movements of. aae..() an:tic an;yllq (TIr,mall Ql'tutcus) orlatu.tiu, between & lake aad a waterfaU. Grlat Buia.N.turd 5t S%:3 .........3S1 K.r1ue. T. E. 19". Graylblg of Gftve:Lak.c. Y.UoW'ltaDe Natiow?uk, Wyon:W1.l. tT.S. Pi,h ad. W11cWfe almo, FlilLeQ" Bullotbll...':30i·3Sl. Lund., 1. A. 1974. ltCFod:u.GtiOll of salJ.lLoDi4lla me wets of Elk Lake. MOutBAL 'UllpubUrhccl master', w.ls. MonElJ12 State. l1n1vorl1ty. SozemaJ.'l. Nello11, P. 8:. 1'54. Life history and management 01' the A.sr1fIncan JTlylinl . (Thymol/wI ,lgnif,,. trir;olol') in MOD1&1la. rournal of Wlldlife ManagClUcnt 18:3.2!·341. •....tfI QUI) . ~:g'.! ;;~ .'1 ;' '~ Unlted States !Jenartment of the Interior L r,SH AND WlLDUFESERVICE. Soulheuc Al»ka E.cologi~1 Se"".;c. ,000 Vincase Blvd .• Suite 201 juna... Aluka 9980\·7100 IN UPLY II!JII!A TO: January 13, 1997 Mr. Jack GoldwasGer InterMountain Energy, Inc. 115 Airport Drive P.O. Box 421 cave Junction, OR 97523 Re: Reynolds Creek Hydropower FERC No. 114BO-000 Dear Mr. Goldwasser: This letter provides a written reapon~e, as requested at our December 3, 1996, meeting in Ketchikan, Alaska, on two aepecto of your current hydropower proposal. Specifically, you asked for our opinion oft 1) your proposed new operating regime, which would maintain water levels in Lake Mellen and summit Lake within the levels ot naLural fluctuation during the qrayling spawning season (March through May), as described in your report or November 27, 1996; and 2) your reeommended in-stream flowB for various reaches of Reynold creek, as described in your November 27 proposal, and en pagll 43 o! your Mareh 15, 1996, I'reliminary Environmental Assesement. (EA). Your November 27 proposal is to maintain SummiL Lake waLer levels between 1314 and 1318 feet elevation and t.o maintain Lake Mellen water levels between 8.74.5 and 876 feet elevation from March through February, and to maintain fish passage to spawning habitats in Lhe inlet streams of both lakes. Waler lovels would fluotuate beyond t.hese ranges from .)une through April. We understand that there would be no penslock or bypass reach between Lhe LWO lakes, the only bypassed reach would be below Lake Mellen. We believe Lhis approach is reasonable, but do need assurance that the absoluto minimum pool elevation outside the e;'awning aeason is sufficient to support the fish po~"laL1on, particularly c;.1ring the winler whon oxygon levels may bll doprcBs~:·. The Service has concerns with your proposed minimum in"stream flow proposals. The November 27 proposal and Lhe EA discuss minimum in-stream flows of 5 to 10 efs in Lower Reynolds Creek immediately below the dam. This reach ia t.he least important of the ent.i~e SLream for fish passage, apawning, incubation, and rearing_ The flows propoQed are probably adequa~Q LO prOLeeL Lhe rcoident fiah in this reach. The bulk of grayling spawning and rearing habitat app~ar~ to be between Summit Lake and Lako Mellen. The November 27 propoBal Btatee that minimum flowH in this reaoh would be increased from 4 cfa without the project to about 16 afs with the project. The EA, however, proposes min.l.mum flowe o( 8 LO 2S cts, depending on the month, with Karch to Kay (apawning/iru;ulJat.ion period) flows of 10, 14, and 25 cfs. Theee flows are approximately SO to 7S percent of the long-term average minimum flowe for any given month. No objective criteria are qlven for how the proposed minimum flows were selected, but because they are well below long-term average minimums, we anticipate impacts to the fish populations if only the minimum flows propoeed are maintained in this reach for several cona.cutiv8 years. In the anadromouB reach, below the powerhouse, the EA proposes no minimum flows, but suggests that ~flow auqmentatlon~ would be "desirable-when natural flows qo below IS to 2S cfe, depending on the month. It is not clear how thes. figures were reached, nor how they would be implemented. We believe that in-stream flows should be specified for this reach to ensure adequate but not exces.ive flows during ,pawning, incubation, and in-stream rearing for the thraa epacle. of salmon and the cutthroat trout USing this reach. The Service recommends that in-stream flow proposals for both reaches used for spawning be baaed on objective criteria. For example, the In-stream Flow Incremental Method (Stalnaker Bt a1. 1995) provides one possible basis for the required flows. The approach of Tennant (1976) is a Simpler, yet sound, hydraulics-based approach to setting stream-flow regimes. We believe that the latter is probably the best technique for use at Reynolds Creek. we request that you design your project to prov!de in-stream flows adequate to maintain the atream habitat in good or better Qondition using the Tennant method. We look forward to continued coordination with the collaborative team on this project. If you have any questions, pleaee contact Steve Bt ekmann at (907) 225-9691. Sincerely, Referenees: Stalnaker, C., B.L. Lamb, J. Henrikaen, K. Bovee, and J. Bartholow. 1995. The In-stream Flow Incremontal Methodology: A primer for IFIM. Nat.Biol.Serv., aiol.Rep. No. 29. 56 pp. Tennant, D.L. 1976. In-stream flow regimes for fish, wilulife, recreation, and related environmental resources. Fisheries 1(4):6-10. cc: ADPC, Klawoek, Ketchikan FIRe, Washington DC (att'nt Mike Strzelecki, NMPS, Juneau saalaaxa Corp. ( att'n: Richard lIarris, One Sealaska ~laza, Suite 400, ~unBau, AK 99801-1276) July 18, 1997 Ms. Lois CasheR Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street N.E., Room A-I Washington, D.C. 20426 Subject: Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 Scoping Document 2 Dear Ms. Cashell: On behalf of Haida Corporation, HDR Engineering, Inc. encloses for filing an original and eight copies of Scoping Document 2 (SD2) for the Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project. SD2 is based on Scoping Document 1 that was distributed via a letter dated March 15, 1996, addresses the conunents and requests for additional studies received during the NEP A scoping process, and contains copies of all consultation correspondence and responses developed in reply to concerns identified in agency conunent letters and at the scoping meetings held in Ketchikan and Hydaburg on May 6, 1996. If you have any questions regarding SD2 or the licensing process for the Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project, please let us know. Sincerely, HDR ENGINEERING, INC. Michael V. Stimac, P.E. Manager, Licensing and Environmental Services Enclosure cc: John Bruns, Haida Corporation Cynthia Pickering Christianson Service List SD2 Mailing List h: Ihyd\reynoJds1.scopingidistr.doc TelephoneHDR Engineering, Inc. Suite 1200 500 loath Avenue. N.E. 206 453-1523 Bellevue. Washington Fax Employee-owned 98004-5538 206 453-7107 REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC PROJECT NO. 11480 Certificate of Service I hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing letter dated July 18, 1997. to Lois Cashell from Michael V. Stimac and Scoping Document 2 for the Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project upon all persons listed below in accordance with the requirements of Section 385.2010 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure. Constance Sathre National Oceanic & Atmospheric Admin. Office of General Counsel P.O. Box 21109 Juneau. AK 99802-11 09 Steven T. Zimmerman National Marine Fisheries Service Protected Resource Management Division P.O. Box 21668 Juneau. AK 99802-1668 Robert W. Loescher Sealaska Corporation One Sealaska Plaza, Suite 400 Juneau. AK 99801 William M. Bumpers Baker & Botts, Attorneys at Law 1299 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Washington, D.C. 20004-2402 Dated at Bellevue, Washington, this 18th day of July 1997. h: \hydlreynoldsllicenselfervice.doc Certificate o/Service Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 August 20, 1997 (See enclosed Mailing List) Re: ReYI!olds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 HDR Engineering, Inc., on behalf of Haida Corporation, is pleased to provide you with the enclosed Draft Application for License (Application) and Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment (PDEA) for the above-referenced project. These documents are being distributed pursuant to Stage II of the consultation process under Federal Energy RegulatoryCornrnission (FERC) regulations (18 CFR §4.38). Please review the Draft Application and PDEA and provide HDR with your written comments no later than November 18, 1997. To. facilitate incorporating your comments into the Final Application and Final PDEA before they are filed with the FERC, we encourage you to provide your written comments before November 18. In addition to comments regarding the Draft Application and PDEA, preliminary license terms and conditions, and recommendations on the PDEA are also being requested at this time from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service and Alaska Department of Fish and Game, the agencies having mandatory conditioning authority for PURPA Section 210 projects. Submittals should bear the heading "Preliminary Comments", "Preliminary Recommendations", "Preliminary Terms & Conditions", or "Preliminary Prescriptions", as appropriate. The Draft Application and PDEA have been distributed to the entries on the enclosed mailing list. If you need additional copies, please let us know. Please do not hesitate to call us should you have questions concerning the Draft Application or the PDEA for the Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project. We appreciate your interest in the project and look forward to receiving your comments. Sincerely, HDR ENGINEERING, INC. Michael V. Stimac, P.E. Manager, Licensing and Environmental Services Enclosures cc: John Bruns, Haida Corporation Cynthia Pickering Christianson h:V!ydlreynoldslpdeaI819971tr.doc HDR Engineering, Inc. Suite 1200 Telephone 500 108th Avenue. N.E. 206 453-1523 Bellevue. Washington Fax Employee-owned 98004-5538 206 453-7107 MAILING LIST Steve Zinunennan Protected Resources Management Division National Marine Fisheries Service P.O. Box 21668 Juneau,AJ( 99802 Nevin D. Holmberg, Field Supervisor Attn: Duane Petersen U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 3000 Vintage Blvd., #201 Juneau,AJ( 99801 Dale Kanen, District Ranger Attn: Barbara Stanley U.S. Forest Service Craig Ranger District P.O. Box 500 Craig, AJ( 99921 Lany Brockman Environmental. Review Coordinator MSWD-124 Environmental. Protection Agency 1200 6th Avenue Seattle, W A 98101 LanyWright Alaska Regional Office National Park Service 2525 Gambell Street Anchorage, AK 99503-2892 Michiel Holley, Unit Coordinator Permit Processing Section, Regulatory Branch U.S. Army Corps of Engineer, Alaska District P.O. Box 898 Anchorage, AK 99506-0898 Bruce Bigelow, Chief Hydrologist U.S. Geological Survey P.O. Box 21568 Juneau,AK 99802 Jennifer Garland State of Alaska, Office of the Governor Division of Governmental. Coordination Southeast Regional Office P.O. Box 10030 Juneau,AJ( 99811-0030 Joan Hughes Alaska Dept. of Environmental. Conservation Southwest Regional Office 410 Willoughby, Suite 105 Juneau,AJ( 99801 Jack Gustafson Area Habitat Biologist Alaska Department of Fish & Game Habitat and Restoration Division 2030 Sea Level Drive, Suite 205 Ketchikan, AK 99901-6067 Jim Durst Alaska Department of Fish & Game Habitat and Restoration Division P.O. Box 271 Klawock, AK 99925 Lana Shea Flanders Alaska Department of Fish & Game Habitat and Restoration Division Mail Stop 1120 P.O. Box 240020 Douglas, AK 99824-0200 John Dunker, Water Office Alaska Department ofNatural Resources Division of Water 400 Willoughby, Suite 400 Juneau, AJ( 99801-1724 Jim Anderson, Land Officer Department ofNatural Resources Division of Land 400 Willoughby, Suite 400 Juneau,AJ( 99801-1724 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project August 20, 1997 FERC Project No. 11480-000 Bill Gary, Regional Manager Alaska Department of Natural Resources Division of Parks & Outdoor Recreation 400 Willoughby, Suite 400 Juneau,AJ( 99801-1724 Judith Bittner State ,Historic Preservation Officer Alaska Department of Natural Resources Office of History and Archaeology 3602 "C" Street, Suite 1278 Anchorage, AJ( 99503-5921 Douglas Mathena, Jr., Mayor City of Hydaburg P.O. Box 49 Hydaburg, AJ( 99922 Steve Brockmann Ecological Services U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 624 Mill Street Ketchikan, AJ( 99901 Nan Allen, OID.JDLC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street NE, Room 62-44 Washington, DC 20426 Robert W. Loescher Sealaska Corp. One Sealaska Plaza, Suite 400 Juneau,AJ( 99801-1512 Bob Lohr, Executive Director Alaska Public Utilities Commission 1016 W. Sixth Avenue, Suite 400 Anchorage, AJ( 99501 Christopher Estes Alaska Department of Fish & Game 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,AJ( 99518-1599 Steve Hoffman Ketchikan Area Management Biologist Alaska Department ofFish & Game Division of Sportfish 2030 Sea Level Drive, Suite 205 Ketchikan, AJ( 99901 Glenn Freeman, Fishery Biologist Alaska Department of Fish & Game Division of Sportfish 2030 Sea Level Drive, Suite 205 Ketchikan, AJ( 99901 Reuben Yost Project Environmental Coordinator Alaska Department of Transportation 6860 Glacier Highway Juneau, AJ( 99801 Harry Hall, Director Portland Regional Office Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 101 S.W. Main Street, Suite 905 Portland, OR 97204 Robert S. Grimm, President Alaska Power & Telephone P.O. Box 222 Port Townsend, WA 98368 William M. Bumpers Baker & Botts, Attorneys at Law 1299 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W. Washington, DC 20004-2402 Rick Harris Sealaska Corporation One Sea1aska Plaza, Suite 400 Juneau, AJ( 99801-1512 Craig Public Library 500 Third Street Craig, AJ( 99921 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project August 20, 1997 2 FERCProject No. 11480-000 Constance Sathre National Oceanic & Atmospheric Admin. Office of General Counsel P.O. Box 21109 Juneau,AJ< 99802-1109 h: Ihydlreynolds \license \maWst.doc Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project August 20, 1997 3 FERC Project No. J J 480-000 --------------- , , ; t TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR a OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET DIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE 3601 'C' STREET. SUITE 370 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503-5930 PH: (907) 269-7470IFAX: (907) 561-6134 CENTRAL OFFICE P.O. BOX 110030 JUNEAU, ALASKA 9981HXJ30 PH: (907) 465-35621FAX: (907) 465-3075 a August 27, 1997 PIPELINE COORDINA TOR'S OFFICE 411 WEST 4TH AVENUE, SUITE 2C ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501·2343 PH: (907) 271-4317IFAX: (907) 272·0690 Mr. M.V. Sionac, P.E. HDR Engineering, Inc., Agent for Haida Corporation 500 1081h Avenue, N.E., Suite 1200 Bellevue; W A 98004-5538 Dear Mr. Stimac: SUBJECT: REYNOLDS CREEK HYDRO Second Stage Consulation Draft License Application! Preliminary Draft EA State J.D. No. AK 9708-1411 (NEPA/lnformational) The Division of Governmental Coordination received the information concerning second stage consultation of the hydroelectric project you submitted for review under the Federal Power Act (FPA) and scoping review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The project is located on Reynolds Creek, approximately 10 miles east of Hydaburg. We are distributing this letter and other appropriate material to participants in the Alaska Coastal Management Program (ACMP) for their review. The enclosed project information sheet includes the State's review number, to be referenced in all correspondence with the State. The licensing of the project is being done through an applicant -prepared environmental assessment (EA) process, which is a relatively new procedure and is not currently in regulations of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The applicant-prepared EA is under the provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 ,\Rd a regulatory waiver process (in the regulatory process currently in place, the NEP A compliance action is at a point at the end of the process, following the filing of final comments and conditions to FERC). This results in a preliminary draft EA being prepared at the front of the FERC process, along with the development of the license application. A review of the project for consistency with the ACMP will occur when all permit applications and public notices are received, including notice that the final application is complete for FERC purposes and FERC is calling for final comments and conditions. All feder.al and state (If·A35LH pennitting agencies are required to receive a State ACMP consistency determination prior to issuance of pennits and licenses. The purpose of the second consultation review is to comment on a draft application, the completed studies which were requested during the first consultation stage, and appropriate mitigation measures. During these pre-ACMP review opportunities, review participants should also preliminarily identify potential ACMP issues. The State appreciates the opportunity to participate in these reviews. S~:I-AtJ.JtJ Jennifer R. Garland Project Review Coordinator Enclosures cc: Distribution List O:\FORMS\FERC1.SU ~u ~u~ ©[F ffi\[Lffi\~~~ TONYKNOWLE~GOVERNOR OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR CENTRAL OFFICE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET CONSISTENCY REVIEW UNIT DIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION 240 MAIN STREET, SUITE 500 CONTACTS P.O. Box 110030 JUNEAU, AK 99811 DEC Dave Sturdevant ......... 465-5276 Fax: 465-5274 DFG Jim Durst ............. 755-2485 755-2440 DNR John Dunker ............ 465-2533 586-2954 DISTRICT: Jean Bland ......... 285-3761 285-3760 COE Mike Holley ............ (800) 478-2712 753-5567 PROJECT INFORMA nON SHEET PROJECT TITLE: Reynolds Creek Hydro -2nd Stage Consultation STATE l.D. NUMBER: AK 9708-14JJ DGC CONTACT: Jennifer Garland Phone: 465-3177 Fax: 465-3075 APPLICANT/PROPONENT: Haida Corporation AGENT: Mike Stimac, HDR Phone: 206-453-1523 Fax: 206-453-7107 DIRECT FEDERAL ACTION: No REVIEW TYPE: OTHER ACTIVITY TYPE: HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT LOCATION: Nearest Coastal District: HYDABURG Project is OUTSIDE the District Boundary . District Plan Approved: Yes REVIEW SCHEDULE: Other REVIEW MILESTONES: Day 1: .................................. 08127/97 Comments Due To DGC with copy to FERC on or before: . 11103/97 Finai Comments to FERC on or before: ............. 11111197 PROJECT PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED UNDER STATE l.D. NO. AK9502-02J, AK9604-12J ST ATE APPROVALS (AGENCY, APPROVAL TYPE AND NUMBER): n/a FEDERAL APPROVALS (AGENCY, APPROVAL TYPE AND NUMBER): n/a DISTRIBUTION LIST Reynolds Creek Hydro Project· 2nd Stage Consultation AK 9708-14JJ Dave Sturdevant, DEC, Juneau Lana Shea Flanders, DFG, Juneau Jim Durst, DFG, Klawock Bill Ballard, DOT/PF, Juneau Mike McKinnon, DOT/PF, Juneau Elizaveta Shadura/Jim Anderson, DNR, Juneau John Dunker, DNR/DOW, Juneau Bill Garry, DNR/DPOR, Juneau Judith Bittner, DNRISHPO, Anchorage Jean Bland, Hydaburg Rick Harris, Sealaska Corporation, Juneau Ron Wolfe, Klukwan, Inc., Juneau l\/\'(\~\-t>f\r.e..v f..-::.t-e.$; Ibr=G-1 AV'c.L-.C,Y'''-6 L The seoping document was distributed directly to reviewers by HDR Engineering. If you need a copy of the document, contact HDR immediately. Lru ~ ~ \1 lE'.lL.JI SFP ? 4 1997DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY u.s. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ALASKA P.O. BOX 898 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99506-0898 REPLY TO r~]l.R 1 6 1991 ATTENTION OF: Regulatory Branch Enforcement Section 9-950127 Mr. Michael V. Stimac, P.E. HDR Engineering, Incorporated Suite 1200 500 108 th Avenue, N.E. Bellevue, Washington 98004-5538 Dear Mr. Stimac: This is in response to your submittal, on behalf of the Haida Corporation, of the Draft Application for License and Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment pertaining to the proposed Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project near Hydaburg, Alaska. The Department of the Army (DA) exerts regulatory jurisdiction over waters of the United States (O.S.), including wetlands, pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. For regulatory purposes, the Corps of Engineers defines wetlands as those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. The law requires that any individual or entity that proposes to discharge dredged and/or fill material into waters of the U.S., including wetlands, must obtain a DA permit prior to conducting the work. Review of the furnished information in the assessment (page 21) recorded the acknowledgement by the applicant that a DA authorization (permit) would be required for the activi~ies that are located in waters, including wetlands, of the U.S. Therefore, this letter reaffirms that a DA authorization will be required prior to the discharge of any dredged and/or fill material into navigable waters and/or other waters of the U.S., including wetlands: Nothing in this letter shall be construed as excusing you from compliance with other Federal, State, or local statutes, ordinances, or regulations that may affect any proposed work.· For informational purposes, we are forwarding a copy of this letter to the agencies on the enclosed list. Please refer to file number 9-950127 (Reynolds Creek) should you have any questions or desire further information. Should you have any questions concerning the application/permit evaluation process, please contact me at the address above, ATTN: CENPA-CO-R-E, or by telephone at (907) 753-2720, toll free within Alaska at (800) 478-2712, or bY,FAX at (907) 753-5567. Leeds, III Project Manager November 12, 1997 Mr. John Dunker Alaska Department of Natural Resources Divison of Water 400 Willoughby, Suite 400 Juneau, AK 99801-1724 Subject: Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Request for Amendment of Water Right -LAS 19845 Dear Mr. Dunker: On July 20, 1995, Haida Corporation applied for a water right for a withdrawl from Lake Mellen (Reynolds Creek) for a run-of-river hydroelectric facility (LAS 19845, copy attached). The requested amount was 30 cubic feet per second (cfs). On behalf of Haida Corporation, we wish to increase the total quantity requested to 90 cfs. . Several other features of the project have also been modified since the original application was submitted. These are summarized in the following table. Feature Previous Current Penstock diameter 34in 42 in Length of penstock 5,700 ft 3,200 ft Dam length, height and width L 100; H 10; W 15 (ft) L 20; H 8; W 24 (ft) Head 400 ft 758 ft (net) Water storage 3,840 acre-ft 600 acre-ft The location of the proposed powerhouse has also moved from Section 4, T. 77 S., R. 85 E. to Section 3, T. 77 S., R. 85 E. Copper River Meridian. An updated project description and figures showing the current project layout are attached. HDR Engineering is the designated agent for Haida Corporation for permitting activities. Please contact me at (425) 453-1523 or Mark Dalton at (907) 274-2000 with any questions about this request or the project. Sincerely, R NGINEERING~INC. . r;7 L CU-e pv.4~ Paul Berkshire, P.E. Project Manager Attachments' cc: John Bruns, Haida Corporation Mark Dalton, HDR Alaska HDA Engineering. Inc. Suite 1200 Telephone 500 108th Avenue, N.E. 425 453-1523 Bellevue, Washington Fax Employee-owned 98004·5538 425453·7107 November 18. 1997 Mr. John Leeds, III Project Manager Attn: CENPA-CO-R-E Regulatory Branch U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska District P.O. Box 898 Anchorage. AK 99506-0898 Re: Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Corps of Engineers Permit Application File Number 9-950127 Dear Mr. Leeds: Haida Corporation (the Applicant) is seeking a License from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for the proposed Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project. To support the licensing process, a Corps of Engineers (Corps) Pennit is required. On behalf of Haida Corporation, HDR Engineering. Inc. encloses a completed penn it application for your review and processing. It is our understanding that this application and supporting materials also serve as application for the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) water quality certification of the Corps Permit, in accordance with Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. Thus, a copy is of this application is being submitted concurrently to ADEC. The final Application for License and Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment, to be filed with the FERC near the end of November 1997, will be provided to you at that time. If you have any questions or require additional information, please caH me at (425) 453-1523. Sincerely, HDR ENGINEERING, INC. Michael V. Stimac, P.E. Manager. Licensing and Environmental Services Enclosure cc: John Bruns, Haida Corporation David C. Sturdevant, ADEC h:lh)'dir(')!lw/ds\perlllifsico('.doc HDR Engineering, Inc. Suite 1200 Telephone 500 108th Avenue, N.E. 425 453-1523 Bellevue, Washington Fax Employee-owned 98004-5538 425453-7107 November 18, 1997 Ms. Jennifer R. Garland Project Review Coordinator State of Alaska, Office of the Governor Division of Governmental Coordination P.O. Box 110030 Juneau, AK 99811-0030 Re: Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Coastal Project Questionnaire and Certification Statement State J.D. No. AK 9708-14JJ (NEPA1Informational) Dear Ms. Garland: Haida Corporation (the Applicant) is seeking a License from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for the proposed Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project. To support the licensing process, a determination that the project is consistent with the Alaska Coastal Management Program is required. On behalf of Haida Corporation, HDR Engineering, Inc. encloses a completed Coastal Project Questionnaire, Certification Statement and supporting permit applications for the project for your review and processing. A copy of the final Application for License and Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment, to be filed with the FERC near the end of November 1997, will be provided to you at that time. If you have any questions or require additional infornlation, please call me at (425) 453-1523. Sincerely, HDR ENGINEERING, INC. Michael V. Stimac, P.E. Manager, Licensing and Environmental Services Enclosure cc: John Bruns, Haida Corporation David C. Sturdevant. ADEC h: :hyd\r")'fI()Jdsipermils'xarianddoc HDR Engineering. Inc. Suite 1200 Telephone 500 108th Avenue, N.E. 425 453-1523 Bellevue, Washington Fax Employee·owned 98004-5538 425453-7107 November 18, 1997 Alaska Department of Fish and Game Habitat and Restoration Division 2030 Sea Level Drive, Suite 205 Kctchi kan, A K 99901-6067 Re: Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Fish Habitat Permit Application Dear Sir/Madam: Haida Corporation (the Applicant) is seeking a License from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for the proposed Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project. To support the licensing process, a Fish Habitat Pemlit is required. On behalf of Haida Corporation, HDR Engineering. Inc. encloses a completed application for your review and processing. A copy of the final Application for License and Preliminary Draft Environmental AssessmenL to be filed with the FERC near the end of November 1997, will be provided to you at that time. If you have any questions or require additional infomlation, please call me at (425) 453-1523. Sincerely, HDR ENGINEERING, INC. Michael V. Stimac, P.E. Manager, Licensing and Environmental Services Enclosure cc: John Bnms, Haida Corporation h: ·,hyd1re)·n()Id.~\permilsl.(Jdfg.do,: HDR Engineering, Inc. Suite 1200 Telephone 500 108th Avenue, N.E. 425 453-1523 Bellevue, Washington Fax Employee-owned 98004·5538 425453-7107 November 18, 1997 Alaska DepaJ.1ment of Natural Resources Southeast Region 400 Willoughby, #400 Juneau, AK 99801 Re: Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Application for Right-of-Way or Easement DeaJ.· Sir/Madam: Haida Corporation (the Applicant) is seeking a License from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for the proposed Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project. As part of the authorization process for the project, on behalf of l-laida Corporation, HDR Engineering. Inc. encloses a completed Application for Right-of-Way or Easement and $ t 00 application fee for your review and processing. A utility easement is requested tor the project's 34.5 kV transmission line where the line will make an aerial crossing of I-[etta Inlet via Jumbo IslaJ.1d. The remainder of the traJ.1smission line \\'il1 be constructed on private property and will follow the access road from the powerhouse along existing logging roads that extend from Copper Harbor north along Hetta Inlet aJ.1d then, on the west side of Hetta Inlet, follQ\\' an existing road to a point approximately 1.4 miles northeast of Hydaburg where it will connect with an existing powerline. Total length of the transmission line will be approximately 10.9 miles. See figure 1 for more infonnation. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call me at (425) 453-1523. Sincerely, HDR ENGINEERING, INC. Michael V. Stimac, P.E. Manager, Licensing and Environmental Services Enclosure cc: John Bruns, Haida Corporation Ir: \hyd\re.Yn()fd~\permilS\dnr.doc HDR Engineering, Inc. Suite 1200 Telephone 500 108th Avenue, N.E. 425 453-1523 Bellevue, Washington Fax Employee-owned 98004-5538 425453·7107 NOV 18 '97 05:52PM REGION 1 907 465 2034 TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR," POST OFFICe BOX 271 KLAWOCK, AK 99!J25·0271DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME PHONE: (B07) 755-2485 FAX: (907) 755·2440 HABITAT AND RESTORATION DIVISION November 18, 1997 Mr. Michael V. Stimac Manager, Licensing and Environmental Services HDR Engineering, Incorporated 500 108th Avenue, Northeast; Suite 1200 Bellevue, W A 98004-5538 Dear Mr. Stimac: Re: Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project (FERC Project No. 11480) Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment and Draft Application for License Preliminary Comments, Preliminary Recommendations, Preliminary Terms and Conditions, and Preliminary Prescriptions The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) has reviewed the Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Draft Application for License (DAL) and Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment (PDEA), submitted by HDR Engineering, Inc. on behalf of Haida Corporation. On August 29, 1997, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) referenced these documents in its Notice ofDraft License Applications and Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment (PDEA). These comments supplement all prior communications regarding this project from the ADF&G and are intended to assist Haida Corp to develop a project with no or negligible impacts to fish and wildlife resources and meet requirements of the Federal Power Act, the Public Utility Regulatory Policy Act of 1978, Alaska Statutes such as AS 16, 46, and the Alaska Coastal Management Program. As the state agency exercising authority over the fish and wildlife resources of the state of Alaska, the ADF&G has mandatory conditioning authority per § 30(c) of the Federal Power Act. Haida Corporation proposes to construct a 5.0 megawatt (MW) hydroelectric power plant in the Reynolds Creek basin. Facilities would include a 20-foot long concrete weir, diversion dam, and int,Uc.e at the outlet of Rich's Pond; a bypass pipe through the diversion dam; a 3,200-foot long, 42~inch diameter steel penstock; a powerhouse with tailrace; associated access roads; and a 12.3 mile long 34,SOO-volt overhead transmission line from the powerhouse to Hydaburg. Diversion of between 5 and 90 cubic feet per secood (cfs) of flow from Reynolds Creek would be used for power generation. NOV 18 '97 05:53PM REGION 1 907 465 2034 Mr. Michael V. Stimac 2 Reynolds Creek Hydro (FERC 11480: November 18, 1997 PDEA and DAL Comments, The Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project would be constructed in two phases. Phase I includes. a dam, penstock, small powerhouse, one turbine with I.S MW installed capacity, and transmission line. Phase 2 increases project capacity to 5 MW by enlarging the powerhouse, tapping into an existing bifurcation in the penstock, and adding a second turbine with 3.5 MW insralled capacity. Insufficient infonnation and details have been provided by the applicant to adequately address potential project effects for the two project development phases and interim stages of development. Accordingly, the ADF&G j~; providing recommendations based on availabJe information. These comments are also primarily directed towards the final 5 mw configuration envisioned by the applicant. PRELIMINARY COMMENTS General Comments Overall, the information provided in the PDEA and DAL documents is insufficient for a rigorous evaluation of the construction and various operational scenarios for the project under both Phase~ 1 and 2 (see also May 15, 1995 and October 17. 1995 information requests from the ADF&G). Illustrations with greater detail should be improved for better interpretation of project layout. And, the hydrological analyses necessary to address project potential and impacts are pending completion by the applicant for agency review. It·should be clarified that the applicant, Haida COl'pOration, replaced InterMountain Energy with HDR [0 complete the environmental assessment and these documents. A meeting with agencies and other concerned entities was never held to review the project status and identify whether course corrections may be necessary as pan of that transition As such, there are several pieces of information needs that have been addressed inadequately, and an agreed upon communications protocol and formal schedule remain lacking. Despite these limitations, the ADF&G is providing specific comments in an effort to keep this process progressing. We believe a meeting is required with the applicant. its agents, FERC representatives. and other interested agencies to also address and hopefully resolve or establish a plan to resolve these concerns. PRELIMINARY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REVmW Summary (Pages 1-3) Pg. 1, Construction, Temporary is not defined in terms of frequency. duration. and when it applies. And, there is no differentiation between construction and project operation under varioius phases and interim periods. I P.4/17NOV 18 '97 05:53PM REGION 1 907 465 2034 Mr. Michael V. Stimac 3 Reynolds Creek Hydro (FERC 11480) November 18,1997 PDEA and DAL Comments, Pg.l, Operation item 5: The PDEA is for the entire 5.0 MW project, so this statement should reflect the 90 cfs reduction at 5.0 MW operation and detail the various interim changes. Pg. 1, Operation item 6: The channel between Lake Mellen will be inundated as well a~ Rich's Pond. Pg 2, Location Map. This figure lacks sufficient detail and requires a companion figure with an enlarged Hetta Inlet to Lake Mellen portion of the figure. Pg. 3, mitigation item 5: As currently proposed, the tailrace would be downstream of the natural anadromous fish barrier. Pg. 3, The assumption by the last paragraph of the page that the project impact would be insignificant is premature and unsubstantiated at this point in time. 1. Application Pg. 4, First paragraph should detail transfer of responsibilities from InterMountain to HDR, including when the transfer occurred and the impacts of the change. Ownership versus leased lands is vague and should be clarified and identified on a map of sufficient scale and detail. Timing of the phased operation and construction of the various project phases should be detailed. II. Purpose and Need Pg. 6, II.B. The need for power description is inadequate in this section and the subsequent sections. Power demand and assumptions for those demands should be provided. including rationale for future growth. The demographics and economy for Southeast Alaska can significantly vary over short periods of time and demand suffieient consideration when planning hydro and other developments in Southeast Alaska that are dependent on local demand. The Memorandum of Understanding with pertaining to the pu.rchase of power etc. of July 17, 1997 should be appended to this assessment. Pg. 6, n.B.2:This section fails to mention the WolfLake Hydroelectric Project, also currently under study by Alaska Power and Telephone Company. The analyses in this section should alo con~ider the generating capacity of the Wolf Lake project. An assessment is also needed to identify the short and longer term (at least 5Q.year) cumulative socioeconomic and environmental impacts projected for this and other existing and planned projects on Prince of Wales Island and other locations in Southeast Alaska. including the potential for expansion of this and addition of other projects in this and adjacent watersheds. Also taken into consideration must be the ability to interconnect Southeast Alaska communities and eventually Canada and the lower 48 states and what those impacts may be. P.2/3 Mr. Michael V. Stimac 4 Reynolds Creek Hydro (PERC 11480) November 18. 1997 PDEA and DAL Comments OU ~I&t..,\ e..).. Pg. 6, II.B.3: This sections and its accompanying figures needs substantial expansion, including identification ofassumptions. sources ofinformation, calculations used, and whether or not other utilities and consumers on Prince of Wales Island agree with the forecasts used. III. Pl'AIlQW Action and Alternatiyes Pg. 9, III.A.2: The ADF&G continues to question the use of the phrase ''nm..of-the-river'' to describe the Reynolds Creek project. Of the three operating modes described, only level control could be construed to be run-of-the-river. Both load following and base loading modes would make use of Lake Mellen for storage, and are therefore a storage project The first paragraph notes that run-of-the-river would be realized only if flows and lake levels are averaged over a weekly, perhaps daily, time frame. Also needed are descriptions of the timing of construction and implementation of the projected phases and various operating scenarios. Will the penstock be burled? This information is central to the evaluation ofall project impacts and design of mitigation. Pg. 10, Figure 4: Water surface elevations should be shown for Interlaken Pond and Rich's Pond since they are significant project features. Direction offlow should be identified, as should the penstock loca.tion, roac:ls, and transmission line corridors. Pg. 11, Load Following: Per earlier comments, this section must be expanded to clarify the various operations being planned. The sections appears to combine both load following and block (= base?) loading operation modes, and should be edited accordingly. Is Figure 5 typical for HydabUll. or some mythical load? What time ofyear and actual inflows were used for the 168-hour simulations shown in figures 6 and 71 To be useful in describing the project under review, these figures must be extensively revised and expanded, and show the fulJ 5.0 MW project. Pg. 15, Startup/Shutdown: Although this operating scheme claims its goal is l'to maintain flow doWD.S1ream ofthe powerhouse during unplanned shutdowns," no mechanism is proposed to in fact provide such flows. Flow with deflectors in place would be minimum, and could easily be below required instream flows. Ifthe jets are fully closed and the diversion dam has drawn down Rich's Pond, there could be a Significant period when the only flow in the anadromous sueam reach would be that passing through the bypass orifice at the dam. This situation is unacceptable. Some fail-safe mechanism. must be designed and installed to assure that instantaneous required instream flows in the anadromous stream reach are maintained even ifthe deflectors are in place or the jets are shut down. It is also prematurely assumed witho~t agency agreement that Scfs is an acceptable year round i.n.stream flow threshold. Pg. IS, Lake Mellen: Throughout the project documents. Lake Mellen is listed as having a water surface elevation of 876 feet mean sea level (fmsl). At what stage does this occurt and a 10Jlg tenn basis how frequently under existing natural flow regimes throughout the year and when (see our 1995 comments)? This section discusses drawing Lake Mellen down to no more than 874.5 finsl during April and May. and gives a minimum elevation at full drawdown of 872 fms1. Thus, NOV 18 '97 05:54PM REGION 1 907 465 2034 P.6/17 Mr. Michael V. Stimac 5 Reynolds Creek Hydro (FERC 11480) November 18,1997 PDEA and DAL Comments it would appear that 872 fmsl (or some lower figure) is the actual geomorphic control elevation of the lake, and a more proper figure for the natural water surface level. Any values greater than 872 could then be seen as a surcharging of the lake, either under natural conditions where the existing log jam may restrict the lake outlet. or through manipulation by the proposed diversion dam. A verage inflow data should also be presented in cfs and should be provided on a monthly basis ac; requested in our 1995 correspondence. An illustration showing a cross section of the lake versus stage and flow releases and adjacent elevations of the mouths of tributaries is needed. Figure 8 is a very inadequate representation of the natural water level characteristics of Lake Mellen. It is only for five months during a single year. and does not seem to include any data for the period of tne year when Lake Mellen has ice coverage. The gage height scale is of little value because it is not correlated with fInsl. The record presented shows variation of between about 2.35 feet and 3.95 feet, a variation of 1.6 feet. This is considerably less than the "in the order of two feet" figure in the text in this section. The proposed four·foot drawdown from 876 finsl to 872 fmsl is actually two and one-halftimes the natural variability shown in Figure 8. The rate of change in the stage of the lake and the amount of change at anyone time and the frequency of how often these changes would occur and when throughout the year are required. The text notes that drawdown will be limited to 874.5 finsl during April and May to facilitate fish access into Middle Reynolds Creek, but does nor address the basis for this calculation. or the mechanism to raise the lake elevation to this level if drawdown has occurred during the low input winter months. Pg. 17, Bypass Reach Flow Regime: The ADF&G applauds the independent, senior nature of the proposed bypass flow outlet in the diversion dam. What is the basis of the comment that the basin in the bypass reach "can be expected" to contribute an average additional flow of 6 cfs? ADF&G has heard anecdotal stories of the flow at the base of the bypass reach being less than that at the outlet of Lake Mellen. One possible outlet for any such underground flows would be the significant spring below the powerhouse site on the major tributary to Reynolds Creek from the north. Also [he amount of flow that must be released has not been agreed upon and needed hydrologic information requested in 1995 have not been provided. Pg. 17, Lower Reynolds Creek Flow Regime: The reference to wet. average, and dry years needs to be expanded and explained. Also, it needs to be made clear whether the required flows mentioned in the second paragraph refer to instantaneous instream flows required for fish habitat, or flows required for a desired level of power production. Pg. 17, Construction Precautions item 2: The ADF&G applauds this proposed prohibition. We have found such a condition of employment velY effective on other hydroelectric projects, and intend to carry the forward as a term and condition. An annual report of studies and project operations and impacts to fish and wildlife resources should be produced. and provided to fisb and wildlife resource agencies. An annual NOV 18 '97 05:55PM REGION 1 907 465 2034 Mr. Michael V. Stimac 6 Reynolds Creek Hydro (FERC 11480) November 18> 1997 PDEA and DAL Comments meeting to review studies and findings should be required to review project impacts on fish and wildlife resources. The annual review should identify whether existing studies are adequate or require revision, whether project operations require modification. and whether existing studies can be ended. Those participating in the annual review should. at a minimum. include the project developer, his agents and fish and wildlife agencies. An annual summary of the results of the project review should also be produced. The Terror River project provides an example of this requirement for studies, reports, annual meetings and use of this information. This recommendation for studies, reporting, and meetings should apply for all impacted project areas/operations. The project developer should provide adequate resources to insure that a representative or representatives of fish and wildlife agencies will be onsite during project construction and monitoring phases. Pg. 18, L'lke Mellen Elevation Operating Regime item 1: It is important to not only assure access to spawning areas, but to maintain adequate flows. and water elevations for successful incubation of eggs, seasonal intersystemmigration of fry. and year round rearing. Pg. 18. Lake MelJen Elevation Operating Regime item 2: Elevations for the project also require an analysis of the existing long-term variability of lake elevations that occur on an instantaneous basis throughout the year, including rate of stage variation, and the amount of variation at any one time in any given period.. Pg. 18, Lake Mellen Elevation' Operating Regime item 3: ADF&G approval should be required for monitoring plans for this project. This work should also be monitored by the ADF&G or an acceptable agent. Additionally these studies should be conducted for a period of at least 5-years after each project revision, ie a minimum of at least S-years until after the final project operational scheme is in place. Pg. 18, Lake Mellen Elevation Operating Regime item 4: ADF&G approval should be required for any modifications to the inlet to and outlet streams from Lake Mellen prior to work beginning: on such modifications. This work should also be monitored by the ADF&G or an acceptable agent. Pg 18, InstfeaIn Flow in Bypass Reach, The amount of instream flow released in the bypass reacb will be contingent in part on an analysis of the of the forthcoming hydrologic assessment and other relevant fish distribution and timing data.. It is premature to identify S cfs as an adequate flow and the 872fmsl as an acceptable pool elevation. Pg 18, Powerhouse and Tailrace. Locatiing the powerhouse upstream of anadromou.1l fish habitat is a desirable objective. However, other other species that will be impacted upstream of the anadromous fIsh reach also reqUire consideration in fmal project design of physical facilities and project operation. AS 167.05.840 requires that fish pa.s..~age is provided for all fish species (non anaciromous and anadromous). P.8/17 Mr. Michael V. Stimac 7 Reynolds Creek Hydro (FERC 11480) November 18, 1997 PDEA and DAL Commentei Pg. 19, Access Roads: Much of the existing access road system was constructed many years ago, as temporary logging roads designed for the 2S-year flood, or both. As such, significant maintenance or upgrading of roads to permanent road and stream crossing standards (designed for the 50·year flood) may be necessary to assure safe passage and minimize nonpoint source erosion and sedimentation of surface waters. Reviews of needed modifications should be contingent upon reviews by ADF&G and other appropriate agencies. Pg. 191II.C This process is not complete to the satisfaction of this agency. Pg. 19IIT.D Depending on the intertie to produce power for Hydaburg should also be based on the final assessment of the environmental consequences to fish and wildlife resources for the proposed Reynolds Creek project. IV. Consultation and Compliance Pg. 20, Seoping: The appropriate acronym for the Alaska Department of Fish and Game includes an ampersand, "&"; therefore, ADF&G. Pg. 21, Seoping: The top paragraph should list agencies from whom comments on Seoping Document 1 were received. The April 23. 1997, site visit with ADF&G was done to flag the point agreed upon by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, and the ADF&G during the July 20, 1995, site visit as being the definite upstream limit of anadromous fish. This action grew out of discussions at the December 3. 1996, interagency meeting. V. Environmental Analysis Pg. 22. V.A. General Description, Per the description of logging modifications in paragraph three, analyses of the cumulative impacts of logging to the hydrology and fish habitat should be incorporated into the overall impact analyses for this hydroproject on a short term and long-term basis, Pg 23. Affected Environment, Is our interpretation of the last sentence of third paragrapb correct in assuming this means there is likely to be more mass wasting. And what are the overall cumulative impacts of both existing and planned logging and this proposed hydro development? Pg. 24, Construction: All work within the limits of ordinary bigh water of the anadromous portion of Reynolds Creek, or that could directly affect that pordon through deposition of sediment, fly rock, or other materials, will require a fish habitat permit from the ADF&G. During the pennit process, the instream work window will be set to provide adequate protection of fish and game pursuant to Alaska Statute 16.05.870. For planning purposes, an inwater construction date of June 15 through August 1 should be used. AS 16.05.840 will be required fOI any instream modifications that impede fish passage for all fish species. The developer should NOV 18 '97 05:56PM REGION 1 907 465 2034 P.9/17 Mr. Michael V. Stimac B Reynolds Creek Hydro (FERC 11480) November 18, 1997 PDEA and DAL Comment,: be provide resources to insure a fish and wildlife agency representative will be onsite' during all onsite activities. Pg 24, Operation What is meant by a "routine basis"? Pg. 24, Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: Instream work may temporarily cause the mobilization of both existing and introduced sediments in the stream bed to travel downstream. Pg. 25. Hydrology: At the December 3, 1996, interagency meeting, the ADF&G strongly encouraged the use of the USGS Old Tom Creek gage (Station No. 15085100) data instead of or in addition to the Fish Creek data. and continues to do so. The Old Tom Creek basin is about 12 miles north northeast of the Reynolds Creek basin, and also contains lakes. The ADF&G is conce.med that use of the Fish Creek data could lead to inaccurate water budgets in the Reynolds Creek system because Ketchikan receives significantly more total rain than the southern portion of Prince of Wales Island, and there are seasonal differences in precipitation patterns and air temperanu-es as well. An independent assessment of the hydrologic projections is essential. Inaccurate projections of hydrologic variability in Alaska are often a major problem after projects go on line. Accordingly, flow data should be collecting during this preliminary license and all subsequent licensing and potential construction phases to refine the knowledge of hydrologic variability. Where are these projected flows with the 60 cfs QAA supposed to occur within the Reynolds Creek watershed? What is normal hourly variability of stage within Lake Mellen throughout the year (on a long-term basis)? Pg. 26, Table 1: What is the basis for the average monthly flows presented in this table. and what are the confidence intervals? The synopsis sentences below the table do not appear to accurately reflect the values in the table. For example, in the average and minimum flow columns, the peak. flows occur in October and May. not October and November as stated. We have not received the hydrologic data requested in our earlier communications in 1995. Pg. 26. Water Quality: This section appears to only address chronic sources of sediment and turbidity. It should also address acute sourceS during COnstruction and operation. including small-and large-scale mass wasting. Water temperature is also a concern. Pg. 27. Water Quality! The extremely limited data (intermittent over two years, April through July) in this section can hardly serve as a basis for confident predictions of project effects. Will the continuing monitoring referenced in this section sample more times of the year? Pg. 28, Fish and Aquatic Life: It would help the reader if the appropriate appendices in the Draft License Application were referenced here. Mr. Michael V. Stimac 9 Reynolds Creek Hydro (FERC 11480) November 18, 1997 PDEA and DAL Comments c"~T...taC.:.{(!.~ Pg. 28, Upper Watershed: The first paragraph references Julie's Pond, but this feature is· not labeled on Figure 4. The PDEA needs to be consistent when referring to the small lake upstream of Lake Mellen, at times referred to as Interlaken and at others as Interlaken Pond. The last paragraph in this section should give examples of the "moderate to high" gradients present in this stream reach. Pg. 29. Figure 9: The ADF&G believes this figure should be revised to initiate the salmon spawning phase earlier, and extend salmon incubation and rearing period longer. Based on observations by biologists from the divisions of Sport Fish and Commercial Fish, and emergent weir work done on Klawock Lake, spawning and incubation for pink and chwn salmon begins about August 1, and for coho salmon about September 1. Incubation and freshwater rearing for pink salmon continues through mid·May. Incubation for chmn salmon continues until May t. and freshwater rearing until mid-May. Coho salmon incubation is not complete until mid-June. Are there other periods of intersystem migration of adult grayling? Pg. 33, Lower Reynolds Creek: Reynolds Creek is specified as stream number 103-25-10420 in the ADF&G Atlas o.nd Catalog ojWatel's Impol'tantjol' Spawn;ng, Rearing 01 Migration of Anadromous Fishes pursuant to Alaska Statute 16.05.870(a). The Catalog and colTesponding Atlas are updated annually. and the most recent vemon should always be checked and referenced. It is important to remember that the aerial surveys discussed in this section were conducted by the ADF&G Division of Commercial Fisheries Management and Development for the purpose of managing pink and chum salmon fisheries. Hence, the surveys poorly document stream use upstream ofllie mouth due to poor visibility through the forest canopy. and do not sample late enough in the year to observe most coho salmon or steelhead trout returns. Although it may be tnle that the numbers in Table 3 can represent fish from more than one stream, the vast majority offish in this instance are Reynolds Creek fish because it is currently the only significant stream mouth within Copper Harbor. Pg. 36, Lower Reynolds Creek: The referenced 1979 stream survey by ADF&.G staff provides a valuable historical document. However, streams are living systems, changing over time. The recent observations that hundreds of pink salmon spawners have used the stream reach upstream of the old USGS gage, and that there is some gmvel among the small pools in this reach, speak to its importance to anadromous fish resources. Perhaps there was less gravel pn=sent when the survey was done. Reynolds Creek is typical ofmany streams on Prince of Wales Island in that it has a relatively length of stream that is actually accessible to anadromous fish species. Therefore, each small reach is of heightened importance to anadromous fish species occurring in the stream. Reynolds Creek and its major tributary from the north (locally called Rachel Creek) demonstrate dynamic natures. A major log jam immediately above the barrier to anadromous fish observed during the July 20, 1995, site visit was lsrscly gone by the April 23, 1997, site visit, with the wood moving downstream to other reaches. The tributary was once a side channel or distributary from a separate anadromous stream. Sometime is the past five to ten years, a log and jam became tight enough to divert the entire stream to become what is essentially the north NOV 18 '97 05:58PM REGION 1 907 465 2034 P.1U17 Mr. Michael V. Stimac 10 Reynolds Creek Hydro (FERC 11480) November 18, 1997 PDEA and DAL Comments fork .of Reynolds Creek. Several old channels can be observed walking across the alluvial fan at the head of Copper Harbor. The upper reaches of Rachel Creek are quite Ullstable at present, cutting new banks and transporting large amounts of gravel and other sediments into the lower reaches of Rachel and Reynolds Creek.c;. Pink salmon carcasses were observed by the ADF&G up Rachel Creek to a bedrock chute at the point of diversion. It appears that the word "redd" was· dropped from the middle of the second paragraph on this page. Pg. 36, Water Quality What is meant by short-term and how does this vary for each project phase including the construction and post construction phases? Pg. 37, Lake Mellen Levels: As noted in our comments on page 15, the PDEA is unclear as [0 what tbe uncontrolled water surface elevation of Lake Mellen is, and to what extent the proposed diversion dam would alter the range of natural variability in water level~. What data are there to support the statements in this section that the proposed water levels fall within normal ranges of variability? Are there data for year-round water surface levels? If so, the data should be presented. Is this section predicting that drawdowns of one to two feet amplitude will be common and recurrent during periods of low inflow? How often are the "infrequent" drawdowns to 872 fmsl expected? The relationship between existing water levels, geomorphic control levels. and seasonal natural variability needs to be clearly defined and described. Pg. 38, Flows in the Bypass Reach: The ADF&G does not necessarily agree that a flow of 5 cfs. measured at the lower end of the bypass reach, is sufficient to meet the instantaneous instream flow needs of the reach. A series on monitoring sites will need to be established initially to determine the relationship between flows at the upper and lower ends of the bypass reach, and to calibrate and possibly adjust how much water is supplied by the water bypass structure in the diversion dam. Pg. 38, Flows Below the Anadromous Fish Barner: It il\ imponant to bear in mind that fish require instantaneous flows to supply their habitat requirements. not average flows on a daily, weekly. or monthly basis. As such, any discussion of instream flows needs to include the range of instantaneous flows as well as any applicable averages. See the page 36 comments for perspective on the 1979 ADF&G surveys. Contrary to the last paragraph on this page, low flows in mid-August would be coincident with spawning activities of pink, and possibly chum, salmon. A major reason the state and federal resource agencies have pressed for the tailrace to return water to Reynold4; Creek upstream of the ultimate anadromous fish barrier was to avoid just such turbulence in the stream reach used by anadromous f1Sh. Pg. 39, Flows Below the Anadromous Fish Barrier: This section seems to further imply that thb: is not a run-of-the-river project, discus.~ing storage in Lake Mellen, larger ~natural diurnal flow fluctuations, and instream flows being dependent on power generation rates when Lake Mellen is below the 876 fmsllevel. The ADF&G does not agree that flow in the anaclromous ponion of Reynolds Creek that is equal to the bypass flow plus the power generation flow will P.12/17 Mr. Michael V. Stimac 11 Reynolds Creek Hydro (FERC 11480~ November 18, 1997 PDEA and DAL Commente. NOV 18 '97 05:58PM REGION 1 907 ~65~2034 meet the instantaneous instream flow requirements for anadromous fish. Some fall-safe mechanism to provide additional flow up to the required instantaneous flows will have be included in the project design, either at the diversion site or the powerhouse. Pg. 40, Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: Depending on the differences between natural and regulated water surface elevations, there may be deterioration and sloughing of the banks along portions of Rich's Pond, Lake Mellen, and the connecting channel. Pg. 40, Vegetation: The last paragraph seems to state that only large trees axe left in 66-foot riparian buffers along Type A water bodies such as lower Reynolds Creek. Unless specifically approved by the State Forester, there is no cutting of any kind allowed within these buffers. Pg. 41, Wildlife: This section would benefit from a reorganization whereby each species of interest is covered in turn. Although this might lead to some repetiUon, it would make specific information of interest much easier to find. Pg. 43, Wildlife: Riparian buffers along Type A water bodies under the Alaska Forest Resources and Practices Act are 66-feet wide beginning at the ordinary high water mark, not 60-feet as stated in the top paragraph. Also, estuarine areas at the mouths of anadromous streams receive similar buffers to specific extents. No mention is made of consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding their cataloging of bald eagle nest trees. Pg. 44. Vegetation, Consttuction: To minimize cumulative effects of this proposed project in addition to the logging being done in the vicinity of Reynolds Creek, it will be incumbent on the project designers to plan facility locations and construction methods that will avoid any clearing of vegetation in riparian buffers. The ADF&G is willing to work with the applicant to develop site-specific measures in areas such as the tailrace where pa.~sage through the riparian area is required. Pg. 45. Wetlands. Construction: Where would f111 be necessary along the corridor? Pg. 45, Wildlife, Construction: As noted on page 17 and the ADF&G comments on that page, the construction force associated with this project will be prohibited from causing increased hunting. trapping. or fishing pressure in the project area. Pg. 48. Operation: Because the range of natural fluctuation in Lake Mellen water levels has not been documented, it is too early to state that project operations will not be beyond that range. Pg. 52, Cumulative Effects: The ADF&G believes that. contrary to statements made in Scopiug Document 2. the cumulative effects analysis for the Reynolds Creek project must include effects on terrestrial and aquatic resources, because the entire project boundary is within lands already subject to extensive and intensive management activities and disturbances. The incremental effect of development of the Reynolds Creek project bas the potential to affect a significant portion of the remaining habitat of old-growth dependent species within the project boundary. P.13/17 Mr. Michael V. Stimac 12 Reynolds Creek Hydro (FERC 11480} November 18,1997 PDEA and DAL Comment2. and any developmental activities within the riparian area.1i of anadromous fish streams needs to be considered in Jight of cumulative effectl'. Logging effects can be quite extensive, but are typically not permanent. Effects due to the proposed project, such as transmission corridor clearing, modifications to Rich's Pond, and project facilities, are essentially permanent losses of habitat. Pg. 54, Transmission Line Route: It will be important that the transmission line be sited so that an y clearing during construction or as part of future maintenance would not affect riparian buffer areas. This may require some route adjustment because much of the existing road system the transmission line would follow parallels the riparian areas of Deer Creek and the Hydaburg River. Pg. 54, Recreation and Other Land Uses: 1n contrast to the rest of Southeast Alaska. Prince of Wales Island has an extensive road system. Current estimates are that about half of the 3,000 miles of road on the island are accessible by passenger vehicles. It is not uncommon for residents to travel several hours to reach desirable recreational sites. Developmental AnaJ,ysis Pg.55: More detail is needed on who the developers are of the cited energy plan for Prince of Wales Island. The ADF&G ha~ yet to receive a requested copy of this energy plan. I DRAFT APPLICATION FOR LICENSB It is difficult for the ADF&.G to provide thorough comments on the Draft Application for License because the document is incomplete and contains insufficient factual or site-speCific data as back-up for statements and analyses. Exhibit A Pg. A-I, Drainage Area: What is the source of the statementt; concerning average flows for the basin? The estimate of 57 cfs for average annual flow at the outlet of Lake Mellen does not agree with the 60 cfs average annual flow estimate on page 25 of tile PDEA. The 50% exceedance flow in Figure A·2 is less than SO cis. Pg, A-5, Transmission LineiSwitchyani: The ADF&.G continues to recommend use of a submarine cable rather than overhead lines for the transmission line crossing of Hetta Inlet, in the; interest of public safety and lower risk to birds. Pg. A-7. Mode of Operation: The ADF&G is concerned that 5 cis flow with deflectors in place has not been identified as an adequate instream flow. If the jets are fully closed and the diversion dam has drawn down Rich's Pond. there could be a significant period when the only I I NOV 18 '97 05:59PM REGION 1 907 465 2034 P.14/17 Mr. Michael V. Stimac 13 Reynolds Creek Hydro (FERC 11480) November 18,1997 PDEA and DAL Comments flow in the anadromous stream reach would be that passing through the bypass oritice at the dam. This situation is unacceptable. Some fail-safe mechanism must be designed and installed to assure that instantaneous required instream flows in the anadromous stream reach are maintained even if the deflectors are in place or the jets are shut down. The flow assurance mechanism could be present at either the diversion site or the powerhouse. It is important to realize that fish habitat is determined by instantaneous flows, not hourly, daily. or weekly averages. Exhibit F Additional exhibits need to include clearing limits, detailed plan views of the activities between Lake Mellen and the cascade below the existing outlet, including the proposed temporary coffer dam and bypass structure. Project drawings should clearly illustrate any proposed modification t(l the mouth of Lake Mellen including the existing log jam. and other habitats in the project urea.. Exhibit F-3: More detail needs to be shown regarding maintenance on required instream flows when the stoplogs are in place. Is the current proposal to only have the 5 cfs bypass flow during stoplog use? Exhibit F-5: It is the ADF&G's understanding that the location or orientation of the powerhollse hac; been slightly modified since this exhibit was drawn. The ADF&G continues to be interested in exploring tailrace design options that will return flow at or above the upper extent of anadromoLls fish habitat. Appendix A Without the hydrology study, we are unable to provide adequate comments on instream flow regimes and other project features. This is a significant deficiency in the DLA AppendixB This appendix is too general for rigorous review. As the project design proceeds, site-specific prescriptions and drawings will need to be developed to implement an adequate erosion control plan. Project featureS that will need to be covered by a specific plan include prevention of point and nonpoint source sediment and erosion during transmission line installation, and capturing and channe,l surface runoff along the penstock route to mimic existing surface flow and avoid erosion. Pg. 2-1, Penstock: Where would the bigblead machine be set up, and where would the tailhold be located? What extent of ground disturbance would be necessary to install the tailhold? Pg. 2-3. Other. Mechanical, Electrical. and Transmission Equipment: The fail-safe mode will need to include provision for required instantaneous in stream flows in the anadromous fish portion of Reynolds Creek. P.1S/17 Mr. Michael V. Stimac 14 Reynolds Creek Hydro (FERC 11480) November 18,1997 PDEA and DAL Comments Pg. 3-1, Climate: In addition to the common gales in fall and winter. storm-force winds are not unusual in the project area. Pg. 3-2, Erosion and Mass Movement: The statement that there is rio evidence of mass movements in the project area needs to be checked. Areas on the north side of Copper Harbor may ex.hibit evidence of such movements. Pg. 5-1, General Guidelines item 3: Some revegetation of disturbed areas may be necessary prior to final grading as an ongoing erosion control method. especially if areas will be left over winter without final grade. Pg. 6-4, SUt Fence Barrier: It has been the ADF&G's on a number oflargc construction project-I; on Prince of Wales Island that silt fence barriers are frequently not nearly as effective at intercepting and containing sediment as are ditch blocks and straw bale dams. This appears largely due to the large volume of water that will travel as sheet flow in the shallow soils of the area. Pg. 6-9, Seeding: More specifics are needed on planned seed mixtures, timing, and fertilization. The ADF&G recommends the use of native seeds, and the stockpiling of the top meter of overburden separately during excavation. This conserved material contains a large number of active propagules that will speed revegetation of disturbed areas, particularly in wetter sites. We recommend the applicant contact the U.S. Fish ahd Wildlife Service for additional recommendations on revegetation. Attachments: Further comments are not possible due to lack of drawings. PRELIMINARY RECO:MMENDATIONS The recommendations incorporated in the above comments should be implemented. Most center on a lack of insufficient attention to our prior communications for data and infonnatioD, especially 1995 communications. We continue to believe a meeting with the new representative of Hydaburg, PERC. and fish and wildlife resource agencies is desirable, especially in reViewing these and other parties comments. This would be a more efficient and constructive approach for identifying the next courses of actions for this project and its studies. PRELIMINARY TERMS AND CONDITIONS In addition to terms and conditions incorporated in our comments above. sufficient instream flows and lake levels must be maintained to insure fish and wildlife production throughout the impacted project area. NUV l~ '~7 06:00PM REGION 1 907 465 2034 Mr. Michael V. Stimac 15 Reynolds Creek Hydro (FERC 11480) November 18~ 1997 PDEA and DAL Comments Developer must provide sufficient resources to cover the personnel and operational costs of onsite monitoring on a full-time basLc; by the fish and wildife agencies during all construction phases. Annual project reviews must be completed Funding for all monitoring and mitigation measures must be held in an interest bearing escrow account for that purpose. Funding can only be spent with agreement of the fish and wildife resource agencies. All project flow releases should be designed on a fail safe basis for routine and emergency shut downs. Flow data and lake stages must be monitored during the prelicensing, construction and post construction phases, including basic water quality parameters (temperature, dissolved oxygen, sediment. rurbidity, etc) All studies must be continued for at least five years beyond the completion of the final construction phase and after any change to project operation. Annual reports and review are required with review by fish and wildlife resource agencies Blasting energy (overpressures) transmitted to fish bearing waters through the ground shall not cause mortality to juvenile fish and shall be limited to an instantaneous maximum change of 2.7 pounds per square inch in fish bearing waters. Additionally. peak particle velocities shall be limited to 0.5 inches per second or less in spawning beds during egg incubation. PRELDMINARYPRESC~ONS Studies and information identified in May 15 and Oct 17. 1995 correspondence are still required. In addition to our prescriptions incorporated in our comment~ above. sufficient instream flows and lake levels must be maintained to insure fish and wildlife production throughout the impacted project area. Developer must provide sufficient resources to cover the personnel and operational costs of oD!~ite monitoring on a full-time basis by the fish and wildife ageneies during all construction phases. Annual project reviews must be completed P.17/17 Mr. Michael V. Stimac 16 Reynolds Creek Hydro (FERC 11480} . November 18, 1997 PDEA and DAL Comments Funding for all mOnitoring and mitigation mea.~ures must be held in an interest bearing escrow account for that purpose. Funding can only be spent with agreement of the fish and wildife resource agencies. All project flow releases should be designed on a fail safe basis for routine and emergency shut downs. Flow data and lake stages must be continuously monitored on an instantaneous basis during the prelicensing. construction and post construction phases, including ba.~ic water quality parameters (temperature, dissolved oxygen, sediment. turbidity, etc) Thank you for the opportunity to comment on these documents and this proposed hydroelectric project. If you have any questions. or need additional information, please contact me. Sincerely, ~'D~\~. James D. Durst Area Habitat Biologist cc: Lana Shea Flanders. ADF&G H&R, Douglas Rocky Holmes, ADF&G SF, Douglas Christopher Estes, ADF&G SPIRTS. Anchorage Dave Sturdevant, DEC 401, Juneau Jennifer Garland, DOC, Juneau Jim Anderson, DNR DOL, Juneau John Dunker, DNR DMWM, Juneau Michiel Holley. COE. Anchorage Nan Allen, PERC, Washington DC Nevin Holmberg. FWS. Juneau Steven Brockmann, FWS. Ketchikan Steve Zimmerman. NMFS, Juneau Andy Grossman, NMFS. Juneau Rick Harris. Sealaska Corp .• Juneau John Bruns. Haida Corp., Hydaburg ARt,IS Alaska Resourct:s ''''rary & Information Servlcer <