The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutReynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment 1997i'~' HAIDA CORPORATION ".:iiI'! .-- ----------------------~~~~~------T_----august TK 1425 .R49 R49 1997d nineteen-hundred ninety-seven HAIDA CORPORATION • .. -Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project • FERC Project No. 11480 -August 1997 Draft - .. Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment - - -T""" 8 LO ~ ('I) AEJL1S -('I) AIaskaResolJrLC, UI,raf\ ,\: inforrnaliOH Services Libran BuiiJllH'. SuilC 11.1 321 f Prdvidc;~'Cl Dri\',,: .. Anchorage, A!"': (1)508-4614 • - • • • .. • • • • • - - • - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARy ................................................................................................................................ 1 1 APPLICATION ...................................................................................................................... 4 II PUKPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION ................................................................................ 5 II.A PURPOSE OF ACTION ............................................................................................................ 5 II.B NEED FOR POWER ................................................................................................................. 5 II.B.l Hydaburg ............................................................................................................................................. 6 II.B.2 Interconnected Prince of Wales Island .................................................................................................. 6 ILB.3 Load Forecasts ..................................................................................................................................... 6 III PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES .................................................................. 9 III.A APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL ................................................................................................... 9 lILA. 1 Project Facilities ................................................................................................................................. 9 IILA.2 Project Operation ............................................................................................................................... 9 GeneraL ..................................................................................................................................................... 9 Lake Mellen ............................................................................................................................................ 15 Bypass Reach Flow Regime ..................................................................................................................... 15 Lower Reynolds Creek Flow Regime ........................................................................................................ 17 IIIA.3 Proposed Environmental Measures ................................................................................................... 17 Construction Precautions ......................................................................................................................... 17 Lake Mellen Elevation Operating Regime ................................................................................................ 18 Instream Flows in Bypass Reach .............................................................................................................. 18 Powerhouse and Tailrace Location ........................................................................................................... 18 Transmission Line Features ..................................................................................................................... 18 Access Roads ........................................................................................................................................... 19 III.B MANDATORY CONDITIONS .............................................................................................. 19 III.C MODIFICATION OF APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL ............................................................ 19 III.D NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE .............................................................................................. 19 IV. CONSULTATION AND COMPLIANCE .......................................................................... 20 IV.A AGENCY CONSULTATION ................................................................................................ 20 IV.B INTERVENTIONS ................................................................................................................. 20 IV.C SCOPING ................................................................................................................................ 20 IV.D WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION ............................................................................... 21 IV.E COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT PROGRAM ....................................................... 21 V. ENVIRONMENTAL ANAL ySIS ........................................................................................ 22 V.A GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE REYNOLDS CREEK WATERSHED ...................... 22 V.B PROPOSED ACTION AND ACTION ALTERNATIVES ..................................................... 23 August 1997 Draft Reynolds Creek HydroelectriC Project FERC Project No. 11480 • - - - - • - - • - - • - • - .. Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment V.B.l Geology and Soils Resources .............................................................................................................. 23 Affected Environment. ............................................................................................................................. 23 Environmental Impacts and Recommendations ........................................................................................ 24 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts .................................................................................................................. 24 V.B.2 Aquatic Resources ............................................................................................................................. 25 Affected Environment. ............................................................................................................................. 25 Environmental Impacts and Recommendations ........................................................................................ 36 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts .................................................................................................................. 39 V.B.3 Terrestrial Resources ......................................................................................................................... 40 Affected Environment. ............................................................................................................................. 40 Environmental Impacts and Recommendations ........................................................................................ 44 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts .................................................................................................................. 46 Y.B.4 Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species ................................................................................. 46 Affected Environment. ............................................................................................................................. 46 Environmental Impacts and Recommendations ........................................................................................ 46 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts .................................................................................................................. 46 V.B.5 Aesthetic Resources ........................................................................................................................... 47 Affected Environment. ............................................................................................................................. 47 Environmental Impacts and Recommendations ........................................................................................ 48 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts .................................................................................................................. 48 V.B.6 Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................................. 48 Affected Environment. ............................................................................................................................. 48 Environmental Impacts and Recommendations ........................................................................................ 49 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts .................................................................................................................. 49 V.B.7 Recreation and Other Land Uses ........................................................................................................ 49 Affected Environment. ............................................................................................................................. 49 Environmental Impacts and Recommendations ........................................................................................ 50 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts .................................................................................................................. 50 V.B.8 Socioeconomic Resources .................................................................................................................. 50 Affected Environment. ............................................................................................................................. 50 Environmental Impacts and Recommendations ........................................................................................ 51 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts .................................................................................................................. 51 V.C CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ...................................••••...............................•••............................. 52 V.C.1 Geographic Scope .............................................................................................................................. 52 Aesthetic Resources ................................................................................................................................. 52 Recreation and Other Land Uses .............................................................................................................. 53 V.C.2 Temporal Scope ................................................................................................................................. 53 V.C.3 Cumulative Effects Analysis .............................................................................................................. 53 Aesthetic Resources ................................................................................................................................. 53 Recreation and Other Land Uses .............................................................................................................. 54 V.D NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE ............................................................................................... 54 JlI. DEVELOPMENTAL ANALySIS ...................................................................................... 55 VII. COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT AND RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE ...... 57 VIII. CONSISTENCY WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLANS ................................................... 58 North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NA WJvfP) ....................................................................... 58 Alaska Outdoor Recreation Plan (AORP) ................................................................................................. 58 Hydaburg Coastal Management Program ................................................................................................. 59 IX. FINDING OF [OR NO] SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ........................................................... 60 X LITERA TURE CITED ........................................................................................................ 61 August 1997 Draft II Reynolds Creek HydroelectriC Project FERC Project No. 11480 .. • - • • • • • • • • .. • • • • • - • Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment XI. LIST OF PREPARERS ................................................................................................... 63 XII MAILING LIST. ............................................................................................................. 64 APPENDICES Appendix A -Agency Letters and Comments Figure 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 LIST OF FIGURES Location Map .................................................................................................................. 2 Hydaburg Historic Energy Sales ...................................................................................... 7 Annual Energy Requirements, Prince of Wales Island (interconnected) ............................. 8 Reynolds Creek Drainage & Location of Project Facilities ............................................. 10 Typical Electric Load Profile ......................................................................................... 12 Weekly Operations Simulation, Phase 1 -1,500 kW Peak Load, Load Following Operation ..................................................................................................... 13 Weekly Operations Simulation, Phase 1 -1,500 kW Peak Load, Flows DS of Powerhouse ......................................................................................................... 14 Lake Mellen Elevation Changes, April 15 -September 22, 1996 .................................... 16 Timing ofFish Life History Stages in Reynolds Creek System ........................................ 29 Topography of Lake Mellen Inlet ofInterlaken Pond ..................................................... 31 Topography of Lake Mellen Outlet to Rich's Pond ........................................................ 32 Project Area Wetlands ................................................................................................... 42 LIST OF TABLES Reynolds Creek Average Monthly Flows ....................................................................... 26 Water Quality Data (1995 to 1996) ................................................................................ 27 Anadromous Fish Counts for Reynolds Creek (Copper Harbor) from ADFG Records (1963-1996) ................................................................................. 34 Estimated Fill in Wetlands .............................................................................................. 45 Species of Concern ........................................................................................................ 47 Estimated Annual Amounts of Diesel Fuel and Resulting Pollutants from Equivalent Amounts of Generation from a Diesel-Fired Power Plant.. .................... 56 August 1997 Draft 111 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • - - - - • • • - • • • • • - • - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment SUMMARY The Applicant, Haida Corporation, proposes to construct, operate and maintain a 5.0 megawatt (MW) hydroelectric project on Reynolds Creek just west of Lake Mellen on Prince of Wales Island, approximately 10 miles east of Hydaburg, Alaska (Figure 1). The project will 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. All project lands are owned by Haida Corporation or will be acquired through a lease or purchase from Sealaska Corporation or the State of Alaska. No federal lands will be utilized for the project. This project could generate up to 23.5 million kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year of electrical energy. The project will displace diesel-fueled electric power generation and, thereby, conserve non-renewable fossil fuels and reduce the emission of noxious byproducts caused by combustion of fossil fuels. This Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment (PDEA) analyzes the benefits of the proposed project and the effects of project construction and operation on the natural resources of the Reynolds Creek Basin. Natural resource impacts have been identified as follows: Construction • A temporary increase in turbidity and sediment in Rich's Pond and Lower Reynolds Creek. • Temporary wildlife displacement due to construction noise and activity. • • Elimination of approximately 2 acres of wetlands for construction of the intake, transmission line and access road. Short-term disturbance of approximately 4.5 acres of vegetation and permanent elimination of approximately 2.5 acres of vegetation. Operation • Overhead transmission lines posing a threat to raptors. • Increased runoff from areas occupied by structures. • In-lake rearing and spawning altered by the lake level fluctuations in Lake Mellen. • Visual impacts from the presence of project facilities in the area. • A decrease in flow in the bypass reach of Reynolds Creek by 30 cfs at 1.5 MW operation. • Inundation of Rich's Pond area. August 1997 Draft 1 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 I -. -, ARCTIC OCCAN City of ALASKA P,lCIFIC OCCAN LOCATION MAP ----------------"---,,,-- --t -a VICINITY MAP Figure 1 Reynolds Creek Location Mop --I • - - • • Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment The Applicant has proposed the following mitigation measures: • Installation of a low-level outlet in the diversion structure to continuously release flows into the bypassed reach of Reynolds Creek. • Design of the overhead transmission line according to raptor protection guidelines and installation of collision avoidance devices on the line, if appropriate. • Implementation of an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and Best Management Practices to control runoff and prevent delivery of construction sediment to streams. • Timing of certain construction activities to minimize disturbance to fish and wildlife. • Construction ofthe tailrace above the anadromous fish barrier in Reynolds Creek. • Design and construction of project facilities to minimize aesthetic impacts. • No threatened, endangered or sensitive species have been found or are expected in the project area. A list of species of concern provided by the agencies was considered in the analysis of terrestrial impacts. • The amount of any environmental resource affected would either be a small increment of the total in the project area or mitigation measures that are proposed would render the impact insignificant. • Thus, on the basis of the overall environmental analysis, a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is recommended. • • • - • • • • - - August 1997 Draft 3 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • - • • • • • - • • • - - ... • • - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment I. APPLICATION The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) issued a Preliminary Pennit to the Haida Corporation (the Applicant) effective December 1, 1994, to allow them to study the hydroelectric potential of Reynolds Creek. This permit expires on November 30, 1997. Haida Corporation is an Alaskan corporation established under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act as the village corporation for the Native village of Hydaburg. Haida Corporation has retained HDR as its agent for purposes of this project. Haida Corporation intends to me an application with the Commission for a Major Water Power Project (18 CFR 4.61). The maximum installed capacity will be 5 MW. The project would be located on Reynolds Creek just west of Lake Mellen on Prince of Wales Island, approximately 10 miles east of Hydaburg, Alaska (Figure 1). All project lands are owned by Haida Corporation or will be acquired through a lease or purchase from Sealaska Corporation or the State of Alaska. No federal lands will be utilized for the project. The project will consist of a dam/intake near the outlet of Rich's Pond on the west side of Lake Mellen, a penstock to convey water from the intake to the powerhouse, a powerhouse on Lower Reynolds Creek, and a transmission line to the City of Hydaburg. The Commission, under the authority of the Federal Power Act l (FP A), may issue licenses for up to 50 years for the construction, operation, and maintenance of non-federal hydroelectric developments. Under the Commission's regulations, issuing a license for the project first requires preparation of either an Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969.2 Pursuant to the authority granted under Section 2403(b) of the Energy Policy Act of 19923 , Haida Corporation, in coordination with the Commission staff, has prepared this Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment (PDEA) for the Reynolds Creek Project consistent with the requirements of NEP A and the Council on Environmental Quality's guidelines, 40 CFR Part 1500. This document includes descriptions and evaluations of the effects of the Applicant's proposed action, including an assessment of the action's cumulative effects and project- specific effects. The PDEA will be submitted to the Commission, in lieu of the Environmental Report (Exhibit E), as part of the Application for License. This PDEA will be circulated for review to all interested parties. Following ruing, the Commission staff will independently review the PDEA and other application material for adequacy and will issue a staff Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA). The Commission Staffwill consider all comments med on the Staff DEA for the Final EA The Staff will present conclusions and recommendations for the Commission to consider in reaching its final licensing decision. The Applicant will seek benefits under Section 210 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (pURPA) of1978. The project will be located at a new diversion as defined in 18 CFR 292.202 . U.S.C. Section 791(a)-825(r). 2 42 U.S.c. Section 4321 et seq. (1988) 3 Pub.L. No. 102-486 August 1997 Draft 4 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 .. - - - • • • • - • • • - .. .. . - .. - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment II. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION II.A PURPOSE OF ACTION The Commission must decide whether or not to issue a hydropower license to Haida Corporation for the project, and what conditions should be placed on any license issued. Issuing a license would allow Haida Corporation to construct and operate the project for a tenn of up to 50 years, making electric power from a renewable resource available. The environmental and economic effects of construction and operation of the project, as proposed by Haida Corporation, are assessed in this PDEA. The effects of a no-action alternative are also considered. II.B NEED FOR POWER The Reynolds Creek Project would be located approximately 10 miles east of the City of Hydaburg, Alaska, on Prince of Wales Island (POWl). Power from the project would have an immediate use in meeting the needs of Hydaburg and would be useful in meeting the island's long- tenn anticipated power needs. The project would displace diesel-fueled electric power generation and, thereby, conserve non-renewable fossil fuels and reduce the emission of noxious byproducts caused by combustion of fossil fuels. Displacing fossil fuels would also reduce the production of "greenhouse" gases and reduce risk of oil spills associated with the handling and storage of these fuels. This is particularly important in the pristine environment of southeast Alaska where the project would be located. If the project license is denied, the project's capacity would likely need to be replaced with diesel generation. Hydaburg is located within the service territory of Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T) who currently operates and maintains the electric generation and distribution system. 4 The Hydaburg system is an isolated electrical network with no interconnection to any other utility or transmission system outside of the existing service territory. AP&T intends to purchase the power from the project to offset diesel generation in Hydaburg as outlined in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the two parties, dated July 17, 1997. As the island becomes interconnected, the project's energy will be used to meet the energy requirements of all of POWI. To assess this need for power, AP&T's current resources and the projected regional need for power were reviewed . 4 AP&T also holds the electrical franchise for the nearby communities of Hollis and Craig and provides wholesale power to the community of Klawock. August 1997 Draft 5 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • - - • • • • • - • • • - • • • • .. - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment n.B.1 Hydaburg Currently, all electrical generation in Hydaburg is from diesel generators owned and operated by AP&T. In 1996, the peak demand was 390 kilowatt (kW) and total sales were 1,530 Megawatt- hours (MWh) (175 kW average). The number of customers totaled slightly less than 200. However, peak demand has been as much as 490 kW which occurred both in 1992 and 1994. Energy sales have increased by an average of about 50 MWh over the last ten years as shown in Figure 2. n.B.2 Interconnected Prince of Wales Island The CraiglKlawock area, located 22 miles north-northwest of Hydaburg, is currently served by AP&T and the Tlingit-Haida Regional Electric Authority (THREA). The majority of generation is being supplied by the Black Bear Lake Hydroelectric Project (BBL). BBL is estimated to have an average annual generation capability of25,000 MWh. Generation from BBL, in 1996, totaled 19,000 MWh. At the end of 1996, there was a surplus of hydroelectric generation on POWl. However, a transmission intertie from BBL west to the City of Thorne Bay, the Goose Creek Industrial Park and Kasaan has been funded and will soon be constructed. Construction is estimated to be complete in 1999. With this interconnection in place, BBL will be essentially 100% utilized. AP&T is currently pursuing development of the South Fork Black Bear Creek project (BBL2) to increase their hydroelectric generating capacity. The output from this project will largely be consumed by the parallel development of a mineral processing facility near Klawock. n.B.3 Load Forecasts To identify the future need for power on the island, the Applicant worked jointly with AP&T and the Sealaska CorporationS to develop load forecasts and to identify resource options. As part of this study, transmission interties to interconnect the communities of Hollis and Hydaburg to the existing electrical grid system were investigated. A comparison of the load forecasts and the utilization of resources from this study is shown in Figure 3. Since all energy in excess of 23,000,000 kWh per year must be generated using diesel fuel-fired generators, a clear need for the project power output to offset this fuel generation would exist by the time the Reynolds Creek Project could be constructed. 5 Sealaska Corporation is the major private landholder on Prince of Wales Island and is responsible for the majority of the industrial activity such as logging and mining that is taking place on the island. Sealaska is also the Regional Cotporation fonned under the Alaska Native Settlement Claims Act (ANSCA) and, thus, represents a significant number of electrical consumers on the island. August 1997 Draft 6 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 I I I I • I I • • • • • • • • • • I • FIGURE 2 Hydaburg Historic Energy Sales 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 ------------ 600 ------------------------------- 400 200 o +-------~------_r------_+------~--------+_------~------~------_+------~--------~----~ 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Year I • • • • • I • t I • • FIGURE 3 Annual Energy Requirements Prince of Wales Island (interconnected) • • • • • • ~.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 40 35 30 ... 25 ~ i :E 20 15 5 o +-......,.._..---...,.........J ~ Year o N ~ • • - - - - • • • • • • • • • • - • - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment III. PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES llI.A APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL m.A.1 Project Facilities The Reynolds Creek Project would consist of a 20-foot long, concrete weir, diversion dam and intake at the outlet of Rich's Pond (Lake Mellen); a bypass pipe; a 3,200-foot long, 42-inch diameter, steel penstock; a powerhouse; access roads (500 feet total), and a 12.3-mile long, 34.5 kV overhead transmission line. The project will 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. The Reynolds Creek drainage is shown in Figure 4 and general drawings of project facilities are presented in Exhibit F of the Application for License. m.A.2 Project Operation General The Reynolds Creek Project will operate almost entirely in a run-of-the-river mode, generating electrical energy from 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. The water balance of Upper and Lower Reynolds Creek will be the same on a weekly, ifnot daily, time frame. Three control modes are planned for the project. In the first control mode, the project would be responsible for governing the 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, the project would likely see two additional modes of operation, "base" loading and "level control". When base 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. August 1997 Draft 9 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project fERC Project No. 11480 I I I Lower Re)f1olds Creek I Waler Quality Sampling Slle RCHDR 1/1 • I • • Mountain Copper E IN FEET III~A~P~P~R~O~X~IM~;A~TE~S~C~A~L~~~~ -.-. 50~0' r--O' 2500 O' 125 • • • t.Aiddle \ Reynolds Creek \ Pond Interlaken • • I I Summit Lak 1318 fmsl) (Elev. I ~ Upper Ids Creek r-J/ I Reyno ~3 Lake Marge 1750 fmsl) (Elev Figure 4 • and k Drainage Reynolds Cree . t FaJ(c~il~it:::ie:.s~ ___ _ of Pro Jec Location • • - - • • • Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment When the project is operating in either a load following or base 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. A description of each of these operational modes and the effect on Lake Mellen elevation and Reynolds Creek flows are discussed in more detail below. Load Following In this control mode, the generating unit would be programmed to adjust to increasing or decreasing system loads and frequency by varying the output, and hence the turbine discharge. • The typical variation in load in the existing system is characterized by a morning and late afternoon peak as shown in Figure 5. This would mean that the project would ramp up and down twice a day according to the system load. Slight, and immediate variations in output would be • expected at all times in response to instantaneous loads placed on the system, such as when electrical motors are started or stopped. Figures 6 and 7 show the results of a week-long, hourly simulation of this mode of operation using Block Loading • • • • • • - - - - With block loading, the unit would be set to a desired output level and left there for a period of time. Generally, the desired output from the unit would probably be established weekly and updated once or twice daily. Actual operations will vary based upon load, hydrology and other unit availability within the system. During these load blocks, discharge from the unit will remain constant. Level Control When the project is operating under level control, all available inflow up to the rated turbine capacity is used for generation. Inflow in excess of the maximum turbine flow is passed as spill. Flows in Lower Reynolds Creek are equal to the naturally occurring inflow. Due to the electrical constraints of an isolated system, this mode of operation will only be possible when the project is interconnected to the remainder of Prince of Wales Island. Actual hourly inflow data recorded at the site. During the early years of project operation, when the project is used to meet the loads of Hydaburg only, the project will be able to operate in this mode at all times except for periods of extremely low inflow. When there is insufficient water to support this mode of operation, the project will need to operate in conjunction with another generating resource. August 1997 Draft 11 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • I • I • • • • • • • • • • • • t • • FIGURE 5 Typical Electric Load Profile 100% 90% 80% 70% ~ 60% u III Q. III (J 50% ~ III GI a. -0 ~ 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour • I • • • • • • • • FIGURE 6 Weekly Operations Simulation Phase 1 -1,500 kW Peak Load Load Following Operation • • • I • I 75r-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~878.0 50 25 I~v~~ __________ ~ ""'---------____ A ~ _ .. -'" _. - _ .. _. _" -.. -... __ -0_ .. _ .. _"_"_" _ '" _. __ ... _ .. _ .. __ .. _ .. _. _._ .. _ .. _. _ .. _ .. _ .. _"_" ___ . __ .. _ .. _" _ .. _ .. _~_._ 877.0 876.0 = c o 875.0 ti ,------------~----~~-------------..,.". ... _-------... ------------w~ ---------- , ~, . , ........... " , , I . , . , , " .. . ..... . , . . -. , . , . 874.0 873.0 o ~-,---,--_+_ __ _.,__+__.. __ --t__,...__r___t__.___,__+___.___,... ___ --,.__+__.,.._...,.__+__,_ __ _+ ____ ____;--,.__.,__+_..,..__.__!_ ____ __+ ____ _+ 872.0 o 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96 108 120 132 144 156 168 Hour L ----------------- ---Bypass Reach Natural Inflow - -----Turbine Flow - --• lake MelienE': • I • I I • I • • • • FIGURE 7 Weekly Operations Simulation Phase 1 -1,500 kW Peak Load Flows OS of Powerhouse • • • t 75.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------. ~-.... ,". . ... ,', ,--, , . .A ~ ,,"''' ~ ..... ~.~-.• ~~.-,----,~ r--~---7~ , . ' ....... /11 50 25 o 12 24 36 48 60 72 ,," * "''' .. "''' ..... '" . 84 Hour . . ...... If 96 108 '".... ... ~--'~,~-,~----~,~. ~~~~v-_~ --. .. ...... " 120 132 144 156 168 • II • - - - - • • • • • . ,. • • - - - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Startup/Shutdown A typical mode of operation for use of deflectors is to set up the turbine so that if generation shuts down for any reason, the deflectors are swung into position, and flow is maintained through the turbine until such time as a plant operator can assess the reason for the plant shutdown. Flows through the turbine would be reduced to a minimum level 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 would have to be shutdown for an extended period, the flow through the jets would be slowly shut-off. It is proposed that the turbine for this project be operated in this way to maintain flow downstream of the powerhouse during unplanned shutdowns. During startup, the process is reversed. Lake Mellen Lake Mellen has a surface area of approximately 150 acres at elevation 876 feet mean sea level (fins!). Average annual inflow to the lake is 43,300 acre-feet. Lake Mellen naturally experiences elevation changes in the order of two feet due to changes in inflow as recorded and shown in Figure 8. During normal operation of the project, the pool elevation will be at or near the crest elevation of 876 fins!' Inflows in excess of the required turbine flow will pass over the diversion as uncontrolled spill. During periods of extended low inflow, or to account for daily variability in inflow, storage in Lake Mellen will be used to supplement natural inflow. On a day-to-day basis, little variation in pool elevation is expected. Drawdown of Lake Mellen will be limited to a minimum elevation of 872 finsl which equates to about 600 acre-feet of usable storage, or about 1 % of the average annual yield of the system. During the months of April and May, the minimum drawdown elevation will be limited to elevation 874.5 finsl to facilitate resident fish migration upstream into Middle Reynolds Creek. If, and when, the elevation of Lake Mellen reaches the minimums described above, project operations will be curtailed until sufficient inflow returns to the system. During any drawdown times, flow will always be entering the bypass reach via the uncontrolled low level outlet . Bypass Reach Flow Regime The bypass reach of Reynolds Creek will extend from the intake location at the outlet of Rich's Pond approximately 3,500 feet downstream to the tailrace location (Figure 4). The average gradient in the diversion reach is 23%. Much of the diversion reach is located in incised bedrock with isolated step pools forming at low flows. During project operation, flow in the diversion reach will be a combination of releases from the low level outlet, spill and local runoff. August 1997 Draft 15 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 I • • • 4.00 3.80 3.60 3.40 5:3.20 l! .2' GI x 3.00 GI t7I fa (!) 2.80 2.60 2.40 2.20 2.00 III ... • • i I • FIGURE 8 Lake Mellen Elevation Changes April 1S-Sep 22, 1996 Days of Record I • • I • • • - - • Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment A minimum in stream flow will be released through the low level outlet on the diversion structure. This flow will be continuous and will be senior and independent of flows used for power generation. Spill flows will occur anytime the elevation of Lake Mellen is at elevation 876 finsl and inflow into the lake exceeds the required turbine flow required for generation. The 0.5 square miles of drainage area of the bypass reach can be expected to contribute on average an additional 6 cfs of flow. Lower Reynolds Creek Flow Regime .. Flows in Lower Reynolds Creek immediately below the tailrace will be the sum of bypass reach flows and power generation flows. These flows will increase with the addition of unregulated tributary flows which enter approximately 700 downstream of the tailrace. During average and wet years, and during most dry years, flows in Lower Reynolds Creek under project operation will generally be the same as are occurring naturally now with the exception of the daily fluctuation that is described above. During extreme low flow periods which could occur in any year, water will be drawn from storage to supplement naturally occurring inflow when required. This will result in an *' enhancement of flows in Lower Reynolds Creek until such time that the usable storage in the system has been exhausted. When enhancement flows can no longer be provided by the system, flows in Lower Reynolds Creek will revert back to natural flows. Following a period of low flow, flows in excess of the minimum in stream flow and the turbine flow will be used to replenish the flows that were used previously for enhancement. This will result in a slight "shaving" of the flows in Lower Reynolds Creek , .. - • - - ID.A.3 Proposed Environmental Measures Several measures have been built into the project design to ameliorate or mitigate for potential adverse impacts of project construction and operation. These measures have largely been incorporated as best management practices (BMPs), as a result of identification of potential adverse impacts by the Applicant's design team, or by agency comments during scoping or consultation. To protect and/or mitigate impacts on environmental resources, Haida Corporation proposes to: Construction Precautions • • Provide erosion and sediment control measures during construction and operation of the project by implementing the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan in Appendix B of the Application for License. Prohibit hunting, trapping, and fishing by construction personnel during the construction of the project. • Minimize area of disturbance for construction of project facilities. August 1997 Draft 17 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment • Lake Mellen Elevation Operating Regime • '. • .. .. • - • - • Maintain lake elevation during the potential grayling spawning period (April through May) above elevation 874.5 finsl to ensure that grayling have normal access to potential spawning areas. • Maintain the elevation of Lake Mellen between 876 and 874 finsl during the remainder of the year, under normal hydrologic conditions and power demand. Under extreme conditions, lake level may be drawn as low as 872 finsl. • • Monitor grayling spawning in tributaries to Lake Mellen in Years 1 and 2 following construction to ensure that access to spawning areas is not hindered by lake elevation changes. Modify the inlet stream to Lake Mellen to provide a somewhat greater flow in an eastern tributary that currently lacks sufficient flow to allow grayling access for spawning, as mitigation for potential lost grayling spawning or rearing habitat in the reach between Lake Mellen and Rich's Pond. Instream Flows in Bypass Reach • Install a low-level outlet in the diversion structure to continuously release flows into the bypassed reach of Reynolds Creek. The outlet would be unregulated and would be sized to release 5 cfs at a pool elevation of 872 finsl. Powerhouse and Tailrace Location • • Locate the tailrace between elevation 90 and 95 feet, near the limit of accessibility of anadromous fish and above the area of significant spawning or rearing habitat; thus, diversion of water between Lake Mellen and the tailrace will not have a significant effect on anadromous fish reproduction . Design the tailrace to prevent access or attraction by fish and to dissipate remaining hydraulic energy before release of water to the creek. Transmission Line Features • • Locate the transmission line to maximize the proportion of the route that follows existing roads; virtually the entire route will cross areas that have been c1earcut within the last 15 years. Locate the transmission line in accordance with FAA requirements for aircraft safety and incorporate in the design state-of-the-art devices for raptor protection and diverters, where appropriate, for the protection of bird life. August 1997 Draft 18 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project fERC Project No. 11480 .. • • .. - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Access Roads • Utilize existing timber harvest roads to the greatest extent possible to reduce the amount of disturbed project area. m.B MANDATORY CONDITIONS Haida Corporation is seeking benefits under Section 210 ofPURPA and believes that the project meets the definition under Section 292.202 (p) of 18 CFR for a new diversion. As such, the U.S . Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and the state agency exercising authority over fish and wildlife resources of the state (Alaska Department ofFish and Game) have mandatory conditioning authority under the procedures provided for at Section 30 (c) of the Federal Power Act.6 m.c MODIFICATION OF APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL Throughout the development of the PDEA, a variety of measures and modifications were identified that served to address potential environmental impacts and! or agency comments that were raised during the agency consultation process. Because the "Applicant-prepared EA" process occurs simultaneously with the development of the Application for License, these modifications were incorporated in Haida Corporation's proposed project as they were identified. After the PDEA and Application for License are reviewed by the Commission staff, other modifications to Haida Corporation's proposal may be recommended. m.D NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE Under this alternative, the Reynolds Creek Project would not be constructed. The City of Hydaburg would continue to receive power from fossil fuels for the foreseeable future. The noise and air quality impacts of the existing generation system would continue unabated or at increased levels as the local demand for power increases. The risk of spills of diesel fuels would likewise continue at current or increasing levels. No project facilities would be built in the Reynolds Creek drainage and no new transmission lines would be constructed. The financial benefits to the residents of Hydaburg in the form of lower electrical rates and to the Haida Corporation in terms of project operating revenues would not be realized. Ultimately, the intertie between CraiglKlawock and Hydaburg might be built and Hydaburg could be supplied by hydroelectric generation from other projects on the central or northern part of the island. This eventuality could result in elimination of the need for local diesel generation of power but would not provide the same level of economic benefit to the people of Hydaburg and to the Haida Corporation that would be derived from the Reynolds Creek Project. 6 U.S.C. Section 797 (e) August 1997 Draft 19 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • • • ill - - • - .. Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment IV. CONSULTATION AND COMPLIANCE IV.A AGENCY CONSULTATION The Commission's regulations require applicants to consult with the appropriate resource agencies before filing an Application for License. This consultation is the first step in complying with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, the Endangered Species Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, and other federal statutes. Pre-filing consultation must be complete and documented according to the Commission's regulations. Copies of all consultation documentation as of August 15, 1997, are located in Appendix G of the Application for License. IV.B INTERVENTIONS Currently, there are no intervenors on the proposed project. The Sealaska Corporation and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) filed motions to intervene on FERC Project No. 11480 during the time the Application for Preliminary Permit was being reviewed by the FERC. Those motions were granted. In their motion, the NMFS requested that (1) any permit issued for the project include an article requiring the permittee to conduct fishery and need for project studies, and (2) that NMFS be an active party to the development of these studies. Article 9 of the Preliminary Permit requires the permittee (Haida Corporation) to consult with the NMFS during the pre-filing consultation process to coordinate any necessary studies for FERC Project No. 11480. In their motion to intervene, Sealaska Corporation only requested party status. A notice soliciting interventions wiU be issued when the Commission accepts the Application for License. IV.C SCOPING The First Stage Consultation Package and Proposed Study Plan for the Reynolds Creek Project was issued on January 26, 1995. As part of the three-stage consultation process required under Commission regulations, a joint public/agency/Applicant meeting was held at the Ketchikan City Council Chambers on March 14, 1995. An interagency overview meeting was also held in Hydaburg on July 20, 1995, followed by a site visit for representatives of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to view the project site, discuss the project, identity agency data on resources of concern, and discuss their policies regarding permit application processes. The participants agreed that impacts on terrestrial species would be minimal and that fish species (grayling and salmonids) would be their primary concern with respect to potential impacts from the project. August 1997 Draft 20 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • - - - - .. • - • Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Scoping Document 1 (SOl) was issued on March 15, 1996. Comment letters were received from various agencies. Teleconference meetings were held on March 8 and 18, 1996, to discuss spring 1996 survey plans and subsequent monitoring of the status of grayling populations. The teleconferences included representatives of ADFG and USFWS. Scoping meetings were held on May 6, 1996, in Ketchikan and in Hydaburg. Agencies attending one or both scoping meetings included ADFG and USFWS. An additional site visit was conducted for the agencies on May 7, 1996. A project meeting was held in Ketchikan on December 3, 1996, and was attended by representatives of ADFG and USFWS. At this meeting the Applicant presented details of the design and operating regime to address agency concerns regarding potential project effects on grayling spawning. A site visit was held with ADFG on April 23, 1997, to determine the location of the anadromous fish barrier on Lower Reynolds Creek. Scoping Document 2, which was based on SD 1 and addressed the comments and requests for additional studies received during the NEP A scoping process, and contained copies of all consultation correspondence and responses developed in reply to concerns identified in agency letters and at the scoping meetings, was promulgated via a letter dated July 18, 1997. IV.D WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION Haida Corporation will request water quality certification under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act by submitting to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) a copy of their application for a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) permit to discharge dredged or fill material into navigable waters under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. By agreement between the Corps and the ADEC, an application for the Corps permit may also serve as application for water quality certification. This process will be initiated prior to filing the Application for License. • IV.E COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT PROGRAM • - - Under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (CZMA), as amended, before the Commission can issue a license for a project, the state must find the project consistent with the state's Coastal Management Program. State review commences on receipt of a consistency certification which is presumed in the absence of a state's objection within six months after the state begins its review. The Alaska Division of Governmental Coordination (ADGe) coordinates the state's consistency review under the CZMA. This process will be initiated prior to filing the Application for License. August 1997 Draft 21 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • .. ... • • .. - .. • .. .. - - - .. - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment V. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS In this section the general environmental setting of the project is described, followed by a discussion of the site-specific effects on the resources affected by the proposed action, alternative configurations, and the No Action Alternative. A cumulative effects analysis is also presented for selected resources. V.A GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE REYNOLDS CREEK WATERSHED 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 (POWI). POWl is part of the Alexander Archipelago of southeast Alaska islands (Figure 1). The Reynolds Creek drainage (Figure 4), 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. Reynolds Creek (Upper Reynolds Creek) flows from Lake Marge at about 1,750 feet above sea level, down a series of cascades to Summit Lake at about 1,318 feet above sea level, then through a relatively wide and gently sloping valley to Lake Mellen at about 876 feet above sea level (Figure 4). From Lake Mellen the stream (Lower Reynolds Creek) flows through a steep narrow canyon to about the 100-foot elevation. Below this elevation the valley widens somewhat, and the gradient decreases as the stream flows into the head of Copper Harbor on the east side of Hetta Inlet. The Reynolds Creek valley was largely unlogged and had no passable roads until 1997. A portion of the drainage of a major tributary to Reynolds Creek (entering from the north about 400 feet above tidewater) was clearcut prior to 1994. Additional areas in the drainage of this tributary were disturbed in the early part of the century by copper mining activity high on Copper Mountain, a 3,900-foot peak one mile to the north of the mouth of Reynolds Creek. When mining began, the small enclave of Coppermount was built on the north side of the head of Copper Harbor. This town included a smelter that handled ore from Copper Mountain and other mines in the Hetta Inlet area. The mining and smelting activity was short-lived, and the town site has been abandoned for over half a century. No permanent structures remain there or anywhere else in the Reynolds Creek drainage. In 1997 the major landowner in the Copper Harbor and Reynolds Creek drainage, Sealaska Corporation, initiated road building and logging in the drainage. Based on conversations with Sealaska, it is expected that the majority of marketable timber in the drainage will be cut by the time the Reynolds Creek Project is constructed. Logging roads were constructed near the vicinity of the proposed powerhouse in 1997 and are planned near the outlet of Lake Mellen. August 1997 Draft 22 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. J 1480 • .. - - • • • • • - • • • • - • - .. Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment V.B PROPOSED ACTION AND ACTION ALTERNATIVES V.B.1 Geology and Soils Resources Affected Environment The project site lies on the contact of a large igneous rock mass (granodiorite) overlain by a thin layer of soil. Granodiorite is exposed on the glacially scoured cliffs and outcrops of the upper and middle Reynolds Creek drainage. The gorge between Lake Mellen and Lower Reynolds Creek is carved into granodiorite by glacial and stream action. The streambed at the outlet to Rich's Pond is comprised of a large blocky coluvial deposit The granodiorite along Lake Mellen is very hard and contains tight joints which strike east to west. Grandorite is present along approximately half of the penstock route and then transitions into homfelsic metamorphosed rocks and to marble along the lower reach of Reynolds Creek near the powerhouse site. Soils within the project area have been developed from a variety of organic and inorganic sources. Inorganic soils developed from glacial deposits, uplifted marine sediments, metamorphic and igneous rocks. Organic soils developed from deposits of decomposed plant material that generally collect in poorly drained areas associated with low relief Acidic organic soils that support open areas of herbaceous vegetation are referred to as muskeg. The area surrounding Rich's Pond is comprised of exposed bedrock and areas of muskeg. The soils along the penstock route are generally thin «10 feet) and stable due to the heavy vegetative cover that is providing additional cohesion to the soil mass. The soils along the lower reach of Reynolds Creek near the powerhouse site and the outlet of Reynolds Creek are comprised of alluvium and could have a thickness of 10 feet or more. This soil consists mostly of a granular, sand and cobble mixture having little to no cohesion. The cohesion that is currently being provided by the heavy vegetative cover will be reduced significantly as the timber in the basin is harvested. Within the basin, the existing slopes are relatively stable. Minor surficial soil creep is occurring but is limited to the top one to two feet ofloose top soil (clay, silt, and sand) and organic cover that is in close proximity to steep slopes. This type of movement is common on saturated, oversteepened soil slopes that are underlain by a rock base. Mass wasting, in the form of large block failure, has been observed in the creek's canyon vertical cliffs and along steep slopes. Numerous faults have been mapped in the vicinity of the project. These faults generally have a northwest to northeast trend. While no major destructive earthquakes have been reported in this area, southeast Alaska is considered to be seismically active. August 1997 Draft 23 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 - - - - • • • .. - .. • •• - .. .. .. - .. Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Environmental Impacts and Recommendations Construction Vegetation removal, excavation, and blasting during project construction would temporarily increase turbidity and sediment in the project area. Most construction-related sedimentation at the project site would be the surface runoff However, there is the potential for blasted rock to reach Reynolds Creek during powerhouse excavation. Construction of the diversion/intake structure and a short reach of the tailrace will require in-stream construction work In-stream construction work will increase the turbidity in Reynolds Creek as the streambed is disturbed during excavation and construction and removal of cofferdams. The Applicant has developed a draft Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (ESCP) that will be finalized when the project undergoes final design. The ESCP includes measures for capturing sediment before it reaches Reynolds Creek or Rich's Pond or any of the other small tributaries in the drainage area. The ESCP measures include using sediment ponds, sediment barriers, soil erosion matting and mulches, drains, etc. to prevent sediment laden runoff from leaving the project site. The final ESCP would detail the specific measures to be used at specific locations at the project site. The ESCP also describes measures to revegetate disturbed areas. The ESCP will be made part of any construction-related contract package. ESCP measures will be routinely inspected by the Applicant's on-site field representative to ensure that the objectives of the ESCP are being met. Construction activities that will directly involve contact with Reynolds Creek water, such as construction and removal of cofferdams and connection of the tailrace will occur between June 15 to August 15. Operation Localized slope failures may occur along the penstock route or near the powerhouse as the result of timber harvesting activities in the basin. The tailrace could be blocked or damaged by a debris torrent or high flood event. The project will be inspected and maintained on a routine basis. Slope instability that could affect the integrity of any of the project structures will be stabilized as soon as possible. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Minor, temporary, localized erosion would be unavoidable during project construction until disturbed surfaced are stabilized and revegetated. Construction of the diversion/intake structure will require in- stream work to place and remove temporary water retaining structures and flow diversions. This work may temporarily cause existing sediment in streambed to travel downstream . August 1997 Draft 24 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • - - - - • • • • • • • • - - - - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment V.B.2 Aquatic Resources Affected Environment Climate Climatic conditions at the site are dominated by weather systems originating in the Gulf of Alaska. Both high and low temperatures are moderated by the proximity to saltwater. Over much of the year, particularly from September through June, low pressure systems bring extensive moisture to the region. These systems are often accompanied by strong winds, especially in the fall and winter. Average annual rainfall usually exceeds 100 inches per year. Near sea level, the majority of the precipitation falls as rain; increasing amounts of snow fall above about 1,000 feet in elevation. Infrequent high pressure systems bring colder air to the region for periods of up to 5 or 10 days in winter with temperatures falling into the teens or lower. High pressure and dry periods are more common in the late summer with high temperatures into the 60s and 70s. Hydrology Streamflow data was recorded from two USGS gages on Reynolds Creek. USGS gaging Station No. 15081995 (located on Reynolds Creek at Lake Mellen outlet, with a drainage area of 5.2 square miles and the gage datum at elevation 860) operated for the period July 1982 through September 1985. USGS gaging Station No. 15082000 (located on Reynolds Creek near its mouth to Copper Harbor, with a drainage area of 5.7 square miles and the gage datum at elevation 50) was in operation for the period June 1951 through September 1956. The Applicant used a correlation analysis based on the streamflow record of Fish Creek near Ketchikan (USGS Station No. 15072000) to extend the Reynolds Creek daily streamflow data to a 71-year period from June 1915 to September 1989, absent 3 years of data from November 1935 to September 1938. Based on this methodology, the average annual outflow from Lake Mellen is estimated to be 60 cfs. Unpublished flow data has also been recorded by the Applicant for water year (WY) 1996. Table 1 shows the estimated monthly average, high, and low flows in Reynolds Creek at the point of diversion. Lake Mellen, with a surface area of 150 acres, drains 5.2 square miles and provides a usable storage of about 600 acre-feet. Reynolds Creek flows approximately one mile from its natural outlet at Lake Mellen through Rich's Pond to saltwater in Copper Harbor. Reynolds Creek, below Rich's Pond to the powerhouse site, has an average gradient of23%. August 1997 Draft 25 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • - - • • • • • • .. • • .. - .. .. - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment TABLE 1 REYNOLDS CREEK A VERAGE MONTHLY FLOWS Average Minimum Maximum Month (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) October 83 51 124 November 63 38 93 December 51 19 97 January 58 18 129 February 63 24 107 March 43 15 98 April 49 20 86 May 80 52 124 June 69 38 90 July 38 27 50 August 43 11 79 S~tember 49 20 76 Streamflows peak below Lake Mellen with rains in October and November. A secondary peak due to snow melt occurs in May and June. Low flows occur in mid-to late summer and mid- winter. Water Quality Water quality in the Reynolds Creek system is generally excellent. However, road building and logging activity which began in the drainage in 1997 has the potential to alter water quality in Lake Mellen and Lower Reynolds Creek. It is expected that increased erosion and resulting sedimentation will enter the system's surface waters at several points and result in some increases in the very low suspended sediment loads and turbidities seen in the baseline. These increases will be greatest during periods of high rainfall and in the first few years following completion of logging. Vegetated hillsides are generally stable and yield little sediment, even under conditions of heavy rainfall. Numerous lakes, ponds, and areas of muskeg retain suspended materials and the cascading nature of all streams provides high oxygen levels. The water is generally soft and low in dissolved minerals with conductivity of 18 to 35 Jlrnhos/cm2 in the lakes and Reynolds Creek. Water quality data has been and will continue to be collected at two sites: RCHDR #1 near the tailrace discharge location and RCHDR #2 in Rich's Pond near the outlet of Lake Mellen (see Figure 4). Table 2 lists water quality data available to date . August 1997 Draft 26 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • - - - - • • - - - • •• - - - - - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment TABLE 2 REYNOLDS CREEK WATER QUALITY DATA, 1995 TO 1996 I Air Water Temp. Temp. Conductivity DO Turbidity TSS Date' Sitez (0C) (OC) pH I (Illdhosfeml ) (ppm) (NTU) (ppm) Jul-95 5 22 16.2 -30 --- 8 25.5 17.8 -30 --- 23-Apr-96 8 -4 -20 -- 21-May-96 7 -7.8 7.38 20 9.9 0.39 - 2 -8.5 7.48 77 11.7 0.39 - 7-Jun-96 7 -8 25 --- 23-Apr-97 I RCHDR #1 6.5 3.8 5.8 22 -0.1 U' RCHDR#2 10.3 3.2 5.1 21 0.27 U "10 T. -97 RCHDR#1 17.1 15.8 7.6 0 10.1 0.1 0.6 RCHDR#2 17.1 14.6 7.6 0 10.2 0.1 1.1 II Average 6.53 2 .02 0.14 0.43 1 1995 and 1996 data collected by Pentec Environmental; 1997 data collected by HDR Alaska, Inc. 2 Sites 2 and 5 correspond to RCHDR #1. Sites 7 and 8 correspond to RCHDR #2. 3 Undetectable. The data, although limited, illustrate that the current water quality is unimpaired. Water temperature exhibits the expected normal seasonal variability, corresponding to changes in air temperature. Dissolved oxygen in the system has a high concentration and percent saturation (approximately 80%-100%). This would be expected with the relatively low water temperatures and high turbulence experienced in the stream channels between lakes. The pH is near neutral. Turbidity and total suspended solids (TSS) are low or near the method detection limit. This indicates that there is naturally very little sediment entering the system. A clearer picture of seasonal changes in water quality parameters IS expected to emerge as monitoring continues. Water Rights On July 27, 1995, the Haida Corporation filed an application with the Alaska Department of Natural Resources for a water right of 30 cfs from Reynolds Creek to operate the project on a continuous basis. Fish and Aquatic Life The Reynolds Creek system supports both resident and anadromous fish. In 1962 and 1967, Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADFG, 1982) introduced Arctic grayling (Thymallus arcticus) into Lake Marge and Summit Lake in an attempt to establish fish in these lakes, which had remained barren since the retreat of the glaciers. Since then grayling have become well established in the three larger lakes (Marge, Summit and Mellen) and in connecting stream reaches and ponds. August 1997 Draft 27 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 .. .. - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Lower Reynolds Creek, below the canyon that begins at the outlet of Lake Mellen, supports several species of both resident and anadromous fish. Resident cutthroat trout is the only species collected in the steep pools of the canyon above the limit of anadromous fish migrations. General timing of the various life history stages of fish in the Reynolds Creek system is indicated in Figure 9. Results of the Applicant's studies on fish and aquatic life in the Reynolds Creek drainage are provided by Pentec (1997a). Upper Watershed • The upper watershed of Reynolds Creek consists of Lake Marge, Summit Lake, Jack's Pond, Julie's Pond, and interconnecting stream reaches and unnamed ponds. Stream sections of Reynolds Creek in the upper watershed vary from steep cascades to low gradients (Figure 4). • • • - .. - • - - - - • - - Reynolds Creek begins at the outlet of Lake Marge, the uppermost water body in the Reynolds Creek system. This lake is approximately 96 acres and is about 1,750 finsl (ADFG, 1982). A large waterfall (26-32 feet) at the outlet of Lake Marge prevents return of any fish leaving that lake. A senes of shallow ponds provide excellent grayling habitat on a bench between Lake Marge and Summit Lake; Reynolds Creek leaves this bench via a series of falls and cascades dropping down to Summit Lake. Summit Lake (384 acres) lies in a steep mountain valley on the east flank of Copper Mountain (Figure 4). The lake surface elevation varies naturally from about 1,321 feet to about 1,315 feet. Fish habitat potential may be limited by the limited accessible inlet stream spawning habitat since the inlet from Lake Marge is too steep for grayling to ascend. The outlet of Summit Lake flows through a narrow notch in bedrock directly into a series of cascades that mark the beginning of middle Reynolds Creek. A viable population of grayling resides in Summit Lake, although the source of recruitment is unclear. There is a strong possibility that some fish move downstream into Summit Lake from the outlet ponds of Lake Marge. It is also probable, based on the 1996 ADFG surveys, that grayling spawn in the larger of the northwest inlet streams. Below Summit Lake, Reynolds Creek flows down the northwest side of a relatively broad valley of gently rolling terrain toward Interlaken and Lake Mellen (Figure 4). Overall the creek in this reach has a moderate to high gradient that is punctuated with several areas of higher gradient with waterfalls and cascades. The cascades at the outlet of Summit Lake prevent the return to the lake of any fish who move downstream. Interlaken and Lake Mellen Interlaken is a heart-shaped pond about 13 feet above Lake Mellen and connected to it by a short (330 feet) reach of Reynolds Creek (Figure 4) Interlaken has a bottom and shores composed primarily of cobble-size and larger talus. Both inlet and outlet are broad and unconstrained; the water level does not appear to fluctuate significantly throughout the year. A high waterfall about 650 feet upstream of Interlaken limits the upstream movement of fish from Interlaken. Reynolds Creek flows into the northern lobe ofInterlaken and two much smaller creeks feed the pond from August 1997 Draft 28 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • -Figure 9 Timing of Fish Life History Stages in Reynolds Creek System Jan. Feb. Mar. A~ June July Aug. Sept Oct. Nov. Dec.! -Pink Salmon Spawning I I • Incubation I I Freshwater rearing I C • Marine rearing 15 To 18 Months Chum Salmon Spawning I I Incubation I I Freshwater rearing C Marine rearing 2 to 3 years Coho Salmon • Spawning I Incubation " -Freshwater rearing 1 to 2 years Marine rearing 2 to 3 years .. Rainbow/Cutthroat Trout Spawning •• Incubation I Freshwater rearing 1 to 2 years Marine rearing 2 to 3 ~ears before first spawning migration Arctic Grayling I _I I I I I Spawning migrations (some fish spend summer in stream) - Incubation I I ,. Instream rearing (YOY) I I Lake residency Uuv.) I -Lake residency (adults) I 00214'005\append\1lshtimeJds - • - • - - - • • • • • - - - - - • Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment the east. These creeks are partially blocked by old beaver dams and are associated with a muskeg wetland northeast of the pond. Reynolds Creek has built a small deltaic fan of rubble where it enters Interlaken; at lower streamflows, a lower gradient distributary channel splits from the main creek channel about 100 feet above the pond. The lower reaches of the Reynolds Creek inlet and the smaller inlet stream below the older beaver dams are used for spawning by grayling and Interlaken supports a healthy grayling population. Lake Mellen is a small, T-shaped sub-alpine lake at an elevation of876 finsl (Figure 4). The basin is steep-sided and rocky with old-growth evergreen vegetation down to the water's edge. The shoreline of Lake Mellen is generally composed of talus and bedrock. Shoreline habitat is enhanced by numerous trees that have fallen from the banks. Although steep in most places, the lake bed near the inlet is relatively flat, shallow, and strewn with grounded logs. The shoreline adjacent to the inlet is composed of loose, cobble-sized talus. The inlet of Reynolds Creek to Lake Mellen is similar to the inlet to Interlaken with a small deltaic fan of rubble and a lower gradient distributary channel split from the main creek channel (Figure 10). Deep pools and relatively low velocity areas adjacent to the main channel would appear to offer excellent instream habitat for grayling for about 100 feet above the lake. At that point a bedrock ledge crosses the stream creating a drop of about three feet that may prevent or at least limit upstream access; it is unclear if grayling from Lake Mellen can migrate up to Interlaken. In July 1997, fyke net and hoop net sampling was conducted to index grayling populations at three locations in Lake Mellen. The catch rates were very low at all stations and it was concluded (Pentec 1997a) that this technique would not provide an adequate index. Rich's Pond is fairly shallow. It has one broad, very shallow lobe with a silty bottom and a single small island. The rest of the pond shoreline is composed of talus and rock. Yellow pondweed (Nuphar polysepa/um) is sparsely dispersed throughout the shallow margins ofthe pond. The outlet of Lake Mellen is formed by a shallow sill that has collected a large quantity of logs that are aligned across the outlet where they have floated and grounded on the sill (Figure 11). Grayling were abundant along and among these logs in July 1995 and 1997. Downstream of these logs, the outlet passes through a broad, shallow channel about 197 feet long into a separate downstream subbasin (Rich's Pond) that is about six feet lower than the main lake (Figure 11). This connecting channel has a rock rubble bed that is covered with a dense growth of filamentous algae during the spring and summer. Apart from the algal growth, this stream segment would appear to offer excellent habitat for grayling young-of-the-year (YOY) or adults with relatively quiet water margins, excellent cover, and deep pools. Except during high runoff conditions, the outlet from Rich's Pond disappears beneath the surface and flows through boulder-sized talus near the site of the proposed diversion structure. Flow emerges from the talus into the first of a series of cataracts leading directly into the steep, rocky canyon. This canyon carries the stream precipitously down to the lower reach of Reynolds Creek. August 1997 Draft 30 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 .. - - - • • • • • iii , • • - - - • • - Lake Mellen ELEV. = 876 fmsl .... Survey monument "0" at elevation 880.3 fmsl Interlaken 889 fmsl APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET P-t.-__ 0' 50' Figure 10 Topography of Lake Mellen Inlet of Interlaken Pond 200' • - - - • • • - - - • - • Rich's Pond ELEV.=870 With Vegetation Lake Mellen ELEV. = 876 fmsl Log Jam APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 100' Figure 11 Topography of Lake Mellen Outlet to Rich's Pond 200' • - - • • • • • • • - - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Lower Reynolds Creek Lower Reynolds Creek flows through an old-growth forest typical of lower elevations on POWl. About 1,300 feet of the stream, to an elevation of approximately 95 feet above sea level, is accessible to anadromous fish. Stream gradient is relatively constant up to the site of an old USGS gaging station at about elevation 75 feet. Above this point, gradient increases to about 11 percent for the 90 feet between the 80-and 90-foot elevations. Above the 90-foot elevation, gradient increases to about 25 percent for the short distance (about 40 feet) up to the anadromous fish barrier. The ADFG Anadromous Stream Catalogue, Stream 10420 on Craig A-2 quadrangle (ADFG, 1992), shows use of Reynolds Creek by coho, chum, and pink salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch, 0. keta, 0. gorbuscha, respectively). ADFG has records of aerial counts of salmon spawning escapement to streams in the Copper Harbor area since at least 1974 (data provided courtesy of S. Walker, ADFG 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 (Table 3) may represent fish from several streams. 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 (ADFG 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 (Table 3) but numbers seen in September 1995 suggest much higher run sizes are likely. No other adult salmon were reported, but juvenile coho and trout (Oncorhynchus clarki and/or 0. mykiss) fry were reported by Pentec and ADFG observers. Pink salmon begin to move into Reynolds Creek in mid-to late August (Figure 9). Initial spawning probably occurs in lower stream areas; 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 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 seen in early September suggests a considerable overlap with pink salmon activity. It is likely that chum salmon continue to spawn into mid-October; only relatively old carcasses were seen along the river banks in early November 1994. Like pink salmon, chum fry leave the system quickly upon emergence from the gravel (Figure 9). As previously noted, above the old USGS gaging station, stream gradient increases progressively. Numbers of spawners in September 1995 dropped markedly in proportion to the diminished area of the stream that had velocities and turbulence in which fish could rest or spawn. Despite this, pink salmon were visible in each stream margin area without turbulence for about 140 feet upstream of the log crossing below the gaging station (Figure 4). Fish were moving upstream by actively jumping cascades or by bypassing the thalweg and moving upstream along the stream margins. At about 140 feet above the gaging station (elevation 85 feet) is a cascade system 6 to 8 August 1997 Draft 33 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 .. - - • • - • - • . .., - - - - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment TABLE 3 ANADROMOUS FISH COUNTS FOR REYNOLDS CREEK (COPPER HARBOR) Date Survey Type 26-Aug-63 Air 07-Se~-66 Field 20-Sep-n Field 09-Aug-73 Air 12-Aug-73 Air 15-Aug-73 Air 20-Aug-73 Air 12-Sep-73 Boat 23-Aug-74 Air 27-Aug-74 Air 07-Aug-75 Air 21-Aug-75 Air 13-Aug-76 Air 15-Aug-76 Air 16-Aug-76 Air 20-Aug-76 Air 04-Aug-77 Air 08-Aug-77 Air 24-Aug-77 Air 22-Sep-77 Air 30-Sep-77 Field 20-Aug-78 Air 26-Aug-78 Air 12-Aug-79 Air 20-Aug-79 Air 05-Aug-80 Air 13-Aug-80 Air 18-Aug-80 Air 29-Jul-81 Air 06-Aug-81 Air 24-Aug-81 Air 02-Sep-82 Air 08-Sep-82 Air 17-Sep-82 Field 17-Sep-82 Field 08-Aug-83 Air 28-Aug-83 Field 21-Aug-84 Air 19-Aug-85 Air 26-Aug-85 Air 08-Sep-85 Field 08-Sep-85 Field 28-Sep-85 Field 28-Sep-85 Field August 1997 Draft FROM ADFG RECORDS (1963-1996) Species Mouth Pink --- Pink 90 Pink --- Pink 2,500 Pink 2,500 Pink 10,000 Pink 13,000 Pink 9,000 Pink 10,000 Pink --- Pink --- Pink 15,000 Pink 400 Pink 3,000 Pink 3,000 Pink --- Pink 4,000 Pink 16,000 Pink --- Pink 3,000 Pink 500 Pink 3,000 Pink --- Pink 1,500 Pink --- Pink Few small schools Pink 1,000 Pink 5,000 Pink 100 Pink 4,000 Pink --- Pink --- Pink 3,000 Pink 1,000 Chum --- Pink 1,500 Pink --- Pink 7,000 Pink 18,000 Pink 4,000 Pink --- Chum --- Pink --- Chum --- 34 Tidal Stream Total Count 7,000 700 7,700 75 420 585 420 275 695 ------2,500 ------2,500 500 ---10,500 ------13,000 400 ---9,400 --- ---10,000 20,000 ---20,000 9,000 ---9,000 --- --- 15,000 ------400 ------3,000 10 ---3,010 1,500 ---1,500 ------4,000 ------16,000 16,000 ---16,000 ------3,000 ---6,300 6,800 100 ---3,100 10,000 ---10,000 800 ---2,300 8,000 ---8,000 --------- ------1,000 5,000 ---10,000 ------100 4,000 ---8,000 11,000 ---11,000 1,000 ---1,000 6,500 ---9,500 440 1,422 2,862 ---19 19 ------1,500 ---20,000 20,000 7,000 ---14,000 16,000 ---34,000 35,000 ---39,000 ---1,635 1,635 ---5 5 4,000 3,000 7,000 ---112 112 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • • • • , • • '. - - - - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment TABLEJ ANADROMOUS FISH COUNTS FOR REYNOLDS CREEK (COPPER HARBOR) Date Surve 05-Aug-86 Air 05-Aug-86 Air 12-Aug-86 Air 19-Aug-86 Air 06-Se -86 Air 01-Aug-87 Air 13-Aug-87 Air 19-Aug-87 Air 27-Au -87 Air ll-Aug-88 Air 15-Aug-88 Air 24-Au -88 Air Air Air Air Air 04-Aug-91 Air 13-Au -91 Air 12-Aug-92 Air 25-Au -92 Air 10-Aug-93 Air 29-Aug-93 Air 05-Se -93 Air 15-Aug-94 Air 27-Au -94 Air 22-Aug-95 Air 26-Aug-95 Air 02-Se -95 Air 14-Aug-96 Air Air August 1997 Draft FROM ADFG RECORDS 1963-1996 eci Pink 10,000 Pink Pink 1,000 Pink 5,000 Pink Pink 50 Pink Pink 15,000 Pink Pink Pink Pink Pink Pink Pink Pink Pink Pink Pink Pink Pink Pink 500 Pink Pink Pink 1 Pink Pink 4,000 Pink 20,000 Pink 10,000 Pink 35 ream Total Count 25,000 35,000 500 500 2,000 3,000 12,000 17,000 110,000 110,000 50 15,000 15,000 33,000 48,000 25,000 25,000 4,000 4,000 2,000 2,000 8,000 8 10,000 I 6,000 8,000 I 700 800 800 500 500 14,000 14,000 6,000 6,000 2,000 2 25,000 65,000 130,000 2,000 7,800 1,000 7,500 2,000 27,000 25,000 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 ... - - • .. ... - - • - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment feet in height. However, this cascade is not a total block to salmon migration; 4 or 5 pink salmon were found just upstream of the cascade, in a relatively lower velocity 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 cascade beginning at about elevation 95 feet. No fish were seen in the limited area of non-turbulent 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 in July 1995 and April 1997 have agreed that this cascade is the ultimate upstream migration barrier for anadromous fish . 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. ADFG (1979) reported no available spawning habitat above the USGS gage. Surveys conducted in July 1995 and 1996 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. 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 feet) is likely negligible. In contrast, Lower Reynolds Creek below the gaging station and its main tributary have good spawning and rearing habitat in series of pools formed by low cascades, mostly over large organic debris (LOD). The pools typically had low velocity tailout glides among large cobbles. ADFG personnel reported capturing coho fry in the tributary (ADFG, 1995). Environmental Impacts and Recommendations Construction Water Quality Some short-term increases in turbidity and suspended sediments will be experienced in the diversion reach during construction of the Lake Mellen diversion structure and tailrace, and potentially from runoff from disturbed forest soils resulting from construction of the penstock. The Applicant has developed an Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (ESCP) that will be finalized when the project undergoes final design. The ESCP includes measures for capturing sediment before it reaches Reynolds Creek or Rich's Pond or any of the other small tributaries in the drainage area. The ESCP measures include using sediment barriers, soil erosion matting and mulches, drains, etc. to prevent sediment laden runoff from leaving the project site. The final ESCP will detail the specific measures to be used at specific locations at the project site. The ESCP also describes measures to revegetate disturbed areas. The ESCP will be made part of any construction-related contract package. ESCP measures will be routinely inspected by the Applicant's on-site field representative to ensure that the objectives ofthe ESCP are being met . August 1997 Draft 36 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • .. .. • • " .. ... - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Construction of the dam at the outlet of Rich's Pond would not require significant lake level fluctuations and would have no significant effect on fish populations in Rich's Pond and none on those in Lake Mellen . Operation Lake Mellen Levels In Lake Mellen, the primary changes in shoreline will be similar to those from water level drops that naturally occur, leaving an exposed rocky shoreline. Maintenance of the water level at near its natural high elevation during much of the year will place the water closer to the surrounding and overhanging riparian vegetation for more of the time. This may be a positive change for a species like grayling for which insects are a preferred prey and appear to favor association with large woody debris in the lakes. Minor drawdown of Lake Mellen by 1 to 2 feet will occur when power demand exceeds inflow to the lake and when the lake is not spilling. This is most likely in late summer or early fall and during long cold spells in winter. Rates of change in lake level will be greater under Phase 2 than under Phase 1 but extremes of lake level will be similar. Normal lake level changes will be in the order of one to two inches per day due to project operation. During infrequent drawdowns to the minimum pool elevation of 872 finsl, Lake Mellen would be about 4 feet below its normal high level. Such changes in lake surface elevation would be expected to temporarily reduce the productivity of the littoral zone for less mobile invertebrates, i.e., those that cannot readily adjust their depth to accommodate lake level changes. To the degree that this productivity supports prey for grayling, there would be a reduction in prey availability. Grayling stomach analyses conducted by ADFG (1996) in the Reynolds Creek system suggest that a relatively minor proportion of grayling prey organisms would be affected by these lake level fluctuations. Limited drawdown of Lake Mellen is not expected to hinder upstream migration of grayling into Middle Reynolds Creek. Some grayling spawning may occur in the stream reach between Lake Mellen and Rich's Pond although this has not been confirmed (Pentec, 1997a). Planned operating levels, as controlled by the Rich's Pond diversion structure, will inundate a portion of this possible spawning area. At elevation 874.5 finsl in Rich's Pond, water depth at the downstream end of this reach (Figure 11) would be about 2.5 feet as compared to the depth under normal flows of 0.5 to 1 foot. As a result, flow velocities will be reduced somewhat from the rates under present conditions. At the upper end of the reach (e.g., at the Lake Mellen outlet sill) a Rich's Pond elevation of 874.5 finsl would have little effect on normal depths and flows. When Rich's Pond is at or slightly above a water surface elevation of 876 finsl, as is expected for much of the spawning period, the lower end of the reach will be inundated to a depth of 4 feet and currents will be slight; at the upper end of the reach water depth will be about 2 feet (compared to a natural 1 to 2 feet) and currents will be reduced. Some areas suitable for spawning by grayling may remain . August 1997 Draft 37 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 - - • • .. .. - .. - - - - - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Flows in the Bypass Reach Operation of the project will reduce the amount of flow in the bypassed reach of Reynolds Creek potentially affecting the small number of cutthroat trout that reside in the reach. In the steep canyon of the diversion reach, observations during high flows (July 1997) confirm that there is little pool habitat and that habitat conditions for cutthroat trout is limited. This habitat is expected to be improved by reduced flows as long as pools containing fish become less turbulent yet remain filled and flowing. A minimum in stream flow in the bypass reach of 5 cfs, as measured in the lower end of the bypass reach, will be sufficient to meet this criteria. Lower and more stable flow of water through the bypass reach is not expected to have any negative effects on the limited population in the reach and may have a positive effect. High flows will always occur in the bypass reach several times a year. Flows Below the Anadromous Fish Barrier The project will have little adverse effect on the average flow regime or on water quality of the reach of Reynolds Creek accessible to anadromous fish (Figure 7). Project operation will provide daily average minimum flows in excess of natural low flows and will reduce slightly the maximum flows experienced during freshets. At maximum capacity the system will require 30 cfs for 1.5 MW generation during Phase I and 90 cfs for 5 MW generation under Phase 2. Bypassing up to 90 cfs of flow around the canyon reach of Reynolds Creek would have little effect on the water quality in Lower Reynolds Creek. Under winter conditions, the project would have its most significant effect on stream water quality conditions when air temperatures are low and natural flows reduced. Under these conditions, the bypassed water from Lake Mellen would be returned to the lower reach of Reynolds Creek at a slightly warmer temperature than water following the natural channel through the canyon and subject to atmospheric cooling. Warmer water under these conditions could reduce the extent of freezing in the margins of the lower creek. Reduced risk of freezing could increase egg-to-fry survival. Water will be returned to the stream at approximately 90 finsl, near the impassible barrier to upstream migration. It should be noted that an ADFG survey in 1979 reported no available spawning habitat for over 200 feet below the proposed tailrace location. The tailrace will release flows in a manner that will dissipate energy and avoid the possibility of providing an attraction flow for anadromous fish. As noted above, it is probable that the potential contribution of fry to the system from the last 50 feet below the final fish barrier is negligible. The return of tailrace flow to this area will not significantly alter the condition of extreme turbulence that exists here under all but the lowest flows. These low flow periods (July to mid-August) are not coincident with the spawning or rearing activities of pink or chum salmon so any increased turbulence will not be detrimental. Thus, the location of the tailrace just below the anadromous fish barrier is not expected to reduce the production of pink or chum salmon in Lower Reynolds Creek. August 1997 Draft 38 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • - - - • • • • • • • • .... - - • - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Under low inflow conditions that are likely to be encountered during the middle of winter or later summer, storage in Lake Mellen will be used to supplement inflow. As noted above, the project will operate primarily as a run-of-the-river facility and will have only limited Lake Mellen storage that can provide low flow augmentation. This augmentation would occur early in a low flow period and would last only until the Lake Mellen storage is exhausted. After that point, combined flow in the anadromous reach (the sum of project flow and bypassed flow) would equal the natural inflow to Lake Mellen. Limited low flow augmentation may reduce slightly the potential for winter freezing losses and improve egg to emergence survival for both coho and pink salmon (e.g., Bjornn and Reiser, 1991; Sandercock, 1991). Low flow augmentation may also slightly improve summer rearing conditions for coho, steelhead, and cutthroat. Several researchers have established a positive correlation between summer streamflows and success of coho and/or steelhead rearing (e.g., Smoker, 1953; Salo and Bayliff, 1958; see also reviews by Bjornn and Reiser, 1991; Sandercock, 1991). Although average flow conditions in Lower Reynolds Creek will be similar to or slightly more moderate with the project than without, diurnal flow fluctuations in excess of those occurring naturally will occur under some conditions as a result of diurnal variations in power demand. When the daily flow requirements for power generation and minimum bypass reach flow exceed the natural input to Lake Mellen from Reynolds Creek for an extended period, the lake level will drop below the spillway elevation of 876 finst. Under these conditions, power generation will draw the lake down below the spillway and the flow in Lower Reynolds Creek will equal the sum of the bypass flow and the flow through the powerhouse. Based on the anticipated power demand, the turbine flow could range from a low of 20 in the predawn hours to 30 cfs at the time of the evening peak under summer conditions in Phase 1 operations and from 60 to 90 under Phase 2 operations. Initially, project flows in the range of 7- 10 cfs will be all that is required to meet the electrical load. The higher flow requirements of Phase 2 operation will coincide with high inflows. During low inflow periods, the project may not be able to operate at its rated capacity. For comparison, natural flow variations can also be significant; increases of as much as 53 cfs (128 percent) and decreases of23 cfs (22 percent) have been recorded in an 8-hour period in the Applicant's field program. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts The following potential adverse effects of construction and operation of the proposed project would be unavoidable: • Construction of the access road, dams, powerhouse, tailrace, and penstock will result in temporary and minor increases in siltation reaching Reynolds Creek. • Minor effects of level fluctuations in Lake Mellen on certain species of invertebrates rearing in the lake will be unavoidable; these species are not believed to comprise a significant proportion of the diet of grayling and it is considered unlikely that lake level fluctuations will result in a significant decrease in the availability of prey for grayling. August 1997 Draft 39 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • « - - • • • • • • • - • • - - - - • • Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Raising the level of Rich's Pond to control elevation of Lake Mellen will result in unavoidable loss of the majority of potential (but unconfirmed) grayling spawning habitat in the reach between the Rich's Pond and Lake Mellen in most years. Diversion of flow around the canyon of Reynolds Creek below Lake Mellen may have a slight, but unavoidable, impact (which may be positive) on cutthroat trout populations in the reach. V.B.3 Terrestrial Resources Affected Environment Vegetation The Reynolds Creek basin is steep and rocky with old-growth evergreen vegetation down to the water's edge. Much of the forest is dominated by western hemlock. On areas of thinner soils and on muskegs, western hemlock is replaced by stunted lodgepole pine and Alaska yellow-cedar. A variety of shrubs, including salal (Gaultheria shallon), huckleberry (Vaccinium spp.), and fool's huckleberry are evident in open areas of forest and stream margins and in wetlands. There are two small subbasins associated with Lake Mellen. The upstream subbasin (Interlaken Pond) is fed by Reynolds Creek and a much smaller creek entering from the east (Figure 4). These creeks are partially blocked by old beaver dams and are associated with a muskeg wetland that opens up the lodgepole scrub forest. A western hemlock-forested wetland occupies a roughly triangular area that occupies the majority of the flat land at the head of the subbasin between Reynolds Creek and the unnamed creeks to the east. Characteristic understory plants in this wetland include devil's club (Oplopanax horridum) and skunk cabbage (Lysichitum americanum), as well as lady fern (Athyrium filix-femina), deer fern (Blechnum spicant), and sword fern (Polystichum munitum). The downstream subbasin (Rich's Pond) is considerably smaller than Interlaken. It is surrounded by western hemlock forest interspersed with muskeg that supports very small lodgepole pine and Alaska yellow-cedar as well as typical muskeg mosses and herbs. Prior to logging in 1997, Lower Reynolds Creek flowed through an old-growth forest typical of lower elevations on Prince of Wales Island. The overstory consisted of large Sitka spruce and western hemlock with lesser numbers of western red cedar (Thuja plicata). The spruce were generally larger than 39 inches in diameter; the hemlock average 20 to 30 inches. Logging has left only those larger trees within the required 66-foot buffer. A riparian community dominated by red alder (Alnus rubra) with an understory of salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis) and stink currant (Ribes bracteosum) remains more or less intact along the stream channel. The understory of the upland is primarily composed of Alaska huckleberry (Vaccinium alaskaense), with occasional oval-leaf (V. ovalifolium) and red huckleberry (V. parvifolium). Increasing amounts of devil's club and fool's huckleberry occur from about the 50-foot elevation upward. A bed of thick mosses, ferns, and lichens covers the forest floor. Significant changes will occur in the understory in the August 1997 Draft 40 Reynolds Creek HydroelectriC Project FERC Project No. 11480 • .. - • • • Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment coming years with the canopy removed and as the area recovers from logging and develops into second growth. The south side of the ravine upstream of the USGS station supported a stand of old second-growth western hemlock with occasional larger Sitka spruce. This area may have been logged in connection with the mining operation on Copper Mountain. The smelter was located north of the mouth of Reynolds Creek on the shore of Copper Harbor. The understory of the second-growth stand was sparsely vegetated with sword fern and deer fern. The Sealaska Corporation has logged much of the drainage basin downstream of Lake Mellen during 1997 and will continue to log in the area in 1998. Sealaska's logging activities by 1998 will cover areas that would have been impacted by construction of the transmission line, penstock and powerhouse for the proposed project. This logging has in essence pre-empted the great majority of the potential impacts of the proposed project because there will be significantly less tree removal and road building required. Wetlands • Wetlands in the project area were defined from National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) mapping (Figure 12) and limited on-site ground truthing. Although most of the project area is steep and well drained, the area surrounding Rich's Pond is muskeg bog and some saturated forest occurs • along Reynolds Creek. • Wildlife The Reynolds Creek area provides habitat for three big game species: black bear (Ursus americanus), Sitka black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus sitkensis), and Alexander Archipelago • wolt' (Canis lupus ligoni). All three species are common in the study area, as numerous tracks attest. The bear feed on berries and roots in the riparian wetlands and higher elevation meadows as well as on the abundant runs of salmon in Lower Reynolds Creek. Black-tailed deer follow an • elevational migration pattern that is common throughout the range (e.g., Schoen and Kirchhoff 1985). Sitka black-tailed deer winter in low elevation stands of heavy timber. Most (about 70 percent in Schoen and Kirchhoff's study) migrate to summer range in alpine meadows, but a ;. non-migratory segment typically remains in the low elevation wintering ground throughout the year. Wolves principally prey on black-tailed deer but feed extensively on spawning salmon as well. Beaver are also an important prey species of island wolves. • .. .. .. - - The habitat in the Reynolds Creek area is suitable for a number of smaller furbearers, including mink (Mustela vison), beaver (Castor canadensis), and river otter (Lutra canadensis). American marten (Martes americana) were introduced to islands throughout the Alexander Archipelago and are now abundant (1. Lindell, USFWS. August 16, 1995. Pers. comm.) . 6 The Alexander ArcbipeJago wolf is a "species of concern" in part because it was once proposed for listing as a threatened species, but it was found that there is insufficient information to support such a listing (60 FR 10056, February 24, 1995.). August 1997 Draft 41 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • • • I • • • CRAIG (A-2)) ALASKA !)' 1 r, , . ~ , ! 1 • • • • • I I • NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR REYNOLDS CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Project Area Wetlands FIGURE 12 I • • - - - • • • • • • • !. .. • - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Prior to logging in 1997, the Reynolds Creek area contained potential old-growth nesting habitat for marbled murrelets (Brachyramphus marmoratus), the Queen Charlotte subspecies of the northern goshawk (Accipiter gentilis laingi), bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), and olive-sided flycatchers (Contopus borealis). Logging has removed these old-growth trees from all but a 60-foot buffer along the anadromous stream reach. Marbled murrelets in Alaska tend to select nest sites within 0.6 mile of saltwater, relatively near creeks or other forest openings, and choose the largest available (generally 39 inches dbh or larger) Sitka spruce or hemlock trees, particularly those with a large amount of defect and moss (Hamer and Nelson, 1995). There are a few remaining large old-growth Sitka spruce trees in the lower reaches of Reynolds Creek that are potential marbled murrelet nest trees. Many are infected with dwarf mistletoe and have deformed branches that could serve as nest platforms. Goshawks also nest in large coniferous trees, primarily in old-growth forests. Bald eagles nest in the upper canopy of large deciduous or coniferous trees. Olive-sided flycatchers are neotropical migrant songbirds that nests in the upper canopy of large trees, often near forest openings. Preliminary results of an ongoing study suggest that, at least in the Anchorage area, olive-sided flycatcher territories are located primarily in canyons or adjacent to streams (Wright, 1993). Olive-sided flycatchers were heard throughout the study area in May and June 1996. The Alexander Archipelago hosts a relatively large summer popUlation of marbled murrelets. However, in a USFWS small boat transect survey in 1994, murrelets were found primarily in Iphigenia Bay and the Gulf of Esquibel near the northern end of Prince of Wales Island and in the ReviIIagigedo Channel near Ketchikan. Relatively few murrelets were seen near southern Prince of Wales Island and Hetta Inlet in particular (S. Kendall, USFWS. 1995. Pers. comm.). Because of the nature of this project, which will remove relatively few potential nest trees, and because of the current status of the marbled murrelet in Alaska (neither listed as endangered or threatened nor proposed for listing), no surveys of marbled murrelets were conducted in the project area. A short survey for the presence ( absence) of potentially nesting northern goshawks was conducted in July 1995. The standard US Forest Service survey protocol was followed (US Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 1992). This protocol employs the observation that, although goshawks occupy large home ranges and are generally cryptic, they are very defensive of nests and responsive to juveniles during the breeding/nesting season and can be induced to respond to taped calls. Although the probability of goshawk response to taped calls in random locations is only 1 to 5 percent, response within 1,600 feet of an active nest is as high as 70 to 90 percent (c. Iverson, USFWS. 1995. Pers. comm.). Goshawks were called at intervals along Reynolds Creek using an amplified, USFS-supplied tape recording of a female wail call that was appropriate for the nestling feeding period in July. No goshawks responded to the tape broadcast. Suitable trees in the project area, including the proposed transmission line corridor along the shore of Copper Harbor and Hetta Inlet, were searched (from helicopter, motorboat, and from the ground) for bald eagle nests in 1995, before extensive logging in the area, but none were found. Wolf and bear sign were abundant during 1995 fieldwork. However, deer sign was not found in the middle elevation area around Lake Mellen in July 1995. This is consistent with the general -migration patterns of Sitka black-tailed deer, in which deer are expected either near the coast or in alpine meadows in the summer. - August 1997 Draft • 43 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • - - - • • • • • • • Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment The probability of marbled murrelet nesting is lower in the Lake Mellen area than in the lower watershed as Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis), a preferred nest tree, is absent. The old-growth western hemlock, also a suitable nest tree, tends to be smaller and have smaller branches than the trees in the lower watershed. Lake Mellen and its associated ponds provide no habitat for harlequin ducks, which require fast-flowing water for foraging and nesting. Bald eagles are less likely to be found at higher elevations more distant from saltwater but bald eagles have been observed over Lake Mellen and Summit Lake in the course of field work. An old beaver dam is located in a small Interlocken Pond inlet stream and beaver-cut sticks were found in July 1997 in Lake Mellen. Beavers are a favored prey of Alexander Archipelago wolves (Smith et aI., 1986). It is likely that beaver distribution and colonization dynamics are strongly influenced by wolf predation. Black bear and wolf sign were abundant throughout the area in both November and July 1995, and a single bear was seen just below the USGS gaging station location in September 1995. Wolves were seen and heard along the north shore of Copper Harbor during the field reconnaissance in November 1994. The fruit-laden scat of marten was commonly encountered in July, particularly along the lower reaches of Reynolds Creek. No other evidence of small furbearers was found in the lower watershed, although mink are likely to occur here. There were few areas where tracks of furbearers and other relatively lightweight animals would have registered. Only tracks of bear, wolf, and deer were found. No evidence of recent activity by beaver was seen along Lower Reynolds Creek. Environmental Impacts and Recommendations Vegetation Construction Constructing the project would affect the vegetation at the project site. Riparian vegetation around the shoreline of Rich's Pond between its current elevation and elevation 876 finsl is .8 expected to die. Some trees in the riparian buffer strip left by logging along lower Reynolds Creek may require removal for powerhouse construction and penstock installation. ... No mitigation measures are proposed for vegetation impacts. The Applicant's ESCP includes measures for revegetating areas disturbed by project construction. -Operation No mitigation measures are proposed for vegetation impacts. - - - August 1997 Draft 44 - Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Wetlands Construction Constructing the project would affect the wetlands at the diversion/intake site. It appears that there will not be any impact to the saturated forest wetlands along Lower Reynolds Creek. Some clearing of saturated forest wetland will be required to install the transmission line across Jumbo Island in Hetta Inlet. The transmission line corridor will not be grubbed, however, and fill will be negligible. The muskeg wetland type adjacent to Rich's Pond is designated PUBH on Figure 12, .. the NWI for the project area. The saturated forest wetland type downstream along Reynolds Creek and on Jumbo Island is designated PF04R Table 4 lists the estimated fill area in wetlands for proposed project facilities and access roads . .. • '. .. • II .. - - .. .. - TABLE 4 ESTIMATED FILL IN WETLANDS Estimate Area of Pro.iect Component Fill in Wetland Wetland Type • Intake 0.75 acre muskeg bog Penstock 0.0 - Powerhouse 0.0 - i Transmission Line < 0.1 acre saturated forest Access Road <1.0 acre muskeg, saturated forest No mitigation measures are proposed for wetlands impacts. The Applicant's ESCP includes measures for revegetating areas disturbed by project construction. Operation No wetland impacts are expected from project operation. Wildlife Construction The presence of a construction work force may increase the hunting and fishing pressure on the system due to increased access. Flooding the shallow reach of Reynolds Creek between Lake Mellen and Rich's Pond could interfere with north-south movement of large mammals to some degree. Animals crossing here would be forced to wade deeper water or potentially swim. Operation Project operation will cause only minimal variations in the water surface elevation at Lake Mellen which is not expected to impact terrestrial fauna. Operation of the diversion will be fully automated~ however, servicing will require periodic visits via the construction road. These visits August 1997 Draft 45 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • - - - • • • • I. - • - - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment may cause minor and temporary disturbance to wildlife in the area. Overhead transmission lines may pose a threat for electrocution and collision for birds. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Vegetation Construction of the proposed project and associated access roads, work areas, and permanent facilities will result in the short-term disturbance of approximately 4.5 acres of vegetation and permanent elimination of approximately 2.5 acres of vegetation. Wetlands As noted previously, project construction would permanently eliminate approximately 2 acres of wetlands. Wildlife Project construction would cause temporary wildlife displacement due to construction noise and activity. Noise from project operation is not expected to cause long-term adverse effects on wildlife. V.B.4 Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species Affected Environment As noted previously, no threatened, endangered or sensitive species have been found or are expected in the study area. An initial list of species of concern (Table 5) was considered in the analysis of terrestrial impacts. Discussion of the rationale for eliminating three of these species from the discussion is provided in Pentec, 1997b. The only potentially significant project impacts on species of concern would be the loss of potential nesting trees for marbled murrelets and the limited potential for power line collisions by marbled murrelets and goshawks. Environmental Impacts and Recommendations The Applicant proposes to design the transmission line using the latest raptor protection guidelines and install collision avoidance devices on the line when the line crosses migrating bird flight paths. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts None. August 1997 Draft 46 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • - - - • • • • • • • • • • - - - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment TABLES SPECIES OF CONCERN* Scientific Name Comments Olive-sided fl catcher Lenticular sedge Brachyrhamphus marmoratus Accipiter gentilis lain i Histrionicus histrionicus Contopus borealis Canis lupus ligoni Rana retiosa Calamagrostis "crassi lumis" Carex lenticularis doUa May occur in the Reynolds Creek area May occur in the Reynolds Creek area Reynolds Creek does not provide suitable habitat Common in the Reynolds Creek area Common in the Reynolds Creek area Does not occur on Prince of Wales Island** Unlikely in the Reynolds Creek area; not of conservation concem** Not observed in the Reynolds Creek area** *These species were identified by U.S. Fish and Wildlife or Alaska Department ofFish and Game in communications to the Applicant. ..... See Pentec 1997b. V.B.S Aesthetic Resources Affected Environment The Reynolds Creek drainage rises from tidewater to alpine tundra on the ridge tops and mountains surrounding Lake Mellen. Lake Mellen is surrounded by a mix of thick conifer forest, gray rock cliffs, slide paths from adjacent mountainsides, and limited park-like areas of taiga or muskeg. Past clearcutting of the side of Copper Mountain on the north side of Copper Harbor has affected the wilderness aspect of the view from the water and from aircraft flying over the area or up Hetta Inlet. No other visible signs of human disturbance were evident in the Reynolds Creek drainage prior to 1997, except for a tailings pile from a small epidote crystal mine high on the south flank of Green Monster Mountain just north of Summit Lake. The west flank of Copper Mountain, which would be traversed by the transmission line, is being logged progressively from the Sealaska base on the west side of Copper Mountain. A road was built on Sealaska lands south into Copper Harbor and around Lower Reynolds Creek in 1997 and a floating dock and construction camp at the old Coppermount site. Major logging activity began in 1997 and it is expected that the entire Lower Reynolds Creek basin will be logged in the next few years. Logging will also extend into higher elevations on the northwest and southwest flanks of the Lake Mellen basin. The remainder of the transmission line route across Jumbo Island, along Deer Creek and the Hydaburg River has virtually all been logged in the past 20 years and presents a mix of various stages of regrowth. August 1997 Draft 47 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • - • • • • • i. Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Environmental Impacts and Recommendations Construction Traffic, noise, dust, and exhaust emissions from construction machinery would be evident along private roads leading to and at the project site during construction. Construction of the penstock, powerhouse, and tailrace will require clearing of some old growth timber that will make these facilities visible from the air or to individuals accessing the site. Clearing of construction staging areas will be minimized. Some portion of the facilities may also be visible from the water in Hetta Inlet or Copper Harbor. However, the effects of these actions will be insignificant in comparison to the associated with logging of the surrounding basin. Operation Permanent project features including the diversion/intake structure on Lake Mellen, the penstock, powerhouse, and access roads will alter the visual quality of the area. Since the surrounding area will have been recently logged, these disturbances will not greatly affect the aesthetics of the area. Project operation will not result in fluctuation of Lake Mellen beyond its natural range of variation and should not affect the aesthetic experience of the few individuals who may access the lake by float plane to fish. The transmission line will add an element of permanence and structure to the already disturbed nature of the hillsides and valleys along the route which have already been clearcut. To the • degree possible, the line will parallel existing roads. The overhead transmission line will have visual impacts from the air to those utilizing the road which it will follow, and in the immediate area where the line will cross Hetta Inlet via Jumbo Island. • Unavoidable Adverse Impacts • Construction of the dam at Lake Mellen, the penstock, and the powerhouse will unavoidably and permanently alter the current wilderness character of the lake and nearby area although this character will have already been lost due to logging. V.B.6 Cultural Resources • Affected Environment The Applicant conducted a cultural resources survey of the project (Campbell, 1996). No _ archaeological or historic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places were identified. The Coppermount mine facilities which date to the tum of the century are completely collapsed and deteriorated. Machinery associated with the mine has either been -removed or significantly altered or vandalized. • - August 1997 Draft 48 • Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • - - - - • • • • • • ,. • - - - - • Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Environmental Impacts and Recommendations Construction Although no known National Register eligible sites would be affected by the project, there is the possibility that undiscovered archaeological or historic sites may be present, such as buried archaeological sites, that may be affected by project construction. If sites are discovered, the Applicant will: 1) consult with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO); 2) prepare a cultural resources management plan and a schedule to evaluate the significance of the sites and to avoid or mitigate any impacts to National Register eligible sites; 3) base the plan on the recommendations of the SHPO and the Secretary of the Interior's Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation; 4) file the plan for FERC approval, together with the written comments of the SHPO; and 5) take the necessary steps to protect the discovered archaeological or historic sites from further impact until notified by FERC that all of these requirements have been satisfied. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts None. V.B.7 Recreation and Other Land Uses Affected Environment Southeast Alaska, an area 500 miles long and 120 miles wide, is characterized by a multitude of saltwater islands, rugged mountains, and numerous lakes and streams. Heavy precipitation nurtures towering evergreen forests interspersed with muskeg, icefields, and glaciers. Southeast has 12% of Alaska's outdoor recreation acreage and 9% of all recreation facilities and trails. Its coastline is convoluted by fjords and glaciers in the north. Because of this geography, excluding the usually popular walking/running and driving, water-related activities of motorboating and fishing have the highest participation rates. In contrast to statewide averages, with the exception of camping and motorboating, most outdoor recreation in Southeast occurs within one hour of the community, with less activity further than one hour. The Tongass National Forest and the Haines State Forest provide over 17 million acres for outdoor recreation pursuits. The Tongass National Forest alone is 82% of the Southeast's total recreation acreage and provides the majority of the region's outdoor recreation facilities and trails. (Alaska DNR, 1988) There are no developed recreation facilities located near the proposed project Recreational use of the project area is limited by the difficult access and private ownership of all lands in the project area and adjacent to the project. Access to the lands is strictly controlled by the landowner. Lake Mellen is only accessible by float plane. However, it is difficult to access via float plane under many weather conditions because of surrounding terrain factors. Copper Harbor is accessible by boat and may occasionally be visited for recreational crabbing or hunting. Past clearcutting of the side of Copper Mountain on the north side of Copper Harbor has been colonized by an early scrub/shrub community dominated by alder. This habitat provides August 1997 Drqft 49 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • - • • Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment open ground and forage frequented by deer possibly increasing the desirability of the area for hunting. A floating dock and temporary logging construction camp were established in this area in 1997; road building and logging may have reduced deer use of the area. Fishing opportunities in Copper Harbor are not unique although halibut and rockfish are probably present. Pink and chum salmon can be caught in the harbor in late summer. Environmental Impacts and Recommendations Construction During construction, machinery and constructed-related activity would produce noise, dust, exhaust emissions, and additional traffic. These same impacts would detract from the overall • recreation experience in the project area. However, these impacts would be minor due to the limited number of people who would be exposed to them and because their duration would be short. Operation Within the project area, the opportunity to engage in recreational activities is constrained by land ownership patterns. Because the land is under private ownership, access and use by the public is restricted, limiting opportunities for recreation. With the exception of the transmission line • crossing ofHetta Inlet, all ofthe land that will be occupied by project facilities is privately owned. III - - - - - Recreation and tourism in the Hydaburg area are only briefly referenced in the Concept Approved Hydaburg Coastal Management Program (CH2M Hill, 1983). Tourism was not considered to be a significant industry in the area and increased tourism was not included by the City as an economic development goal or objective. Provision for recreation facilities is not applicable to the project area, where land ownership is private and where access and land use is controlled. For these reasons, development of a recreation plan for the proposed Reynolds Creek project is not considered necessary. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts None. V.B.8 Socioeconomic Resources Affected Environment Although Alaska is the largest state in the United States by land mass, it is the second smallest state by popUlation. Southeast Alaska comprises 12 percent of the State's population. The total population for Alaska in 1990 was 553,600 and is estimated to increase to 716,500 by the year 2000 (Alaska Department of Labor, 1996). The annual growth rate for the state between 1990 and 2000 is anticipated to be about 2.57 percent, while the annual growth rate for KetchikanlHydaburg area is far below that at 0.87 percent (Alaska Department of Labor, 1992). August 1997 Draft 50 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • - - • • If! III • • - .101, .. - - - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Hydaburg with a population of about 500, is a first-class city with a city manager form of government. It is not part of an organized borough. Population trends are affected by employment opportunities. Natural resource-based industries have sustained Southeast Alaska's economy in the past and present. They include forestry, fishing, and mining. For Hydaburg, commercial fishing is the main economic activity and logging has also been important in the area. Recreation and tourism also have a strong effect on the economy in Southeast Alaska. Services needed to keep the tourist industry growing are anticipated to increase. However, Hydaburg is not yet a tourist destination. Accommodations and support services are fairly limited at this time. Areas where employment growth is expected to occur are mining, services, and wholesale/retail trade. Declines are forecasted for construction, seafood processing and government (Alaska Department of Labor, 1994). Most of these industries experience seasonal swings in employment, usually peaking in the summer months. For example, unemployment in the Ketchikan area for 1995 ranged from a high of 11.95 percent in January to a low of3.7 percent in August. Environmental Impacts and Recommendations Construction Project construction would require on-site employment of up to 30 workers. Most construction personnel would be hired from the HydaburgiCraiglKlawocklKetchikan area. Some workers might commute by ferry from other islands in Southeast Alaska on a weekly basis and stay in available accommodations or camp near the project site during the week and return home on weekends. Few, if any, workers are expected to relocate during the construction period. Because no in-migration of families with school-age children would not occur, the project would have a discernible impact on local government services. Short-term benefits to the Hydaburg economy would include reduced unemployment and more local spending by construction workers. In addition, the project contractor would undoubtedly purchase some equipment and material from suppliers in the general area, thereby providing additional short-term benefits. Operation The project would not displace any residences or business establishments. Once the proposed facilities are operational, the project would generate additional revenue for Haida Corporation through the sale of power to AP&T . Because the project's socioeconomic impacts would be primarily beneficial, the Applicant is not proposing any mitigation measures specifically addressing socioeconomics. One to two permanent, full-time jobs would result from long-term project operation. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts None. August 1997 Draft 51 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment V.C CUMULATIVE EFFECTS According to the Council on Environmental Quality's Regulations for implementing NEP A (§1508.7), an action may cause cumulative impacts on the environment if its impacts overlap in space and/or time with the impacts of other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of what agency or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative effects _ can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time, including hydropower and other land and water development activities. • Scoping Document 2, for the Reynolds Creek Project, identified those resource issues to be analyzed for cumulative impacts as: .. if III I~ Illil - - - • • V.C.l Aesthetic Resources The degree that construction and operation of project facilities would adversely impact the visual quality of the area. Recreation and Other Land Uses Whether project construction and operation would impact recreational opportunities and what those impacts would be. Geographic Scope The Applicant's geographic scope of analysis for cumulatively affected resources is defined by the physical limits or boundaries of: 1) the proposed action's effect on the resources, and 2) contributing effects from other hydropower and non-hydropower activities within the project area. No hydropower development currently exists in the area and none other than the Reynolds Creek Project is proposed. Anticipated non-hydro activities potentially affecting resources in the project area that have been identified are recreation, logging and road construction. Aesthetic Resources Water from Lake Mellen, at approximate elevation 876 finsl, flows through a short, low gradient stream section to Rich's Pond (elevation 872 finsl) and then into Copper Harbor in Hetta Inlet by way of Lower Reynolds Creek. The proposed project will raise the level of Rich's Pond to 876 finsl and affect flows in the reach of Reynolds Creek from the point of diversion at Rich's Pond downstream to just below the anadromous fish barrier (elevation 95 finsl). The altered flows in the bypassed reach of Reynolds Creek, due to project operations, and the existence of project facilities, including the transmission line, have the potential to affect the aesthetic character of the area. Thus, the geographic scope of the cumulative effects for aesthetic resources analysis has been defined as the Reynolds Creek basin consisting of the reach of Reynolds Creek that enters Lake Mellen, Lake Mellen, Rich's Pond and Lower Reynolds Creek to tidewater and the transmission line route to the City of Hydaburg. August 1997 Draft 52 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • - - • • • - • .. - - - .. Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Recreation and Other Land Uses The geographic scope of the Recreation and Other Land Uses analysis is the same as that for the Aesthetic Resources. V.C.2 Temporal Scope The temporal scope of the cumulative analysis includes past, present, and future actions and their effects on each resource that could be cumulatively affected. F or purposes of this analysis, the temporal scope looks 50 years into the future, concentrating on the effect of the resources from reasonably foreseeable future actions. The historical discussion is, by necessity, limited to the amount of available information for each resource. The present resource conditions are based on the Initial Consultation Document, Scoping Documents 1 and 2, and studies conducted to date. V.C.3 Cumulative Effects Analysis Aesthetic Resources Reynolds Creek Area As was discussed previously, the Reynolds Creek drainage rises from tidewater to alpine tundra on the ridge tops and mountains encircling Lake Mellen. Lake Mellen is surrounded by a mix of thick conifer forest, gray rock cliffs, slide paths from adjacent mountainsides, and limited park-like areas of taige or muskeg. Past clearcutting of the side of Copper Mountain on the north side of Copper Harbor has affected the wilderness aspect of the view from the water and air. However, there were no other visible signs of human disturbance evident in the Reynolds Creek drainage prior to 1997 with the exception of the tailings pile from a small mine on the south flank of Green Monster Mountain just north of Summit Lake. Logging by the land owner, Sealaska Corporation, has begun and will continue to progress around the west flank of Copper Mountain into Copper Harbor and beyond Reynolds Creek during the next few years. This logging will transfonn the hillsides around Copper Harbor from mostly unroaded old growth to mostly roaded and logged. This will be a major transformation. As a result, the minimal amount of clearing associated with the project facilities (penstock, powerhouse, and short access road), will not make a discernible contribution to the degradation of the viewscape. Looking decades into the future, the logged areas will begin to re-establish through natural successional processes. Access to the project facilities will be maintained but the regrowth of surrounding vegetation will help to screen the features from observers except when viewed from the air or from limited vantage points on the ground. No other hydroelectric installation is known to be planned for the area and other types of development are not anticipated. Thus, it is concluded that the construction of the project will not have a significant contribution to the changes in the viewscape in neither the near-term nor the long-term. August 1997 Draft 53 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 ,. - - • ,. .. .. • .. - - - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Transmission Line Route Approximately 12.3 miles of overhead transmission line will be constructed for the project. The line will connect the project's powerhouse to electrical facilities in the City of Hydaburg. The line will be 34.5 kV, consist of four wires (3 phases and a ground wire), and be mounted vertically (no crossarms) on wooden poles. To the extent possible, the line will follow existing logging roads along the route except where an aerial crossing of Hetta Inlet via Jumbo Island will be constructed. The maintained right-of-way for the line will be 30 feet wide. Although some clearing will be needed for the line, most of the route has been previously clearcut. Grasses and herbaceous vegetation will not be removed . The transmission line will be a developmental feature in the already disturbed hillsides and valleys along the route. Its presence will be apparent to observers in aircraft, to those utilizing the roads which it will follow, and to those in the immediate area of the Hetta Inlet crossing. Regrowth of harvestable timber will be precluded on the right-of-way. Thus, the transmission line will permanently alter the viewscape along its route, but its contribution to cumulative impacts to aesthetic resources should not be significant given the already disturbed nature of the area and the absence of other present and future development. Recreation and Other Land Uses As was discussed previously, there are no developed recreation facilities located near the project area and recreational use is limited because of the difficult access and private land ownership. The State's Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP), indicates that Southeast Alaska communities are small and have limited road systems, making it difficult to go more than one hour without a boat or aircraft. Because these aspects are not expected to change significantly during the construction and operation of the project, impacts to recreation and land use attributable to the project are considered to be minor, project-specific, and not cumulative in nature. V.D NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE Under the No-Action Alternative, the Reynolds Creek Project would not be constructed. The City of Hydaburg would continue to receive electrical power from fossil fuel-fired generation for the foreseeable future. The noise and air quality impacts of the existing generation system would continue unabated or at increased levels as the local electrical demand increased. The risk of spills of diesel fuels would likewise continue at current or increasing levels. The financial benefits to the residents of Hydaburg in the form of lower electrical rates and to the Haida Corporation in terms of project operating revenues would not be realized. Ultimately, the intertie between CraiglKlawock and Hydaburg might be built and Hydaburg could be supplied by hydroelectric generation from other projects on the central or northern part of the island. This eventuality could result in elimination of the need for local diesel generation of power but would not provide the same level of economic benefit to the people of Hydaburg and to the Haida Corporation that would be derived from the Reynolds Creek Project. August 1997 Draft 54 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment - • .. • .. • • - VI. DEVELOPMENTAL ANALYSIS When the project is fully utilized it could produce approximately 23,000,000 kWh of energy during an average water year and would generate a maximum power output of 5 MW. The purpose of the project is to generate energy for sale in the distribution system and to offset the need to generate energy using diesel-fuel powered generators. For the proposed project to be economically beneficial, the estimated levelized cost of the project would have to be less than the current cost of alternative energy from any other sources available that could supply the regional energy needs. In analyzing the economic benefits of the project, the cost of production and the value of the project's power were considered. To be viable, the project should be economically beneficial over a license period of 50 years. The current energy plan being development for POWl calls for the interconnection of the communities of Thorne Bay, Kasaan, Hollis, Hydaburg to the existing system serving the Craig! Klawock areas. The transmission line to Thorne Bay and Kasaan has obtained funding and is currently being designed. The line to Hollis and then Hydaburg will follow thereafter. The Reynolds Creek project will be a key generating resource for this interconnected system. Development of the project will be undertaken in a phased approach. The project will have an initial capacity of 1.5 MW and will serve the immediate needs of Hydaburg. The project will have a plant factor of about 12% initially. Once the transmission line system is in place to serve the rest of the island, the plant factor will steadily increase until the plant is fully utilized. At this time, the powerhouse would be expanded and a second 3.5 MW generating unit installed. This phased approach has been adopted to keep the cost of generation from the hydroelectric project at or below the anticipated cost of diesel generation. Using this phased development approach, and assuming interconnection of Hydaburg and Hollis would occur around the year 2003, the 30 year levelized cost of energy from the project would be a about $0.084 kWh using the current cost method of analysis. In comparison, the levelized cost of continued diesel generation would be about $0.107 kWh. Therefore, there is a clear economic benefit to the construction of the project . Estimates were made of the amount of diesel fuel necessary if diesel generation was used to generate the 23 million kWh (potential energy production of the proposed project). Estimates were also made of the amounts of pollutants-oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and unburned hydrocarbon-that would be produced by burning that diesel fueL The diesel power plants do not contain state-of-the-art emission control systems such as catalytic converters and low NOx, but are efficiently operated. Table 6 shows the result of the analysis . Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 55 August 1997 Draft - • ... .. - - - - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment TABLE 6 ESTIMATED ANNUAL AMOUNTS OF DIESEL FUEL AND RESULTING POLLUTANTS FROM EQUIVALENT AMOUNTS OF GENERATION FROM A DIESEL-FIRED POWER PLANT Item 16,100 25 Note: Emissions calculations based on the following estimated engine emissions: NOx- 2.0 rIBHP-hr., CO-4.0 r.lBHP-hr, CO r 3.09lbllb fuel, UHC-0.75 r.lBHP-hr. Carbon dioxide is considered to be a prime contributor to global warming, and the oxides of nitrogen and unburned hydrocarbons are considered to be prime contributors to the production of acid rain and photo-chemical smog. Carbon monoxide is a poison. It was concluded that construction and operation of the Reynolds Creek Project would benefit air quality and the environment because the need for fossil-fueled generation would be avoided or minimized. In previous sections of this PDEA, the environmental benefits of several resource mitigation measures proposed by the Applicant and recommended by the agencies were assessed. Some of the measures proposed are operational measures that would not have significant effects on cost or generation. The project, as proposed by the Applicant, includes all these measures . Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 56 August 1997 Draft - • • - - • - - - - - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment VII. COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT AND RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE Sections 4(e) and lO(a)(l) of the FPA, 16 U.S.c. §§ 797(e) and 803(a)(1), respectively, require the Commission to give equal consideration to all uses of the waterway on which the project is located. When the Commission reviews a hydropower project, the recreational, fish and wildlife, and other non-developmental values of the waterway are considered equally with its electric energy and other developmental values. In determining whether, and under what conditions, a hydropower license should be issued, the Commission must weigh the various economic and environmental tradeoffs involved in this decision. Based on review and evaluation of the proposed project, and the no-action alternative, the proposed project is the preferred option. August 1997 Draft 57 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 .. - - • • .. • • .. ,0 • • - - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment VIII. CONSISTENCY WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLANS Section 10(a)(2) of the FPA requires the Commission to consider the extent to which a project is consistent with federal and state comprehensive plans for improving, developing, and conserving waterways affected by the project. Twenty-two plans are currently on the Commission list of comprehensive plans for the state of Alaska. Three of these plans address resources relevant to the Reynolds Creek Project, and are discussed below. North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) The NAWMP set goals for conserving North American waterfowl through cooperative planning and management. The plan provides the framework for a waterfowl conservation effort by describing population and habitat goals and suggesting recommendations to resolve problems of international concern through the year 2000. The plan's intent is to set the stage for the development of national, flyway, provincial, territorial, and state plans that contain specific management measures for waterfowl conservation in the United States and Canada. The plan recognizes that habitat loss and degradation is the major waterfowl problem in North America and sets habitat conservation as a top priority. The only foreseeable impact that the Reynolds Creek Project could have on waterfowl would be temporary displacement due to noise and other human activity during the construction phase. However, this impact would be minor since Lake Mellen is not important habitat for waterfowl. Therefore, the project would be consistent with the NAWMP . Alaska Outdoor Recreation Plan (AORP) The AORP is the State's Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) and identifies citizen preferences and suggested actions to address outdoor recreation issues in the state. The plan identifies the following issues: • The state needs to maintain its recreational land base. • The outdoor recreation needs of urban Alaskans must be met with sites near people's home. • • Cooperation among agencies is essential to successfully meeting state recreation needs. Preserving and protecting Alaska's culture and history is critical in maintaining the state's distinct identity. • High quality outdoor recreation experiences must be perpetuated and enhanced. The Reynolds Creek Project would have little, if any, noticeable effect on outdoor recreation. Current access opportunities would not change significantly. The minor road additions (less than 500 feet total) associated with the project could encourage some additional use of the project area. However, the available information indicates that demand for using this area is low. No Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 58 August 1997 Draft • - - • • • • • .. - - - - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment known cultural resources would be affected, and the project is not close enough to cities of the size of Ketchikan, to meet the needs of urban Alaskans. Thus, the project would be consistent with the AORP. Hydaburg Coastal Management Program The project lies within Alaska's coastal zone and the City of Hydaburg's coastal resource district Coastal management policies for the district are presented in the Concept Approved Hydaburg Coastal Management Program (CH2M Hill, 1983). The planning area is divided into three subareas: the City of Hydaburg corporate limits, the general coastal planning area, and Area's Meriting Special Attention (AMSA). The Hydaburg coastal management district has no direct authority over actions occurring within the planning area. However, land managers are encouraged to consult with the district over actions that may affect the planning area. Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 59 August 1997 Draft - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment IX. FINDING OF [OR NO] SIGNIFICANT IMPACT On the basis of the independent environmental analysis presented in this document, issuance of a license for the project would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Therefore, a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate and an -environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required. - • • II - .. II .. .. - - - August 1997 Draft 60 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 - • • • .. • - - - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment X. LITERATURE CITED ADFG. October 17, 1995. Letter from J. Durst, Klawock Habitat Manager, to J. Houghton, Pentec Environmental, Inc. ADFG. 1992. Anadromous stream catalog. Stream 10420 on USGS Craig A-2 quadrangle. ADFG, Juneau. ADFG. 1982. Partial report provided by ADFG 1995. ADFG. 1979. Survey field data sheet provided by ADFG 1995. Alaska Department of Labor, Administrative Services Division, Demographics Unit. 1991. Alaska Population Projections, 1990-2010. November 1991, Second Printing March 1992. 105 pp . Alaska Department of Labor, Research and Analysis Section. 1994. Alaska Economic Trends, 1994- 95 Forecast. Volume 14, Number 5. May 1994. 20 pp. Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Parks, 1988. Outdoor Recreation: Alaska. Bjornn, T. c., and D. W. Reiser. 1991. Habitat requirements of salmonids in streams. Pages 83-138 in W. R. Meehan, editor. Influences offorest and rangeland management on salmonid fishes and their habitats. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19. Bethesda, Maryland. Campbell, C. R. 1996. An Archaeological Survey of the Lake Mellen Hydroelectric Project, South Prince of Wales Island, Alaska. CH2M Hill. 1983. Concept Approved Hydaburg Coastal Management Program. Clarke, R. 1991. Fielding Lake studies report. Alaska Department ofFish and Game. Hamer, T. E., and S. K. Nelson. 1995. Characteristics of marbled murrelet nesting trees and nesting stands. Pages 69-82 in C. J. Ralph, et al., technical editors. Ecology and Conservation of the marbled murrelet. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-152. Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest Service, US Department of Agriculture, Albany, California. Iverson, C. 1995. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Personal communication. Kendall, S. 1995. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Personal communication. Lindell, J. August 16, 1995. US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Personal communication. -Pentec, 1997a. Fisheries and Aquatic Studies in the Reynolds Creek Drainage. - - • Pentec, 1997b. Additional Species of Interest in the Reynolds Creek Drainage. August 1997 Draft 61 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment • Salo, E. 0., and W. H. Bayliff 1958. Artificial and natural production of silver salmon (Oncorhynchus • • • • • • • • II II - .. ". ,~ - - kisutch) at Minter Creek, Washington. Washington Department of Fishery Resources, Bulletin 4, Olympia. Sandercock, S. K. 1991. Life history of coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch). Pages 397-445 in Groot, C., and L. Margolis, editors. Pacific salmon life histories. UBC Press, Vancouver, Canada. Schoen, J. W., and M. D. Kirchoff 1985. Seasonal distribution and home range patterns of Sitka black-tailed deer on Admiralty Island. Journal of Wild life Management 54:371-378. Smith, C. A, R. E. Wood, L. Beier, and K. P. Bovee. 1986. Wolf-deer-habitat relationships in southeast Alaska. Alaska Department ofFish & Game, Juneau. Smoker, W. A 1953. Streamflow and silver salmon production in Western Washington. Washington Department of Fishery Resources Paper 1, Olympia. U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service (USFS). 1992. Goshawk inventory protocol, Alaska Region. Juneau, Alaska. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Canadian Wildlife Service. 1986. North American Waterfowl Management Plan. Walker, S. 1994. Unpublished Data. Alaska Department ofFish & Game, Commercial Fish Division, Ketchikan. Wright, 1. M. 1993. Abundance, timing, and demography of neotropical migratory birds during migration; and preliminary study of olive-sided flycatchers in Alaska. Alaska Department of Fish & Game Division of Wildlife Conservation, Endangered Species Research Final Report. August 1997 Draft 62 Reynolds Creek HydroelectriC Project FERC Project No. 11480 ,. • • • • .. • - • - - - - - - Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment XI. LIST OF PREPARERS Paul Berkshire -(HDR) -Project Manager, Purpose and Need for Action, Applicant's Proposal, Geology and Soils Resources, Developmental Analysis (B.S. Civil Engineering, M.S. Civil Engineering, P.E. Civil Engineering -Alaska and Washington) Sally Boggs -(HDR) -Threatened and Endangered Animals, Terrestrial Resources, Aquatic Resources (B.S. Zoology, M.S. Hydrogeology/Aqueous Geochemistry) Mark Dalton -(HDR) -Environmental Manager, Overall PDEA Reviewer (B.S. Biology/Geology) Bonnie Lindner -(HDR) -Cultural Resources, Overall PDEA Reviewer (B.S.B.A) Michael V. Stimac -(HDR) -Licensing Manager, Socioeconomics, Cumulative Effects, Overall PDEA Coordination (B.S. Electrical Engineering, M.S. Fisheries, P.E. Nuclear Engineering -Washington) Susan Walker -(HDR) -Recreation (B.S. Psychology, M.S. Industrial Psychology) John Wolfe -(HDR) -Land Use (B.A WritinglEnvironmental Studies) Jonathan P. Houghton -(pentec) -Fish and Aquatic Life, Aesthetics (AB. Biology, Ph.D. Fishery Biology) Margaret M. Glowacki -(pentec) -Fish and Aquatic Life (B.S. Biology, M.S. Fishery Biology) Julie L. Stofel -(pentec) -Threatened and Endangered Species, Terrestrial Resources (B.S. Biology, M.S. Wildlife Biology) HDR -HDR Engineering, Inc. Pentec -Pentec Environmental, Inc. August 1997 Draft 63 Reynolds Creek HydroelectriC Project rERC Project No. 11480 - • • • • • • • III • • • • .. .. XII. MAILING LIST Steve Zimmerman Protected Resources Management Division National Marine Fisheries Service P.O. Box 21668 Juneau,AJC 99802 Nevin D. Holmberg, Field Supervisor Attn: Duane Petersen U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 3000 Vintage Blvd., #201 Juneau,AJC 99801 Dale Kanen, District Ranger Attn: Barbara Stanley U.S. Forest Service Craig Ranger District P.O. Box 500 Craig, AJC 99921 Larry Brockman Environmental Review Coordinator MS WD-124 Environmental Protection Agency 1200 6th Avenue Seattle, W A 9810 1 Larry Wright Alaska Regional Office National Park Service 2525 Gambell Street Anchorage, AJC 99503-2892 Michiel Holley, Unit Coordinator Permit Processing Section, Regulatory Branch U.S. Army Corps of Engineer, Alaska District P.O. Box 898 Anchorage, AJC 99506-0898 Bruce Bigelow, Chief Hydrologist U.S. Geological Survey P.O. Box 21568 Juneau,AK 99802 J eonifer Garland State of Alaska, Office of the Governor Division of Governmental Coordination Southeast Regional Office P.O. Box 10030 Juneau, AJC 99811-0030 August 1997 Draft 64 Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Joan Hughes Alaska Dept. of Environmental Conservation Southwest Regional Office 410 Willoughby, Suite 105 Juneau, AJC 9980 I Jack Gustafson Area Habitat Biologist Alaska Department of Fish & Game Habitat and Restoration Division 2030 Sea Level Drive, Suite 205 Ketchikan, AJC 99901-6067 Jim Durst Alaska Department of Fish & Game Habitat and Restoration Division P.O. Box 271 Klawock, AJC 99925 Lana Shea Flanders Alaska Department of Fish & Game Habitat and Restoration Division Mail Stop 1120 P.O. Box 240020 Douglas, AJC 99824-0200 John Dunker, Water Office Alaska Department of Natural Resources Division of Water 400 Willoughby, Suite 400 Juneau, AK 99801-1724 Jim Anderson, Land Officer Department of Natural Resources Division of Land 400 Willoughby, Suite 400 Juneau,AJC 99801-1724 Bill Gary, Regional Manager Alaska Department of Natural Resources Division of Parks & Outdoor Recreation 400 Willoughby, Suite 400 Juneau,AJC 99801-1724 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • - - • • .. - • '. - - • - • Judith Bittner State Historic Preservation Officer Alaska Department of Natural Resources Office of History and Archaeology 3602 "c" Street, Suite 1278 Anchorage, AK 99503-5921 Douglas Mathena, Jr., Mayor City of Hydaburg P.O. Box 49 Hydaburg, AK 99922 Steve Brockmann Ecological Services U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 624 Mill Street Ketchikan, AK 99901 Nan Allen, OHLIDLC 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,AJC 99801-1512 Bob Lohr, Executive Director Alaska Public Utilities Commission 1016 W. Sixth Avenue, Suite 400 Anchorage, AJC 99501 Christopher Estes Alaska Department of Fish & Game 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage, AK 99518-1599 Steve Hoffman Ketchikan Area Management Biologist Alaska Department ofFish & Game Division of Sportfish 2030 Sea Level Drive, Suite 205 Ketchikan, AK 99901 Glenn Freeman, Fishery Biologist Alaska Department ofFish & Game Division of Sportfish 2030 Sea Level Drive, Suite 205 Ketchikan, AK 99901 August 1997 Draft 65 Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Reuben Yost Project Environmental Coordinator Alaska Department of Transportation 6860 Glacier Highway Juneau, AK 99801 Harry Han, 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, W A 98368 William M. Bumpers Baker & Botts, Attorneys at Law 1299 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W. Washington, DC 20004-2402 Rick Harris Sealaska Corporation One Sealaska Plaza, Suite 400 Juneau,AK 99801-1512 Craig Public Library 500 Third Street Craig, AJC 99921 Constance Sathre National Oceanic & Atmospheric Admin. Office of General Counsel P.O. Box 21109 Juneau,AK 99802-1109 Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480 • .. - - • • • • • • • - - - - - - ,. August J 997 Draft Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment APPENDIX A AGENCY LETTERS AND COMMENTS Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. J 1480 ,. - • • • • - • • ,. • - - • • ,. Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment AGENCY LETTERS AND COMMENTS WILL BE PROVIDED IN THE PRELIMINARY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FILED WITH THE FERC IN NOVEMBER 1997 August 1997 Draft FOR THE REYNOLDS CREEK PROJECT Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 11480